Staffs FC wrote:It's his kicking game that has disappointed me. Take the up and under that led to his ban - not a good one. And there have been many grubbers he has put in that his team mates had no idea were going to be kicked where they were. That shows a lack of organisation and communication by him.
I like the player and still think he will be the answer to our medium term half back requirement. But he needs to be more consistent particularly with his kicking and he needs to commit defenders a little more than he does at times. That doesn't make him a 'victim' as you somewhat bizarrely put it. It just means he needs to improve as do many other of our players.
Agree about the kicking game.
The committing defenders is part of what I mean. His running game has been very hit and miss, as has been several half's before him. IMO part of that is because a) we don't commit enough runners in support often enough, so defenders don't have much of a decision to make, and then when they do commit there are no viable options for him so he's caught in possession, and b) our ptb speed is usually not quick enough, so he does not have the benefit of running at a scrambling defence. Another area I'd highlight because of these factors is his long passing. Several times this season we have had the second row and centre almost stationery near opposition defenders with the winger with open space in front of him. We've then tried the long ball over the top which has often been misjudged.
I don't mean victim in the sense that he is not at all at fault, I mean he is a victim of the Hull FC situation where we make it harder for our halfbacks than it should be. Chances are still there, but there is increased pressure on the halfbacks to execute almost perfectly nearly all the time. It's why it's so noticeable when they have even a slight off day IMO. It's like we need our halves to play at 95% of their ability every week, whereas some other teams' can get away with 80% sometimes and still get the job done.
