I'd prefer that to the current, tbh.

Hmmm .... winning pay?

Wilkin is pretty terrible all he cares about is media i used to think he was half decent till 3 years ago now all he cares about is how he comes across

I'd hate to see your opinion on Harrison Hansen and Sean O'Loughlin then. Terrible Jon Wilkin beats them both hands down this season at Metres made, Carries, Tackles, Tackle busts, Offloads, Clean breaks, Marker tackles, penalty rate.....you know, all the things you'd want from a back rower.

Sorry, what is Royce doing this Sunday? I can't quite remember.

That doesn't mean there was anything wrong with his coaching. Purtill went too. McManus has fired a coach before. Was he poor too? He was very successful.

You still haven't addressed my point though. Wilkin was superb last season. Last season Saints were coached by Royce. Royce also coached Saints for the first seven rounds this season. So therefore the problem with Wilkin's performance cannot be the coach.

So there's no chance Royce asked Wilkin to play a slightly different role this season and allow our slightly more experienced half backs to show what they could do? If he's playing a typical back row role, staistically, he's doing it better than Sean O'Loughlin. What do you think about that?

Purtill was an assistant coach. He probably did his job very well but I've absolutely no idea on that. No matter how well he did his job, he didn't pick the team or tell the players how to play, so just as with your Lance Hohaia statistic, it has absolutely no relevance to Jon Wilkin.

Sure there's a chance. Just as there's a chance Royce told Wilkin to play standing on his head.

Maybe his performaces have declined as all the good influence left over from Mick Potter have gradually worn off?

Deary me. Is this because your "completely anonymous" argument has been shot to pieces? Or that you're still in cloud cuckoo land that one good game in the halves against Leeds 5 years ago makes him the next Wally Lewis?



All joking aside, you say that Wilkin is capable of a good showing in the halves due to a great game he played away at Leeds. Lomax produced a masterclass at scrum half at Leeds last season, yet isn't a scrum half in the memory of man.

What's the difference?

Unfortunately, simply [isaying[/i someone's argument is "shot to pieces" doesn't make it true. And no-one has ever compared Wilkin to Wally Lewis so we can put that straw man to rest, too.



I didn't say Wilkin's performance against Leeds [ialone[/i makes him a half. I said Wilkin has - at many times during his career - functioned as an effective tactical option (in support of the likes of Scully, Long, Martyn etc.).



Since you chose to substitute your words for my argument and then argue against them claiming success - you tell me?

I'd have thought a man of your intellingence would have noticed that I put a

after the Lewis comment. In your very first post on this matter you said Wilkin had been completely anonymous this season. He hasn't been. Nowhere near in fact. He's been poorer in attack granted but as I've already said, show me a player in the current Saints line up other than Roby and Sia who are performing to their ability. To pick up on Wilkin who has been nowhere near our worst performer surprises me.

I'm also surprised that you went from [i"completely anonymous"[/i in one post to [i"No one disputes whether Wilkin is putting the work in"[/i in another. It confused me.

Now that I realise your major gripe is that Wilkin isn't taking enough pressure off the halves, I can agree in part. The fact that you in no way, shape or form agree that Royce's coaching could have come into is what I don't agree with and I certainly don't think Wilkin has stopped moving into the halves or producing certain runs because he is thinking about his testimonial. If he was prioritising his testimonial, I'd imagine his whole game would suffer, not just part of it.



I agree. Again, you're taking a tongue in cheek comment the wrong way.








Your words. It just took me a while to understand what you were actually saying.

I'm not sure why a back rower is carrying the can for us looking awful in the halves, just because he has filled in there in the past.

He isn't taking it for that reason though, as I think you know. The suggestion is that because he has the experience there, is a talker anyway, and is one of Saints' longest serving senior players he should have been taking on the role of leader. It's not like he is a shy retiring type is it? And when he has played well in the halves, he has known how to lead the team around.

Message board posts don't exist in a vacuum. They are set against a contextual backdrop of former contributions. Since I have publicly - to the point of weariness - defended Wilkin's workrate (and, prior to this season, entire game) for the best part of six years I didn't think it necessary to re-state what is a matter of fact.



At NO point did I say it is impossible Royce was, in some way, to blame. The problem is I've no evidence to support that fact - other than Wilkin's performance - which isn't evidence.

To be honest, I didn't realise that Wilkin was carry the can for this season until this thread popped up.

So far we have had Flannery as a scapegoat, I'll hold my hands up I was first in on that one, but that was cause Dixon had a storming first couple of games and Flannery had some glaring errors. Could not see why he was picked ahead of Dixon. But Flannery has settled down a bit now.

Then we had Foster
Perry
Lance kinda got it from some not from others
Meli - well for me his -ve just outweights the +ve
LMS
Perry - well he did have a few weeks out
Foster again
Now Wilkin, I'll be honest did not see the Bradford game, so maybe he had a howler but can't really say he has been poor the rest of the year.

I was hoping he would be a leader on the pitch, but you can't really direct the play from 2nd row. So maybe if he drops to loose he'll be able to help stear the team better. Although I suspect Lance may be dropped into the halfs to do this. But then that leaves us with 2 similar halves. It can be done, with Wilkin kicking from loose, Leeds have done this for years, but I suspect its a case of our spine being a bit in flux. No one really certain who should play where from the talent we have.

6.7.13.9 These are the key areas for controlling the team, with 1. also contributing but having more of a free role.

This year we have had several 13's not in the traditional ball playing role.
9 has been a little disrupted in the last few weeks.
6 and 7 have not really clicked in the last few weeks either.

We have options but fitting them all together in a well working unit, where we know our go to men are is more the issue than any one scape goat. IMHO.

Jon Wilkin has not been the problem. His field kicking is not the best, but there is not a lot wrong with his game or commitment.

What?????? Are you Tony Blair?

You'd make a good politician.

im from the north....does that mean we like him or not?

I'm not an avid follower of the board so I wasn't fully aware of your thoughts over the last 6 years. Now I am, it's safe to say we're arguing the toss over 7 games in which we've seen slightly different things. We're entitled to opinions and whilst I don't agree with you, we're going to start circulating each other if we continue.

I am surprised that SaintsFan, after admonishing me for failing to address their point has failed to answer my point regarding Wilkins statistical superiority in ALL worthwhile back row contributions so far this season to Sean O Loughlin who is generally held up in such a good light.

Or what Lance Hohaia's tackling stats have to do with Jon Wilkin.

Because I was talking about his leadership, not whether he was any good as a back rower, although he certainly hasn't been playing to the levels of last year.

If I wanted to portray Wilkin as the one and only scapegoat for this season's mess I would have probably posted a thread title such as, [i"Wilkin: the one and only scapegoat for this season's mess".[/i

Of course, there are countless other under-performing players. But many of them are young, inexperienced, physically immature (Gaskell, Foster , Makinson etc.), or new to the team (Hohaia, Laffranchi), or so modest of ability there's is no earth-shaking difference between a good and a bad performance (Meli, Gardner and possibly Flannery). In other words - they have one (or more) mitigating factors.

Wilkin is a good player (or at least should be). He's in his prime. He lacks neither maturity nor experience. He's tactically astute etc. Which means he has far fewer excuses. Hence my singling him out for specific criticism.

This.

Since Wilkin wants the benefits of being a senior player, not to mention an international, then he must also take the responsibilities. That's part of being a team. IMO neither he nor one or two other senior players have been doing this and that is largely the reason why we slid in confidence once we lost Robes to injury.

Last season almost every time one of our newbies referred to on-field/performance guidance it was either Jammer or Pryce they mentioned. Those have both gone. I don't think anyone has stepped in to take their place but the inexperienced guys are still to play a full season in the first team (Foster excepted) and therefore still need the same support and guidance they needed last year.

Not sure how much " on field guidance" pryce gave last year, he was barely on the field himself.