My question is: Accepting that Sheens is a very good judge of talent, why has Moltzen been let go when he still was under contract? Was this judgement made on early season form? Or does he have a better player in mind? Because I just don’t get it. Moltzen isn’t the best fullback in the game and even now, in good form, has been stacking up the errors. But, he simply suits our style of play perfectly. He is fast, creative and has an eye for the tryline. He is so good that he has become a legitimate playmaker option in a backline that contains Marhsall, Lui and Farah. So why are we letting him go?
And now for my rant:
I posted the topic ‘Moltzen is the best option at fullback’ somewhere around the tenth round and regularly disagreed with what felt like the majority who were demanding a change of coach and to ‘blow up’ the first grade side in favour of steve Georgalis and the under 20s squad. Do many of you who expressed these views realise now how over the top criticism of Sheens and Moltzen has been?
Moltzen was recovering from a serious injury and was low on fitness and confidence. It took half a season but he returned to good form when it mattered. This is typical of players recovering from serious injury. The constant criticism of him lacking heart and regular suggestions that he regain form in reserve grade have clearly been proven wrong.
Similarly, the hysteria about Sheens’ tactics have also been proven wrong. While other teams started with great promise only to plummet once other sides figured them out, the Tigers have steadily improved despite a horrid injury run. On top of all this the tigers have won playing the most entertaining brand of footy in the competition.
Now, I’ll shut up about being right. But, maybe next time we can all try to be a little more cautious and less hysterical in our assessment of players and tactics and recognise that this is a 26 round competition.