Signings, Suggestions & Rumours Discussion

tigermate said:
sorry -- i don't agree with the first part.

hastings only wanted to go when sheens said he would pay him at Lock and didn't see him as a 7.

if sheens had wanted to keep him at 7 -- we would've let brooks go -- like Newcastle wanted.

Newcastle only turned their attention to Hastings -- when Sheens wouldn't let Brooks leave.

Now Sheens has neither Brooks or Hastings.

That's my point.
Click to expand...

I think what you say here is correct.

Hastings has been poor at 7 though for Newy, I'm not confident he would have been the answer for us in that position.
 
426Tlgerland said:
You would hope club has some good news soon
Brooks going
Tommy Going
Joffa Gone
Nofo , offered up
Blore , Offered up ( big mistake )
Laurie Offered up

we the punters need some good news Now
Click to expand...
Front loading contracts like last year it seems.

We must be the leaders in front loading contracts, and yet Brooks was on a heavily back ended contract. Go figure.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 851
Why is everyone so stressed about Tommy Talau officially signing for Manly in 2024 and thinking that'll jepordise the Fainu swap, if anything it just increased it.

Manly will try to get him over ASAP for this year as they're making a push for finals and needs as many outside backs as possible as they're dropping like flies.
 
426Tlgerland said:
You would hope club has some good news soon
Brooks going
Tommy Going
Joffa Gone
Nofo , offered up
Blore , Offered up ( big mistake )
Laurie Offered up

we the punters need some good news Now
Click to expand...
Many on this forum argued that they would be more than happy to see some of those players gone, go figure 🤔
 
king_sirro said:
king_sirro said:
I could delve into an analysis as to why Inglis was in the centres at the Storm (Slater fullback) and Latrell centre at the Roosters (Tedesco), but I know it will fall on deaf ears. Instead, since you mention my coaching, I will ask one simple question. When Latrell comes back for souths, would you play him in the centres and keep Taafe at fullback or would you put Latrell back to fullback?
Click to expand...

I could delve into an analysis as to why Inglis was in the centres at the Storm (Slater fullback) and Latrell centre at the Roosters (Tedesco), but I know it will fall on deaf ears. Instead, since you mention my coaching, I will ask one simple question. When Latrell comes back for souths, would you play him in the centres and keep Taafe at fullback or would you put Latrell back to fullback?
Click to expand...
That’s not analysis, it’s common sense. Slater and Tedesco were so much better at fullback than Inglis and Mitchell, that they may as well have been playing different sports.
Sure Inglis and Mitchell can play fullback when required. They can both play 5/8 as well....and wing.

Mitchell will return at fullback for the bunnies because they have no other decent options. If they did, he would be in the centers because he is not a great fullback:
At fullback, his win rate in 79 competition games is 63%, in 3 rep games his win rate is 33%.
At centre, his win rate in 77 competition games is 82%, in 18 rep games his win rate is 72%.

Im sure we can agree he has an impact on games in both positions, but the stats do not lie...his teams perform better with him in the centres as his involvements are more purposeful, direct and damaging, which is what this whole discussion has been about.
 
Tucker said:
That’s not analysis, it’s common sense. Slater and Tedesco were so much better at fullback than Inglis and Mitchell, that they may as well have been playing different sports.
Sure Inglis and Mitchell can play fullback when required. They can both play 5/8 as well....and wing.

Mitchell will return at fullback for the bunnies because they have no other decent options. If they did, he would be in the centers because he is not a great fullback:
At fullback, his win rate in 79 competition games is 63%, in 3 rep games his win rate is 33%.
At centre, his win rate in 77 competition games is 82%, in 18 rep games his win rate is 72%.

Im sure we can agree he has an impact on games in both positions, but the stats do not lie...his teams perform better with him in the centres as his involvements are more purposeful, direct and damaging, which is what this whole discussion has been about.
Click to expand...

So you would put Mitchell at fullback when he returns rather then in the centres where you say he is better and centres can have more influence on games then people think? Enough said.
 
king_sirro said:
So you would put Mitchell at fullback when he returns rather then in the centres where you say he is better and centres can have more influence on games then people think? Enough said.
Click to expand...
Its not enough said and I explained why using facts to back it up.
You are talking with your emotions and they are wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Staff online

Members online

Total: 420 (members: 20, guests: 400)
Back
Top