teddy23
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2015
- Messages
- 2,380
Well it’s quite self explanatory, I don’t see how it’s weird or doesn’t make sense…. we just invested around $5-6 mill over 5 years for Luai so he pretty much locks up a position within the halves. Which means either Latu/Galvin won’t be able to play their natural positions within the squad. Unfortunately one will miss out.Well that's just weird. Doesn't make any sense for those to be the only 2 options.
So Galvin plays halback or edge backrow, but not 5/8 or lock. Luai can play 6 or 7, but if he plays 7 it's only with Latu at 6, not Galvin. If he plays 6, Latu goes to 13. The combinations you have make no sense to limit these selections the way you have.
If Galvin doesn’t play in the halves, I’d only want him on the edge.
If Latu doesn’t play in the halves, I’d only want him at lock.
Otherwise, I don’t think we’d be putting these young future stars in the right positions to succeed and bring the value they’re capable of providing. Personal opinion. I’m not bothered if they’re at 6 or 7. As long as it’s in the halves I think both players are capable of playing either one I was just talking about outside of the halves.
But ideally, I think if Luai was to partner Latu, it would work better with Luai at 7 controlling the team and allowing Latu to roam and provide spark.
Whilst, if Luai was to partner Galvin it would work better with Luai at 6 roaming around providing some spark as I believe Galvin showed signs being a dominant playmaker and demanding the ball finishing sets etc.
But that’s just me.