To be fair, during the Widnes game he didn't pass when there was a blinding overlap. He has probably been coached to get the ball to Josh whenever he can. Great example of passing when he should have took the tackle. The understanding between the two will grow over the coming weeks. I am definitely in the camp of keeping Josh and Toby together, injuries permitting.

point proven.

yes he threw one bad pass, but every man and his dog was bagging him for not passing to charnley since coming into the side, the same commentators were praising him for giving charnley early ball so he can work his magic, much like he did against widnes when he scored the try with two defenders on him.

And in regard to the yardstick, Revans [uat the time [/uhad been a quite highly rated academy international. That's the comparison i was making, not the person we offloaded last year, that arguably had regressed.

That's the thing with Rhys Evans, outstanding prospect (even well-known pie and youth team watcher Rogues Gallery called him a 'superb young player') but did not progress on elevation to senior status.

Price commented on him not passing to his winger too, not just men and dogs on here. It's like he just doesn't have natural centre play in his game. I mean these aren't u16s which are teaching the principles of the game too. He is a SL professional playing for an alleged top side. He shouldn't need a coach to tell him to pass when there is an overlap. The resultant "just ship it to Charnley come what may" approach now (ala Salford) is not the answer either. Being a top centre requires skills, judgment, guile, pace, illusiveness and great hands. Happy to be proved wrong on Toby though.

Rhys may have be highly rated initially but it was clear to most since about 2015 years he was not good enough and going backwards. Probably an injury too far. That's why I picked up on the comparison.

The 2 look a good match together and seem to compliment each others style very well. The pass back inside from Charnley to King has produced tries in the last 2 games - it gives the defenders a bit more to think about which is always a good thing.

If Ryan wants the short back he's going to have to change his style - Charnley needs earlier ball to be effective

To be fair Atkins has recognised he needs to pass the ball to the wing, and he did it in the game against Salford. Unfortunately he didn’t check there was someone there to take it first! He’s still young though and will learn.

LOL yes when I saw that I thought there's another for the Row Z collection.

John Fieldhouse?

There wasn't much wrong with that pass. If Charnley holds his position, he walks in. Having been tackled, there was no prospect whatsoever of Atkins passing to where Charnley ended up running.

Perhaps Ryan should have held onto the ball, but we cannot have it both ways.

If having it "both ways" means passing the ball to your winger or holding the ball if the pass isn't on, I would hope that we could have it both ways.

Again, it's passing for the sake of passing.

Toby king signs contract extension this morning.

Price sees something in him.

Yep it's a good extension. Just 1 year. Not like a Matty Russell 3 year one.

Clearly the pass was on, because he made it. If Charnley scores from it, noone comes on here and says 'that was a ridiculous pass, he should really have held onto it.'

The ball ended up in the stands because there was no winder outside of him, how is there a pass on there? People are saying 'that was a ridiculous pass, he should really have held onto it' because it was a ridiculous pass, and he should have held onto it!

Exactly the responsibility lies with the passer to pass to the receiver, not the receiver to be where the pass is going to.

Disagree completely. You cannot play ball unless it's a shared responsibility.

Scenario...if this there was a move straight off the training pitch....
It involves a no look pass to a runner from Roberts...the move is practiced over and over...
On the game day the move is on...the runner falters for whatever reason...obstructed, trips...has a Vape!...it doesn't matter...

Are you saying 100% Roberts is at fault?

There is a fine line here though between the passer making the right / wrong decision to pass or the receiver being in the right / wrong position to collect.
There have been games in the past when attackers have thrown some miracle balls / offloads from the tackle into a position they expect the support player to be. They make these passes while under pressure, with tacklers around them, not knowing for sure that their support player is there but they do it anyway in hope that the support player is where he expects him to be.

The Atkins pass falls into this category for me. Atkins chances his arm and, had Charnley stuck to his wing, the try was on and Charnley would have had a walk in. As it happens, the pass was on (as he made it / didnt drop it or fumble it) but Charnely wasnt where Atkins expected him to be. Maybe communication was the problem, maybe it was a bad read from both players, but to just lay blame solely at Atkins door is wrong in my opinion.

Like I pointed at before...John Fieldhouse.
A ball playing backrower....too far ahead of our team. He was reading plays expecting runners....and ends up throwing balls into the Brian Bevan stand. We all pulled our hair out over it.
Eventually going to Saints via Widnes I recall....then ripping us up with some sublime passes with men on the end of them, he still didn't look...progressed to the British Lions.

It wasn't a move straight off the training pitch
It was Atkins first and only pass of the game I think.
It was early in the tackle count.
Atkins has a well established track record of being at passing (even by his own admission)
There is no rapport between Charnley and Adkins established yet (have they even played together before) which would result in a successful telepathic path.

Taken in that context I cannot blame Charnley.

Charnley came off his wing to run behind Atkins....you can't blame Atkins for not having eyes in the back of his head!

Look the simple rule is...whenever 2 parties are involved in anything...accident, whatever, there is always a share of blame. That is the law of the land.
One generally carries a greater share and is often liable....but not 100% responsible!

I'm sort of with you on the Atkins pass, but I hope to god you aren't a lawyer if that is your understanding of the law.

You be surprised how strange it is.
..

If someone rear end shunts your car... you too have shared blame but not liable because the greatest share of blame is with the person behind you.

I think that is more of an interpretation of the law from the motor insurance industry point of view. Knock for knock.

You may well be correct.
Anyways....what was we on about?

Arh yes....Atkins wasn't 100% at fault... in my interpretation.