: Sat Apr 11, 2009 9:52 am  

Dave K. wrote:

Think he did OK, did some good and bad things as many other players did. Looked alot better when we had Lee, Berrigan, Thorman and Horne on the field together. Something I would start with on Monday.

I agree with that. Our half backs are creating anything so well just put more on the field.

What does anyone think about having Tommy Lee at 13. He did good when he was on Yesterday i thought, and we looked a little bit quicker. Weve got too many uncreative forwards, lets take one out of the pack for rotation and put Lee at Loose man!

: Sat Apr 11, 2009 9:53 am  

Is it just me or does he seem to take forever to deliver a pass?

: Sat Apr 11, 2009 9:57 am  

MrPhilb wrote:

Worked alright for us

We are lacking creativity

: Sat Apr 11, 2009 9:59 am  

whiting or washbrook at loose man
in years gone by the 3 main points of attack always stemmed from No6 No7 & No13 and we were lucky enough to have Lee Jackson No9 (a player who was way ahead of his time in that position)
a ball playing loose forward can only help the team along with 2 second rowers who can run with the ball.

: Sat Apr 11, 2009 10:11 am  

Thorman looked the business in the last 20. That just happened to be when he became what he should be 'a pivital player' becoming first and second reciever!
Blame Thorman for nothing... Blame Agar for playing this strange, one dimentional system were Horne plays right and Thorman plays left. How can you have a 'half back partnership' when they rarely pass to each other!!
My answer would be to play thorman full back ONLY WHEN THEY HAVE THE BALL. This will firstly stop him getting targeted, as Rovers clearly did yesterday ang he would have more energy with ball in hand. Secondly he would have a free role to come forward when we had the ball.
It may sound a little strange but all Hall or Motu does when we have the ball is become an extra back anyway. It would also go a long way to solving our dire full back problem[/i]

Re: Thorman : Sat Apr 11, 2009 11:16 am  

Jake the Peg wrote:

He's rubbish, can't organise anything, poor decision maker, slow as ferk and kicking game isn't what it was built up to be.

I'd rather see lee at 7 (and that is saying something)

Discuss

Thorman isnt the problem. Richard Horne has been as bad. The problem is our gameplan that they are told to work to.

: Sat Apr 11, 2009 11:46 am  

he's rubbish, slow and has a poor kicking game

we looked better when we shuffled it all round after Briscoes injury and he was out the way at fullback, his kicking for most of the game was atrocious

Chris Thorman : Sat Apr 11, 2009 11:52 am  

I've lost count of the number of times Thorman puts a seemingly good ball in to space, but the follow up player is either missing or over running the ball. It just looks like they are on a different wavelength.

[Chris71]

Re: Thorman : Sat Apr 11, 2009 12:00 pm  

Big Dave T wrote:

The problem is our gameplan that they are told to work to.

Have to say I agree with this except I honestly don't think they are given a game plan to work to, its the same crap play of one man rugby and a kick and hope that we had under Sharp. Nothing has changed for me and we struggle to make any ground at all and if & when we occasionally get into the oppositions 20 we looked devoid of any ideas of breaking through the defensive lines.

We still lack players running onto the ball at pace, dummy runners, angles and support play of any kind.

: Sat Apr 11, 2009 12:00 pm  

I, like many others, wasn't very excited about the signing of Thorman but was prepared to give him a chance and hope that I was wrong.

I WASN'T !!!

He is an average stand off or full back for a mid-table SL squad. We can call him a scrum half as often as we like but he isn't one. Like the signing of the coach, we have tried to do it on the cheap again and we have got exactly what we have paid for.

BUY CHEAP, BUY TWICE !!!