Is nobody else getting bored of BK's offensive postings and trolling?

You really are the worst kind of pseudointellectual. There's no such word as constructual you muppet!

Yep

Could have sworn this was a thraed about Phil Bailey





Anyway back to the topic in hand, he's had 2 very strong games and has 'helped' Lockers to lead the side.



I've not seen Lockers as vocal as last week probably ever and thats great to see.



The message seems to be getting through to these players that all anybody expects is effort, if wins don't come they don't come but aslong as the effort is there we're happy enough.

Back on topic, i fail to see exactly how Locky cannot be accepted as a 13, what more does he need to add to his game. I was once in the stick him in the secondrow camp but he has proven himself in my opinion to have every trait a 13 needs.



Would love an explanation as to why some posters think he is still not a 13.

He's proved beyond doubt this year that he's a 13



He runs



He kicks



He passes



He scores trys



He sets them up



He gets through tonnes of work



Spot on!



When people talk about Joel Tomkins moving to 13 what do we think he'll bring to the position that Lockers can't?

At the moment Tomkins is every bit a secondrow, people need to accept that Locky is a very acomplished 13 and move on.

There hasn't been an explanation. Probably because there isn't one. I've seen a few misguided opinions though...do they count?

That isn't the right question IMO. The right question is IMO will the team be better with Lockers at 11 or 12 and Joel at 13 as opposed to the other way around.



It's about the team not individuals.



I definitely think it is worth a try for three reasons:



Lockers plays great in the 2nd row for GB



Joel plays much better at 13 than in the 2nd row, he played very well tonight when Lockers went off and did so last season when Lockers was injured.



Moving Lockers to 2nd row will help make up for the loss of Hock.



Dave

Only if backed up with mature debate and accurate spelling, so on this thread........No.

He did play well tonight but again i felt he played the game of a secondrow filling in for a natural 13.



Took his try well but again it came from a secondrow channel run.



Not directed at you but it seems to me the same people that dispare at the death of the creative 13 seem to want Locky pushed forward and Tomkins given the job, when in truth Locky is a far more complete player in all aspects of his creativity and natural "oldschool" 13 game.

Tomkins had to play 13 because Lockers was out last year and did a very good job but i think it's because he'd built up a great relationship with Barrett and getting regular games helped the 2 of them work on that relationship. He'd have built the same playing from second row imo.



Without Barrett he's struggled because nobody seems able to find him with the supply of balls that Barrett could. He's a great runner of the ball that hits gaps and has pace to get through them but unlike Lockers he doesn't do alot of the things expected of an out and out 13 like the kicking and passing.



Joels a wide running second rower and Lockers is a loose forward.....end of story imo.