He is playing the same role. He did that on the weekend.
This is clearly not true. Last year it was obvious that Brooks was the best long kicker in the team so that point is clearly wrong. The second point about Hastings winning us that game might be true but based on our results last season the evidence suggests it's not true.
He is playing the same role. He did that on the weekend.
This is clearly not true. Last year it was obvious that Brooks was the best long kicker in the team so that point is clearly wrong. The second point about Hastings winning us that game might be true but based on our results last season the evidence suggests it's not true.
I definitely agree that Brooks was taking the ball at second receiver but that is because he was taking the ball second man from middle forwards so our halves could operate on either side of the field. That is the Des Hasler James Graham strategy to split halves, which worked to a degree but eventually failed with lateral moving halves which is what we have. What is absent in that action is a vocal organising half or attacking minded organising forward, of whom there are pretty much none, who is sending messages to not only the second receiver but the structure outside him. That is where we are falling down - messaging on the field is not up to first grade standard.
I 100% agree that Brooks is the best kicker we have in our team but would you sacrifice his kicking ability to have leadership ability? I think a lot of people on this forum, and fans who aren't, would. Kicking mechanics are coachable - Seibold spoke on NRL360 tonight about sending Josh Schuster down to Carlton to develop a penetrating kicking style. It is common knowledge that Melbourne have partnered with various AFL clubs to develop the kicking style of their halves and hooker. Cameron Muster has a textbook AFL kicking style. Could Hastings not have developed that skill? Douhei already has the kick below the knee AFL mechanic in his kicking in addition to the spiral bomb from midfield, which is critical in my opinion to a modern NRL kicking offence.
What would benefit us more - Luke Brooks' physicality or a smart footballers organisational skills? We need organisation, we need leadership, we need a cool hand Luke (no pun intended) fulfilling the role as the steward and custodian of our side. Luke Brooks in particular does not offer that and after a decade in first grade is not even showing the potential to offer it. I think Luke Brooks has every single physical attribute to be a good, even above average, first grader but that is not what we need. We are losing because we have no brains - cut and dried.
One of the great privileges of playing for our club is that our fans stick with people who identify with our club - Nofa, Brooks, Liddle to some extent. It is our burden as fans to change the way we view these players. We need players who identify with our club - sure - 100% agree. However, these players also need to be better than competent first graders regardless of their junior club, their fandom or their personal attributes. I'd sign any man and his dog who could help us win games of footy at the moment irrespective of where they played their junior footy, who their heroes are or where their dad played.
After Hastings was suspended last season against Newcastle Brooks had his opportunity to lead as a mature player and he failed. Nothing has changed. He was awful last season and in the first two weeks of this season he has been equally, if not more awful. Why did the Dolphins sign Isaiya Katoa who has outperformed Brooks in the first two weeks for 1/5 of the price of Brooks contract and we still have Luke Brooks? Why did the catalyst of our two best results last season - Parramatta and Souths games - leave our club because he wasn't wanted when he would take less than a seasoned player who oozes negativity and ineptitude?
As a fan base we need to be more demanding of success and that starts with wanting the best players available in the game - not the best players available to us who are part of our club. Signing Api, Papali'i, Klemmer and Bateman is part of that - it is a way better recruitment drive than Mautalino, Packer, Mbye and Reynolds but the constants in our side that let us down remain and they not only let us down continually but they make these incoming competent, and in some cases exceptional players worse.
It is time for change for Brooks and Nofa at a bare minimum and we need to drive that change by being objective about our/their ability, our results and our direction. Can Brooks and Nofa play good football - yes. Can they play good football for us - on the sample size no.
