Your Nines Squad...

Off-season, Pre-Season and Round Archive
supercoach
Member
Member
Posts: 7029
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 2:38 pm

Re: Your Nines Squad...

Post by supercoach » Tue 17 Jan, 2017 2:42 pm

As a group they will get a hell a lot more out of the nines by being very competitive and successful than just making up the numbers and sending a average squad over there. Even from a marketing point of view its a no brainer. Okay sure there is the injury worry but as I said that is ever present 24/7 anyway


gallagher
Member
Member
Posts: 5340
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 1:18 pm

Post by gallagher » Tue 17 Jan, 2017 5:26 pm

2041 wrote:
gallagher wrote:
2041 wrote:
gallagher wrote::(
I agree.
It's a mickey mouse comp because the clubs generally don't send their stars. If all the big names went it would attract bigger crowds and more sponsors making it a bigger event. That would bring in more money for the clubs and players.
Rugby league bosses don't understand that they are in the entertainment business. its a very narrow minded sport.
There is a limit to the amount first-grade players can play at top level without losing effectiveness or having too many of them get injured. Pre-season is all about getting players ready for the demands of a long, gruelling season ahead. It's narrow minded of fans to expect star players to be available to fulfill any whim of the scheduling calendar.

Personally I feel the nines is about as good a compromise as it can be. Coaches and most clubs would probably rather it didn't exist at all, the organisers and media would like more stars to take part. Players, I imagine, are largely indifferent. In the end we get a watered down comp which, after several months of no football, is just about diverting enough to keep some of us interested. That's about as good as it's going to get.
I disagree, rhe nines is not really grueling work.
On one side there's you, who asserts that the nines is easy work and everyone should send full-strength squads. On the other there is basically every NRL coach, who believe it's unhelpful for full-season preparation. I know who I'm going to believe.
I think they'd be more worried about injury than burn out. We wouldn't have origin if it was up to the coaches.

User avatar
2041
Member
Member
Posts: 1076
Joined: Fri 14 Jan, 2011 12:32 pm

Post by 2041 » Wed 18 Jan, 2017 11:39 am

gallagher wrote:
2041 wrote:
gallagher wrote:
2041 wrote:
There is a limit to the amount first-grade players can play at top level without losing effectiveness or having too many of them get injured. Pre-season is all about getting players ready for the demands of a long, gruelling season ahead. It's narrow minded of fans to expect star players to be available to fulfill any whim of the scheduling calendar.

Personally I feel the nines is about as good a compromise as it can be. Coaches and most clubs would probably rather it didn't exist at all, the organisers and media would like more stars to take part. Players, I imagine, are largely indifferent. In the end we get a watered down comp which, after several months of no football, is just about diverting enough to keep some of us interested. That's about as good as it's going to get.
I disagree, rhe nines is not really grueling work.
On one side there's you, who asserts that the nines is easy work and everyone should send full-strength squads. On the other there is basically every NRL coach, who believe it's unhelpful for full-season preparation. I know who I'm going to believe.
I think they'd be more worried about injury than burn out. We wouldn't have origin if it was up to the coaches.
There is also the fact that basically no other successful sport in the world is going down the route of adding more competitions - with the possible exception of cricket, I guess. Sports administrators know that fans have limited capacity to care about new tournaments, and teams know that without massive squads they simply can't play full intensity for endless games.

Soccer: big clubs basically care about their domestic league and the Champions League. Star players are routinely rested for domestic cup competitions and the UEFA Cup. Big teams play lots of money-spinning friendlies, but with mixed squads and at low intensity.
NFL: the pro bowl has become a half-pace, non-contact knockabout. Efforts to extend the regular season to 18 from 16 games have encountered significant resistance.
Rugby union: a bit different because the international game dominates, but fixture congestion and player burnout is a major issue especially in Europe. Sevens is now a completely separate code with no player crossover.
AFL: the pre-season tournament is viewed as a warm up by most/all teams, and played at half pace. The international rules games have all but disappeared.
Cricket: the addition of T20 has been a huge game-changer, of course - but mainly because there is more cash in the new version of the game than the old one. Interest in 50 over and test cricket is declining, player (especially bowler) fatigue is a huge issue, and you don't see international players turning out for their clubs or even states more than once or twice a year for a tune up.

And yet you want NRL clubs not only to commit their full squads to a meaningless pre-season tournament played under completely different rules but to go at it full-intensity? It's nonsense.

What players are training for in pre-season is the demands of regular season rugby league. Playing 80 minutes, defensive structure, honing set moves. None of this stuff applies to nine-a-side football in short bursts - it's a totally different code and not helpful for preparing for the real season.

happy tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 40468
Joined: Sun 27 Feb, 2011 4:49 pm

Post by happy tiger » Wed 18 Jan, 2017 11:55 am

2041 wrote:
gallagher wrote:
2041 wrote:
gallagher wrote: I disagree, rhe nines is not really grueling work.
On one side there's you, who asserts that the nines is easy work and everyone should send full-strength squads. On the other there is basically every NRL coach, who believe it's unhelpful for full-season preparation. I know who I'm going to believe.
I think they'd be more worried about injury than burn out. We wouldn't have origin if it was up to the coaches.
There is also the fact that basically no other successful sport in the world is going down the route of adding more competitions - with the possible exception of cricket, I guess. Sports administrators know that fans have limited capacity to care about new tournaments, and teams know that without massive squads they simply can't play full intensity for endless games.

Soccer: big clubs basically care about their domestic league and the Champions League. Star players are routinely rested for domestic cup competitions and the UEFA Cup. Big teams play lots of money-spinning friendlies, but with mixed squads and at low intensity.
NFL: the pro bowl has become a half-pace, non-contact knockabout. Efforts to extend the regular season to 18 from 16 games have encountered significant resistance.
Rugby union: a bit different because the international game dominates, but fixture congestion and player burnout is a major issue especially in Europe. Sevens is now a completely separate code with no player crossover.
AFL: the pre-season tournament is viewed as a warm up by most/all teams, and played at half pace. The international rules games have all but disappeared.
Cricket: the addition of T20 has been a huge game-changer, of course - but mainly because there is more cash in the new version of the game than the old one. Interest in 50 over and test cricket is declining, player (especially bowler) fatigue is a huge issue, and you don't see international players turning out for their clubs or even states more than once or twice a year for a tune up.

And yet you want NRL clubs not only to commit their full squads to a meaningless pre-season tournament played under completely different rules but to go at it full-intensity? It's nonsense.

What players are training for in pre-season is the demands of regular season rugby league. Playing 80 minutes, defensive structure, honing set moves. None of this stuff applies to nine-a-side football in short bursts - it's a totally different code and not helpful for preparing for the real season.
The T20 comparison just makes me laugh , worse case you bowl 24 balls or maybe face 70 balls and they pay you probably 10 times as much for it

And they complain about fatigue

What because their wallets are too heavy to carry ?? :roll

Fade To Black
Member
Member
Posts: 5411
Joined: Tue 21 Feb, 2012 5:51 pm

Post by Fade To Black » Wed 18 Jan, 2017 4:21 pm

2041 wrote:
gallagher wrote:
2041 wrote:
gallagher wrote: I disagree, rhe nines is not really grueling work.
On one side there's you, who asserts that the nines is easy work and everyone should send full-strength squads. On the other there is basically every NRL coach, who believe it's unhelpful for full-season preparation. I know who I'm going to believe.
I think they'd be more worried about injury than burn out. We wouldn't have origin if it was up to the coaches.
There is also the fact that basically no other successful sport in the world is going down the route of adding more competitions - with the possible exception of cricket, I guess. Sports administrators know that fans have limited capacity to care about new tournaments, and teams know that without massive squads they simply can't play full intensity for endless games.

Soccer: big clubs basically care about their domestic league and the Champions League. Star players are routinely rested for domestic cup competitions and the UEFA Cup. Big teams play lots of money-spinning friendlies, but with mixed squads and at low intensity.
NFL: the pro bowl has become a half-pace, non-contact knockabout. Efforts to extend the regular season to 18 from 16 games have encountered significant resistance.
Rugby union: a bit different because the international game dominates, but fixture congestion and player burnout is a major issue especially in Europe. Sevens is now a completely separate code with no player crossover.
AFL: the pre-season tournament is viewed as a warm up by most/all teams, and played at half pace. The international rules games have all but disappeared.
Cricket: the addition of T20 has been a huge game-changer, of course - but mainly because there is more cash in the new version of the game than the old one. Interest in 50 over and test cricket is declining, player (especially bowler) fatigue is a huge issue, and you don't see international players turning out for their clubs or even states more than once or twice a year for a tune up.

And yet you want NRL clubs not only to commit their full squads to a meaningless pre-season tournament played under completely different rules but to go at it full-intensity? It's nonsense.

What players are training for in pre-season is the demands of regular season rugby league. Playing 80 minutes, defensive structure, honing set moves. None of this stuff applies to nine-a-side football in short bursts - it's a totally different code and not helpful for preparing for the real season.
We have to play in the 9's tournament so we may as well try and win the thing. Give the players a tiny sniff of some actual success.


User avatar
innsaneink
Member
Member
Posts: 28883
Joined: Fri 10 Jul, 2009 9:49 pm
Location: ...ahead of you....

Post by innsaneink » Wed 18 Jan, 2017 4:36 pm

Disappointed to hear a negative attitude from the coach and club about a competition we are in.
White flag raised.
I appreciate the honesty.... And I see both sides of the argument... But as a fan I want my team to have a good hard dig every single time they run out even if it's handball or hopscotch their competing in

User avatar
2041
Member
Member
Posts: 1076
Joined: Fri 14 Jan, 2011 12:32 pm

Post by 2041 » Wed 18 Jan, 2017 4:41 pm

Fade To Black wrote:
2041 wrote:
gallagher wrote:
2041 wrote:
On one side there's you, who asserts that the nines is easy work and everyone should send full-strength squads. On the other there is basically every NRL coach, who believe it's unhelpful for full-season preparation. I know who I'm going to believe.
I think they'd be more worried about injury than burn out. We wouldn't have origin if it was up to the coaches.
There is also the fact that basically no other successful sport in the world is going down the route of adding more competitions - with the possible exception of cricket, I guess. Sports administrators know that fans have limited capacity to care about new tournaments, and teams know that without massive squads they simply can't play full intensity for endless games.

Soccer: big clubs basically care about their domestic league and the Champions League. Star players are routinely rested for domestic cup competitions and the UEFA Cup. Big teams play lots of money-spinning friendlies, but with mixed squads and at low intensity.
NFL: the pro bowl has become a half-pace, non-contact knockabout. Efforts to extend the regular season to 18 from 16 games have encountered significant resistance.
Rugby union: a bit different because the international game dominates, but fixture congestion and player burnout is a major issue especially in Europe. Sevens is now a completely separate code with no player crossover.
AFL: the pre-season tournament is viewed as a warm up by most/all teams, and played at half pace. The international rules games have all but disappeared.
Cricket: the addition of T20 has been a huge game-changer, of course - but mainly because there is more cash in the new version of the game than the old one. Interest in 50 over and test cricket is declining, player (especially bowler) fatigue is a huge issue, and you don't see international players turning out for their clubs or even states more than once or twice a year for a tune up.

And yet you want NRL clubs not only to commit their full squads to a meaningless pre-season tournament played under completely different rules but to go at it full-intensity? It's nonsense.

What players are training for in pre-season is the demands of regular season rugby league. Playing 80 minutes, defensive structure, honing set moves. None of this stuff applies to nine-a-side football in short bursts - it's a totally different code and not helpful for preparing for the real season.
We have to play in the 9's tournament so we may as well try and win the thing. Give the players a tiny sniff of some actual success.
Manchester City have to play in the English League Cup. You think their management would do anything other than laugh if they saw Chelsea running out their first choice team and playing flat out against Rotherham in the early rounds? Wasting effort on Mickey Mouse tournaments is the mark of a Mickey Mouse outfit. The serious sides will focus on what matters to them - and it sure as hell won't be this bit of pre-season hit 'n' giggle.

Fade To Black
Member
Member
Posts: 5411
Joined: Tue 21 Feb, 2012 5:51 pm

Post by Fade To Black » Wed 18 Jan, 2017 4:47 pm

Agree with Ink.....Taylor coming out and stating that WT are not interested in doing well at the 9's has that real Nick Kyrgios feel about it, competing half-arsed instead of having a winner's attitude of trying to go full bore at everything.
The threat of potential injuries excuse being trotted out by some is a poor one, you are more likely to get hurt playing without total commitment anyway and let's not forget David Kidwell in his playing days rupturing his ACL stepping over his toddler at a bloody BBQ or John Simon at the Steelers slicing tendons in his foot after trying to stand up on a soap-holder in the shower and it broke. Injuries are mostly just a fate thing, if you're gonna get them they can happen regardless of what you are doing.

Fade To Black
Member
Member
Posts: 5411
Joined: Tue 21 Feb, 2012 5:51 pm

Post by Fade To Black » Wed 18 Jan, 2017 4:57 pm

2041 wrote:
Fade To Black wrote:
2041 wrote:
gallagher wrote: I think they'd be more worried about injury than burn out. We wouldn't have origin if it was up to the coaches.
There is also the fact that basically no other successful sport in the world is going down the route of adding more competitions - with the possible exception of cricket, I guess. Sports administrators know that fans have limited capacity to care about new tournaments, and teams know that without massive squads they simply can't play full intensity for endless games.

Soccer: big clubs basically care about their domestic league and the Champions League. Star players are routinely rested for domestic cup competitions and the UEFA Cup. Big teams play lots of money-spinning friendlies, but with mixed squads and at low intensity.
NFL: the pro bowl has become a half-pace, non-contact knockabout. Efforts to extend the regular season to 18 from 16 games have encountered significant resistance.
Rugby union: a bit different because the international game dominates, but fixture congestion and player burnout is a major issue especially in Europe. Sevens is now a completely separate code with no player crossover.
AFL: the pre-season tournament is viewed as a warm up by most/all teams, and played at half pace. The international rules games have all but disappeared.
Cricket: the addition of T20 has been a huge game-changer, of course - but mainly because there is more cash in the new version of the game than the old one. Interest in 50 over and test cricket is declining, player (especially bowler) fatigue is a huge issue, and you don't see international players turning out for their clubs or even states more than once or twice a year for a tune up.

And yet you want NRL clubs not only to commit their full squads to a meaningless pre-season tournament played under completely different rules but to go at it full-intensity? It's nonsense.

What players are training for in pre-season is the demands of regular season rugby league. Playing 80 minutes, defensive structure, honing set moves. None of this stuff applies to nine-a-side football in short bursts - it's a totally different code and not helpful for preparing for the real season.
We have to play in the 9's tournament so we may as well try and win the thing. Give the players a tiny sniff of some actual success.
Manchester City have to play in the English League Cup. You think their management would do anything other than laugh if they saw Chelsea running out their first choice team and playing flat out against Rotherham in the early rounds? Wasting effort on Mickey Mouse tournaments is the mark of a Mickey Mouse outfit. The serious sides will focus on what matters to them - and it sure as hell won't be this bit of pre-season hit 'n' giggle.
I don't think anybody is suggesting that WT should make winning the 9's tournament their major goal and sole focus for season 2017. Obviously the regular season is where you want to shine.
But having a who cares, lazy attitude at the start of a new season will surely seep into our players' mindset just a few weeks after when the real stuff begins. That sort of attitude is the sign of an underachieving, soft club that let's face it our club is seen as in the eyes of many, many people in and around the NRL. You always hear champions stating how much they desperately want to win anything at all that they compete in. You wouldn't hear Floyd Mayweather say he is happy to cop a beating in sparring because it really doesn't mean anything.

jadtiger
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 3254
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 8:12 am
Location: bayview

Post by jadtiger » Wed 18 Jan, 2017 5:13 pm

Prepare to win play to win.Prepare to not have a go shows a very poor mind set.A team like us needs to start the year off on a high note.
It really is not good enough and continues the mediocrity is acceptable approach.

User avatar
Geo.
Member
Member
Posts: 29168
Joined: Fri 10 Jul, 2009 10:55 pm
Location: Perugia Italy..

Post by Geo. » Wed 18 Jan, 2017 5:17 pm

I'm sure the Squad selected will have a positive attitude ..those young and fringe players may also stake a claim or push their case for further NRL consideration...

No way I would send Teddy either ...
Ivan's Laws

1. You are either on the Bus or you are off..
2. The Star of the Team is the Team
3. Be the player your teammates want to play with..

formerguest
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 3962
Joined: Fri 07 Jun, 2013 7:33 pm

Post by formerguest » Wed 18 Jan, 2017 5:33 pm

I have no issue with WT only sending over the minimum requirement as we are fulfilling our commitment and one would assume those selected will be giving it their all. Not much difference in how I would allocate personnel when I was responsible as a supervisor, nor as part of my business.

User avatar
stryker
Member
Member
Posts: 10825
Joined: Sun 19 Jul, 2009 4:16 pm
Location: Cairns

Post by stryker » Wed 18 Jan, 2017 7:25 pm

Not trying your best to win everything you enter is a defeatist attitude. It is the attitude of the loser. Im embarrassed my club acts this way.

gallagher
Member
Member
Posts: 5340
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 1:18 pm

Post by gallagher » Wed 18 Jan, 2017 7:25 pm

Some like the nines, some don't. Its a pity that its gonna be killed off.

User avatar
GNR4LIFE
Member
Member
Posts: 22142
Joined: Mon 28 Feb, 2011 5:57 pm

Post by GNR4LIFE » Wed 18 Jan, 2017 7:29 pm

stryker wrote:Not trying your best to win everything you enter is a defeatist attitude. It is the attitude of the loser. Im embarrassed my club acts this way.
Have you seen the squads the Storm send over? They must have an defeatist attitude too

gallagher
Member
Member
Posts: 5340
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 1:18 pm

Post by gallagher » Wed 18 Jan, 2017 7:35 pm

GNR4LIFE wrote:
stryker wrote:Not trying your best to win everything you enter is a defeatist attitude. It is the attitude of the loser. Im embarrassed my club acts this way.
Have you seen the squads the Storm send over? They must have an defeatist attitude too
Your right, its just about across all clubs. I think the difference is that some clubs have that winning culture/feeling and some are still trying to attain it.

User avatar
stryker
Member
Member
Posts: 10825
Joined: Sun 19 Jul, 2009 4:16 pm
Location: Cairns

Post by stryker » Wed 18 Jan, 2017 7:50 pm

GNR4LIFE wrote:
stryker wrote:Not trying your best to win everything you enter is a defeatist attitude. It is the attitude of the loser. Im embarrassed my club acts this way.
Have yous[/spoiler] seen the squads the Storm send over? They must have an defeatist attitude too
I couldnt give a toss im talking about us.

User avatar
Geo.
Member
Member
Posts: 29168
Joined: Fri 10 Jul, 2009 10:55 pm
Location: Perugia Italy..

Post by Geo. » Wed 18 Jan, 2017 7:52 pm

Penrith must also be losers with Hook ruling out Moylan Cartwright Merrin Martin Watene-Zelezniak Whare Hiku Fisher-Harris Campbell-Gillard Peachey and Latu..to name a few..
Ivan's Laws

1. You are either on the Bus or you are off..
2. The Star of the Team is the Team
3. Be the player your teammates want to play with..

Post Reply