That pass reached Swift's hands. So was the pass from Makinson stupid or was it a poor attempt by Swift to catch a ball that was actually in his hands? It could be said that two players, neither of whom are experienced at this level in the positions they are playing, both saw the opportunity and both failed to take it but had both those players been more experienced either Makinson would have done as you suggested, and made a short pass to the centre, or Swift would have been able to take the long pass to exploit the clear gap ahead of him.

Lomax doesn't always get his passes right you know. Quite often he sends in other players to get a right old bashing. He did it when he played in the halves and he has done it while playing at fullback.

I'm getting weary of reading the incessant doing down of Makinson. He has been asked to play at fullback. I am quite sure he is well aware that he is already in the shadow of Lomax. He is still young and still learning the fullback trade at this level and so I think that he should be supported, especially if he is going to be important to us in the next few games.

The pass wasn't great, a little hard, a little high and a little behind,but it wasn't a guarenteed drop.
I think what t'other poster was more focused on is that when Mak gets the ball, its a 3 on 2 situation, which should be a guarenteed score from a pro team. If Tommy straightens up the play before passing he'd have drawn Pryce and given their winger little chance of defending. What he did was crab accross the field without committing the defender and actually took our space away, removing the advantage even if Swift had taken the ball.

He will improve in that sort of situation, but I would have honestly expected a little better from him and, as other posters state, in Lomax was getting the ball in that situation, its most likely try time.

You straigten up an force Pryce to commit, when you shape to pass, if he knows they're short of men then he may go and you sell the dummy, if he sticks then you pass and your 3/4s have a 2 on 1.

Not sure which stats you were looking at but you most definitely missed the tries scored column, and that's the most important one.

But that column wouldn't have supported her argument therefore it was omitted.

Is it? So Lomax now has to score a hatrick of tries every match or he will be a lesser fullback?

Makinson is doing very well at the moment but needs to be more of a threat with ball in hand he doesn,t have the footwork like Lomax to cause defensive uncertainity.
Spare a thought if Makinson gets better would we see the possibility of Lomax re introduced to being a running half back again.

Spot on that mate.

Makinson is a runner, but he doesn't have the footwork required to play in the Full Back position. Ideally, you want your 1 to be a second Stand-Off in the modern game, and although Lomax lacks the authority to control a game from 7, his vision, and his pass selection out the back is first class. Makinson would improve in those areas over time, but as I say, Lomax is an ideal Full Back in the modern game.

Makinson has extra pace though. As we know, what you do without the ball is also important. If Makinson can develop his movement when goign behind our 1st phase attackers to join the line, the pace of which he can do it should really disturb the oppo defences and create spce for other players.

He did that beautifully in the 2011 Grand Final.

Something someone hasn't given any apparent thought to is how he is being coached in his role.

Interesting, what do you mean by that? Do you think he is being coached to play the role differently to Lomax?

Whilst it's possible he is being asked not to adopt a ball playing role, I think it's it's more likely that his skill set doesn't allow him to do it as well as Lomax.

That's not a criticism BTW as I think Lomax could make a truly brilliant FB and most players would suffer in comparison to him. Makinson does a decent job there, but Lomax he ain't.

Brown said in interview that Makinson is a different kind of player to Lomax so I would imagine different things are being asked of him, wouldn't you?

As I edited above (too slow!):

Whilst it's possible he is being asked not to adopt a ball playing role, I think it's it's more likely that his skill set doesn't allow him to do it as well as Lomax.

That's not a criticism BTW as I think Lomax could make a truly brilliant FB and most players would suffer in comparison to him. Makinson does a decent job there, but Lomax he ain't as the best FB's offer the ability to chime as an extra half.

So far as I'm aware, Makinson has never played in the halves so that role would be alien to him I should think. I think he spent his junior days playing mainly at centre but also at fullback.

He can chime in with the line though. I've seen him do it. But had he learned to play in the halves then maybe he would have adapted more readily to the modern fullback role.

However, I think people are too harsh on him. He is being compared to someone he is not at a time when we need him to be confident over a long period of time in what he can do well.

Makinson is a good player and does ok at full back, for me the main issue is twice last week he opted to throw a poor attempt at a cut out pass straight to the winger rather than a short ball to the centre which bombed 2 tries for us. That aside he is pretty solid and I have no issue with him playing there (although as soon as Lomax is back he will surely play at 1)

Makinson to the halves is a joke and anybody who thinks putting him there is a good move is surely a few sandwiches short of a picnic. As mentioned above, he doesnt seem to have the ability to pass a ball very well (a fundamental for a half back) and pace alone isnt just what we need to inject into the halves.

I think this is a big discussion with very little disagreement.

Makinson > Wellens
Lomax > Makinson.

There is no harm in saying there is a better player waiting in the wings. It does not do anything to down grade Makinson at all. In fact because Makinson can cover FB competantly, I would say that's great as we don't have to buy in a FB to cover any loss of Lomax in the future.

People may bemon the fact that Lomax was not playing as from what we have seen his impact could have changed the game. I think when people have scored the players they would not be rating Makinson as a failure, they just wish we had Lomax as it could have turned the game in our favour, as could have TP or Manu.

The players who got a real keyboard bashing of the fans were LMS and Howarth. I was not there, but from the Stats that seamed to be pretty fair.

An unfair bashing would be someone like Meli who gets it in the neck whether he has a good game an average game or a terrible game, as people hold his past disasters over him, even if he is close to being MOM.

Was listening to Brown and he mentions that very point.

I mean the best players can pull these passes off, merely because they are the 'best players'. Makinson's passing game is ok, but nowhere near the standard where he can afford to try this, especially the last chance to Swift.

I'm confident that Lomax would have executed that pass far better or made a smarter pass choice, but it wasn't to be.

Although it wasn't really necessary for him to mention it at all, he couched is as 'young players like to play long passes, don't they?' or words to that effect. However, even a backdoor criticism was unnecessary, unless he was also going to apply the same approach to say LMS, who gave away penalties at crucial moments or others who missed tackles at important points.

It really annoys me when coaches pick on one player to cricitise, even by the backdoor.

Lomax is hardly slow himself is he, and his ball playing ability and footwork make him such a threat out the back. Although he isnt a 7, his stint at Scrum Half will help him massively as a Full Back, and that was evident when he played there. Makinson reminds me of Lomax when he first burst onto the scene in 2010 in the fact that he doesn't quite have the ball skills to play in a pivotal position, but is slightly wasted on the wing. As I say, Lomax's decision making is generally pretty good, and the experience of playing at 7 has improved him enourmously.

Makinson looks as though he is a winger playing at Full Back for me, and although he is doing reasonably well, it's not his natural position.

In terms of his pass selection, that will improve with experience. You tend to find that young players look to play the long pass before the short pass, but as I say, the decision making side of his game will improve the more he plays there. Whether he gets those opportunities long term is another matter, and the answer is quite obvious IMO.

One needs to be careful about players becoming overnight sensations when covering positions. Usually it has a lot to do with that player's ability but there are other reasons they can sometimes shine:

They see things differently from the previous player, not be constrained by years of playing that role/position
They may be completely hacked off in their previous position and relish the chance to be away from it
They may just be better than the player they have replaced
They may just catch the opposition unawares as there's less information for them to prepare against this 'new man'
Anyone can have a run of good games (in any position)

In Lomax's case, he's clearly a very good player and no doubt can cope with full back on a longer term, career basis but there have been many 'revelations' if one only looks at a short representative timespan.....in fact, Lee Smith once won the Harry Sunderland trophy which earned him a place in a World Cup and he was, is and always will be, dog dirt.

I'm presuming SaintsFan is talking about the Academy system, where we seem to have played a number of players in a number of roles to develop aspects of their game.

The coach may regard it as the best way to motivate the player, he knows his mentality more than any of us on here.

Maybe. It doesn't sound particularly nice though.

Yep, that's what I was referring to.

Well I would expect that's a given. You wouldn't expect a coach to ask a prop to play like a fullback would you? ( Highly exaggerated to push a point before saintsfan gets on her high horse ).

Makinsons skillset is different therefore he could not do what Jonny does. He will play fullback in his own way to his strengths. Is it then all down to opinion who is the better fullback.

Good coaches know what buttons to press with certain players. This could possibly be a way of getting a reaction from the player.

Some players need a arm around them, some need to be left to their own devices, some need to me told straight and some need to be told one on one. As a player I liked to be pulled to one side and told straight if I was doing something wrong, my mentality was, " I'll show him".

A little off topic. Brown has done all the above with Gaskell and seems he's burnt all his bridges at saints.