Quote ="SomersetSaint"It seems as though the club are very much going for good pro's, the new signings this year all fit that mould, particularly Laffranchi who is coming with a great reputation for being a club man and leader on and off the park. Whether or not the Fisher rumours are true, he appears to fill this mould. The departure of Moore adds to the clubs push for high standards, which has to be a good thing when we are trying to bring through so many youg players.'" Surely the dropped case against Laffranchi was a much more serious allegation than Moore's dropped case? www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/a ... 1115904550

Quote ="SomersetSaint"It seems as though the club are very much going for good pro's, the new signings this year all fit that mould, particularly Laffranchi who is coming with a great reputation for being a club man and leader on and off the park. Whether or not the Fisher rumours are true, he appears to fill this mould. The departure of Moore adds to the clubs push for high standards, which has to be a good thing when we are trying to bring through so many youg players.'" Surely the dropped case against Laffranchi was a much more serious allegation than Moore's dropped case? www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/a ... 1115904550

As long as we dont drop quality for the sake of them I dont have an issue. In Fishers case imo he doesnt have the quality, Laffranchi was a test player so he obviously isnt too bad



Personally i'd settle for a load of rabble in the dressing room if they brought home the trophy's every season ala Longy

Quote ="Stinky Turner"Surely the dropped case against Laffranchi was a much more serious allegation than Moore's dropped case? www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/a ... 1115904550'" Alleged being the key here. I have a feeling the last Scott Moore case was the straw that broke the camel back rather than being specifically the reason Saints allowed him to move on. Reading the above on the Laffranchi case is quite interesting , it seems that when both a man and woman are drunk and do 'things' the man gets the blame by default .... In Aus RL is like our Football and players are targets for people looking for a profile, money etc etc ..

Quote ="Stinky Turner"Surely the dropped case against Laffranchi was a much more serious allegation than Moore's dropped case? www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/a ... 1115904550'" Alleged being the key here. I have a feeling the last Scott Moore case was the straw that broke the camel back rather than being specifically the reason Saints allowed him to move on. Reading the above on the Laffranchi case is quite interesting , it seems that when both a man and woman are drunk and do 'things' the man gets the blame by default .... In Aus RL is like our Football and players are targets for people looking for a profile, money etc etc ..

He's been in the UK since before the federation rules were introduced, so he'll be exempt from that, and probably also exempt from the old-fashioned quota on residency grounds, I would imagine. Not that I think it matters either way, as I don't reckon there's much mileage in this one.

I doubt there is any milage in this. Not doubting Fishers qualities but as Pete says he is a player in the shape of Monaghan, that being the case I don't see the point. Someone like that needs to start not be brought on for impact.

Hence why Lance or Lomax or Flanaghan, as they could offer a burst of running to give roby a rest. I agree Roby's impact dwindled towards the end of the year, a bit like Graham, but that happens when players do 80 minutes a week until they bust. Nothing wrong with the odd 80 minute spell but week in week out would leave even the best physically and mentally exhausted. I think Saints fan said during the season that Roby had extra time after each match to return to training to allow him to do those 80 minutes.

Nothing wrong with doing 30 mins, then letting Lance run em ragged for 10 minutes either side of half time, then inject roby back in for the final 30.


(besides didn't the club say no one else was coming in? and if we did get anyone surely it would be the phantom prop.)

I don't think lance and lomax are great replacements as they are both runners. Flanaghan isn't a hooker but will do a job.

I think Royce is thinking the same way I am. We rely to much on roby and some games just don't suit robes running play and the likes of fisher offers something different from dummy half. It also gives robes a rest.

IMO it would be a good signing. The more I think about it the more I like the idea.

If he's thinking like you, does that mean the back on the bench has gone?

He ain't good enough.

Ben Fisher? FFS we'd be better off with Climie Fisher!

They'd at least rise to the occasion.

Quoting yourself. It's Not Supposed To Be That Way

Shush, you are just keeping the mystery alive

I think you know opinion on that, I'm not going down that route until the season starts.

I think you've warmed too much to the idea of it rather than the practicalities of Fisher being the player you imagine him to be

I just think he'd do a good job for us, add depth and means we can leave lomax, hohaia and flanaghan in their proper positions.

Fisher is a clever cunning player which IMO we needed in the games where teams nulified robes running game.

On the subject of roby, I don't think we can flog him like we did last year, the back end of the season he looked tired and didn't offer any impact like he had in the first half of the season.

Correctamundo Peter. Roby is the long term future of saints and we need to ensure that we don't completely thrash him week in week out. I would prefer him to be doing no more than 50 mins per week

Precisely why the ludicrous argument that we can afford to play games with 16 men as we can just thrash Roby all year winds me up so much.

This is even more important now interchanges are down. Hopefully we've seen the end of the unused substitute at Saints under Royce.

Totally agree!

As most know on here, it drives me feckin mad the while back on the bench that royce opts for!

You'd see jammer and robes out on their feet while a back is sat on the bench scraching his balls!

Modern day players can play in more than one postion. Teams train them to play other positions yet royce stuck to flogging certain players while some didn't even do a minute!

I'm not a fan of the "back on the bench" plan either. you can see an argument for it in big games if a pivotal player is injured, but like you say modern players are flexible enough to cover.

Who do you reckon will be our bench players when we have a fully fit squad. I reckon if Lance starts the season well then Gaskell might not make the 13 and Royce must decide to keep him on the bench or outside the 17, don,t fancy the latter.

Royce will go for Gaskell on the bench with lms, clough and flanaghan.

I think clough will have a battle on his hands this year to stay in the 17 if Magennis stays fit and Forster knocking on the door. I thought clough looked half the play he was, I know he'd spent most of the year injured but was shocked how easy he was to tackle and he'd lost that leg drive he had.

I was dissapointed with Cloughy last year, I know he was injured, but I thought he would go up a level. Frustrating sometimes when going into the opposition he use to spin around and die with the ball. Looking forward to see how Flanagan fits in as second hooker which makes this Ben Fisher a non starter.

Flanaghan will only play hooker if roby gets injured and I wouldn't be surprised to even see lance go there before flanaghan.

I would suggest Lance will help your above situation, covering the backs and taking pressure off Roby. Perhaps you'll see them both on the pitch at once, but with lance taking some of the responsibility from dummy half?

Just imagine most of these players on the pitch at the same time, Lance, Roby, Gaskell, Lomax, Flanagan all taking on the line with there own individual "box of tricks". Reasons to be cheerful if Royce works on all the potential attacking options.