Harry Grant

Well I think Cam Smith at HB last week for the first part of the game, a little insight to why moving him permanently to the halves isn't such a hot idea. Not that he's dreadful, but totally dented when he gets the ball so far from the defensive line and he doesn't have the physicality (speed nor power) to worry the opposition as much when they've got time to watch him move. Storm totally shifted gears when Cam Smith went back to hooker.

Smith is the GOAT hooker, no idea why you'd plan to move him, not even if Jesus O'Nazareth himself was the next player in line. Smells like a Tim Sheens move a la R Farah to halfback.
 
Well if Grant wants to stay....works in our favour because I think he is our best fit going forward as a club.
If he goes back to Storm and Smith wants to be a permanent 9...we should make a play for him because he's got great footy in him.
Both go back and we stay with Liddle and Walters.....I think not as good as either Grant or Smith, but we certainly wouldn't have the worst hooking stocks in the league....
 
@facepalmer said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177393) said:
The way people talk up Simpkin makes me think he pretty much is a guaranteed top grader.

Maguire was involved in his recruitment. That is a good indication if how highly he is valued.
 
@Tigerlily said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177276) said:
![FB9646FD-B761-4AD2-9C3D-1302868CEA32.jpeg](/assets/uploads/files/1594195074241-fb9646fd-b761-4ad2-9c3d-1302868cea32.jpeg)

That's one weird way to draw his left arm.
 
@Sabre said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177306) said:
Rumour on LU that the loan deal will be extended for another season.

It’s what I’ve been suggesting the whole time. It buys both clubs an extra 12 months to sort out long term solutions.
 
@Furious1 said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177410) said:
@Sabre said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177306) said:
Rumour on LU that the loan deal will be extended for another season.

It’s what I’ve been suggesting the whole time. It buys both clubs an extra 12 months to sort out long term solutions.

Except someone will need to upgrade his money ! Why would the Tigers do that if it’s only for one year . Better to move on to Liddle then Simpkin and Walters is still on the books . Harry can return next season unless he wants to sign on long term !
 
@Snake said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177415) said:
@Furious1 said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177410) said:
@Sabre said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177306) said:
Rumour on LU that the loan deal will be extended for another season.

It’s what I’ve been suggesting the whole time. It buys both clubs an extra 12 months to sort out long term solutions.

Except someone will need to upgrade his money ! Why would the Tigers do that if it’s only for one year . Better to move on to Liddle then Simpkin and Walters is still on the books . Harry can return next season unless he wants to sign on long term !

If we have him for next year it is a good result for both parties. No issues with that at all, and gives Simpkin another year to develop.
 
@avocadoontoast said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177419) said:
@Snake said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177415) said:
@Furious1 said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177410) said:
@Sabre said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177306) said:
Rumour on LU that the loan deal will be extended for another season.

It’s what I’ve been suggesting the whole time. It buys both clubs an extra 12 months to sort out long term solutions.

Except someone will need to upgrade his money ! Why would the Tigers do that if it’s only for one year . Better to move on to Liddle then Simpkin and Walters is still on the books . Harry can return next season unless he wants to sign on long term !

If we have him for next year it is a good result for both parties. No issues with that at all, and gives Simpkin another year to develop.

The other variable next Year is the defence would of worked Harry out! So will Harry be as effective next season that is unknown and teams will have had a whole off season to reboot to the new rules .
 
@Snake said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177425) said:
@avocadoontoast said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177419) said:
@Snake said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177415) said:
@Furious1 said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177410) said:
@Sabre said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177306) said:
Rumour on LU that the loan deal will be extended for another season.

It’s what I’ve been suggesting the whole time. It buys both clubs an extra 12 months to sort out long term solutions.

Except someone will need to upgrade his money ! Why would the Tigers do that if it’s only for one year . Better to move on to Liddle then Simpkin and Walters is still on the books . Harry can return next season unless he wants to sign on long term !

If we have him for next year it is a good result for both parties. No issues with that at all, and gives Simpkin another year to develop.

The other variable next Year the defence would of worked Harry out! So will Harry be as effective next season that is unknown .

Nah, he's a keeper Snake. Quality like Grant doesn't come around very often and it's exceedingly rare that a team like the WT gets someone like him. If we can grab him for 2 seasons it's very fortunate.
 
@Snake said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177425) said:
@avocadoontoast said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177419) said:
@Snake said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177415) said:
@Furious1 said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177410) said:
@Sabre said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177306) said:
Rumour on LU that the loan deal will be extended for another season.

It’s what I’ve been suggesting the whole time. It buys both clubs an extra 12 months to sort out long term solutions.

Except someone will need to upgrade his money ! Why would the Tigers do that if it’s only for one year . Better to move on to Liddle then Simpkin and Walters is still on the books . Harry can return next season unless he wants to sign on long term !

If we have him for next year it is a good result for both parties. No issues with that at all, and gives Simpkin another year to develop.

The other variable next Year is the defence would of worked Harry out! So will Harry be as effective next season that is unknown and teams will have had a whole off season to reboot to the new rules .

It’s not just his running of the footy that makes him good. If our forwards are rolling there won’t be much the opposition can do to stop him as well
 
@jirskyr said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177372) said:
Well I think Cam Smith at HB last week for the first part of the game, a little insight to why moving him permanently to the halves isn't such a hot idea. Not that he's dreadful, but totally dented when he gets the ball so far from the defensive line and he doesn't have the physicality (speed nor power) to worry the opposition as much when they've got time to watch him move. Storm totally shifted gears when Cam Smith went back to hooker.

Smith is the GOAT hooker, no idea why you'd plan to move him, not even if Jesus O'Nazareth himself was the next player in line. Smells like a Tim Sheens move a la R Farah to halfback.

He looked very awkward in the halves. Honestly he looked a little lost.
 
@avocadoontoast said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177419) said:
@Snake said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177415) said:
@Furious1 said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177410) said:
@Sabre said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177306) said:
Rumour on LU that the loan deal will be extended for another season.

It’s what I’ve been suggesting the whole time. It buys both clubs an extra 12 months to sort out long term solutions.

Except someone will need to upgrade his money ! Why would the Tigers do that if it’s only for one year . Better to move on to Liddle then Simpkin and Walters is still on the books . Harry can return next season unless he wants to sign on long term !

If we have him for next year it is a good result for both parties. No issues with that at all, and gives Simpkin another year to develop.

depth we have at #9 is a good thing, hopefully when Grant gets injured Liddle, Simpkin or Walters will fill the gap.
 
@JoshColeman99 said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177431) said:
@Snake said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177425) said:
@avocadoontoast said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177419) said:
@Snake said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177415) said:
@Furious1 said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177410) said:
@Sabre said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177306) said:
Rumour on LU that the loan deal will be extended for another season.

It’s what I’ve been suggesting the whole time. It buys both clubs an extra 12 months to sort out long term solutions.

Except someone will need to upgrade his money ! Why would the Tigers do that if it’s only for one year . Better to move on to Liddle then Simpkin and Walters is still on the books . Harry can return next season unless he wants to sign on long term !

If we have him for next year it is a good result for both parties. No issues with that at all, and gives Simpkin another year to develop.

The other variable next Year is the defence would of worked Harry out! So will Harry be as effective next season that is unknown and teams will have had a whole off season to reboot to the new rules .

It’s not just his running of the footy that makes him good. If our forwards are rolling there won’t be much the opposition can do to stop him as well

Kind of like Damien Cook this year compared to the previous 2-3 years. Everyone knew what he was about, but Souths' forwards dominated in a way there was often no way to stop him.
 
@Kazoo-Kid said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177439) said:
@JoshColeman99 said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177431) said:
@Snake said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177425) said:
@avocadoontoast said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177419) said:
@Snake said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177415) said:
@Furious1 said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177410) said:
@Sabre said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177306) said:
Rumour on LU that the loan deal will be extended for another season.

It’s what I’ve been suggesting the whole time. It buys both clubs an extra 12 months to sort out long term solutions.

Except someone will need to upgrade his money ! Why would the Tigers do that if it’s only for one year . Better to move on to Liddle then Simpkin and Walters is still on the books . Harry can return next season unless he wants to sign on long term !

If we have him for next year it is a good result for both parties. No issues with that at all, and gives Simpkin another year to develop.

The other variable next Year is the defence would of worked Harry out! So will Harry be as effective next season that is unknown and teams will have had a whole off season to reboot to the new rules .

It’s not just his running of the footy that makes him good. If our forwards are rolling there won’t be much the opposition can do to stop him as well

Kind of like Damien Cook this year compared to the previous 2-3 years. Everyone knew what he was about, but Souths' forwards dominated in a way there was often no way to stop him.

Yeah he’s been quiet because he doesn’t have the forward pack to give him room

Harry is good enough to play great no matter what, like I said it’s not just his running that’s great, he’s great at getting his forwards over the advantage line, he picks the right passes and he’s everywhere in defence.

Like Josh Reynolds said on triple M, he’s a bin chicken. Loves getting into all the rubbish out there on the field ?
 
@jirskyr said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177372) said:
Well I think Cam Smith at HB last week for the first part of the game, a little insight to why moving him permanently to the halves isn't such a hot idea. Not that he's dreadful, but totally dented when he gets the ball so far from the defensive line and he doesn't have the physicality (speed nor power) to worry the opposition as much when they've got time to watch him move. Storm totally shifted gears when Cam Smith went back to hooker.

Smith is the GOAT hooker, no idea why you'd plan to move him, not even if Jesus O'Nazareth himself was the next player in line. Smells like a Tim Sheens move a la R Farah to halfback.

Cam Smith could play as a control type halfback with Munster at 6 and Grant at 9 to provide most of the attack. He provides leadership, referee influence and excellent game management. I know its an unusual arrangement but I think it could work.
 
@Snake said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177415) said:
@Furious1 said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177410) said:
@Sabre said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177306) said:
Rumour on LU that the loan deal will be extended for another season.

It’s what I’ve been suggesting the whole time. It buys both clubs an extra 12 months to sort out long term solutions.

Except someone will need to upgrade his money ! Why would the Tigers do that if it’s only for one year . Better to move on to Liddle then Simpkin and Walters is still on the books . Harry can return next season unless he wants to sign on long term !

Why would they need to upgrade his money? He has a contract with the Storm, so if the Storm choose to use him by loaning him to us, we pay the "hiring" cost. Unless of course you are referring to Grant pulling a Ryan Matterson with the Storm in which case it's a whole new ball game.
 
@Kazoo-Kid said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177437) said:
@jirskyr said in [Harry Grant](/post/1177372) said:
Well I think Cam Smith at HB last week for the first part of the game, a little insight to why moving him permanently to the halves isn't such a hot idea. Not that he's dreadful, but totally dented when he gets the ball so far from the defensive line and he doesn't have the physicality (speed nor power) to worry the opposition as much when they've got time to watch him move. Storm totally shifted gears when Cam Smith went back to hooker.

Smith is the GOAT hooker, no idea why you'd plan to move him, not even if Jesus O'Nazareth himself was the next player in line. Smells like a Tim Sheens move a la R Farah to halfback.

He looked very awkward in the halves. Honestly he looked a little lost.

That's probably why he moved to hooker in the first place. He's not good as a 7. I can't think of any 9 that's gone on to play 7 and been a success. I'm sure there's some or there, but not many I wouldn't imagine. Still, let's hope the storm think Smith's a good fit in the halves.
 
Back
Top