Chee-Kam

T

Tigerboy

Well-known member
Is there a specific reason this guy isn't playing?! Thought he played out of his skin against the Warriors and his utility value would be handy against a big Canberra pack - better than Lovett imho. Also Joel Edwards was impressive and would only improve against his old club at LO, thoughts on him starting and rowdy to the bench? :supporter:

Edit: why is siro in then out?? Especially if he's been resigned and in our top 25…
 
Welcome to the forum, in short i believe its due to the fact we have used all of our second tier salary cap and can only play if an injury occurs to a similar position player in the top 25 salary cap
 
@Kavi said:
Welcome to the forum, in short i believe its due to the fact we have used all of our second tier salary cap and can only play if an injury occurs to a similar position player in the top 25 salary cap
Click to expand...

Thanks mate. Well what about Liddle; even though he's not in our top 25 I think we'd have a fair case for not having an actual hooker right ? Need someone like him to exploit chinks in the green machine
 
@Tigerboy said:
@Kavi said:
Welcome to the forum, in short i believe its due to the fact we have used all of our second tier salary cap and can only play if an injury occurs to a similar position player in the top 25 salary cap

Thanks mate. Well what about Liddle; even though he's not in our top 25 I think we'd have a fair case for not having an actual hooker right ? Need someone like him to exploit chinks in the green machine
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Cherrington is fit to play meaning that Liddle is still illegible unfortunately.
 
I posted in the team thread, I think it's about minutes. JT's bench rotation requires a long-minute player in case of injuries, because he cannot leave Halatau on for the whole match.

MCK doesn't have those kind of long minutes in him.
 
@jirskyr said:
I posted in the team thread, I think it's about minutes. JT's bench rotation requires a long-minute player in case of injuries, because he cannot leave Halatau on for the whole match.

MCK doesn't have those kind of long minutes in him.
Click to expand...

Mate, surely you don't feel as if Lovett and CL are doing a better job than MCK and Siro would (siro is definitely an impact player) but I feel Chee kam does have enough minutes in him. I don't know why Lovett would be back if he was so 'sick' last week - he's also only effective for the first 15 minutes he is on anyway - but understand what you're saying.
 
@jirskyr said:
I posted in the team thread, I think it's about minutes. JT's bench rotation requires a long-minute player in case of injuries, because he cannot leave Halatau on for the whole match.

MCK doesn't have those kind of long minutes in him.
Click to expand...

Chee Kam played 55 odd minutes against the Warriors, made good metres and made his tackles. He did well for a bloke you think doesn't have the minutes in him. It's not only that, but Lovett doesn't dominate in any area. Yes he has improved but he is dominated in 95% of tackles, and when he tackles, yes he makes them but doesn't really dominate in those either.
 
@Tuiaki Chicken Wings said:
@jirskyr said:
I posted in the team thread, I think it's about minutes. JT's bench rotation requires a long-minute player in case of injuries, because he cannot leave Halatau on for the whole match.

MCK doesn't have those kind of long minutes in him.

Chee Kam played 55 odd minutes against the Warriors, made good metres and made his tackles. He did well for a bloke you think doesn't have the minutes in him. It's not only that, but Lovett doesn't dominate in any area. Yes he has improved but he is dominated in 95% of tackles, and when he tackles, yes he makes them but doesn't really dominate in those either.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

That's exactly the point! Neither does Lawrence although I love the bloke. Even ET is more of a caching sort of tackler, needs other blokes to help put them down - why we need a genuine hard hitter like Jedwards in for Lovett
 
Chee-Kam should 100% take lovetts spot.

He has been playing in the centres as well this year in NSW Cup….so he gives us alot more versatility in the event he needs to go out there and cover Leilua.....just in case we lose a centre or back during the game. He was more than good against the Warriors in the forwards over the weekend so to me its a no brainer.

Nice to know that going into Round 26 we have something to play for......its been too many years since that was the case at the WT.

Don't know if I would rush Teddy back though.....if he is close to fit then maybe Week 1 of the semi's if we make it.

1st time in years I've been a little excited.
 
@WTDiehard said:
Chee-Kam should 100% take lovetts spot.

He has been playing in the centres as well this year in NSW Cup….so he gives us alot more versatility in the event he needs to go out there and cover Leilua.....just in case we lose a centre or back during the game. He was more than good against the Warriors in the forwards over the weekend so to me its a no brainer.

Nice to know that going into Round 26 we have something to play for......its been too many years since that was the case at the WT.

Don't know if I would rush Teddy back though.....if he is close to fit then maybe Week 1 of the semi's if we make it.

1st time in years I've been a little excited.
Click to expand...

You'd have to think we're a slight chance!!! :smiley:
 
@matchball said:
@wd in perth said:
Cant ever recall Siro having an impact on a game. Not ever….

Correct. I'm not sure where is future lies. Obviously signed to the club because of his surname.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

He literally has 'Bench impact forward' written across his forehead?
Especially the way the game is headed, toward less interchanges.
 
I would prefer Chee-kam over Lovett.

Lovett has had plenty of opportunities to impress, not a bad player just an ok one.
 
I don't get the sudden attraction for him. He's yet to cement a fg position at any club he's played. He's a fringe first grader at best.
 
He 100% should be in the 17…..but I don't think our coach wants to tell his good buddy Kyle that he's not required.
A He can cover the centre position
B He has more impact in attack and defence
C We need impact off the bench
 
@maxxy86 said:
He 100% should be in the 17…..but I don't think our coach wants to tell his good buddy Kyle that he's not required.
A He can cover the centre position
B He has more impact in attack and defence
C We need impact off the bench
Click to expand...

x2
 
@maxxy86 said:
He 100% should be in the 17…..but I don't think our coach wants to tell his good buddy Kyle that he's not required.
A He can cover the centre position
B He has more impact in attack and defence
C We need impact off the bench
Click to expand...

Well summarized. It's a clear case of playing favourites instead of selecting the most potent bench players available. It takes courage in your conviction to drop a player that you like as a bloke and who tries hard but who does not bring enough impact to the bench. JT has clearly done some good work with the young Tigers team, but I cannot respect his inconsistency and poor decision making regarding team selections. I supported the strong stand of dropping Farah due to attitude issues but I can't support his refusal to replace an under performing player with someone who is in better from and has more versatility. Ridiculous - it's a make or break game!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 431 (members: 33, guests: 398)
Back
Top