@jirskyr said in [No goal kicker for three years = farcical](/post/1046590) said:
@fair-dinkum said in [No goal kicker for three years = farcical](/post/1046572) said:
Latrell Mitchell 2016 - 2019 77%
Adam Reynolds 2012 - 2019 82%
James Maloney 81%
Some muppet sitting on his laptop in his kitchen has just worked out you need an 80% kicker if you want to get anywhere near the premiership. Whats the issues here, whats wrong with this Tigers club?
>1. Ah Latrell kicked at 77% in 2018 and Roosters won the comp. Marsters kicked at 77% the same year. Do you mean kick at or over 80%, or close enough? I doubt there's anyone at Tigers that doesn't realise you want top kicking. It's been a part of the game since 1908. *and yet they continually for years fail to do anything about it??*
2. In defence of the mid 2000s early WT, the idea of a 80% plus kicker is a more modern expectation. Daryl Halligan only kicked at 80%. Jason Taylor kicked at 75%. El Magic just under 82%.
1.
Cronk @ 7
Latrell kicked 90 from 117 attempts 76.92%
Luke "Johnny Morris" Brooks @ 7
Marsters kicked 56 from 74 attempts 75.68%
43 extra kicks!
88 tries scored compared to 61 at the Tigers
This thread is about goal kicking thus what was written about.
However,
Its pretty clear what the Tigers 2 major issues are. No kicker and a 2nd grade half back with no attacking and kicking game that gets by on "potential" until some on here finally realise he's 33 and announced his retirement after 15 years of leading the Tigers to 9th place for the 10th time? Anyone that says otherwise, that these arent 2 major issues at the Tigers must be involved directly with the Tigers or directly involved with Brooks, defensive about the obvious issue much? Blind Freddy can see it.
2.
No one has an issue with "the mid 2000s early WT" its current year problems and the last decade problems and all that are involved currently with the Tigers that have failed to do anything about, so not sure if youve just added that second paragraph to fluff out your post in an attempt to hide that you have no point.