Nathan Brown doesn't help himself. He says one thing and then does the opposite. If he wants to talk BS then he shouldn't be surprised if some people don't believe anything he says!

It was either on Twitter or the Facebook site. I suspect Twitter as that's where I get most of the injury and other info from Saints from these days. All I know is that the club said Ade was recovering from injury.

Which is Rugby/coaching talk for he is gaining match fitness and fighting for his spot by playing having been injured last year, that is part of recovering. Makinson was first choice during pre season and up til the hull game

And you suggested I was talking theory?

I'll let you have your theory. I'll just take what the club said at face value.

I'm talking from experience and also having spoken to someone in the know, Ade was fit but Tommy was in ahead of him at the time. Club isnt going to come out and say Ade isnt viewed as good enough right now so tommy is playing are they? Great PR

You pick and choose what you take at face value then accuse the club of lying on other fronts!

When have I said the club is lying? I've said that Brown talks BS. Are you confusing those two completely different entities?

Ok. Since you think the club talks BS to the fans about injuries and such like, is Lomax injured or is that just a cover too so that Wello can continue playing at fullback or someone else have a go who maybe ahead of Lomax in the position? Or should I just take what the club is saying at face value and believe that Lomax is injured?

Full back On Friday

Could be interesting, 100% better than having wello there

If that's the case then I hope he has an absolute stormer.

Can't see it though as there was a chance to play him there against Salford to get him up to speed but Wello played there.

It's true tommy 1 paul is 6

Nice early excuse . . .

If he's good enough, which I think he could be, he'll do fine. Tompkins has plenty holes in his game but does well from fb

No place for Charnock then?

unless that means we put wello at 6 , in which case we are utterly fooked

where did i say the club speak BS? After you got on your high horse about me saying things you say you havent don't do it, thanks. I said about spin, they aren't going to give team selections away in the public domain are they?

We have seen a few times this year players come in from outside the 19, what do you make of this? Club lying? Brown spouting BS? Or playing it smart?

You have accused the club/its staff of numerous things, most of which are tripe

Brown is head coach, part of the clubs staff so when he talks, he talks on behalf of the club. You acuse Brown of lying/talking BS, you acuse the club of lying/talking BS

Nice early excuse for what? Him not being picked?

Let it go.

You should take your own advice ...

You're basically saying that if Makinson underperforms at full back, it's Brown's fault for playing Wellens there last week.

Seems everyone is to blame for Makinson/Gaskell not pushing on except Makinson/Gaskell themselves.

Anyway, here's hoping we do see some pace at FB tomorrow and it pays dividends. Having said that, the way people talk you'd think we had never won a game with Wellens at full back.

I have done so. I ended it.

I wasn't even remotely saying that. I actually said that if Makinson plays I hope he has a stormer. So how is that saying what you are suggesting I said? People on here like to twist my words to suit their own silly games but you have just taken it to a new level. You've completely made something up!

You did say you hope he had a stormer . . . . then said:



Thereby saying the reason he's unlikely to have a stormer is because Brown didn't pick him to play there last week.

If you weren't saying that, what were you saying?

I was saying exactly what I said and I didn't ever say I thought he wouldn't have a stormer. You've made that bit up from scratch.

Stop trying to stir up an argument that just doesn't exist.