@Camel2281 said in Signing Suggestions & Rumours:

@Nelson said in Signing Suggestions & Rumours:

@Hangonaminute said in Signing Suggestions & Rumours:

@JC99 said in Signing Suggestions & Rumours:

Our spine on paper is the worst in the NRL, find me a worse one

Bulldogs, Titans, Dragons, Warriors…

You can’t be serious
Hoppa, Brimson, Dufty and Roger are all a million times better fullbacks than M’Bye
Whilst I like and rate AD he’s unproven at 6 yet. Burton (maybe 2022), Norman, Taylor (playing 6 outside of a controlling 7) and Harris-Tevita are all more proven 6’s
I’d have any of Flanagan, Fogerty, Hunt or Kodi Nikorima instead of Brooks
And lastly at hooker we are ahead of the dogs, probably on par with Titans and Warriors with Rein and Jazz Tevanga and miles behind the Dragons with McInnis

Tevaga was playing 13 for the Warriors with Egan and Lawton playing 9. He did not play hooker at all for the Warriors in all of 2020. Why are you using him for the comparison? McInness was also spent half of his time playing lock for the Dragons. They had Brittain, Isaac Luke and I can’t even remember who else covering the rest of the time at hooker and it was all garbage. Rein is an absolute journeyman who offers nothing. No club at all would sign Rein over Liddle and/or Simpkin and that should tell you all you need to know.

Taylor and Norman are proven 6’s alright - proven garbage. They have done nothing for years. Burton doesn’t even play for the Bulldogs yet - try Lachlan “I’ll take 10 seconds to set up for a bomb” Lewis. Harris-Tevita has not lived up to expectations in his 30 odd games so far, I’d rather be taking a roll on AD.

Dufty and Hoppa are not “a million times better” than Mbye on any sensible assessment - Hoppa was moved from fullback for Mbye at the Dogs for a reason - he has no ball playing ability at all and just runs a lot. Dufty is useless in defence and a confidence player, not a consistent player (yet anyway).

Brooks had a down 2020 but has had some very good years in the past, including Dally M half of the year in 2018. His best is much better than anything that Flanagan (who has never done anything), Fogarty (played half a dozen games) or Kodi Nikorima (can run and that’s it) have shown.

So yes, I’m serious.

@Curly_Tiger said in Tigers tell Reynolds he's free to find a new club:

@airbus said in Tigers tell Reynolds he's free to find a new club:

@The_Patriot He’s on 900 next year and 950 in 2021

Are we sure on this, all I ever heard was $3 million over 4 years and I heard $700k got to $750k at some stage but never up into the $900s
While we are on that Mbye is reported as on $950k each year from 2019 through to 2022? It was reported when he signed with us he was on somewhere around $750k to $800k with the Dogs and that they were covering $250k for 2019 & 2020. I can’t believe he would have got an increase on $800k, does anyone have anything concrete to go on with these estimates?

No, nobody knows the details of these contracts. I have noticed though that when we and/or the player concerned is playing poorly people like to just add $200Kpa to any reported figures or estimates just so they can stick the boot into the club some more.

@weststigers said in Packer & Reynolds:

@avocadoontoast said in Packer & Reynolds:

@TrueTiger said in Packer & Reynolds:

Big deal,Josh cant get a game because the club legend keeps getting picked and produces poor performances,they won but JREY beside Brooks in previous games,the team performed better as a whole…Packer left because he doesnt know any better,look at his last few games and he knows why he was replaced…

As Madge said they didnt break any rules…

Reynolds and Packer aren’t getting picked because they’re hopeless. It’s their own fault. What sort of an example is it to younger players when you see two of the highest paid, most senior players in the team leave at half time because it’s cold?

They’re both idiots and I can’t wait wait until they’re gone from the club forever.

Yeah I’m with you. I know they aren’t technically required to be there, but I’m old school with stuff like that.

One in, all in - they are senior players and should be there for the full game or not at all.

It’s not even the kind of thing they should need to have a rule for, it’s just bloody obvious that if you’re being paid as a player you turn up and support your teammates. Getting paid $15K a week and they can’t stay for 80 minutes of footy, it’s pathetic.

Is Moses a signing suggestion or rumour? If not then please stop talking about the little twerp in this thread.

Moylan would be an awful signing. He does not fit with what our team needs at all. Dugan would literally be a better option, and I’m far from advocating us going out and signing Dugan! Moylan (when he can be bothered playing) is a play maker. We don’t need another one when we have Brooks, Benji, Mbye, Reynolds, Talau and Momirovski all hoping for spots in the 17 - we need players that run hard and break the line from time to time!

The Doueihi deal is skewed by the ridiculous contract that Souths gave him. If he weren’t already getting $600K for 2021 under that deal I don’t imagine many would be saying that we should be paying $600K for him for 2021, or that he would have any right to demand that sort of salary. Those being critical of the club not just leaping in and taking on that salary should consider what kind of salary they thought he was on or would have justified before that $600K figure came out. I seriously doubt anyone would have thought he was contracted for anything more than $400K at the absolute most.

Can we stop with the petty feuds? Just get it out of your systems with a tirade that earns you a temporary ban and then move on and learn to ignore or tolerate each other…

@Madge said in Lure Latrell....as a Fullback:

Sorry guys random question, can anyone go an watch the tigers train at concord oval at anytime ?

People in prison can’t.

@happy_tiger said in Folau could be welcomed back - Sky News:

What sometimes confuses me when people argue against religious beliefs is this

Whether you believe in God or not isn’t or shouldn’t be the argument

Virtually every religion talks about making our world a better place , about what you can do to help your fellow man , showing compassion for others

Why is that forgotten about …why do we focus on the words from 4000 years ago that were made by people who if they lived now would have an entirely different view

Anyway put it this way …for many of us the WT’s is a religion …imagine what many would think of us

Often people aren’t actually arguing against religious beliefs or coming from the viewpoint that belief is a bad thing, they are arguing against the manipulation of religious beliefs by individuals and institutions. Faith can drive people to live selfless, giving lives and have incredibly positive impacts on the world. It can drive them to do plenty of good. It can also be manipulated and used as a weapon in the pursuit of money, power or influence by others. Organised religion with it’s hierarchies and political agendas is often what turns people off…also this kind of thing that Folau is up to.

@Demps said in Alex Johnston Contract Discussion:

@jadtiger said in Alex Johnston Contract Discussion:

Only 1 person was pushing buying Lichaa and i think they must be a relo or friend of his.

And we enter the season with no established hooker and a bunch of untested makeshift 9s… Great.

I’d rather go with untested potential than run out a proven numpty like Lichaa

@Magpieger said in Signing Suggestions & Rumours:

@cochise said in Signing Suggestions & Rumours:

@Magpieger said in Signing Suggestions & Rumours:

@Nelson said in Signing Suggestions & Rumours:

@Magpieger said in Signing Suggestions & Rumours:

@cochise said in Signing Suggestions & Rumours:

@Magpieger said in Signing Suggestions & Rumours:

@cochise said in Signing Suggestions & Rumours:

@Magpieger said in Signing Suggestions & Rumours:

@cochise said in Signing Suggestions & Rumours:

@Magpieger said in Signing Suggestions & Rumours:

Seriously, I don’t dislike the 'bop. In fact I hope he can keep his hands clean to handshake, knuckle-bomb and sign with the Boncos.

And who would you play at fullback?

I’ve stated before, I don’t think he’s a bad player, but his performances are not commensurate with his price tag.
He is a capable player whose hands under a high ball have let him, and the team, down.
He will do until we organise a better option at the back.
The comment I made was tongue in cheek.
Having said that, how do we know if one of our young-uns couldn’t do a similar or better job if given the chance? But his all-round experience is certainly an advantage at this stage in proceedings.

I pretty much agree with most of this post, none of our young player could do a better job because none of them a fullbacks. Kepaoa could maybe transition to fullback in the future but it is too much to put on him this early.

The joke was really about regaining some salary-cap space, thats all.

I get it, I’m happy for him to go at the end of the year. We need him this year.

True, gets you thinking though about how we could leave such an important position with no contingency plan.

They have signed Laurie with a view to him being fullback from 2022 onwards and are still working on getting him earlier, do you want them to go chasing some other high cost fullback as a 12-month stop-gap? You can’t always fix every roster issue in a single off-season.

What was our plan before we got AD?

Mbye

Contingency?

Corey Thompson, Mbye and Dylan Smith were the main fullback options when AD was signed as far as I recall.

@Magpieger said in Signing Suggestions & Rumours:

@cochise said in Signing Suggestions & Rumours:

@Magpieger said in Signing Suggestions & Rumours:

@cochise said in Signing Suggestions & Rumours:

@Magpieger said in Signing Suggestions & Rumours:

@cochise said in Signing Suggestions & Rumours:

@Magpieger said in Signing Suggestions & Rumours:

Seriously, I don’t dislike the 'bop. In fact I hope he can keep his hands clean to handshake, knuckle-bomb and sign with the Boncos.

And who would you play at fullback?

I’ve stated before, I don’t think he’s a bad player, but his performances are not commensurate with his price tag.
He is a capable player whose hands under a high ball have let him, and the team, down.
He will do until we organise a better option at the back.
The comment I made was tongue in cheek.
Having said that, how do we know if one of our young-uns couldn’t do a similar or better job if given the chance? But his all-round experience is certainly an advantage at this stage in proceedings.

I pretty much agree with most of this post, none of our young player could do a better job because none of them a fullbacks. Kepaoa could maybe transition to fullback in the future but it is too much to put on him this early.

The joke was really about regaining some salary-cap space, thats all.

I get it, I’m happy for him to go at the end of the year. We need him this year.

True, gets you thinking though about how we could leave such an important position with no contingency plan.

They have signed Laurie with a view to him being fullback from 2022 onwards and are still working on getting him earlier, do you want them to go chasing some other high cost fullback as a 12-month stop-gap? You can’t always fix every roster issue in a single off-season.

@Curly_Tiger said in Coronavirus Outbreak:

@mike said in Coronavirus Outbreak:

@Nelson said in Coronavirus Outbreak:

@Curly_Tiger said in Coronavirus Outbreak:

It isn’t crazy to question all this and I’d encourage everyone to do so and don’t believe everything your television tells you, even if it’s not from some “backward country” whatever that means
…
Conspiracy theorist was a term which originated from the CIA to classify those who disputed the findings of the Warren Commission into JFK’s assassination

You question “all this” but seemingly accept without question whatever dodgy internet site told you that the CIA originated the term “conspiracy theorist “?

Pretty funny isn’t it.

About as funny as believing it’s been debunked by incredulous sites like Snopes. Look into them when you have a minute

Perhaps it arose earlier not through them but they certainly “weaponised it”. “False flags” are a real thing, check them out, Gulf of Tonkin incident which ramped up US involvement in Vietnam is a less controversial one than 911

Here’s one bit of discussion on the matter. I get we won’t convince each other by putting up one source against another. You’ll claim mine are loopy and I’ll claim yours are owned or behlden to a system. Either way, there are different points of view

https://ampoli.com/the-origins-of-the-term-conspiracy-theory/

I’m not here to convince you just to challenge what is being accepted, call me a contrarian if you like but it is a healthy thing to being open to alternate opinions. I respect your right to yours even if I don’t agree. I may try to convince you otherwise but I won’t call you an idiot or get personal

What you posted is someone whose “research” is based on the writings of like-minded individuals. He made no effort to question any of the propositions made by others because it suited his premise to accept them as right. Any credible researcher would look for material that might contradict their assertion like, maybe, the Oxford dictionary which cites usage at least as early as 1907. Have they been inveigled into the web of the CIA too?

You literally did just accept as correct a dodgy internet site…

@Curly_Tiger said in Coronavirus Outbreak:

It isn’t crazy to question all this and I’d encourage everyone to do so and don’t believe everything your television tells you, even if it’s not from some “backward country” whatever that means
…
Conspiracy theorist was a term which originated from the CIA to classify those who disputed the findings of the Warren Commission into JFK’s assassination

You question “all this” but seemingly accept without question whatever dodgy internet site told you that the CIA originated the term “conspiracy theorist “?

@shiretiger said in Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here:

@Nelson said in Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here:

Then they should deal with companies that don’t have brands to protect and go with smaller players, that’s just risk minimisation in business. Of course getting kicked off Amazon etc probably suits their cause anyway.

Easily said than done and Amazon knew full well that was the case.

Whose cause are we referring to here? Parler is non-partisan. They are a small start up trying to make a dollar.

The whole Big Tech reaction I believe is more them protecting their businesses from the Democrats come January 20.

They are showing that they can tow the line and are hoping to stymie any meaningful changes to section 230.

They are not non-partisan at all, they have clearly marketed themselves as an alt to “big tech” for particular groups. Read some of the articles in which the founders have been interviewed. They are trying to cash in on a large and ready made market.

@shiretiger said in Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here:

@Nelson said in Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here:

They don’t need that at all, they just need web hosting services and I’m sure there are plenty of companies happy to accept their money. They’ll be back in no time, they’ll just have to direct market now that they’ve been kicked off the main app stores.

So the company that controls 50% of the market has just done some giant virtue signalling. It is basically daring the smaller players in cloud hosting - Google and Microsoft the next two largest - to host the new social piriah.

It would take a company some courage to do so in the face of recent events.

Then they should deal with companies that don’t have brands to protect and go with smaller players, that’s just risk minimisation in business. Of course getting kicked off Amazon etc probably suits their cause anyway.

@TillLindemann said in Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here:

@Papacito said in Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here:

@TillLindemann said in Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here:

@Papacito said in Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here:

@TillLindemann said in Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here:

@Papacito said in Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here:

If you don’t like it, build your own.

yeah, they did you see, and it got taken down - you may have heard.

Not quite.

None of the tech companies want the legal risk of dealing with Parler.

If they did, they’d see their share price tank. Execs and shareholders would lose out massively. It’s as simple as that.

So the reproach of ‘build your own platform’ is meaningless.

Not at all.

Getting booted off a host would have been their number one business risk from the get go.

The fact haven’t raised enough capital to develop their own infrastructure tells you something about them.

“You’re free to have your voice heard, you just need ready access to billions of dollars of capital to assemble your own infrastructure”.

They don’t need that at all, they just need web hosting services and I’m sure there are plenty of companies happy to accept their money. They’ll be back in no time, they’ll just have to direct market now that they’ve been kicked off the main app stores.

@Cultured_Bogan said in Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here:

Is there anything to be gained out of attempting to impeach him again? By the time the process is started won’t Biden be inaugurated? And can he be impeached posthumously (posthumously in the sense that he won’t be president by the time it is confirmed.)

The government is basically in caretaker mode now until January 20th. The guy will probably go to ground given that he has no vehicle to rant on. He’s had all the oxygen taken away, I don’t think there is any genuine positives in removing him now other than abject humiliation which could cause more problems.

Yes, it can be done after he has left office (the hearings). That is what they would do - defer it for a few months. Is there a point? In one sense no, but I guess they want to make sure he is killed off and can’t return in 4 years; shame the republicans for ever putting him forward; and re-introduce presidential accountability that has been lacking the last few years.

@TillLindemann said in Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here:

@Cultured_Bogan said in Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here:

However, the storming of the Capitol was a direct action to subvert the confirmation of the election (i.e. their democratic process,) it was a very deliberate attempt by a minor percentage of the population to stop something that a majority of the population decided upon. It was rebellious disorder, the very definition of sedition

Rebellious disorder is not the definition of sedition, and if it is we’re in trouble, because a politician could twist those words to cover just about any protest.

Even the phrase ‘storming the Capitol’ I find hysterical (I’m not having a go at you, the phrase is being used by plenty).
It was a bunch of Trump fan boys who protested the election was robbed. A dumb belief, but they have the right to believe it. They broke into parliament momentarily, then were turfed out. They didn’t stay to launch a coup.

99% of the protestors are no better or worse than the thousands of people protesting this time 4 years ago that the elections were stolen by Putin.

Their intent was to subvert the democratic process so yes, it was rebellious and it was seditious. You don’t get to just redefine words because they don’t suit your desire to cast the events in as benign a light as possible.

The phrase “storm the Capitol “ was used by people organising the event, so why would people not pick it up and infer that that was their intent given they said it was?

@TillLindemann said in Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here:

@Nelson said in Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here:

Have armed people stormed Parliament House numerous times?

In 1996 it was, yes, if you consider sledgehammers and the like weapons.

This wasn’t an ‘armed mob’, it was 99% flag bearers, not machine gun bearers.

A single hammer and some makeshift crap that some pissed idiots picked up - idiots who were more interested in looting than anything else. There is no equivalence at all.

You have no idea what percentage of the crowd was armed, but it doesn’t take many guns to do a lot of harm anyway.