You are missing the point Dave, they can all tackle to a very high degree. However, the attacking role of the full-back has developed significantly over the last few years and the position now utilises a different kind of player and as others have said, taking the high ball, plus kick returns together with coming into the attacking line are regarded as more important than making a certain percentage of one on one takles when a player breaks the line.
We all like to see a FB crunch an opposition player when they break through but, it seems to happen less frequently these days.

yeahhhhh I take you're point. Can't argue on that really (not that I was arguing as such)
although the question of "do you rate mathers?" I seemed to have flaked on a little.....

The answer to this is yes I do.

Great in the line, good under a high ball, positionally superb
BUT
whinges a lot, tackling isn't great, and it's just interestingly concerning that top coaches seem to have shifted him on fairly quickly over the last few years.

to me his + outweight his -

but if I was right, he'd have settled at Warrington and not come to Cas. And even Cas were quick to get shut.

funny carry on

What do you think Milwards problem was with RM, he never gave him a chance ?
It's not as though he'd screwed up in the first 10 games and tbf, the other guy hasn't exactly been a world beater.

Maybe you shouldn't have got shut

Cas aren't the first team to ship Mathers on.

he never gave him a chance correct... maybe it was decided that behind the scenes he wasn't worth one? I don't know any ins and outs as to what conversations took place - could have been related to training, who knows???

I'd have a fiver on cause it's due to how much he whines though. But that's as far as my guess would go. Based on nothing other than, I just said it lol

Well, I totally disagree about the attacking full back being some new fangled thing.
You could not get full backs any more attacking then Derek Edwards at Cas, the GB international Gerry Round at Trin, Wraith at Trin/Cas and Gary Cooper the ultimate attacking full back at Trinity.
He too had his critics defensively . but as an international centre , before settling at full back he could read when to join in the threequarters and cause havoc with his pace , swerve, sidestep and brilliantly timed passes.
Oh yes, also England international Les Sheard was a great attacking full back for us.
There are many more such as Paul Charlton GB international , and the great John Holmes GB /Leeds who could throw out long cut out passes matching those of King Wally.

As an outsider, it was a truly bizzare decision, to isolate one of the senior players in the squad, before a ball had been played seemed crazy and it certainly didn't galvanize the rest of the team, in fact it seemed as though there was unrest in the camp all season and you would have to agree that Cas were poor last season.
Obviously there were off field incidents and of course the sad loss of IM's son which was horrendous, so maybe thins will improve this season.
But, we still have Mighty Mathers and you have Santas helper

oh absolutely, I can't say I agreed with the decision - it baffled me as much as anyone. All I'm saying is whatever issues he left Leeds, Warrington and Cas for, he will probably take with him to Wakefield. Just cause we don't know what it is or see it happening doesn't mean it doesn't exist. There were underlying issues for his departure and if he was coming to my team, it'd concern me a little.

And yeah I agree, we have no excuses to not have a better year. If you look at our ins/outs we are far stronger - and obviously the death of our coach's son 6/7 games in didn't do us any favours. Not that we can single that out as a sole reason for poor results.

I also would say that Mathers is a better full back than Owen - you're spot on. But as for 'mighty mathers'........I'd maybe keep that one to yourself for now lol

When RM was at Cas Tigers the training regime included an early start (I think it was a 6am start finishing at 2pm). I don't know if they are still doing this. RM didn't like the idea of this so IM isolated him from the rest of the squad. I could understand RM not liking it due to having a newborn at the time which you would always put first.

If he did accept the changes though his handicap would have improved dramatically because after clocking off at 2 some of the players got a round of golf in.

Deary me, what a sensitive flower you are - be damned if I could see a personal attack but hey ho.

I agree it is not new at all. I just think the game has changed and so focusses on it more.
Saw some recent games with Paul Charlton and I was amazed how good he was. I knew his name but didn't know much about him.

As for Holmes v Lewis. Holmes was skillful and elusive but I'm not sure his long pass was as good as Lewis at all.

All this todays full back role has changed makes me laugh didnt the full back always have to deal with the high ball,kicks to touch,grubber kick and tackle and join the attacking line no matter if it was the unlimited,four or six tackle ruling etc.

Correct. The only difference now is that due to the limitations in the H/B's the FB is the only player with space and has now become a pivot player rather than the extra attacking option he once was. However it doesn't make todays FB's massively better than those of old.

All this about defensive v attacking is a bit of a misnomer imo.

It should be taken as read that a professional RL full back can make a huge majority of one-on-one tackles, pick up loose balls etc as just being the basics.

Barba, Slater, Bowen, Tomkins etc are "attacking fullbacks" but the still have the defensive basics to make them a solid last line of defence, its not often they miss "simple tackles". In fact i have seen all 4 of them make incredible defensive plays in the past couple of seasons that have saved certain tries.

Radlinski was hailed as a great defensive fullback because he always got the basics right and also made positive defensive contributions (such as being v reliable at taking high balls under pressure, last ditch tackles/preventing grounding etc). He had good attacking qualities (not in the mould of the 4 above mentioned) which were mainly to do with good support play and decision making rather than dazzling speed or footwork.

Mistakes made by the 4 quoted above are often magnified because of their attacking flair and also their inherent desire to take risks, but i dont think any of them are bad defensively.

Re Mathers, he has alot of positive contributions to make from fullback. My only disappointment with him is that he fails more often than he should in some of the basics that he really shouldnt fail in, such as picking up simple balls under little pressure and failing to prevent tries (like the one vs Widnes at home for example) - things that a Radlinski (or even the other elite fullbacks above) would not let happen. If Mathers gets the basics right he is an excellent fullback and i don't think we have anybody better, or are likely to get anyone better in the next few years.

Spot on, if Mathers could master the basics a little better he would be an excellent FB. My fear is it's getting a bit late in the day now, but fingers crossed.

Exactly.
Well said

Clearly not. There was no reason to kick the ball when you had unlimited tackles.
4th tackle you kicked for distance because you weren't as far up the field
Up and Unders were a definite 'Hail Mary' play where as 6th tackle and the more modern game has developed a bomb play that drops on the line. Changes in the rules of what happens when you field these kicks has also menat they occur more in the game. Fielding these kicks is more important now as it has developed into a main attack tool for some teams.

Teams can't target the fullback to run at him because there is always someone in front of him. They target the half backs now.
They CAN target them easily, from anywhere, if they are weak under the high ball.

a few posts ago i seemed to be the only critic of richard mathers , the only person who thought fullbacks should tackle but now i find theres afew on here feel the same thank god because id seiously thought what i was seeing on the field was an illusion, lwasnt actually seeing our full back sit on his behind as he attempted tackles,a lot of emphesis is put on his positional play ,but il say again defensivley when tries are scored against us on most occaisions our no1s defencive frailties are to blame

They still did though, no idea why. I was watching some old matches from the 60's and it was pretty shocking to be honest.

I quite like Mathers at the back, he does a lot of talking and organising. He is prone to errors at important times though and does miss some tackles.

Try scorer can you offer a better fb than mathers that's both available and affordable?

They have unlimited tackles in yawnion and they seem to do little else, other than kick the ball to each other

you say affordable as if mathers is on a low wage reports ihave heard say this aint so. My point as always been that it was foolish to throw a two year contract at a player putting him in acomfort zone which in my humble opinion his performances didnt deserve. Iknow my opinion wont mean a lot to some on here who can see no wrong in mr mathers but when i hear some one say hes better than owen a player with a load of potential if he can control his offfield antics i despair. In anwer to the other question thrown at me why didnt we make aserious bid for someone like gaskel out of favour at saints a quality player who was languishing in their reserves at the end of last season

Can we not just put this to bed !!

can for me

Hope he plays well on sunday otherwise it'll drag on and on and on and on