Our bench, how would you arrange it

Our bench, how would you arrange it?

  • 4 forwards/second row.

    Votes: 1 2.4%

  • 3 forwards/second row. one Utility or half

    Votes: 18 42.9%

  • 3 forwards/second row. one Hooker for Api

    Votes: 17 40.5%

  • 2 forwards/second row. One utility that can play in the forwards and one half

    Votes: 3 7.1%

  • 4 Wings, Max Sheensball

    Votes: 3 7.1%
  • Total voters
    42
  • Poll closed .
innsaneink said:
That's what I'm thinking.... everyone's assuming hell be in the 6
We got Latu, Galv and Luai.... 3 into 2 (halves spots) don't go
Click to expand...
Agreed although I think Galvin is still at least a year or 2 away from being able to transition. The kid would get bashed. I agree with @Tucker and would keep developing Latu in reggies. He'll get game time in firsts through injury.

Best case for me in 2027 would be;

1. Bula
6. Latu
7. Luai
13. Galvin (Scott Hill mould)
 
Ideally, a wrecking ball forward for impact (Hunt)
A fit second rower who can play five eighth/centre(nice to see Bird doing extras)
A prop to carry the load with no drop off in intensity (Twal)
A creative player who can fill in around the ruck ( Latu Fainu)

I like our bench.

Our starting forward pack is the big question mark.
 
Tucker said:
Luai will be 6 where he belongs
Click to expand...
Luai at 6

Galvin is 14 or something?
Latu at 7? with no real proven track record there.


Ok, Latu has had plenty of opportunities to show his stuff. It hasn't really happened, occasional brillance but so many games he did not register.
The opportunities to be at Center, or wing or even fullback were there. Latu did not put his hand up.

Halfback you need to be 100% behind your team. He is young, so who knows. But I definately don't see it from what he has shown us in 2024. Galvin has IMHO done more to push for 7.

Ofcourse we could get a nr 7 that just turns up and lets other people drive the team. Though unsure if Manly would release their 5/8 back to us. 😉
 
I would prefer our bench to be stronger than the starters, otherwise there’s not much point in having a bench. Coach needs to have a skill set to throw on the park at a time when it’s needed.
 
Generally, a hooker/utility plus 3 forwards fits the mould, but that might vary depending on injuries, availability etc

The make-up will depend on what our roster eventually settles at.

I think that because of our focus getting off the floor of the comp, Benji will be hoping for better luck with injuries and that we have no where the need to replace players as we did this year.

So I guess, the sin bin/discipline factor will have to be addressed.

But really, the bench blends with the chosen 13 as best can be, so the core team is ever so important.
 
twentyforty said:
I would prefer our bench to be stronger than the starters, otherwise there’s not much point in having a bench. Coach needs to have a skill set to throw on the park at a time when it’s needed.
Click to expand...
I disagree.

Mainly because the starters tend to get more minutes. Although:
A nice impact prop at 14 can make a huge difference. Wear people down a little first then put on Hunt.
A X-factor player like Latu Fainu, can run riot when the other side is more tired. Ben Barba, Craig Wing and a few others come to mind.

Normally though, I want our best players in the 1-13 not 14-17.
 
tiger_one said:
Generally, a hooker/utility plus 3 forwards fits the mould, but that might vary depending on injuries, availability etc

The make-up will depend on what our roster eventually settles at.

I think that because of our focus getting off the floor of the comp, Benji will be hoping for better luck with injuries and that we have no where the need to replace players as we did this year.

So I guess, the sin bin/discipline factor will have to be addressed.

But really, the bench blends with the chosen 13 as best can be, so the core team is ever so important.
Click to expand...
We did have a few bad injuries and we did have a few players that played injured. Olam comes to mind.

That said, other teams were hit worse then us in the injury stakes at various times of the year.
 
crazycat said:
I disagree.

Mainly because the starters tend to get more minutes. Although:
A nice impact prop at 14 can make a huge difference. Wear people down a little first then put on Hunt.
A X-factor player like Latu Fainu, can run riot when the other side is more tired. Ben Barba, Craig Wing and a few others come to mind.

Normally though, I want our best players in the 1-13 not 14-17.
Click to expand...
What if the starters got less minutes? You need to think outside the triangle crazycat.
 
14.TDS (Api is better playing 50-70mins not 80)
15.Prop 1 (think we have a few big minute guys so two props will be enough)
16.Prop 2
17.Bird/Fainu (utility value but will most likely play lock)
 
jrtiger said:
by default I like the Penrith model.

hooker/utility
middle that can play edge
middle
backrower that can play centre

problem is, a lot of the guys that fit those roles are gonna be in the starting 13 for us, because our squad is atrocious.
Click to expand...
Not true.
Bench of Latu, Bird, Hunt, Bateman covers it.
 
twentyforty said:
What if the starters got less minutes? You need to think outside the triangle crazycat.
Click to expand...
Are they tired though?

Yea, we could give the starters less minutes. The one difference people noticed when Taylor left and Ivan arrived was that Ivan would pull people off when they were tired. Taylor and Madge seemed to do a clock rotation.
 
I'd go TDS over Latu on the bench - although, I'm very worried about our Latu/Galvin situation.

I know people say it's a nice problem to have, but it stresses me out.

Only positive way it could go for us is either one of them willingly wants to play 13 (which I don't think either wants to).

The reason it stresses me out is not just the thought of losing Latu, which with Galvin and Luai is far from the end of the world - but what it could mean for Samuela.
 
Moh said:
I'd go TDS over Latu on the bench - although, I'm very worried about our Latu/Galvin situation.

I know people say it's a nice problem to have, but it stresses me out.

Only positive way it could go for us is either one of them willingly wants to play 13 (which I don't think either wants to).

The reason it stresses me out is not just the thought of losing Latu, which with Galvin and Luai is far from the end of the world - but what it could mean for Samuela.
Click to expand...
Latu still needs developing. Galvin’s fitness levels were off the chart. Which helped his transition to NRL at such a young age.
 
Given the speed of the game. The old model of 3 big boppers and a utility has been superseded.
If our starting side had a 2x 80mins 2nd rowers and a seasoned NRL lock. You could run a bench like Penrith’s
As @jrtiger pointed out earlier in this thread.- Penrith model.
1.hooker/utility - TDS
2.middle that can play edge - Seyfarth
3. middle- Pole
4. backrower that can play centre -Bird

But because we still have weaknesses in the 2nd row, Lock and centre. I think Bird will be in the starting side. Seyfarth may have to start in the 2nd as there doesn’t seem to be anyone ready to partner Samuel Fainu and Pole may have to start at lock until one of the development players makes there way to lock.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 664 (members: 28, guests: 636)
Back
Top