Quote: Phuzzy "I always exempt yourself, Stu and FTV from the numpties we occasionally get on her. You come at things from a Saints perspective, which is as it should be, but there's balance too and usually a good debate to be had.
What's your view on playing Lomax?'"
I'm no medical expert so I can't say Woolf is right or wrong when he says the injury can't be made worse. However I am confident they wouldn't put him at risk, so it's a case of having to take their word for it in terms of the moral side of things.
As for the rugby side of things, if Lomax can play to 80% of his potential he is still our best option (and better than most in the league) so again for the time being I'm happy to trust their judgement. 1 game isn't enough to judge, especially a game like last week. But if the time comes where he's a passenger or even a liability within the team, I'm sure the club would act accordingly. I think Dodd being injured probably forces their hand a bit, I'm not naive to pretend otherwise. If he was fit then it would be "easier" to let Lomax have surgery and recover in his own time. But being down 2 half backs would spell the end of our season so I can understand why they are keen for him to play on and why he himself is so keen to play on too.
To be honest I don't think Lomax is the issue for us now. It's what we do alongside him. It shows how we much we are lacking an obvious replacement for Dodd when you read the various opinions on who should replace him. Welsby, Davies, Bell, Hopoate, Roby, Lussick even Sironen all been mentioned. That's the biggest conundrum for Saints now, who plays alongside Lomax to get the best out of the team and give us the best shot of winning another GF.