Sorry Pellsey, but I wholeheartedly disagree. I don't think Goode is any better than Humphries in any department (except for having more experience and maybe staying calmer under pressure). I agree that having a solid 12 outside means you don't necessarily have to be a good runner but given the relatively few number of games Gibson (our only decent 12) plays at the moment I think we need a more complete fly half. IMO Humphries should be startingPellsey wrote:Maybe k1, but Goode is a better goal-kicker, a better positional kicker, a better passer and better in defence. Goode is not, at the moment, a good runner, but everybody has some weaknesses and IMHO that is not a complete requirement for that position assuming there is a good number 12 outside him to create the play.k1 wrote:He's a good goal-kicker, good poditional kicker, good runner, good passer and good in defence. Neither Goode nor Burke can testify to being all those things.
Ian Humpreys
Moderators: Tigerbeat, Rizzo, Tigers Press Office, Tigers Webmaster
-
dailywaffle
- Super User
- Posts: 7106
- Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 8:40 pm
- Location: NW Leics
Well, I'd say kicking was pretty even, both in accuracy and distance.
Based on last year Goode's defence is better, although Humphreys (
) looks like he has worked on that.
Humphreys is clearly the better runner; both can pass well.
Humphreys confidence seemed fragile last year, but Goode's is suspect under pressure.
Humphreys has the greater potential, as I have posted before Goode would probably benefit from a different environment.
Not much in it, but Humphreys has (IMO) earned a few 30-40 minute appearances for the 1st team. Loaning him to Leeds would so obviously be a mistake that I still can't quite believe it.
Based on last year Goode's defence is better, although Humphreys (
) looks like he has worked on that.Humphreys is clearly the better runner; both can pass well.
Humphreys confidence seemed fragile last year, but Goode's is suspect under pressure.
Humphreys has the greater potential, as I have posted before Goode would probably benefit from a different environment.
Not much in it, but Humphreys has (IMO) earned a few 30-40 minute appearances for the 1st team. Loaning him to Leeds would so obviously be a mistake that I still can't quite believe it.
-
simon redshaw
- Super User
- Posts: 4454
- Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 8:50 am
- Location: Tonbridge
NO TIGER NO!! DON'T DO THIS!!
BANGS HIS HEAD IN FRUSTRATION!!
Paul Burke is not the first choice fly-half or possibly even back-up fly-half we need. Sooner, rather then later we are going to need to call on Ian Humphries. He hasn't been given much first team experience and I would like to see him given a few replacements chances to give him more confidence.
Loaning Ian Humphries out to Leeds would be a bad move, considering our Fly-half resources when Andy Goode is not playing.
BANGS HIS HEAD IN FRUSTRATION!!
Paul Burke is not the first choice fly-half or possibly even back-up fly-half we need. Sooner, rather then later we are going to need to call on Ian Humphries. He hasn't been given much first team experience and I would like to see him given a few replacements chances to give him more confidence.
Loaning Ian Humphries out to Leeds would be a bad move, considering our Fly-half resources when Andy Goode is not playing.
-
simon redshaw
- Super User
- Posts: 4454
- Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 8:50 am
- Location: Tonbridge
-
Chris Lunson
- Top Cat
- Posts: 57
- Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 10:05 am
- Location: London
