Signings, Suggestions & Rumours Discussion

Saw a headline Eels shopping for a fullback! All in for a massive bid for Gutho?! Strike power Tigers need!!!
 
tony soprano said:
Context is we also trader klemmer and got Bateman which we needed.

But that doesn't fit the narrative being pushed
Click to expand...
Because it’s rubbish.
Klemmer wanted out and the Knights didn’t want him.
You don’t think they wouldn’t have swapped him for Brooks if they could have after they stated publicly they were chasing Brooks?
Klemmer was on $800k there.
We could have swapped and got most of Brooks’ money.
Sheens obviously wouldn’t let Brooks go and wasn’t a fan of Hastings so that was his plan.
As for Bateman refusing to play with Hastings?
Rumour at best with nothing to back it up.
 
cktiger said:
Because it’s rubbish.
Klemmer wanted out and the Knights didn’t want him.
You don’t think they wouldn’t have swapped him for Brooks if they could have after they stated publicly they were chasing Brooks?
Klemmer was on $800k there.
We could have swapped and got most of Brooks’ money.
Sheens obviously wouldn’t let Brooks go and wasn’t a fan of Hastings so that was his plan.
As for Bateman refusing to play with Hastings?
Rumour at best with nothing to back it up.
Click to expand...

None of us really know the details but from reading the tea leaves there was no need to swap anyone to get Klemmer. They Knights wanted him gone probably because they had too much money tied up in middle forwards.

We could have just let Brooks go and paid a premium but we had already backended his contract so we are paying that now anyway.

The reality is the club saw Brooks as being a better option than Hastings. So far that looks like a poor decision.

Let's see what happens over the course of the season.
 
balmain boy said:
Why would it have been two years when he only had one year left on his contract (this year).
Click to expand...
Oh well then I'm wrong on what I remembered about costing Tigers 2 years - I always thought Brooks was off contract end 2024.

Still, the reports were that Tigers would have had to cough up hundreds of thousands to have Brooks playing somewhere else, and obviously they decided that was not a good deal. I personally don't understand why some people think that's fine, and it's very very easy to mentally speculate with other people's money.

I also understand why Sheens and Benji may have thought they could get Brooks playing good football again - the player himself is obviously capable of being a decent halfback. Benji is one of the most experienced halves still involved in the game.

Prior to Sheens, Madge, Cleary, JT and Mick Potter all selected Brooks as first-choice halfback, so there must be some contagious generalised madness for incoming Tigers coaches around Brooks.

But unfortunately, like almost the entire side, Brooks is supremely low on confidence and it shows. He doesn't deserve to be picked every week and we'd replace him if there were clearly superior options.

It would also be much more straightforward to punt Brooks if he was the only weak link, but there are at least half a dozen other Tigers players playing way below their proven best - Doueihi, Joffa, Twal, Stefano, IP, Koroisau etc.
 
kiwitiger said:
Hastings is not that good.
The way people talk about him makes him sound like cooper cronk.
If we kept him and got rid of brooks we would still need better
Click to expand...
Dude...ffs...Hastings is better than Brooks hands down!!! How many seasons has Brooks had so far to prove himself? & how many more do supporters need suffer. Look at the season so far...0-4. We have a half decent forward pack & reasonable backs...so who is the weakest link?!
 
Reports
RTS to stay in NZ Rugby or go to Japan ona $ 1 million deal for 16 weeks , he won’t return to the NRL. Bugger I thought he would be gun Fullback for us , Next
 
Noggon said:
Dude...ffs...Hastings is better than Brooks hands down!!! How many seasons has Brooks had so far to prove himself? & how many more do supporters need suffer. Look at the season so far...0-4. We have a half decent forward pack & reasonable backs...so who is the weakest link?!
Click to expand...
Dude...the knights won't play finals this year either. Hastings might be better than brooks but he is not good enough a nrl level either...
 
liltiger said:
Maybe, only time will tell.
Click to expand...
No, that's wrong, this isn't the 90s. the game has moved on, the present is telling us this.

Which props in the game are considered the best in their position, and how old are they? How many 30 year old props are labelled elite, and not at the backend of their careers
 
Earl said:
None of us really know the details but from reading the tea leaves there was no need to swap anyone to get Klemmer. They Knights wanted him gone probably because they had too much money tied up in middle forwards.

We could have just let Brooks go and paid a premium but we had already backended his contract so we are paying that now anyway.

The reality is the club saw Brooks as being a better option than Hastings. So far that looks like a poor decision.

Let's see what happens over the course of the season.
Click to expand...
Brooks won’t get better man. The club made a mistake in letting Hastings go. He’s not the greatest half to play, but he can do his job. He wouldn’t have got the club he’s playing for to a GF, but he would’ve made them threatening. Something Brooks can’t do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Staff online

Members online

Total: 457 (members: 19, guests: 438)
Back
Top