I hope tim smith proved some people wrong today thought the kid di very well give some great balls out to our centres, ok one or two dodgy kicks but i thought the kicks to the corners were excellent

The lad has talent. For all his problems, he's not the problem at Wigan.

I thought he had a good game for you lot tonight, Bossed the side around well and give your team some width .

I want him to progress but @ 7 not 6, We need a descent 6. Smith just needs to be consistent. After all bad players don't win Dally M's

i agree pal, but its like i said in other posts at wigan it dont really matter if you have 6 or 7 on your back they split the field, i hope he can carry on with what he shown today

In modern rugby 6, 7 & 9 should all be playing from the same play sheet, at this point in time 6, 7, & 9 are disjointed they should be link players not individuals.

Excellent in attack but being caught out in defense.

I take it that he hasn't learned to tackle since last week then. They were possibly the two worst attempts at tackles I've seen for years for the 2 Wakey tries.

Smith was shocking against Wakefield.

He appears to have had a better game at Hull but I would still be concerned about him, not so much for his tackling but his apparent lack of fitness, particularly in the second half in the Wakey game.

We are simply carrying too many players at the moment who aren't up to the physical demands of SL. Whether that's players who are physically too weak like Mathers and Phelps or too unfit like Smith, Riddell and (to a lesser extent) Feka.

Until someone gets a grip on the backroom side of the club and the whole culture changes, replacing BN, the captain, individual players will just be tinkering around the edges really.

Was pleased with Smith - despite minor errors (i.e. making a break but losing the ball just ebfore playing it), he's a fab organiser and reminds me of Longy with his speed to spot thing happening and to create things out of nothing.

A very talented player and has the potential to be the best 7 in SL. The problem is, he is a specialist 7, not a 6.

At most SL clubs, there is no diffeence at all in the modern game. They operate down either side of the field. There's no link work anymore.

Your wrong. I agree for alot of players there is no difference but Tim Smith is an out and out 7 - a classic ball player not a runner which is why he should not be a second reciever.

That is the issue.

He doesnt play as a second receiver.

He plays down the right and tommy down the left. We play a structured approach based on 2 scrum halves. This is all wrong in my opinion and we need timmy at 7 with a second receiver at 6

Smith was first receiver most of the time last night.

Sounds promising...maybe Noble is realising?

He was by far your best player last night. He seemed to do a lot talking and he tried his best to lead the side around the pitch.

Wot about the kick he did which went out on the full and the next set hull scored off it.

Spot on!!

Well there was another break straight up the middle like Wakey did in the 1st minute last week - Hull bombed it completly. At one point as well he was defending on the wing!

what about the kick he put in for 2 of our tries, did hull not kick the ball out on the full

Blame the defending from the resulting set.

Not true. There is certainly not as much traditional link work but it is still there and just as important.

When Smith was coming on last season he gave Barrett acres of space to work in with his distribution.

He is an out and out 7.

It's funny that in Oz, they still have a lot of players who are out and out 7's or 6's. We don't.

If he hadnt kicked out on full they would have been 20 meters further back so proberly not gone over to score.

I'm not sure that anyone from a team with Sean Longs tackling record should criticise Tim Smith though.



[urlhttp://www.superleague.co.uk/statistics_player.php?hs1=2008&hp1=2014&hs2=2008&hp2=357&stat=missed_tackles&season=2008[/url