He's got good passing skills in timing, weight and accuracy, as mentioned the centres and wings are getting quality ball especially for Percival who is now getting that extra second to work with.
What I do like is his doginess in defence, up to now I,ve not seen him drift out of the game as per HKR, so something tells me that Saints style of play is suiting him fine.
An on form Walsh and Burns will be awesome and will be something the opposition will fear when our pack dominates.

I,m not too bothered about his discipline and technical offences because he brings a lot more to the table than what we have had lacking over the past 5 years.

I think his main strength is how judicious he is. He seems to know which ball to give and the team are moving the ball well AND in the right direction under his stewardship.

Last night, Greenwood broke down the left, then we quickly flashed right for vea to break again (from a peach of a ball from Burns), then, as Salford tracked back, we flashed back to the left for Turner to go over. Very, very good rugby and he's the main reason, even if he doesn't give every pass.

He's made a very solid start. His discipline has been fine and I liked his bollocking of Vea a lot. We've needed a proper on field captain for years and whether he's named it or not, he's clearly our leader.

An utterly ridiculous statement. He's played TWO GAMES so far. There's not a chance in hell guys like Roby, Wilkin or even Lomax will accept the "leadership" of anyone who still probably uses a map to find the stadium.

[i"What has Travis Burns done?"[/i might be the first question which emerges from their lips.

The next might be [i"How many SL titles has he won?"[/i

Sure, he railroaded Vea (one of the only players who has as much Saints experience as he has). Big deal.

These are professional players. Not amateurs.

James Graham might have been the Bulldogs' best player for the past two seasons. But in his second game at the club precisely NO ONE would have taken so much as an order for fish and chips from him.

The same goes for Burns. When he EARNS the right to be called a leader the players will make him their leader. And not one moment before.

You couldn't be more wrong if you tried.

If I'm wrong he'll throw the kitchen sink at Roby the next time he drops a ball under pressure. My guess is we'll wait to see that.

A long, long time.

I've got to disagree also, you could bring any leader into a squad and he would command respect irrespective of how long they have been there. Yes Travis has only played 2 games but you can clearly see his leadership on the field for all to see. He's a player we've been crying out for years.

Another corker of a post lol

I think you are looking it in the wrong perspective, there.s nothing wrong in Burns showing leadership qualities and bossing the established players, he looks very much a competitive player who is an irritation to the opposition.
He,s come here to win some silverware and he,s not going to go about it doing it quietly, we could have Gary Wheeler as an alternative I suppose!

Are you for real

The problem here is people don't understand that there is a difference between a leader and a playmaker.

Burns is a halfback and thus no one will have any issues with him CALLING PLAYS.

But this does not mean he has the right to dress down senior Saints players if they make a mistake. Just as James Graham didn't so much as squeak at any of his teammates until he'd EARNED their respect on the field.

Nonsense. As an experienced player in a key position he has every right to give players a rollocking if needs be. There's seemingly only you that doesn't understand this.

If we signed Paul Gallen next week would he not be able to shout at young Luke Thompson or Joe Greenwood until he had "earned" their respect? Rubbish.

How do you know?

How do you know KC hasn't said to him 'you're the guy who controls the plays so you call the shots and if it doesn't go well you do what you gotta do. If that takes bawling someone out then do it'.

How do you know that he hasn't EARNED their respect on the field? You are making a cosmos sized assumption that he hasn't purely on the basis of playing 2 meaningful games but you don't actually know either way do you?

You'd perhaps do well to earn some respect yourself rather than babbling your sanctimonious, better than thou, know it all preachings when you come on here.

If you think - say - a British player with TWO GAMES under his belt for his new club in the NRL will be able to get away with railroading experienced players who might have 5 or 10 hard years under the hood you haven't watched enough NRL.

We're not in the amateur era any more. This is a highly competitive game with not just positions but entire careers at stake.

But we will see. By your rationale guys like Roby and Wilkin will have no problem whatsoever with Travis Burns if he gets in their faces following a mistake this game or next.

But we know he won't. Because Burns is enough of a professional to know new players are under serious scrutiny from their first game.

And no - I wouldn't expect any kid who has spent four or five years in the academy to meekly take stick from Paul Gallen with two games under his belt (not that I'd expect Gallen to give it). The minute you arrive at a new club you are back to zero in terms of achievement. Certainly his teammates aren't likely to give him anything for nothing. Indeed, he could just as easily be the next Bradley Clyde whose stellar reputation amounted to precisely ZERO at Leeds.

It wasn't any old dropped ball, it was right at the beginningof the set and in our half, it was a very simple mistake.