The problem with Smith is that he's had the other things you mention, but he's never really done the one in bold.

Matty's not having a great season injurywise, though is he?

My point is we havn't seen enough of either of them to make a judgement.

Yes against Bradford was last full game he played.







No.







Eastmond has 24 first team appearances for Saints, to Smiths 17 for Saints

In addition Smith has 8 appearances for Celtic.

So its pretty safe to say that Eastmond has played against nearly as much top class opposition as Smith.







not yet, but then neither can Matty Smith. The ability to control a game comes with experience.







Can any player? At this stage he is no more injury prone than Matty Smith

How did he play? I didn't go.











That may be the case, but on how many of those occassions has he been used at 7 for the duration? I can't remember him playing or being introduced in a tight game at seven. When he has played, generally it has been later in games when defences are tired and he is kind of given a free reign to go and run wherever.



Smith has played against the top teams, not least in the play-off eliminator against Leeds where he should have made the team for the Final with his performance.







From the times i've seen Smith, both at Saints and particularly at Celtic he has been the one controlling the play. It speaks volumes that in the game against Warrington they were winning until he was injured and likewise the first win was in his first game back from injury.









I agree. Smith has had a few injuries, of which one was a freak injury where he was kicked after putting in a kick. My point in reference to Eastmond is not only does he get the odd "serious" (for want of a better word) injury but he seems to be like Gilly and end up limping virtually every game.

There more I think about it, the more I think we might have missed a trick not giving Matty a decent run out at hooker. If Moore can make the transition there's no reason preventing Matty. He could be lethal kicking long out of the dummy half.

What I find annoying about your argument is that you seem to be quick to point out that you've never seen Eastmond "control" a game from 7, when you obviously know (as you've pointed it out) that he hasn't had much of a chance in his favoured position. Smith got a good once when long was injured, but since then Kyle's not had the same chance in terms of a run of games without Long being about.



As for the bit in bold, go and watch the game from the JJB earlier in the year. Kyle's presence at 1st receiver really settled us down, his varied kicking game was superb, he offered a threat to the line when in possession, kicked a touchline conversion and then banged over a 40m drop goal. His introduction was one of the biggest factors in us winning.



I was on this train of thought while Moore was at Cas, although since he's pulled it round at the Giants, I think he's trumped Matty on this front.

Maybe, but unless Roby gets moved elsewhere (which I think would be a bad move) I doubt that we would ever need him there.



I also think that Moores size is an advantage for him at nine, as we will be missing beef in the defensive line when KC retires.

I just hope Moore lives up to the hype. In the Hudds v Hull KR and France v England matches he looked very impressive indeed, but in his most recent Hudds match against Cas he looked back to his old self - penalties and wayward passes. One thing he seems to lack is a cool head when the going is tough - not a good thing for a hooker. Hopefully that will come with experience though; he's certainly come on in leaps and bounds this year.

but very understanable given his age. I'm sure that could be easily sorted.

Ideally he'd accept a one-year extension so we could have a look at a more mature Smith at scrum half and hooker. But I very much doubt he'll accept such terms given his age and potential.



Difficult decision. My heart's saying we can afford to lose Smith but my head's saying it's going to bite us on the .

I accept that but then my point is, which i haven't seen answered anywhere, is how can Eastmond possibly be touted so uniformly by everybody as the next and future number seven (people have even suggested he could go on to England etc) when, even by your admission he hasn't really had much chance there?



That is my entire point. Eastmond is a great talent, that i'm not disputing, but compared to Smith for the seven shirt i don't see how he can be deemed ahead in that race. I liken him to Kevin Penny in the respect that he has pace and has used it occassionally but other than that, in the first team we have seen very little.











I agree actually, he played well when he came on?



Was that when Long was out and Wilkin was seven?

a lot of the England players seem to have been down on thier usual best a bit this weekend.