If you know it's early days why are you so quick to dismiss his long-term potential on the back of a handful of games? Why would you do that?

I am quick to dismiss him based on what I have seen. I have never saw him "ghost through a defence" or cause concern for any defence nor have I seen any other teams saying we need to watch him cause he will punish us. I wouldn't criticise him for his performance in a final but to not see the simple pass outwide on several occasions which would have almost certainly seen us score does concern me a bit. I know he is young but to think back when Eastmond was 21 he was the best half back in Super League by a mile and this for me is the kind of level we need to look at. I really don't think he is the world class stand off most of you think. Watch him this year and keep a tally of how many tackles he ghosts through, how many one on one tackles he completes and how many times he slows down our attack as we swing it out wide. Gaskell's kicking game is his best asset which IMO isn't worth his place in a side looking to go all the way as it is inconsistent at best. I hope he proves me wrong though i'm sick of losing finals.

Did you not watch the final games of the season when he ghosted through the defence? Didn't he more or less score or set up most of our tries in the game against Wigoon? I'm sure he did to the point that Wigooners were actually concerned about what he could do. As Lomax faded, Gaskell grew stronger.



Yet you do in the same sentence....





Why are you struggling to see what he does well? It's been a long time since I saw a British half back come through at his age possessing the qualities that you think he should already have. None of Edwards, Long, Burrow, McGuire or Eastmond had those abilities that you are requiring at the same age. Certainly Eastmond, who you praise as being the best half back in Super League never had anything like the kicking or organising game of Gaskell even when he left. Eastmond was quick, could pass and had a good kicking game. Neither his passing nor kicking was better than Gaskell's.



There is more to half back's game than just breaking through tackles you know. The controlling of the game is a critical aspect including field position and the speed at which the game is played. Without a half back who can do this you end up with a team that is headless, disorganised and often at a disadvantage when it comes to wanting to stamp some authority on the contest. Surely you've been able to recognise that from us being outgunned by Sinfield et al in four Grand Finals?

Anyway I think you should just see yourself and be prepared to eat humble pie at the end of the season. Gaskell has bags of potential and may well be the most naturally skilled position player we've brought through our ranks in about thirty to forty years. I'm not saying he's the new Alex Murphy or anything just pointing out that I can't remember the last home grown half back we had who had his degree of RL intelligence (only Briers compares and even he wasn't at this level or we'd have kept him). All he needs now is more exposure so that he can bring his skills up to the level at which his brain will start to work.

Ok examples of Gaskell other than kicking.

Match against wigan floated through their defensive line, steam rollered Tomkins to score.
Match against Warrington, we where getting tonned on the come back he gave us field position but more than that had the awareness to run around the back of the line to make an extra man in the line, which allowed him to be there for the pass from soliola.
Can't remember the game, but wasn't he first to the ball from a Saints kickoff to score one of the quickest tries, may have been against salford.

So he does run through defenses, he does have awareness and gets into good positions, he does have speed.

Eastmond was quick but he was no jason robinson, more often than not he would duck under tackles but end up getting his legs taken, on quite a few occasions doing damage to his own legs.

I'd have kept Eastmond before his nightmare last season, but he was always going to be a runner, not the all round half back we needed. Just like Tomkins who is an elusive runner and brings that x factor in, but tomkins was/is a much more talented kicker than Eastmond was.

Maybe it Gaskells lack of boyish looks and cheeky chappyness that goes against him. People seam to forget the duff plays from the little guys, aw they are little so they are trying hard. The big fella's just have that cuteness factor. Yet the tall fella can be just as skillfull if not more. ie Sculthorpe, Daley, Lockyer.

As for Eastmond being the best half back in super league by a mile, eh????
He was always a decent prospect, but the best in SL by a mile.

ps Gaskell was only 21 in October.

Eastmond had all the ability to eventually be better than Long was for us, don't forget he was basically a runner until 2004, bur now we'll never know. He'll spend the next two to three years wasting away on an RU wing rather than learning how to control a game.

The semi final of the CC showed me how much we needed an organised kicker rather than two runners at half back.

Gaskell's kicking game can be erratic, he's young and inexperienced, but even then it's exponentially better than Lomax's and I've never seen Hohaia in a position to guide a team round the park, evidence from Friday shows that it may not be one of his plus points...

Let's hope Royce sees it that way too then!

lyono wrote: I really don't think he is the world class stand off most of you think. Watch him this year and keep a tally of how many tackles he ghosts through, how many one on one tackles he completes and how many times he slows down our attack as we swing it out wide. Gaskell's kicking game is his best asset which IMO isn't worth his place in a side looking to go all the way as it is inconsistent at best. I hope he proves me wrong though i'm sick of losing finals.



Lyono I don't no what ur problem with Gaskell is ?? He has got good kicking game he can run the lines good passing he looks so laid back

I think Gaskell brings something to your side which Lomax doesnt, and I dont think Lance will either. He does seem to have a great kicking game which is vital for any side.

Most of you have picked up on his decision making in the GF last season, but for an inexperienced kid he didnt do so bad and his partnership with Lomax was a massive factor in getting there. I do think decision making/greed when having the ball does let him down at times when Ive watched him but every younger player goes for glory more often than not.

It is a shame, but I can see Wellens at 1, Lomax and Lance at 6 and 7 and Gaskell missing out more often than not. With out kicking game being as bad as its been for a while according to some, we will lend him for a season to play alongside Finch



Only time will tell though with what and who Royce wants to play with what system.

To be fair Gaskell and Lomax were not the reason we did not win the GF. Even if Gaskell had got that right, it would not have stopped Shentons elbow dislocating, leading to the Meli Sia partnership that just gave Leeds the green light to attack attack attack.

Spot on.

I think the inexperience of both Gaskell and Lomax did cost us in the GF last year, but that's what you get with having two inexperienced half backs and as long as they learn from it then there's no problem. It's probably also the reason that Hohaia was brought in, to give us some experience. It's just getting the balance right between the three, and at the moment Lomax and Hohaia are too similar to play together for me.

Having said that, I don't go against the argument that Shenton getting injured was a major part of that defeat.

Agree entirely, and we still havn,t really got a team leader in the calibre of Joynt, Sculthorpe or Cunningham, this is one of our major concerns. We might have the talent in the team but some games we will be playing like headless chickens.