Hooker position - Thread

Liddle must be extremely unfit, he only managed to play 31 minutes. Having to carry a starting hooker who can only play that limited amount of time is too detrimental to keep persisting with. Taking him off then putting him back on late in the game wastes 2 interchanges.

And while he was on his service was poor too. His passing from dummy half was far too slow.

I'm not sure what we do.

Reynolds was impressive from dummy half however. Maybe we persist with him for the time being.
 
I'd like to see McIlwrick at least get a game to two to see if he is the alternate solution to buying another hooker.

In some ways I'd like to see Liddle develop like Ray Brown with the Magpies and Manly as a second rower who could also play hooker. I'm just not sure on his body handling 80 minutes in the middle. When the interchange numbers are pared back surely we cant handle the luxury of having a second hooker in the interchange.
 
Until Benji gets injured (or steps down) what about Reynolds starting at hooker, replaced by Liddle at the 20 min mark and come back on for final 20min…
 
@ said:
Until Benji gets injured (or steps down) what about Reynolds starting at hooker, replaced by Liddle at the 20 min mark and come back on for final 20min…
Click to expand...

In my opinion Benji is in until JR is fit and always has been and Im sure he is aware of it.
JR doesnt have to prove his worth, the position is his…and Benji isn't playing well enough to hold him out of it ALTHOUGH hes gone better than most expected.
 
Liddle will be good patience is required still growing into his body not 80 minutes yet but when he's on he goes well enough interchange with Reynolds/Marshall Taylor not a good options but if desperate will do.
 
ET is not the answer. The only guy capable of supporting Liddle is McIlwrick, but Cleary obviously isn’t a fan. I’d like to see us sign Granville.
 
ET is not the answer. The only guy capable of supporting Liddle is McIlwrick, but Cleary obviously isn’t a fan. I’d like to see us sign Granville.
 
The thing i dont like about Liddle is he doesnt play in the Moment.
He is trying to think of the next play or the one after

He isnt ready of any offloads
I can recall at least 2 from MCK where Liddle was looking elsewhere ( this is over the season, not today)
 
Liddle is the best option by far. He made a few mistakes (loose offload and a dropped ball) but the thing about him compared to all the other hookers like MM, Godinet, Taylor is that Liddle actually looks likely of creating something, as he plays direct and draws in the markers. Even today while he made a few mistakes and may not have created an opportunity, he did do a couple of things that made him look dangerous and he follows the ball well and does some little things. He also offers some much needed pace ina ball touching position that we need.

He is long term the answer and I am very happy to keep him in the 9.
 
Today was odd with 3 different hookers having a run. Liddle has great service and needs time to develop his game - problem is he is the best we have. Taylor is not a hooker his service is terrible. Reynolds brings a lot of energy and gets the troops going but isn’t a long term option at 9
 
Many teams have been using 2 hookers to great effect. It's about time we pushed boundaries with the 3 hooker attack. It's the way of the future.
 
@ said:
The thing i dont like about Liddle is he doesnt play in the Moment.
He is trying to think of the next play or the one after

He isnt ready of any offloads
I can recall at least 2 from MCK where Liddle was looking elsewhere ( this is over the season, not today)
Click to expand...

Lacking immaturity.
Had a shocker yesterday.
He'll get there eventually.
 
everyone has a shocker from time to time. He is still by far the best no9 in the club and yesterday he was probably the only forward who looked like making a bust. I thought JR was very good at D/H when he came on so that might be the way to go for the rest of the season
 
Roberto Farah , don't laugh , could be ok short term , he is still better than Liddle and behind Packer and Matts could be ok , Cheap ,
 
@ said:
Liddle is the best option by far. He made a few mistakes (loose offload and a dropped ball) but the thing about him compared to all the other hookers like MM, Godinet, Taylor is that Liddle actually looks likely of creating something, as he plays direct and draws in the markers. Even today while he made a few mistakes and may not have created an opportunity, he did do a couple of things that made him look dangerous and he follows the ball well and does some little things. He also offers some much needed pace ina ball touching position that we need.

He is long term the answer and I am very happy to keep him in the 9.
Click to expand...

Thank you. I can't believe how many people are ready to punt a 21 year old with barely 20 first-grade games to his name (and no consistent run in the team) on the basis of a mediocre game or two.

What the Tigers need at hooker, if anything, is a decent backup who can spell Liddle while he develops physically (remembering, too, that he has had major surgery and therefore no pre-season). If it's someone who can play some minutes elsewhere to maximise their interchange value, so be it. But it's not an area to spend a lot of cap room on and - more to the point - we can't be giving a long-term deal to someone who expects to play long minutes.
 
@ said:
Roberto Farah , don't laugh , could be ok short term , he is still better than Liddle and behind Packer and Matts could be ok , Cheap ,
Click to expand...

100%
Hes too busy travelling the world watching soccer tho.
 
@ said:
@ said:
Liddle is the best option by far. He made a few mistakes (loose offload and a dropped ball) but the thing about him compared to all the other hookers like MM, Godinet, Taylor is that Liddle actually looks likely of creating something, as he plays direct and draws in the markers. Even today while he made a few mistakes and may not have created an opportunity, he did do a couple of things that made him look dangerous and he follows the ball well and does some little things. He also offers some much needed pace ina ball touching position that we need.

He is long term the answer and I am very happy to keep him in the 9.

Thank you. I can't believe how many people are ready to punt a 21 year old with barely 20 first-grade games to his name (and no consistent run in the team) on the basis of a mediocre game or two.

What the Tigers need at hooker, if anything, is a decent backup who can spell Liddle while he develops physically (remembering, too, that he has had major surgery and therefore no pre-season). If it's someone who can play some minutes elsewhere to maximise their interchange value, so be it. But it's not an area to spend a lot of cap room on and - more to the point - we can't be giving a long-term deal to someone who expects to play long minutes.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Mainaia Cherrington off the bench….
That'd be good.

Otherwise we have McIlwrick who has been solid.
 
@ said:
@ said:
@ said:
Stupid for JR to be at hooker.
Hes our 6
Options are Liddle, Benji, Killa

Benji at hooker? You be trippin'.

Well its not gonna be JR ?
Id like to see Liddle and Killa but Ivan doesnt Seem to like MM
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Bring back Godinet *runs to shelter to take cover*

Seriously, Benji played Hooker for Brisbane and did a good job of it.

We tried Reynolds at hooker and it failed. I would go Benji or see if Lawrence is up for it.
Lolohea doesn't seem to have the speed for hooker or the body.
M Killwrick rocked with powerful runs, but I think Cleary wants to get good ball to Brooks and Reynolds.
Taylor ain't up for it. Something is wrong with the guy, Give him a break.

The only problem is if Benji has brain explosions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 401 (members: 20, guests: 381)
Back
Top