Re: Matty Smith : Fri Sep 10, 2010 9:36 pm  

I think Matty might have played himself into the next play off game regardless of Eastmond and Lomax being fit.

Re: Matty Smith : Fri Sep 10, 2010 9:36 pm  

Wire destroyed by Saints youngsters, with Graham missing most of the second half........

Re: Matty Smith : Fri Sep 10, 2010 9:54 pm  

foster is one of the best under the bombs ! imo

Re: Matty Smith : Fri Sep 10, 2010 9:59 pm  

i hope Eastmond was watching Smith's performance-just shows what a decent kicking game does!

We look rather silly for letting him go

Re: Matty Smith : Fri Sep 10, 2010 10:00 pm  

the 2 occasions where smith did the short kicks under the sticks were superb, normally moore or someone woulda kicked that straight at the opposing teams feet

Re: Matty Smith : Fri Sep 10, 2010 10:13 pm  

_nay0r_4_jenny_ wrote:

foster is one of the best under the bombs ! imo

If he improved in defence, I'd be very intrigued to see how he would at full back for you lot. See if he can do a Sam Tomkins.

Re: Matty Smith : Fri Sep 10, 2010 10:26 pm  

i said at start of season we should of brough smith back instead of moore, as he also covers hooker

Re: Matty Smith : Fri Sep 10, 2010 10:27 pm  

adamfairclough wrote:

i said at start of season we should of brough smith back instead of moore, as he also covers hooker

Why instead of Moore? Moore may not be Cunningham, but he's a perfectly capable player and will be an asset to us next season.

Re: Matty Smith : Sat Sep 11, 2010 12:01 am  

Smith was very impressive, and noticably a better player than when he last played for Saints. He always had a great long kicking game, but tonight he won us loads of repeat sets with grubber kicks (why we don't do this more often I just don't know) and took the line on in attack, two things he didn't do when he was last here.

Re: Matty Smith : Sat Sep 11, 2010 12:26 am  

Merged the two Matty Smith threads.