Signings, Suggestions & Rumours Discussion

Of course they had to bring Hastings over as lock whether it was their intention to play him there or not. As if they were going to let Brooks believe that he was going to replaced when he is the highest paid player in the team and had only ever played 7. They needed leadership on the field and Hastings provided that, and it didn't take long for him to be in the 7 and Brooks at 6.
What happens next year who knows because clearly there is still plenty to play out.
 

Now why would Brooks' management be talking to Newcastle when they aren't allowed to negotiate with him until November 1? Maybe he has permission from the club?

This not definitive enough for you from Sheens; Newcastle Herald as well. So where is your source?
 

This not definitive enough for you from Sheens; Newcastle Herald as well. So we're is your source?
Already posted it.

Didn't Sheens also say he's not in the market for a front rower? Pom tells us we've offered Klemmer a big contract.

Usually when you're trying to sell a car you make out it out to be more valuable than it really is to get the sale.

Continue defending Brooks/criticising Hastings all you like, I've got better things to do.
 
No one (Including me) Believed it - But that appears to be what's happening....

I argued strongly that Hastings was bought in to play 7 and I didn't believe a word out of Sheens mouth. Hastings was moved to 13 and it seemed to be via Sheens pushing for it. Paws to me has got it correct but none of it matters.

We'll find out over the course of the season.
 
Already posted it.

Didn't Sheens also say he's not in the market for a front rower? Pom tells us we've offered Klemmer a big contract.

Usually when you're trying to sell a car you make out it out to be more valuable than it really is to get the sale.

Continue defending Brooks/criticising Hastings all you like, I've got better things to do.
Did you read the article you posted? What is your view on this advice contained in the article (italics added)

Kent and James Hooper noted that Sheens has been solid on keeping Brooks all the way along.

“Sheens has shown no inclination in letting Luke Brooks go,” Kent said.

“I admire the Knights because they just keep chipping away.

“He has been consistent and solid on that from the word go, Tim Sheens,” James Hooper added.
 
I argued strongly that Hastings was bought in to play 7 and I didn't believe a word out of Sheens mouth. Hastings was moved to 13 and it seemed to be via Sheens pushing for it. Paws to me has got it correct but none of it matters.

We'll find out over the course of the season.

JH to 13 Also coincided with Doueihi coming back
- Doueihi wasn't injured when Hastings was signed...
Who knows how it plays out if he didn't go down.
 

Now why would Brooks' management be talking to Newcastle when they aren't allowed to negotiate with him until November 1? Maybe he has permission from the club?
They can negotiate with him anytime, but cannot formally offer him a contract until Nov 1, can’t believe this question still comes up.
The whole system is a joke, of course they would have unofficially “offered “ him by now if both camps are keen
 
Cant believe the hundreds of pro and anti Brooks posts . I believe the guy is a mixed bag . His tackling has improved over the years and he has a great turn of speed but his 5th tackle options always look rushed and indecisive but that has a bit to do with a pack that has no go forward and is on the back foot . His kicking game is at best ordinary .
In general I feel 9 years should be ample to make your mark and lock down that
No 7 jersey. Furthermore he is very structured last couple of years as opposed to instinctive eyes up footy . Maybe Sheens thinks he can change all that but
IMO I don't think so .
But what spine do we have
Laurie a small but gutsy fullback
Douehi can play 1, 3 ,4 or 6 I feel he is most value in centers given we are really lacking talent there
Hastings .he's main organiser on field and best place for that is at 7
even when he was at 13 he played like 2nd halfback .
If Brooks stays I would put him at 6 but keeping him is not my preference
Think you answered your own query.
 
Did you read the article you posted? What is your view on this advice contained in the article (italics added)

Kent and James Hooper noted that Sheens has been solid on keeping Brooks all the way along.

“Sheens has shown no inclination in letting Luke Brooks go,” Kent said.

“I admire the Knights because they just keep chipping away.

“He has been consistent and solid on that from the word go, Tim Sheens,” James Hooper added.
Kent and Hooper. That's gold 🤣🤣
 
Looks i think brooks should move on, he’s had his chance. But to say he is the worst 7 ever let me just run some names by you -
Michael Gillet
Ben Duckworth
Shane dunley
Ben black
Ben Jeffries
Glen Air
Adam Tippett
Ben reynolds
Kieren Kerr
Jacob Miller
Josh Drinkwater

Just to make a few halves.
Ben Duckworth was a ball playing lock , a handy player at that
 
Looks i think brooks should move on, he’s had his chance. But to say he is the worst 7 ever let me just run some names by you -
Michael Gillet
Ben Duckworth
Shane dunley
Ben black
Ben Jeffries
Glen Air
Adam Tippett
Ben reynolds
Kieren Kerr
Jacob Miller
Josh Drinkwater

Just to make a few halves.
Many of those listed the most highly paid player at their club?
 

Latest posts

Staff online

Back
Top