My team for round 1

[Old Timer]

Get off the fence on selection as everyone knows Dufty is out for 4-6 weeks so why put him in the side for Rd 1?
An international winger selected on the bench as a utility but no actual winger selected is a little more than curious.

 

[SBD82]

Anyway, back to round 1 team......
1. Dufty (or Duges and co captain)
2. McDonald
3. Dugan (or Aitken)
4. Milne
5. I don't know.
6. Mann
7. McCrone
8. Packer
9. McInnes
10. Au Mau
11. Frizz
12. Thommo
13. JDB (co captain)

14. Nightingale
15. Vaughan
16. Sims
17. Host

That's a pretty solid team.

Dufty won't be there round one, so Duges 1 and Mann 3.

I'd put nighty back to 5(right side), and bring havili on the bench. Almost ten years ago nighty played some games off the bench, but when we were going really well, Dean Young played a similar role that I would use Havili in, in rotation with Fein. I don't think Nighty offers anything to the bench, the days of carrying a back in case of injury are long gone.

 

[SBD82]

Get off the fence on selection as everyone knows Dufty is out for 4-6 weeks so why put him in the side for Rd 1?
An international winger selected on the bench as a utility but no actual winger selected is a little more than curious.

You're too fast for me OT.

 

[SBD82]

The team I would play:

FB Dugan
LW Nene
LC Aitken
RC Milne
RW Nighty
5/8 Mann
1/2 McCrone
Packer
Mcinnes
LAM
Thompson
Friz
JDB

Havili
Sims
Vaughan
Host

The team I expect to see:

FB Dugan
LW Nighty
LC Lafai
RC Aitken
RW Nene
5/8 Widdop
1/2 McCrone
Vaughan
Mcinnes
Sims
Thompson
Friz
JDB

Marketo
Packer
LAM
Host

 

[BennyV]

I'm sure I have no idea what you mean by the first paragraph.

The second is pretty simple. If the coach has to pull the marquee playmaker aside work with him in pretty much every facet of the game, don't you think it's better for the team to drop this guy to a lower level team and let him work on it there?

1) I have stated that Widdop deserves to be dropped on current form, especially since we have an exciting prospect in Mann who could do the job.
2) despite that, of course the coach needs to work with his players, ensure their skills are honed and they are on top of their game. BUt it's not about that. Widdop has shown, in the past, that he can play a part in a successful team, and Bellamy made that work - gave him a role and a job to do, and Widdop did it well (running the ball, setting out outside men, the general roll of a 5/8). What they are currently trying to do with him, for whatever reason, doesnt work, and it's up to the coach to change that.

It's the same issue with Dugan - given to a successful coach, the right structures would be placed around him and he would be an instant match winner.

You dont buy a square and then get shitty with it for not fitting into a round hole. You blame the moron that doesnt know what shapes are.

 

[Carlton]

Carlton
In my post I expressly said
"By all means continue to make comparisons why this player or that player deserves to be picked ahead of somebody else but thinking our fortune is linked to any 1 player is just plain stupid."
I also said by all means drop Widdop.
So I am not defending him nor am I saying don't criticise him.
There are lots in this forum who I consider to have thick heads because they falsely believe that changing 1 player can alter our fortune from a bad side to a competitive and good side and over several years they have continually finger pointed to 1 player at a time and this view is IMO myopic.
Small incremental change is not what will save us as a club, or on the field of play.
Small incremental change will only put a bandaid on a severed artery and for some that appears to be enough and that is what I am protesting about.

Lets get something straight, I have never blamed 1 player for all our woes. I have stated on numerous occasions that the biggest problems are the Board/Coach and that I believe the NEXT biggest problem is our playmaker/captain. Changing your playmaker/captain is not an incremental change but I have also stated I don't think this will fix our problems. I have said I want this change so that other players within the club can be given a decent run this year to see if they will be up to it for 2018.

Stop trying to twist the argument, if you don't agree fine but I am not aware of anyone criticising Widdop saying that getting rid of him will solve ALL the problems. Now let's talk about incremental change being of no use, you make a grand statement but that's all it is. Small incremental changes are necessary and should be made. The wrong dramatic change is not going to help, my argument is the right changes need to be made both incremental and large. I would say appointing Mary was a big change but how successful was that.

 

[blacksafake]

1) I have stated that Widdop deserves to be dropped on current form, especially since we have an exciting prospect in Mann who could do the job.
2) despite that, of course the coach needs to work with his players, ensure their skills are honed and they are on top of their game. BUt it's not about that. Widdop has shown, in the past, that he can play a part in a successful team, and Bellamy made that work - gave him a role and a job to do, and Widdop did it well (running the ball, setting out outside men, the general roll of a 5/8). What they are currently trying to do with him, for whatever reason, doesnt work, and it's up to the coach to change that.

It's the same issue with Dugan - given to a successful coach, the right structures would be placed around him and he would be an instant match winner.

You dont buy a square and then get shitty with it for not fitting into a round hole. You blame the moron that doesnt know what shapes are.

Well said Benny V especially the Dugan part.

 

[Old Timer]

Carlton
I was talking in general terms in my post and singled out no particular poster by name but you now wish to personalise it, not sure why but your prerogative.
I am clearly just stating my case that I believe some are fixated on smaller issues that will have very little bearing in the end under current circumstances..
I don't quite understand when you say
"Changing your playmaker/captain is not an incremental change but I have also stated I don't think this will fix our problems."
If it is not incremental but is not going to fix our problems what sort of change is it? What is the purpose of the change?
We changed from Price to Mc Gregor in my opinion that was a small incremental and in fact almost insignificant change but if it had been Price to a Hasler, Cleary, Bellamy tor like then that would have been significant and monumental. The trouble is when the change was initially made many were duped into thinking it was a major structural and monumental change.
People believed the lie that was told to them.
How do I deduct that, simple we got more of the same despite the change so it was a bad decision and certainly not the type of big decision that was required. We needed to critically analyse where we were at, clean it all out but we refused then and we still refuse even now to face that reality and do something positive about it.
Make sure you dont personalise the usage of "we and you" usage you should know the intent of the statement is not to be taken that way.
Our upper level of management and coaching is like a birds nest.
Despite the type of bird that is in the nest originally the cuckoo comes every year and lays its egg along side all the other eggs and when it hatches it kicks everything else out of the nest and the parents of everything tossed out raise the ugly cuckoo regardless.
Young Snr,Farrah, Brown, Price, Mc Gregor, Young Jnr, Hornby all eggs laid in the nest, fed and nurtured by by our board whilst really good people were tossed out.
Changing that process before everything else will then make small incremental change actually count for something.
Re Widdop go back and read the varying posts, lots of people saying getting rid of Widdop will be a fix for the on field issues.
Plenty of he's shit, he cant play, he cant kick, he cant this and that but little attention or focus given to anything else about the team or those in it.
It is simply a whipping post because if it won't change the end result why raise the point.

 

[Glenn01]

Get off the fence on selection as everyone knows Dufty is out for 4-6 weeks so why put him in the side for Rd 1?
An international winger selected on the bench as a utility but no actual winger selected is a little more than curious.

Dufty is slated to return in round 2. I'm hoping he will be ready in round 1. It was only a hyper extension. Not a major injury.

The winger means I don't know but I no longer think Nightingale is up to it. I think that he however can still make a valuable contribution as a utility. Put him anywhere and he may not star but he won't completely suck either.

1) I have stated that Widdop deserves to be dropped on current form, especially since we have an exciting prospect in Mann who could do the job.
2) despite that, of course the coach needs to work with his players, ensure their skills are honed and they are on top of their game. BUt it's not about that. Widdop has shown, in the past, that he can play a part in a successful team, and Bellamy made that work - gave him a role and a job to do, and Widdop did it well (running the ball, setting out outside men, the general roll of a 5/8). What they are currently trying to do with him, for whatever reason, doesnt work, and it's up to the coach to change that.

It's the same issue with Dugan - given to a successful coach, the right structures would be placed around him and he would be an instant match winner.

You dont buy a square and then get shitty with it for not fitting into a round hole. You blame the moron that doesnt know what shapes are.

Okay. So you think the coach needs to spend more time working with the marquee playmaker on how to improve....every facet of his game? McWanker is a joke. For various reasons but for none more so than the fact that he made captain and has stuck with by far the weakest link in the team.

Carlton
I was talking in general terms in my post and singled out no particular poster by name but you now wish to personalise it, not sure why but your prerogative.
I am clearly just stating my case that I believe some are fixated on smaller issues that will have very little bearing in the end under current circumstances..
I don't quite understand when you say
"Changing your playmaker/captain is not an incremental change but I have also stated I don't think this will fix our problems."
If it is not incremental but is not going to fix our problems what sort of change is it? What is the purpose of the change?
We changed from Price to Mc Gregor in my opinion that was a small incremental and in fact almost insignificant change but if it had been Price to a Hasler, Cleary, Bellamy tor like then that would have been significant and monumental. The trouble is when the change was initially made many were duped into thinking it was a major structural and monumental change.
People believed the lie that was told to them.
How do I deduct that, simple we got more of the same despite the change so it was a bad decision and certainly not the type of big decision that was required. We needed to critically analyse where we were at, clean it all out but we refused then and we still refuse even now to face that reality and do something positive about it.
Make sure you dont personalise the usage of "we and you" usage you should know the intent of the statement is not to be taken that way.
Our upper level of management and coaching is like a birds nest.
Despite the type of bird that is in the nest originally the cuckoo comes every year and lays its egg along side all the other eggs and when it hatches it kicks everything else out of the nest and the parents of everything tossed out raise the ugly cuckoo regardless.
Young Snr,Farrah, Brown, Price, Mc Gregor, Young Jnr, Hornby all eggs laid in the nest, fed and nurtured by by our board whilst really good people were tossed out.
Changing that process before everything else will then make small incremental change actually count for something.
Re Widdop go back and read the varying posts, lots of people saying getting rid of Widdop will be a fix for the on field issues.
Plenty of he's shit, he cant play, he cant kick, he cant this and that but little attention or focus given to anything else about the team or those in it.
It is simply a whipping post because if it won't change the end result why raise the point.

I don't think anyone is saying Widdop is the only problem. Many are saying he is the main problem. I think that is perfectly obvious. How hard must it be for the entire team to put in, play hard, put their bodies on the line, often play well only to see the captain and player described as a "marquee playmaker" by the current and former coach (and be on the money that goes with that status) constantly screw everything up in attack and prove to be by far the weakest link in defence?

The will-power and patience of JDB, Duges and Frizz must be really something. Or Widdop must be the most likeable guy on the planet. Even more so than BrissyRedV for example. It's astounding how one of them hasn't knocked him out yet. I suspect the blow-up between Marshall and McGregor last season was the former taking his frustration out on the latter.

Personally I'm of the opinion JDB would also be pushing for Origin selection if he were playing in a team which was able to score tries.

 

[BrissyRedV]

Even more so than BrissyRedV for example.

Appreciate that you think I am a nice guy, but don't involve me in your diatribe.

 

[Carlton]

Carlton
I was talking in general terms in my post and singled out no particular poster by name but you now wish to personalise it, not sure why but your prerogative.
I am clearly just stating my case that I believe some are fixated on smaller issues that will have very little bearing in the end under current circumstances..
I don't quite understand when you say
"Changing your playmaker/captain is not an incremental change but I have also stated I don't think this will fix our problems."
If it is not incremental but is not going to fix our problems what sort of change is it? What is the purpose of the change?
We changed from Price to Mc Gregor in my opinion that was a small incremental and in fact almost insignificant change but if it had been Price to a Hasler, Cleary, Bellamy tor like then that would have been significant and monumental. The trouble is when the change was initially made many were duped into thinking it was a major structural and monumental change.
People believed the lie that was told to them.
How do I deduct that, simple we got more of the same despite the change so it was a bad decision and certainly not the type of big decision that was required. We needed to critically analyse where we were at, clean it all out but we refused then and we still refuse even now to face that reality and do something positive about it.
Make sure you dont personalise the usage of "we and you" usage you should know the intent of the statement is not to be taken that way.
Our upper level of management and coaching is like a birds nest.
Despite the type of bird that is in the nest originally the cuckoo comes every year and lays its egg along side all the other eggs and when it hatches it kicks everything else out of the nest and the parents of everything tossed out raise the ugly cuckoo regardless.
Young Snr,Farrah, Brown, Price, Mc Gregor, Young Jnr, Hornby all eggs laid in the nest, fed and nurtured by by our board whilst really good people were tossed out.
Changing that process before everything else will then make small incremental change actually count for something.
Re Widdop go back and read the varying posts, lots of people saying getting rid of Widdop will be a fix for the on field issues.
Plenty of he's shit, he cant play, he cant kick, he cant this and that but little attention or focus given to anything else about the team or those in it.
It is simply a whipping post because if it won't change the end result why raise the point.

There is no way changing the Coach and/or playmaker is incremental and to suggest it is, is nonsense. Changing your playmaker may not be the only change needed and may not be the long fix required but anyone who says this wouldn't affect how the TEAM plays is wrong.

Please quote me fully as I have clearly said on a number of occasions my reasons for changing Widdop are to give alternative players opportunities in the role prior to 2018 to see if any can perform there.

Your reasoning is that we shouldn't talk about changing players because until the Board/ Hangers on/ CEO / Coach are changed there is no point. I seem to remember a number of your posts where you criticise the playing roster. If there was no point why make them?

It is disappointing when the people having a valid discussion about a players shortcomings are referred to as thickheads and having stupid ideas.

 

[Old Timer]

A hypothetical question
If our entire staff including the board, coaching, recruitment, medical were to change places with the people at the Storm and both clubs maintained their existing rosters where would both clubs be at the start of the 2019 season?

 

[Old Timer]

Carlton
I in now way want to discourage people from being critical of a player or saying someone else deserves a go in place of him.
This was never my intent, I just abhor the way the finger pointing and vitriol from some people is all about 1 person and the belief his removal will fix it.
I truly believe some people have that vision and I push back against it thus my terminology and use of the English language.
I never said don't talk about change regardless of what the board is doing I simply meant stop whipping a player to death over the issues that are much bigger than any 1 player.
I said that they were stupid and were thick headed "IF" they though that changing Widdop alone would fix the issue so you are stretching my statement to get your conclusion.
Changing the coach should have been monumental but it was incremental because we went from poor performing, no experience, insider of the club coach to poor performing, no experience, insider of the club coach so how anybody can interpret that as anything else but significantly incremental?
Maybe this example may explain it better
Ferrarri F1 team announce they have a new car that will be launched next year after they have just had 3 very successful years on the track and state they have 3 or 4 drivers from other teams who could drive it but they have decided to go with the bloke that drove it into the pits after he took it out of the crate.
That obviously fails pretty quickly but due to them dilly dallying the first time, they now only have 1 or 2 recognised F1 drivers to choose from but they decide to again ignore them and get the bloke that drove the car from the pits to the plane for the car to be shipped to the next destination.
Now that is about to fail and there are no F1 drivers left to choose from and they are thinking about the guy in the pit crew as the driver.
The first decision was a monumental decision (just like Craig Young) and ultimately a dud decision no question but all the other decisions re the subsequent drivers are appallingly bad they are as a result of incremental change as when those decisions were made they never had any hope of making the situation better. They were like having an insurance policy to cover your arse.
Obviously you read my posts and interpret them differently so rather than have rancour best we desist the conversation.

 

[BrissyRedV]

Carlton
I in now way want to discourage people from being critical of a player or saying someone else deserves a go in place of him.
This was never my intent, I just abhor the way the finger pointing and vitriol from some people is all about 1 person and the belief his removal will fix it.
I truly believe some people have that vision and I push back against it thus my terminology and use of the English language.
I never said don't talk about change regardless of what the board is doing I simply meant stop whipping a player to death over the issues that are much bigger than any 1 player.
I said that they were stupid and were thick headed "IF" they though that changing Widdop alone would fix the issue so you are stretching my statement to get your conclusion.
Changing the coach should have been monumental but it was incremental because we went from poor performing, no experience, insider of the club coach to poor performing, no experience, insider of the club coach so how anybody can interpret that as anything else but significantly incremental?
Maybe this example may explain it better
Ferrarri F1 team announce they have a new car that will be launched next year after they have just had 3 very successful years on the track and state they have 3 or 4 drivers from other teams who could drive it but they have decided to go with the bloke that drove it into the pits after he took it out of the crate.
That obviously fails pretty quickly but due to them dilly dallying the first time, they now only have 1 or 2 recognised F1 drivers to choose from but they decide to again ignore them and get the bloke that drove the car from the pits to the plane for the car to be shipped to the next destination.
Now that is about to fail and there are no F1 drivers left to choose from and they are thinking about the guy in the pit crew as the driver.
The first decision was a monumental decision (just like Craig Young) and ultimately a dud decision no question but all the other decisions re the subsequent drivers are appallingly bad they are as a result of incremental change as when those decisions were made they never had any hope of making the situation better. They were like having an insurance policy to cover your arse.
Obviously you read my posts and interpret them differently so rather than have rancour best we desist the conversation.

OT, I think you have hit the nail on the head. There have been a number of whipping boys in the past who have now gone on to do bigger and better things. A couple of prime examples include Sowie and Prior who were smashed by fans under the tutelage of Price. Both moved to greener pastures and succeeded under better coaching. Rein may be another example we get to this year.

 

[Carlton]

The issue I have is that we all agree the Board/CEO/Coach have to change for long term success. This is not going to happen anytime in the foreseeable future. This is the disease that needs to be fixed.

However, it is entirely rational to still have discussions about the symptoms and how they should be dealt with. Nobody expects addressing the symptoms to cure the disease but they are looking for a little relief from the pain even if its temporary while they are waiting for the cure.

Any poster on this forum who pretends they haven't criticised or agreed with the criticism of a player or player selection at some stage is being a hypocrite. We have an inept playmaker but some people think we shouldn't talk about that until the Board changes.

 

[Glenn01]

Appreciate that you think I am a nice guy, but don't involve me in your diatribe.

I take it back

A hypothetical question
If our entire staff including the board, coaching, recruitment, medical were to change places with the people at the Storm and both clubs maintained their existing rosters where would both clubs be at the start of the 2019 season?

Ridiculous hypothetical. No way in the world would Bellamy find himself in a situation of having halves like ours. At least not outside of Origin or an injury crisis. If he did, I image he would do better but still badly. If McWanker hadn't been clueless he could have possibly, quickly palmed off Widdop and had another club pick up a decent portion of his salary until the end of this season. Too late for that now. No club is going to pick of a significant % of his salary for this season.

There is no excuse for being stuck with halves such as McCrone and Widdop almost 3 years into his tenure, even with the injury to Hutchenson. The Shonkies paid big money for Carl Filinga several years ago. "The next SBW" they said. I think he played 2 or 3 first grade games. Widdop is our equivalent but he has played almost every game the past 3 years and McWanker has made him captain!!!! Incredible incompetence and stupidity. the like which hasn't been seen since...... Steve Price

 

[Old Timer]

The issue I have is that we all agree the Board/CEO/Coach have to change for long term success. This is not going to happen anytime in the foreseeable future. This is the disease that needs to be fixed.

However, it is entirely rational to still have discussions about the symptoms and how they should be dealt with. Nobody expects addressing the symptoms to cure the disease but they are looking for a little relief from the pain even if its temporary while they are waiting for the cure.

Any poster on this forum who pretends they haven't criticised or agreed with the criticism of a player or player selection at some stage is being a hypocrite. We have an inept playmaker but some people think we shouldn't talk about that until the Board changes.

I forgot to throw Merrin in as he was shit and over rated too remember and he would regret leaving us lol
If Rein plays against us Rd 1 he will look 100% better than when he was with us as well.
Old saying some people just bring out the worst in others very appropriate at our club
As I said IMO you interpret different to the intent of posts so no point in debating

 

[Old Timer]

Glen 01
Spoken like a true Vasovite
You ignore a oerfectly good question to unleash on Widdop
The hypothetical is simple
can some people get the very best out of what he has and everyone improve or can some one bring out the worst in others and have them decline in ability
You are too frightened to even contemplate that Widdop under a good coach could be a good player because you would be f**ked to have anything to write about so you reject the original question out of hand
Obviously we tried to get Bellamy and if we had of succeeded he would have inherited our roster. Yes ultimately he would have fixed it or cleaned it out but do you think he could do better with what we have and would we see significant improvement with him at the helm?

 

[BrissyRedV]

Any poster on this forum who pretends they haven't criticised or agreed with the criticism of a player or player selection at some stage is being a hypocrite. We have an inept playmaker but some people think we shouldn't talk about that until the Board changes.

I am guilty as charged. I have hammered Rein a number of times in the past hence my eagerness now to see how he goes under a different coach.

In the case of the team currently, it is hard to see how any player can succeed with the structures put in place by Mary and in some cases, players could be damaged due to his incompetence. Case in point would be Mann at the start of last year. It could in fact be more detrimental for some players development to be thrust into the spotlight under such a poor coach.

 

[BrissyRedV]

Funny that Bellamy is used as an example with regards to Widdop seeing as he brought him through the grades and won the 2012 premiership with him at 5/8.