Not if he's terrible there which he has been this year. Lomax has found his position and should be left there.

do people think the side will regain direction and effective attack with the return of roby and lomax?

It will improve a little yes. Lomax will take pressure off Wilkin and Roby's eyebrow would be more effective at hooker than Howarth

That's about 6 weeks away. Sure the season does not start till the playoffs, but the team could be shot to ribbons in terms of confidence by then.

Even so with a full compliment I put us as a top 4 side. To win stuff you still need a 7 and 6 and we have neither.

Some. Roby's a lot smarter around the ruck then people give him credit for. He'll get the pack working better.
Lomax being back will give us some direction back as he's such a threat that getting the ball to him will be a key part of our prep.

Makinson played pretty well. If he hadn't have dropped those 2 bombs, then I'd have said very well as he was a genuine threat with the ball. He's generally very good under the high ball.

I'd suggest that if Tom's decent form continues, Lomax [imay[/i be re-introduced at 6 outside Wilkin for a while. It s not particulary what I'd do, though, and Meli's injury/ban may throw a spanner in that works.

I'd say so. Makinson doesn't let us down playing fullback, play Lomax at 6 and we can still make use of Lomax and Makinson in attack.

Lomax needs a clear plan, or someone at #6 to guide him, if he's to play 7. He's tough and brave enough to play close to the line and possesses a very cute short passing game, so can be effective, but in games where he has the responsibilty of deciding where we're going as a team, indecision starts to creep in and his plays go to pot.

Instead of signing Hohaia, we should have thrown some cash at the retiring Darren Lockyer or Trent Barrett to partner him.

One other thing though is, imo, by far the weakest part of Lomax's game is his decision making in defence. It was woeful last year - totally unbecoming of a player with his talents. Putting him at fullback negates this weakness.

I [ireally[/i don't want this to happen, but it could be for the best [ushort term[/u until we get in some HBs. We are guaranteed to not bring anybody in which is a shame

But I really am uneasy about Makinson under the high ball and I don't know why. I'd have Lomax defending at #1 probably.

Try Swift In the halves that was his position when signed. He cannot be worse than Howarth,Heyho or wello and he has speed and good feet at least.

If Swift is capable of playing #6, why hasn't he played there yet?

Because Brown has chosen to go with Wello, Wilkin, Howarth or indeed just about anyone else other than our young halves. That he isn't playing there isn't necessarily a comment upon his ability or readiness to do so, you know.

I dunno how come Wello and Howarth have?

He was injured at the beginnning of the season and when Hohaia was injured. I think.

In todays League Express Martyn Sadler suggests we keep Makinson in the full back role and put Lomax in the halves when he is fit again.

Exactly...if he was capable you would think he would have played over said players.

He suggests it as a more appropriate temporary solution to what we are doing now, which sounds sensible. Makinson is doing fine at fullback and the team will adapt to his way of playing there. Until such time as we have a 6 and 7 on board, it makes sense to play Lomax in one of those positions. Six would be best so he can still roam and not have the responsibility (we would have to concede to Wilkin at 7 most likely), and six is where he always came top of his cohort according to Mike Rush.

Not really. He may not have the balls to do it.

Well if hes no better than Howarth we should get rid now.
Thankfully I think the kids a lot better and would do a better job than both.
Incidently Brown said that Gaskell was exactly the type of player we needed at standoff but changed his mind after three games.
So maybe he needs to have a rethink if hes ruled out Swift

Playing Lomax at 6 might work but would probably tempt the club to cut corners again and leave him there when I suspect 1 is his best position (in the modern game). Hopefully he will be our Darren Lockyer , he will rip it up at fullback for us for a few years and then as he matures as a player he could be moved back to 6 or 7.

Simple Solution is sign Longy for the rest of the year



1.Lomax
6.HiHo
7.Long
9.Roby
Waterboy. Wello
Rochdale Subs bench. Howarth

When Lomax is fit you put him in his best position which is Fullback.

He is electric in that position.

Putting him in the halves will turn him back into an average player.
People seem to be forgetting that in the modern game teams dont play with a scrum half and stand off. They play with a halfback who controls play down the right and one who controls it down the left.
If we therefore moved him back to the halves we would be reintroduced to the ineffective Lomax we saw earlier in the year.

The way i see it is that Makinson is being given an extended run at fullback rather than having Wello or Swift there, because the coach wants to improve Makinsons game awareness. He needs to learn how to read plays better, so that he knows when to be "johnny on the spot" to finish off an attacking move. Fullback is a position that demands you read the game both in attack and defence. In attack its about being able to spot the gap and know when to join the offensive line. These are all skills transferable to a winger or centre and its an area Makinson currently lacks.

Lomax will flounder at 6 alongside Wilkin as we'll be just as predictable as we were with him and Hohaia at 6 & 7. Put him back at 1 when he's fit. If we actually had a decent 6 or 7 in the team I may have had a different opinion but we don't.

I reckon that Swift won't go anywhere near the halves fro the same reason as above, others failings may well knock his career back years .

Agree.

We're not a team littered with stars but Lomax at full back is one.

Simpler solution would have been to give Gaskell more than 3 games before binning him off.

Gaskell or no Gaskell I'd still have Longy back. Something more than is in the public eye has gone on with Gaskell , it must have.

Agreed, whilst TM is OK at FB JL is a lot better.
Will it be worth swopping them just to see what JL can bring to the halves and thus losing what he bringd to FB?