Exactly.
Well said

Clearly not. There was no reason to kick the ball when you had unlimited tackles.
4th tackle you kicked for distance because you weren't as far up the field
Up and Unders were a definite 'Hail Mary' play where as 6th tackle and the more modern game has developed a bomb play that drops on the line. Changes in the rules of what happens when you field these kicks has also menat they occur more in the game. Fielding these kicks is more important now as it has developed into a main attack tool for some teams.

Teams can't target the fullback to run at him because there is always someone in front of him. They target the half backs now.
They CAN target them easily, from anywhere, if they are weak under the high ball.

a few posts ago i seemed to be the only critic of richard mathers , the only person who thought fullbacks should tackle but now i find theres afew on here feel the same thank god because id seiously thought what i was seeing on the field was an illusion, lwasnt actually seeing our full back sit on his behind as he attempted tackles,a lot of emphesis is put on his positional play ,but il say again defensivley when tries are scored against us on most occaisions our no1s defencive frailties are to blame

They still did though, no idea why. I was watching some old matches from the 60's and it was pretty shocking to be honest.

I quite like Mathers at the back, he does a lot of talking and organising. He is prone to errors at important times though and does miss some tackles.

Try scorer can you offer a better fb than mathers that's both available and affordable?

They have unlimited tackles in yawnion and they seem to do little else, other than kick the ball to each other

you say affordable as if mathers is on a low wage reports ihave heard say this aint so. My point as always been that it was foolish to throw a two year contract at a player putting him in acomfort zone which in my humble opinion his performances didnt deserve. Iknow my opinion wont mean a lot to some on here who can see no wrong in mr mathers but when i hear some one say hes better than owen a player with a load of potential if he can control his offfield antics i despair. In anwer to the other question thrown at me why didnt we make aserious bid for someone like gaskel out of favour at saints a quality player who was languishing in their reserves at the end of last season

Can we not just put this to bed !!

can for me

Hope he plays well on sunday otherwise it'll drag on and on and on and on

Just wondering, how did you form this opinion because it seems completely at odds with what I've read on this thread.

Gaskell's still got another year to run on his contract and there's rumors Saints have offered him an extension. With there been a change of coach at Saints he may well be in for much more game time this season. I'd have thought though they'd be lining him to take over from Wellens or play him more instead of Hohaia.

Tbh honest though he's not too flash in defense himself. Hypothetically speaking if he was to come here I'd play him at stand off.

I can't see one poster on this thread that thinks that RM is a 100% complete player

and quite to the contrary, just about everyone agrees there are faults with his game, but try scorer you have been asked several times as to which "affordable available" player you would have at FB and have only just answered with a player which is not available and who is IMHO not as good as RM

Every player has faults, I've seen Billy Slater look like a revolving door quite a few times, would we take a risk with him? Of course we would!

the reason i mentioned gaskel was that these affordable players you talk about are players with potential , but that is going off the point ive been trying to make all along, mathers is on very good money, people admit hes got big problems in his game and at his age i cant see theres gonna be improvement ,why not see how he goes this season before commiting ourselves to another years contract , that to me seems sensible and thats my final say on this subject

Thank the lord.

Try scorer it's hypocritical is that answer, all along "most" on this thread have said there are problems with his game (not "Big" ones though) also your point seems to have been that in your opinion he is crap and we shouldn't have given him a 2 year deal as there were better options out there, it's only in the last couple of posts you have intimated that he's on mega bucks (a fact that I’m sure you can 100% sure of as you check all players pay slips

)

but still you are unable to post a name of firstly a recent FB at WTW who was better than RM or a future available less costly option


Plus you were the one berating him prior to the season without giving him a chance

Yep, let's have no alternative opinions - let's all be part of the Borg and only talk about groovy stuff so that we can be all fluffy together.

Together we are fluffier.

Vasty,

16 pages of the same old debate about wether Mathers is any cop or not is rather boring.

Just saying.

maybe but sometimes it's better than the "what did you have for your tea, dave" chat we seem to be getting a lot of these days - maybe i'm just old

^ i had a ham salad

With gravy?

and drippin

Topped with a Pie?

i'm not from wigan lad

I think this thread is done now. Thank god!