Add to that he's new player. Some players take 3 month to fit in and others take 12 month. He's a new halfback playing in a new system at new club with no regular halfback alongside him.

Would he be worth the fee if he wasn't Australian?

I don't get your persistent question about him being a aussie. Was kyle Amor worth the fee we paid?

Yes.

The fee was required as there were halfbacks tied up to long term deals everywhere.

We also wanted Kevin Brown but he was tied down to a huge deal at Widnes. We had no halfbacks and no idea if Walsh would return. If we had a fit Walsh and Lance was a great 6 would we have been in for burns? Probably not, but we where, were we where.

Yes Pete, predicted it 4 years ago.



But in the end we needed a halfback, who else could we have got in August last year????

Please name a half that was off the class required and going for free?

I just think Burns is one of these players that comes over and ends up being massively overrated just because he played in the NRL. If this was an English player do you really think people would be happy with his performances or consider him to be good enough to be playing for a team near the top of the league, or that Saints would've even been interested in him? Heck, aren't you the guy who said that you wouldn't pay a transfer fee for Theo Fages, who at 20 years old is already a far better player than Burns?

You mean the Theo Fages that that's had half of good season ? I remember Sean Devine have 3 good games and he was the next Alex Murphy and remember Ste Tyrer having few good games and being hailed as next Jamie Lyon.

My point is, you can watch a young kid for half a season and pay £800,000 that salford want or pay £60,000 for a player that's played NRL and super league with a history you can look back on. Imo it's sinple

I'm not talking about paying £800k, just that Burns isn't a great player, he's a mid-table plodder and always has been in both Super League and the NRL. He's also older than Terry Campese, who was a legit star player that most people claim to be past it.

Burns WAS a good player in his first season at KR. Even the most one-eyed Robin admits this.

He then went down injured and has never really been the same since. Whether the injury robbed him of what pace he had or his legs just wore out naturally - I really don't know. My guess is that Saints figured Burns just needed time to get over his injury without knowing his legs were permanently shot. It's a common mistake - but one which you really should pick up either through your scouts or during the fitness test prior to signing.

The things is with Burns is, he's always done more defending than your average half backs, and he's no spring chicken at, 31.

What a nightmare for Walsh last night. Nothing went right and some of his passes were never on. At one stage I expected him to be taken of and I think he would have been if Wilkin had been on the field. Burns' defence and enthusiasm gets the shirt for me but his creativity is to say the least below average. When will we again see a saints side with halfbacks.

We need them to perform as a proper partnership come semi final time, the more they play together the better the chance of there definitive roles. Burns is OK his competitive streak is an 80 min one which set up that last winning play, Walsh is a bit lost, his timing and decision making is is all over the shop, he's 4 games in so he should be getting game awareness. I'm sure its just temporary, see how he goes next week.

We are so one dimensional when it comes to attack. Did Quinlan touch the ball in an attacking move from the HBs?

Yet we still beat the wire, come on give it a few days before you moan

Couple of times from Burns especially on the last play setting up Quinny for the break, can't recall anything from Walshy though.

Quinlan looks lost when we have the ball. He's basically inviasble until someone makes a break. I think the fact he's not played first grade this year and he won't know our players or our plays will take time to fit in.

He's took some great high kicks and his support play is top class but he's pretty awful at running the ball back on his kick returns.

I thought Burns played well on Thursday. His set up for Quinlan's break at the end was top class.
Even with Walsh, he had a bit of a nightmare but at least he's starting to get the confidence in his leg to start taking on the line again. I'm confident the partnership will come good. Whether that's this year or next, I'm not sure. But when it blossoms it will be beautiful!

I think I have heard that somewhere before, or words to that effect..

Burns was a very good player at KR for the majority of his stint, he could create things from nothing and was regularly putting in MoM performances, ironically his best performances were probably against Saints. His worst performances were after it was announced he was leaving, that maybe coincided with a big dip in team performances but Burns took the brunt og criticism.

His downside was his manner on the pitch, enthusiastic yes but he pilloried younger players for mistakes (even his own) and gave off the opinion of a disjointed camp. Rumour has it Chester wasn't sad to see him go. Not sure if that side of Travis has shown itself at Saints.

Either way, your lot don't seem to be doing too badly and we got ourselves a few quid and a couple of halves that if we get them on the pitch are (in our opinion) a lot better than we had so we all move on.

If anything Burns has been the leader on the field this season. Very vocal, ultra committed.

Our 6 and 7 situation is a concern for me. Even when both fit (Which looks unlikely to ever happen), neither are a threat to the line at all. This means they are very predictable and clubs can defend effectively against them.

Other clubs have direct pace/trickery in the halves or at hooker that we can't compete with. I'd love to see us bring in someone like Brierley.

Could have been a HKR man management problem, here at Saints we have got enough strong characters in the team and coaching staff to handle egoistic problems. As for Burns as a player, one of the first names on the team sheet for me, very competitive, niggly and likes to get totally involved whether he plays good or bad, you always need this type of player in your side to keep the team ticking over.
Sooner or later Walsh and Burns are going to click, when that happens I'm pretty confident we can dominate any side in Superleague, hopefully this will come in the play offs, we will have to wait and see.

It doesn't concern me as much. Travis is strong and as the half break for the winning try on Thursday showed, if you give him a gap he can punish you.
Aside from that, Burns showed a lot of nouse in the early games when we were without Walsh. I think we have two minor problems - 1) Walsh is still hit and miss and 2)Travis hasn't adjusted to Walsh's return.

For me, with Greenwood and Vea running in the second row channels and Percy and Turner in the centres, we can afford a lack of pace fromt he playmakers, especially if it means us bulking up on brainpower.

It shouldn't be as much as a concern when we have Roby and Quinlan as attacking options. We don't need to rely on fast pace in the halves, much better to have smart half backs, Walsh is an organiser and when he gets his timing back will pick out players with the right pass, Burns is an "off the cuff" unpredictable runner will quickly change direction and find a support player.

I sincerely hope you are right, but it's not always as simple as that.

Semi, a week on Friday would be nice!