Well it looks like Shaul is the latest hate figure for some on here. Biggest problem I see with him is that he's been asked to play an attacking role that doesn't really suit his skill set. It's no huge secret that he doesn't have a great passing game but there are aspects of his game that don't seem to be getting used much these days. He can be a great supporting player and when we had forwards who were more prepared to use their offloading skills a couple of seasons back he was a genuine threat. Now it seems he's more a square peg in a round hole.
Maybe the team will change its style next year, a fit Westerman and Hadley would reduce the need for a ball playing full back. The other thing not noticed is that Shaul is one of the better defensive full backs around, though some of the rubbish served up in front of him has clouded this view recently. Nobody's place should be automatic and there is always room for improvement but to pick out Shaul as a major problem seems odd.
It's inevitable that Shaul's game will suffer when Sneyd, Connor, Kelly and Westerman are missing - they're are the "creative" players he (and the team) depends on. It's also inevitable that there are a few posters on here who will criticise anyone (and everyone) because that's all they do.
Is Hodgson the new Griffin, or is it all about pace?
Erik the not red wrote:Well it looks like Shaul is the latest hate figure for some on here. Biggest problem I see with him is that he's been asked to play an attacking role that doesn't really suit his skill set. It's no huge secret that he doesn't have a great passing game but there are aspects of his game that don't seem to be getting used much these days. He can be a great supporting player and when we had forwards who were more prepared to use their offloading skills a couple of seasons back he was a genuine threat. Now it seems he's more a square peg in a round hole.
Maybe the team will change its style next year, a fit Westerman and Hadley would reduce the need for a ball playing full back. The other thing not noticed is that Shaul is one of the better defensive full backs around, though some of the rubbish served up in front of him has clouded this view recently. Nobody's place should be automatic and there is always room for improvement but to pick out Shaul as a major problem seems odd.
Yeh I agree , and I find it hard to believe someone who's played rugby every day most of his life , can't pass a ball . I just. Don't think we've ever tried using Shaul in that way , because of our attacking structures and other personnel , granted Shaul gets caught in possession, but is that more down to our attacking structures or Shaul really can't pass a rugby ball ! I can't believe it's the latter . I think we all agree radfords not got much of an idea when it comes to attacking rugby . And I think he struggles to get the best out of our flair players and his completely one dimensional and stubborn with our attacking game
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
