Another pro club propaganda statement.
1. You have no idea where the Sharks will play Dugan so come back to me when you know.
2. Now people having a go at Packer did you cheer him 4 weeks ago when he was in good form? Obviously he is a bit busted at the moment but our c**k head coach came up with the power game plan, well now you reap the seeds he sowed.
3. If you want try scoring opportunities don't leave it to the FB he just adds extras if and when he can. The halves are the creative players on a constant basis so stop blaming Dugan for the impotency of the attack. It is impotent because we have a shit half who has a mortgage on the position due to the coach we just appointed for 2 more years. It is also impotent because he keeps deflecting JDB into a ball playing role which clearly impedes the side. JDB is at his best when he just runs hard and straight with the odd offload. He has been diverted from that and we are the poorer for it.
4. With or without Dugan tell me when we scored long range tries? There is 1 or 2 instances in the past 4 years but our backs are pedestrian and couldn't run out of sight on dark night. You say Dugan isn't needed for our backs to play like superstars you are probably correct because they are incapable of doing it on regular basis (which is what superstars do) with or without Dugan so get it right we don't have a superstar backline.
5. You want to applaud Millward for letting go 2 internationals and by the way you do have to pay big bucks to have them these days and you somehow think we will be better off for letting them go. You like many others try to equate the argument surrounding Dugan & Packer to the money involved which indicates to me if they had of come at low $$$ you would have been happy to keep them and that is where the argument is severely flawed. None of you have come out and said let them go regardless of how much or little they want, you all go for the they're not worth X $$$ excuse. A good recruitment person (of which Millward is not one) would have said "The club is changing its roster and direction so we will not be tabling any offer to Dugan & Packer". Instead we have we tabled them offers they didn't accept them and then people come out and call them greedy which is ridiculous because we created the mess.
By the way have a look at the replays and tell me when the defence looks better with or without Dugan but people conveniently blame him for other people's ineptitude, lack of of foresight, lack of speed, shit house kicking which are really individual skills but he sure does get the busted arse backs a lot better in defence than when he is not playing.
There's nothing regarding my statement that is club propaganda. In a world in which their is a salary cap we can't afford to keep a limited fullback within our team at 1 million a season for 4 years. There is absolutely 0 chance we'll ever excel pass the middle of the table in which we've been stuck in the past 6 years.
1. I gurantee you that Dugan will be playing in the right centre role at the Sharks as they've invested even more money into Holmes and he's improving at a rapid rate.
2. I'm not having a go at Packer what so ever, I'm pointing towards the fact that his stats suggest it was a good idea not to match his offer of $700k for 4 years because he's already busted 14 rounds in of a possible 30 round season. We don't need players that can only last half a season at such a high rate. You bang on about the fact that we need to keep players like Lawrie, Host and Sele and give them game time but that's impossible when you keep players at such a high rate for such a long period of time. I'm not here to get in an argument about the coach because it's known that he's out of his depth but the game plan he did formulate for the first half of the season did work.
3. The last 7 years of grand final winners featured fullbacks who can ballplay, you quite simply cannot tell me that's a strange coincidence. The games changed and a ball playing fullback is now needed at the back.
4. We don't score long range tries which i've stated, the only players with a bit of toe in the backline is Widdop and Macdonald but their not overly quick. I am saying that Dugan isn't needed for our backs to play like superstars because their has been games in which they've excelled greatly, i've never said or stated that our backline is any good but in situations this year they've looked amazing. Having Dugan in or out of it has made no bearing on their performance in which can be seen in the Warriors and Manly game. Don't put words in my mouth.
5. I applaud Millward because he's given us our best recruitment haul since Bennett arrived here, whether he's right or wrong is up for debate in later seasons. With the blokes we had we've been nothing but perennial cellar dwellers. I'm happy for my opinion to be wrong in the future and i'll happily admit that I was wrong if it turned out that it was a massive mistake for us to lose Dugan.
Yes our defence does look worse without Dugan, but again Nightingale set up a try which Dugan would have been incapable of creating. If were able to develop Dufty, Field, Masters or bring in an external recruit who can ball-play and be at least 70% good defensively as Dugan we'd look much better as a team.
