Rumoured and Confirmed Signings and Avenger's Secrets XXVII

[Stagger eel]

No more then $300-350k and I think we did the right thing in not persuing him.

But how much did you hear Penrith have signed him for?

The figure I heard was 470k

 

[hindy111]

Jennings a worth 500k.Guy is dynamite.Id rather spend the extra 140 on him than hiku

 

[Gary Gutful]

Yeah, buddy, once again - referring to his assertion that Cayless was super ceded by the 'big boppers' late in his career. So I pointed out that he captained New Zealand and played a huge role in our march to the grand final in the last few years of his career. Sorry that offends you. My point was that every era can accommodate Cayless types alongside Mannah types.
Now, Mr Escobar - as is his usual wont - has gone off on a little tangent and implied that I don't think the game has changed in 15 years. A typically clumsy attempt to steer the conversation off course a little (looks like you fell for it). Naturally the game has changed (not completely, not unrecognisably, but it has changed). That's my answer to your question one - which you would have already known if you'd read my post properly.
Regarding your second question, I'd say there is no black and white answer. I think the change in the game has advantaged both types of forwards in different ways. Next time read my posts properly before you start your whiny shit. And watch the spelling mistakes. ;-)

Spelling mistakes? :lol: Come on Lingard, you can do better than that. I'll have you know that I won a spelling bee when I was 4. I smashed a bunch of 6 and 7 year olds who stumbled when it came time to spell "Physiotherapy".

A few things:

1. Is it safe to respond now or should I wait until tomorrow when you forget that you have already responded and end up responding again?

2. You haven't offended me. No need to apologise.

3. I did read your posts properly and stand by my questions. I am perfectly capable of reviewing and synthesising information. Maybe you aren't as clear as you think you are.

4. I haven't fallen for anything. I make up my own mind based on my own interpretation of what gets written.

5. There is a certain irony in accusing someone of contributing "whiny shit" in a post where the whiny knob has been turned all the way up to 11.

With that out of the way. Perhaps we can be civil again.

So my next question is "How has the change in the game and the onset of the wrestle advantaged smaller, more skilful forwards"?

 

[natheel]

So what's the go with Jennings?

 

[hindy111]

Put a sock in it Garry its new years day

 

[Gary Gutful]

Put a sock in it Garry its new years day

Sorry Gouldy.

 

[hindy111]

If we sign jennings i reckon we are premiers for 2016.

 

[murraymob]

I heard differently mate

me to difference was he got a longer contract at penrith

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Yep. You're right. Which shows that a more mobile and skillful prop forward, even in the twilight of his career, could match it with all the 'big boppers' on the big stage.

But did he 'match it' with them, just because he was on the same field as them? Did David Gower 'match it' with JWH in 2013 because they faced each other in the grand final?

I already said Cayless was one of the best props in the game early in his career. That means I am comparing him to other props of the time. Then later in his career, at his peak (when he would have been a better player than he was early on), he was not as good compared to other props as he was. This doesn't mean he wasn't good enough to play in the same competition as these better props, or even the same club or rep teams as them. Just that he wasn't ranked as highly against his contemporaries. Because his particular skill set was no longer quite as valuable compared to the bash-barge-and-wrestle of the game's best forwards at the end of Cayless' career.

Oddly enough, James Graham is considered one of the game's best forwards these days, and he has a very similar skill set to Cayless. However he doesn't have Cayless' footwork (I don't know if you ever heard the term 'S-line' but it's something very few forwards besides Cayless could do) and most importantly, he is a lot bigger than Cayless. And Graham isn't a big forward.

I also think Cayless would still be a first grader if he came through today, just as he was a first grader when he retired a few years ago. But I don't think he would be a key member of a top four pack like he was fifteen years ago.

 

[hindy111]

Sorry Gouldy.

Love you Garry - just not felt like reading in depth

 

[hindy111]

Cayless was a great captain and great in his 5 yrs.After that he was just average prop with a great attitude.

 

[lingard]

But did he 'match it' with them, just because he was on the same field as them? Did David Gower 'match it' with JWH in 2013 because they faced each other in the grand final?

I already said Cayless was one of the best props in the game early in his career. That means I am comparing him to other props of the time. Then later in his career, at his peak (when he would have been a better player than he was early on), he was not as good compared to other props as he was. This doesn't mean he wasn't good enough to play in the same competition as these better props, or even the same club or rep teams as them. Just that he wasn't ranked as highly against his contemporaries. Because his particular skill set was no longer quite as valuable compared to the bash-barge-and-wrestle of the game's best forwards at the end of Cayless' career.

Oddly enough, James Graham is considered one of the game's best forwards these days, and he has a very similar skill set to Cayless. However he doesn't have Cayless' footwork (I don't know if you ever heard the term 'S-line' but it's something very few forwards besides Cayless could do) and most importantly, he is a lot bigger than Cayless. And Graham isn't a big forward.

I also think Cayless would still be a first grader if he came through today, just as he was a first grader when he retired a few years ago. But I don't think he would be a key member of a top four pack like he was fifteen years ago.

You're very funny. Compare David Gower with JWH? :lol::lol::lol:
Why don't you compare SBW (as a fast, mobile, skilful forward) with Tim Mannah, and see who comes up trumps?

 

[Eelementary]

Yeah, buddy, once again - referring to his assertion that Cayless was super ceded by the 'big boppers' late in his career. So I pointed out that he captained New Zealand and played a huge role in our march to the grand final in the last few years of his career. Sorry that offends you. My point was that every era can accommodate Cayless types alongside Mannah types.
Now, Mr Escobar - as is his usual wont - has gone off on a little tangent and implied that I don't think the game has changed in 15 years. A typically clumsy attempt to steer the conversation off course a little (looks like you fell for it). Naturally the game has changed (not completely, not unrecognisably, but it has changed). That's my answer to your question one - which you would have already known if you'd read my post properly.
Regarding your second question, I'd say there is no black and white answer. I think the change in the game has advantaged both types of forwards in different ways. Next time read my posts properly before you start your whiny shit. And watch the spelling mistakes. ;-)

I'm an arsehole, so I'll just say - "supesede" is widely regarded as the correct spelling, and it is one word.

I'm really sorry - I truly can't help myself. I think I should take a self-imposed timeout.

 

[oldmancraigy]

I'm an arsehole, so I'll just say - "supesede" is widely regarded as the correct spelling, and it is one word.

I'm really sorry - I truly can't help myself. I think I should take a self-imposed timeout.

Actually i am 99% sure it is supercede, in your paragraph, or should be superseded in his. So you were technically right in the error you were pointing out, you just forgot a letter, and therefore made a spelling mistacke.

 

[Eelementary]

Actually i am 99% sure it is supercede, in your paragraph, or should be superseded in his. So you were technically right in the error you were pointing out, you just forgot a letter, and therefore made a spelling mistacke.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/supercede

Usage Discussion of supercede
Supercede has occurred as a spelling variant of supersede since the 17th century, and it is common in current published writing. It continues, however, to be widely regarded as an error.

 

[Eelementary]

Actually i am 99% sure it is supercede, in your paragraph, or should be superseded in his. So you were technically right in the error you were pointing out, you just forgot a letter, and therefore made a spelling mistacke.

Also, I was referring specifically to the broader, unconjugated word "supersede", so it's not incorrect.

 

[Eelementary]

I will die alone.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

You're very funny. Compare David Gower with JWH? :lol::lol::lol:
Why don't you compare SBW (as a fast, mobile, skilful forward) with Tim Mannah, and see who comes up trumps?

I don't think Mannah is as good as Williams either.

 

[Gary Gutful]

Also, I was referring specifically to the broader, unconjugated word "supersede", so it's not incorrect.

I think OMC was having a joke about the fact that you left out the r in your original post.

$5 if you can find the spelling mistake in my post that Ivor referred to.

P.S. I don't think it is "shined" (when I could have used "shone") or Defence/Defense. Go hard mate. Keen for you to find it.

 

[Gary Gutful]

Why don't you compare SBW (as a fast, mobile, skilful forward) with Tim Mannah, and see who comes up trumps?

Who happens to be BIG and therefore missing one of the important elements of what was originally asserted.