Whoever stands by a just cause and fights for the freedom and liberation of his land from the invaders, the settlers and the colonialists, cannot possibly be called terrorist."
To me, Shaul would be picked all day long. His ability to cause danger when running the ball, is something England just don't have in their squad, and is probably the only player in the squad capable of seeing a gap and being through it before the defence can set. These stats also don't include the Challenge Cup
Comparing Shaul to Lomax is a bit unfair..Lomax only played 19 games to Shauls 33 in 2017. Bennet wants his fullback to pass and Shaul does not do that.
Comparing Shaul to Lomax is a bit unfair..Lomax only played 19 games to Shauls 33 in 2017. Bennet wants his fullback to pass and Shaul does not do that.
Much better to have a full back who isn't even first choice in that position for his club and who misses 3 out of every 4 matches cos he's made of brittle plastic
Whoever stands by a just cause and fights for the freedom and liberation of his land from the invaders, the settlers and the colonialists, cannot possibly be called terrorist."
Much better to have a full back who isn't even first choice in that position for his club and who misses 3 out of every 4 matches cos he's made of brittle plastic
I am not saying Lomax should or should not be the full back. i am just pointing out that the figures are not a fair comparison. Bennett wants a linking fullback and Shaul does not do that. Do i prefer Shaul to Lomax..yes! but i am not i charge of England.