We won the title without being a team of jumped up shouters. It's not something we need. Our players are professional enough to not require beating around the head when things go wrong.

Surely that's calling plays though? Something that isn't being discussed.

I'm not sure why people are comparing Travis Burns coming from HKR where he didn't set the world alight into a club that's just won the title to Tim Sheens going to a club either. One is coming in as a coach, one is coming in as an equal. Same with the management job.

It sees that some people are arguing the person rather than the discussion point.

Bobby Goulding had a similarity to Burns, bit of indiscipline, niggly and mouthy, he was only here 5 mins and he use to rip into players. We also had a few others in Sculthorpe, Martyn and others.

When these type of players dissapeared we became a "quiet team" and during this long period won Zilch, personally I,m all for more vocality between players, this is more positive than negative and keeps the team focussed and avoids malaise.

Hang on a second. Paul Sculthorpe didn't say boo for the first two seasons at the club. It was only when he fleshed out and we started experimenting with him at stand off that he began to voice his opinion.

In other words - he [i"kept his head down and played his game until he'd earned the respect of his peers".[/i

If Goulding's mouth was the answer I dread to think what the question might be.

Sculthorpe was what? 20 when he joined? I like a few on here are tipping Thompson as a future captain of the club but that doesn't mean he'll be yelling at anyone.

A much more obvious example comes from across the hill: do you think Trent Barrett said nothing when he joined Wigan because he had to pay his dues? What about Blake green?

Edit: iPad autocorrect sculthorpe to Shorpe!

You mean, the Paul Sculthorpe who was made Warrington's captain age 18?

Just like you point out with Graham at the Bulldogs, who had previously captained Saints. So leadership within a playing group is as much to do with age and experience as it is "leadership ability". Which is why Thompson isn't captain yet.

That doesn't mean if Graham moved to another NRL club he couldn't do to his new team mates what he did during the playoffs. And doesn't mean that burns coming in to Saints doesn't mean he can't be part of the senior leadership team.

Barrett spoke his mind, just as Green did, and Wigan are missing now ...

You've completely lost me here. Paul Sculthorpe was the Warrington captain. When he came to Saints he [i"kept his head down, played his game and won the confidence of his colleagues"[/i BEFORE he began opening his mouth in any significant way. James Graham was the St. Helens joint captain. When he went to the Bulldogs he [i"kept his head down, played his game and won the confidence of his colleagues"[/i BEFORE he began opening his mouth in any significant way. Neither would DREAM OF blasting a senior player such as Chris Joynt, KC, Paul Wellens, Michael Ennis or Frank Pritchard over a handling error.



Barrett communicated with his players. So did Green. You do understand the distinction, right?

Is anyone else finding the use of bold and underline quite annoying?

Not half as annoying as people's inability to recognise the fundamental distinction between two styles of leadership described in plain English.

Seriously, I can't BELIEVE this thread has dragged on this far.

Maybe your not making your point in a manner that will sway others to agree with you?

Nope. It's definitely because I didn't think ANYONE would think Travis Burns rollocking a senior player over a handling error next week might be a good idea.

Alas, one should never underestimate this universe's ability to unleash novel forms of foolishness.

Excellent post.

And there this "conversation" should end methinks, its not nice to see us squabbling amongst ourselves, especially over something so petty.

Foolishly I read through all seven pages, suffering slow loading of each page due to my dog dirt connection, in the hope of getting to some interesting points about Burns....oh well.

I will, however, support Mugwump's standpoint. What he is saying makes sense. No-one minds the odd bit of shouting, especially as a stand off will likely be moving players around the pitch and it would be unlikely that he would bollock a senior member as readily as he did Vea. In Burn's favour, I have liked his enthusiasm when not directly involved...he looks genuinely thrilled when we've scored or made a special effort in defence...and attitude will take any player a lot further.