Joseph Sualli

[Geo]

Adam Ritson is the player whose career was destroyed by being introduced to early to first grade.

I recall that his life was saved after being knocked out ..scans revealed a brain cyst..that was unknown at the time..

 

[pawsandclaws1]

Adam Ritson is the player whose career was destroyed by being introduced to early to first grade.

I recall that his life was saved after being knocked out ..scans revealed a brain cyst..that was unknown at the time..

He came in for some terrible punishment for such a young player. I still feel for him.

 

[KingRobbie]

My problem is that as I was reading the story to see what criteria was used to make the decision.... I came up with the following:

1. Seems like a nice level headed young man
2. Stood around after the game and chatted with all the young fans - (probably his Kings school mates)
3. Fend off interest from Union.

Thats it.

I am fan of PVL's but this one..not so much.


You are missing one criteria, probably the most important one. He is an enormous human. There is zero question that right now he is suitable to compete physically compared to when he is 18.

As much as we all want to bash the Roosters and the NRL for Rooster bias, IF there was ever going to be an exception, it is this guy. He is undoubtedly physically up to it and mentally/emotionally 5 months will make zero difference.

It drives me crazy that they keep rolling out Jordan Rankin as an example of why the rule exists because he was the youngest ever and it clearly sent his career backwards. Suailli is twice the size of Rankin NOW, it is ridiculous to compare them.

You either have a blanket rule and no exceptions, but if the rule gives the capacity for exceptions, Suailli is the obvious exception.

My problem is that as I was reading the story to see what criteria was used to make the decision.... I came up with the following:

1. Seems like a nice level headed young man
2. Stood around after the game and chatted with all the young fans - (probably his Kings school mates)
3. Fend off interest from Union.

Thats it.

I am fan of PVL's but this one..not so much.


You are missing one criteria, probably the most important one. He is an enormous human. There is zero question that right now he is suitable to compete physically compared to when he is 18.

As much as we all want to bash the Roosters and the NRL for Rooster bias, IF there was ever going to be an exception, it is this guy. He is undoubtedly physically up to it and mentally/emotionally 5 months will make zero difference.

It drives me crazy that they keep rolling out Jordan Rankin as an example of why the rule exists because he was the youngest ever and it clearly sent his career backwards. Suailli is twice the size of Rankin NOW, it is ridiculous to compare them.

You either have a blanket rule and no exceptions, but if the rule gives the capacity for exceptions, Suailli is the obvious exception.

So how BIG is he?

Looks very lean to me

6 foot 5, 98 kgs.

 

[Tiger5150]

My problem is that as I was reading the story to see what criteria was used to make the decision.... I came up with the following:

1. Seems like a nice level headed young man
2. Stood around after the game and chatted with all the young fans - (probably his Kings school mates)
3. Fend off interest from Union.

Thats it.

I am fan of PVL's but this one..not so much.


You are missing one criteria, probably the most important one. He is an enormous human. There is zero question that right now he is suitable to compete physically compared to when he is 18.

As much as we all want to bash the Roosters and the NRL for Rooster bias, IF there was ever going to be an exception, it is this guy. He is undoubtedly physically up to it and mentally/emotionally 5 months will make zero difference.

It drives me crazy that they keep rolling out Jordan Rankin as an example of why the rule exists because he was the youngest ever and it clearly sent his career backwards. Suailli is twice the size of Rankin NOW, it is ridiculous to compare them.

You either have a blanket rule and no exceptions, but if the rule gives the capacity for exceptions, Suailli is the obvious exception.

My problem is that as I was reading the story to see what criteria was used to make the decision.... I came up with the following:

1. Seems like a nice level headed young man
2. Stood around after the game and chatted with all the young fans - (probably his Kings school mates)
3. Fend off interest from Union.

Thats it.

I am fan of PVL's but this one..not so much.


You are missing one criteria, probably the most important one. He is an enormous human. There is zero question that right now he is suitable to compete physically compared to when he is 18.

As much as we all want to bash the Roosters and the NRL for Rooster bias, IF there was ever going to be an exception, it is this guy. He is undoubtedly physically up to it and mentally/emotionally 5 months will make zero difference.

It drives me crazy that they keep rolling out Jordan Rankin as an example of why the rule exists because he was the youngest ever and it clearly sent his career backwards. Suailli is twice the size of Rankin NOW, it is ridiculous to compare them.

You either have a blanket rule and no exceptions, but if the rule gives the capacity for exceptions, Suailli is the obvious exception.

So how BIG is he?

Looks very lean to me

6 foot 5, 98 kgs.

BIgger than most outside backs/threequarters. I dont think there is any question he is physically up to it.

 

[Speed2burn]

Does it mean we can select Tuilagi in top grade next week also or any other development player or is this just something for rorters?

isn't Sualli in the top 30 for the roosters though ? not on a development contract

Yep he is

 

[Don Kershane]

Did he get a scholarship to Kings school.... Or has his parents paid full fees?

Got the world at his feet... Money, influence, talent, looks...

Be interesting to see how he goes in the top grade

Might even be offered a role in a Lowes ad.

 

[Fade.To.Black]

I just hope PVL, Unca Nick and Robbo are practising safe sex. PVL wouldn't look right with a bun in the oven.....

 

[Papacito]

He might be a big lad, but whether his body can handle the rigour of heavy contact and whether he can protect himself is an entirely different issue.

Fending off a few blokes in high school footy is not the same as copping a heavy hit from 119kg 31 year old veteran, Russel Packer.

Hope he has a shocker against us but stays safe.

 

[TigerVinnie]

He might be a big lad, but whether his body can handle the rigour of heavy contact and whether he can protect himself is an entirely different issue.

Fending off a few blokes in high school footy is not the same as copping a heavy hit from 119kg 31 year old veteran, Russel Packer.

Hope he has a shocker against us but stays safe.

There are players like Laurie, Corey Thompson, Paps all lighter and smaller than him and they handle week in week out top grade.

Hate how roosters get a leg up whenever they need but I have no doubt he will handle top grade.

 

[Jedi_Tiger]

Did he get a scholarship to Kings school.... Or has his parents paid full fees?

Got the world at his feet... Money, influence, talent, looks...

Be interesting to see how he goes in the top grade

He was on full scholarship at Kingston however last year he refused to play first xv rugby so the school cut the scholarship and I believe Souths paid the fees for him presume roosters paying this year

 

[tig_prmz]

Why does anyone need an exception in the first place?

NRL just looks spineless bending rules for a 17yo. Doesn't matter if he's ready or not, most 18yo will not be ready.

Every club will be asking for exceptions sooner or later.

The issue is that the NRL isn't accountable to any organisation. They will just create and modify rules to suit whatever agenda they wanna push. One of the many reasons why Rugby League will never be an international game.

 

[hobbo1]

Why does anyone need an exception in the first place?

NRL just looks spineless bending rules for a 17yo. Doesn't matter if he's ready or not, most 18yo will not be ready.

Every club will be asking for exceptions sooner or later.

The issue is that the NRL isn't accountable to any organisation. They will just create and modify rules to suit whatever agenda they wanna push. One of the many reasons why Rugby League will never be an international game.

I thought it was already an international game ?
What have I missed ?

 

[Tim Sheens]

Ridiculous decision!

 

[jirskyr]

My problem is that as I was reading the story to see what criteria was used to make the decision.... I came up with the following:

1. Seems like a nice level headed young man
2. Stood around after the game and chatted with all the young fans - (probably his Kings school mates)
3. Fend off interest from Union.

Thats it.

I am fan of PVL's but this one..not so much.


You are missing one criteria, probably the most important one. He is an enormous human. There is zero question that right now he is suitable to compete physically compared to when he is 18.

As much as we all want to bash the Roosters and the NRL for Rooster bias, IF there was ever going to be an exception, it is this guy. He is undoubtedly physically up to it and mentally/emotionally 5 months will make zero difference.

It drives me crazy that they keep rolling out Jordan Rankin as an example of why the rule exists because he was the youngest ever and it clearly sent his career backwards. Suailli is twice the size of Rankin NOW, it is ridiculous to compare them.

You either have a blanket rule and no exceptions, but if the rule gives the capacity for exceptions, Suailli is the obvious exception.

I choose (b) - blanket rule, no exceptions.

For starters how is there "no doubt" he's physically up to it? Height and weight aren't the only measure of physical capacity. Matt Groat was a large human when he debuted at 19 years old. Got smashed by a Ben Te'o shoulder charge in his second year, barely played another game.

I also disagree that there is no difference between now and August (5 months) for emotional/mental capacity. Not only do young people often have rapid changes in their maturity, there are also significant life events that change the way kids learn / absorb / cope. For example, Suaalii has been at the Roosters only a handful of months and only been widely known in the game for about 6-8 months. In another 5 months he will have more than doubled his Roosters experience and the realities of being a widely watched junior player.

The kid who finishes HSC and the kid who is half-way through his first year of university can be very different people.

So the NRL didn't just introduce the rule for Jordan Rankin, they introduced it for all the kids who have struggled with the transition from junior footballer to professional. And the rule was introduced in relation to a game-wide study by Shane Richardson, particularly after review of the outcomes for the hundreds of kids going through the NYC every year.

 

[jirskyr]

My problem is that as I was reading the story to see what criteria was used to make the decision.... I came up with the following:

1. Seems like a nice level headed young man
2. Stood around after the game and chatted with all the young fans - (probably his Kings school mates)
3. Fend off interest from Union.

Thats it.

I am fan of PVL's but this one..not so much.


You are missing one criteria, probably the most important one. He is an enormous human. There is zero question that right now he is suitable to compete physically compared to when he is 18.

As much as we all want to bash the Roosters and the NRL for Rooster bias, IF there was ever going to be an exception, it is this guy. He is undoubtedly physically up to it and mentally/emotionally 5 months will make zero difference.

It drives me crazy that they keep rolling out Jordan Rankin as an example of why the rule exists because he was the youngest ever and it clearly sent his career backwards. Suailli is twice the size of Rankin NOW, it is ridiculous to compare them.

You either have a blanket rule and no exceptions, but if the rule gives the capacity for exceptions, Suailli is the obvious exception.

My problem is that as I was reading the story to see what criteria was used to make the decision.... I came up with the following:

1. Seems like a nice level headed young man
2. Stood around after the game and chatted with all the young fans - (probably his Kings school mates)
3. Fend off interest from Union.

Thats it.

I am fan of PVL's but this one..not so much.


You are missing one criteria, probably the most important one. He is an enormous human. There is zero question that right now he is suitable to compete physically compared to when he is 18.

As much as we all want to bash the Roosters and the NRL for Rooster bias, IF there was ever going to be an exception, it is this guy. He is undoubtedly physically up to it and mentally/emotionally 5 months will make zero difference.

It drives me crazy that they keep rolling out Jordan Rankin as an example of why the rule exists because he was the youngest ever and it clearly sent his career backwards. Suailli is twice the size of Rankin NOW, it is ridiculous to compare them.

You either have a blanket rule and no exceptions, but if the rule gives the capacity for exceptions, Suailli is the obvious exception.

So how BIG is he?

Looks very lean to me

6 foot 5, 98 kgs.


BIgger than most outside backs/threequarters. I dont think there is any question he is physically up to it.

Plenty of soft 100 kg kids going around. Also lots of short tough guys.

 

[TigerWest]

My problem is that as I was reading the story to see what criteria was used to make the decision.... I came up with the following:

1. Seems like a nice level headed young man
2. Stood around after the game and chatted with all the young fans - (probably his Kings school mates)
3. Fend off interest from Union.

Thats it.

I am fan of PVL's but this one..not so much.


You are missing one criteria, probably the most important one. He is an enormous human. There is zero question that right now he is suitable to compete physically compared to when he is 18.

As much as we all want to bash the Roosters and the NRL for Rooster bias, IF there was ever going to be an exception, it is this guy. He is undoubtedly physically up to it and mentally/emotionally 5 months will make zero difference.

It drives me crazy that they keep rolling out Jordan Rankin as an example of why the rule exists because he was the youngest ever and it clearly sent his career backwards. Suailli is twice the size of Rankin NOW, it is ridiculous to compare them.

You either have a blanket rule and no exceptions, but if the rule gives the capacity for exceptions, Suailli is the obvious exception.

I choose (b) - blanket rule, no exceptions.

For starters how is there "no doubt" he's physically up to it? Height and weight aren't the only measure of physical capacity. Matt Groat was a large human when he debuted at 19 years old. Got smashed by a Ben Te'o shoulder charge in his second year, barely played another game.

I also disagree that there is no difference between now and August (5 months) for emotional/mental capacity. Not only do young people often have rapid changes in their maturity, there are also significant life events that change the way kids learn / absorb / cope. For example, Suaalii has been at the Roosters only a handful of months and only been widely known in the game for about 6-8 months. In another 5 months he will have more than doubled his Roosters experience and the realities of being a widely watched junior player.

The kid who finishes HSC and the kid who is half-way through his first year of university can be very different people.

So the NRL didn't just introduce the rule for Jordan Rankin, they introduced it for all the kids who have struggled with the transition from junior footballer to professional. And the rule was introduced in relation to a game-wide study by Shane Richardson, particularly after review of the outcomes for the hundreds of kids going through the NYC every year.

Yep, don’t think there muscles or bones will be up to it. Can you imagine what will happen if he took a similar shot that Matterson got from Packer?

 

[jirskyr]

This decision stinks IMO, I'm surprised we aren't talking about it more on here.

I was sure NRL would not grant an exception, for nothing other than to avoid a legal case due to lack of due care. The NRL take a very serious approach to concussions because of the emergent evidence of long-term brain injury. The NRL similarly introduced a lower age limit after becoming aware of a negative trend for early-debutant footballers - both physically and mentally.

The NYC was dissolved basically because of the understanding we came to that excessive media exposure of young kids, combined with a lack of physical testing against grown men, was leading to negative outcomes for very many young footballers. We reverted to the old system where these kids come through the ranks with experienced mentors and playing against seasoned physical specimens.

What happens if Suaalii gets a serious injury in his first few games? I realise it's very possible to get hurt at any stage in your career, but far worse in a young footballer who might recover appropriately (physically or mentally). NRL potentially setting themselves up for a lawsuit where they waive their own rule for [reasons].

Every 16 and 17 year old kid will now apply to play FG, because why shouldn't they? Why shouldn't any 90 kg 6 ft kid have a go?

You can't trust the Roosters to be acting in Suaalii's best interests - literally - because they've employed him with the express intention of sending him out to absorb punishment from very large and dangerous men. That's how football works, they don't sign you up for half a million dollars to leave you in cotton wool.

 

[AdelaideTiger]

This decision stinks IMO, I'm surprised we aren't talking about it more on here.

I was sure NRL would not grant an exception, for nothing other than to avoid a legal case due to lack of due care. The NRL take a very serious approach to concussions because of the emergent evidence of long-term brain injury. The NRL similarly introduced a lower age limit after becoming aware of a negative trend for early-debutant footballers - both physically and mentally.

The NYC was dissolved basically because of the understanding we came to that excessive media exposure of young kids, combined with a lack of physical testing against grown men, was leading to negative outcomes for very many young footballers. We reverted to the old system where these kids come through the ranks with experienced mentors and playing against seasoned physical specimens.

What happens if Suaalii gets a serious injury in his first few games? I realise it's very possible to get hurt at any stage in your career, but far worse in a young footballer who might recover appropriately (physically or mentally). NRL potentially setting themselves up for a lawsuit where they waive their own rule for [reasons].

Every 16 and 17 year old kid will now apply to play FG, because why shouldn't they? Why shouldn't any 90 kg 6 ft kid have a go?

You can't trust the Roosters to be acting in Suaalii's best interests - literally - because they've employed him with the express intention of sending him out to absorb punishment from very large and dangerous men. That's how football works, they don't sign you up for half a million dollars to leave you in cotton wool.

What's his parents role in all of this? Kid can't even sign anything without a legal guardian.

 

[jirskyr]

This decision stinks IMO, I'm surprised we aren't talking about it more on here.

I was sure NRL would not grant an exception, for nothing other than to avoid a legal case due to lack of due care. The NRL take a very serious approach to concussions because of the emergent evidence of long-term brain injury. The NRL similarly introduced a lower age limit after becoming aware of a negative trend for early-debutant footballers - both physically and mentally.

The NYC was dissolved basically because of the understanding we came to that excessive media exposure of young kids, combined with a lack of physical testing against grown men, was leading to negative outcomes for very many young footballers. We reverted to the old system where these kids come through the ranks with experienced mentors and playing against seasoned physical specimens.

What happens if Suaalii gets a serious injury in his first few games? I realise it's very possible to get hurt at any stage in your career, but far worse in a young footballer who might recover appropriately (physically or mentally). NRL potentially setting themselves up for a lawsuit where they waive their own rule for [reasons].

Every 16 and 17 year old kid will now apply to play FG, because why shouldn't they? Why shouldn't any 90 kg 6 ft kid have a go?

You can't trust the Roosters to be acting in Suaalii's best interests - literally - because they've employed him with the express intention of sending him out to absorb punishment from very large and dangerous men. That's how football works, they don't sign you up for half a million dollars to leave you in cotton wool.

What's his parents role in all of this? Kid can't even sign anything without a legal guardian.

They are complicit - they've been all over it since he weaseled his way out of his Souths deal.

 

[AdelaideTiger]

This decision stinks IMO, I'm surprised we aren't talking about it more on here.

I was sure NRL would not grant an exception, for nothing other than to avoid a legal case due to lack of due care. The NRL take a very serious approach to concussions because of the emergent evidence of long-term brain injury. The NRL similarly introduced a lower age limit after becoming aware of a negative trend for early-debutant footballers - both physically and mentally.

The NYC was dissolved basically because of the understanding we came to that excessive media exposure of young kids, combined with a lack of physical testing against grown men, was leading to negative outcomes for very many young footballers. We reverted to the old system where these kids come through the ranks with experienced mentors and playing against seasoned physical specimens.

What happens if Suaalii gets a serious injury in his first few games? I realise it's very possible to get hurt at any stage in your career, but far worse in a young footballer who might recover appropriately (physically or mentally). NRL potentially setting themselves up for a lawsuit where they waive their own rule for [reasons].

Every 16 and 17 year old kid will now apply to play FG, because why shouldn't they? Why shouldn't any 90 kg 6 ft kid have a go?

You can't trust the Roosters to be acting in Suaalii's best interests - literally - because they've employed him with the express intention of sending him out to absorb punishment from very large and dangerous men. That's how football works, they don't sign you up for half a million dollars to leave you in cotton wool.

What's his parents role in all of this? Kid can't even sign anything without a legal guardian.

They are complicit - they've been all over it since he weaseled his way out of his Souths deal.

Agreed, very poor form on their behalf, will only lead to maturity issues down the track. I feel very sorry for the young man.