Why not play Jai Field on the Wing?

[RedVDragon]

Ok I hear all your opinions. You all make valid points. Let’s experiment. We have two huge centres in Lomax and Lafai they will protect field to run as fast as he can. It may work it may not. We need to do something?

 

[giboz71]

Ok I hear all your opinions. You all make valid points. Let’s experiment?

Yep. I agree.

We’re not a good enough team to say so and so shouldn’t play here or so and so shouldn’t play there.

We’ve been playing it safe for ages and stunk it up for going on 5 years.

Let’s start the season with our preferred line up but if we’re languising outside the 8 after 8 or 9 rounds, let’s change it up a bit. We have players who can fill in multiple positions.

I’d rather finish last having a crack then finishing 11th playing it safe.

 

[nontime111]

Field to 5/8th to accompany Hunt after Widdy retires or is moved on

hang in there kid youre a gun

 

[watatank]

Experimenting is fine if the moves make some sense and Field on the wing just doesn't make much sense, especially when Dufty is fullback. If we are looking for a younger winger or centre, Garrick, Herbert or Lomax should be the players to consider.

 

[giboz71]

Field to 5/8th to accompany Hunt after Widdy retires or is moved on

hang in there kid youre a gun

Widdops on a 4 year deal. Don’t think Field will wait that long.

Field’s only hope is FB if Dufty falters. Or if McInnes gets injured and Hunt goes to hooker and he can partner Widdop if Mary goes that way.

 

[Dennis Papaioannou]

Gypsy will pull rank. No one makes an easy try from 5m out look difficult and awkward like Gypsy does.

16 easy, awkward looking tries in 2017 no less!

 

[BennyV]

I might be the only one, but I actually cant see Field becoming a long-term first grade at our club. Widdop has the 6 wrapped up for a while full time (Field at 7 would be insanity) and I'd say by the end of that contract, Sailor will be the one to take the jersey. Or some random other buy.

Reminds me of Adam Quinlan. Will probably end up in ESL and killing it.

 

[dragonssamy61]

Experimenting is fine if the moves make some sense and Field on the wing just doesn't make much sense, especially when Dufty is fullback. If we are looking for a younger winger or centre, Garrick, Herbert or Lomax should be the players to consider.

Agree with you.
But Herbert is also ready.
Both herbert and garrick have played a full year in revs and are closer to ready in my option.
What do you think

 

[watatank]

I guess it depends how they are developing. Herbert is probably the safer bet given he played all year in nsw cup when he coulf have been in 20s. I think he is a centre but could play wing or fullback if required.
Garrick played nsw cup too but moved back to u20s. I think he is a more natural winger than centre and has decent upside but needs to develop physically. Lomax is probably the best one of the lot but also at least 2 years younger. So time will tell

 

[Qdf]

Steve Slippery Morris became an outstanding winger. Same frame and speed. So why not, small, midget or not. Yes we may even score more points. Funny that.

That was then,this is now...
Different game now...

 

[giboz71]

I might be the only one, but I actually cant see Field becoming a long-term first grade at our club. Widdop has the 6 wrapped up for a while full time (Field at 7 would be insanity) and I'd say by the end of that contract, Sailor will be the one to take the jersey. Or some random other buy.

Reminds me of Adam Quinlan. Will probably end up in ESL and killing it.

Two things are against him.

Clearly his size limits his options. Can’t play wing or centre being that small.

And he doesn’t possess enough game management to be a half. We wouldn’t have invested long term in Widdop and Hunt if we thought he could eventually play in the halves. And then they brought in Nicholls as a back up.

I’m guessing he’ll be insurance if Dufty falters but we have Mann as well. So not really sure where he’s gonna fit?

 

[Dennis Papaioannou]

Two things are against him.

Clearly his size limits his options. Can’t play wing or centre being that small.

And he doesn’t possess enough game management to be a half. We wouldn’t have invested long term in Widdop and Hunt if we thought he could eventually play in the halves. And then they brought in Nicholls as a back up.

I’m guessing he’ll be insurance if Dufty falters but we have Mann as well. So not really sure where he’s gonna fit?

Good points but given Widdop's experience, he also lacks game management.
We lost a number of games in 2017 because of it.
Hoping that Hunt will rectify that.

 

[True_Believer]

Genuine questions here, what would be the preferred plan for bringing juniors through? The reason I ask is:

1. If you put someone like Lomax in for round 1 and he doesn't fire in attack or defensively is found to be a liability and contributes to us losing the first game, how many more games do we persist with him? This applies to all youngsters. Do we risk losing 3 or 4 games at the start of the season just to find out if a player is capable of performing in the NRL? that puts us behind the 8 ball from the get go.
2. If we are keen to buy quality players from elsewhere, where does the blooding youngsters come into it? My personal opinion is that you can't have both. Financially you might be able to, but having a viable plan to bring young players through creates an issue when you have a 1 or 2 quality players with experience standing in front of them in all positions. That creates issues and you risk losing those players.
3. How many youngsters are you prepared to have in the team at once? There has to be a balance in both first grade and res grade. Too many young inexperienced players in the team creates a Newcastle situation and we risk languishing at the bottom of the table for a couple of years while we continue to bring them through
4. When do you stop the 'blooding of youngsters'? Each year there is going to be a batch of new viable players coming through - as we are finding now. If you don't stop at some point you will be in a constant state of rebuild. At some point you have say we have a reasonable team - we need to let some of the up and comers go.

I think it's OK to say bring this player or that player through because they show promise, but for me it appears alot more complicated than that. i think you need a good balance and you need to manage their progression to ensure their confidence isn't broken etc. Also, the step up is bigger for some than others and it's about identifying that difference in players.

 

[giboz71]

Good points but given Widdop's experience, he also lacks game management.
We lost a number of games in 2017 because of it.
Hoping that Hunt will rectify that.

I agree. Widdop is far from perfect. But he’s a seasoned NRL premiership winner and club captain and we’ve banked our future on him by signing him to a 4 year deal. He’s gonna be our 5/8 like it or not.

No way they will consider Field in the halves now. Even if there is an injury, Nichols would probably get the nod to step in.

 

[True_Believer]

Good points but given Widdop's experience, he also lacks game management.
We lost a number of games in 2017 because of it.
Hoping that Hunt will rectify that.

I'd have to disagree. Watch the Souths game again. We did lose that game but it wasn't because of Widdops inability to manage the game. He actually has down their end for much of the last 1/4 of the game thanks to deft kicks and good decisions in the context of the game.

It's about consistency and, as I've said over and over, getting support from the rest of the spine. Hunt will help in that it will take sole responsibility off of our only play maker.

 

[dragonssamy61]

Good points but given Widdop's experience, he also lacks game management.
We lost a number of games in 2017 because of it.
Hoping that Hunt will rectify that.

Dennis
I'm hoping hunt runs the team.
This way widdop can play his natural game.
He is always better with a organised half next to him.

 

[BennyV]

Only at the Dragons where the quickest players in the club don’t have anywhere to play.

So let’s continue being the slowest team in the comp. Coz that’s worked out well for us.

Hate to be harsh, but if Dufty works out at FB, then effectively there is nowhere for Field to go. May as well set him loose. Sure some other club would happily grab him so he can run rings around us in the future. He can get in the queue behind all the other fast backs that run rings around us.

He could get minutes in the halves if Hunt plays some hooker but apparently that’s a stupid suggestion as well.

So why not just set him loose. He doesn’t fit anywhere after all?

I know you're uber keen on Hunt to 9, but To do that in order to give FIeld minutes is silline

Genuine questions here, what would be the preferred plan for bringing juniors through? The reason I ask is:

1. If you put someone like Lomax in for round 1 and he doesn't fire in attack or defensively is found to be a liability and contributes to us losing the first game, how many more games do we persist with him? This applies to all youngsters. Do we risk losing 3 or 4 games at the start of the season just to find out if a player is capable of performing in the NRL? that puts us behind the 8 ball from the get go.
2. If we are keen to buy quality players from elsewhere, where does the blooding youngsters come into it? My personal opinion is that you can't have both. Financially you might be able to, but having a viable plan to bring young players through creates an issue when you have a 1 or 2 quality players with experience standing in front of them in all positions. That creates issues and you risk losing those players.
3. How many youngsters are you prepared to have in the team at once? There has to be a balance in both first grade and res grade. Too many young inexperienced players in the team creates a Newcastle situation and we risk languishing at the bottom of the table for a couple of years while we continue to bring them through
4. When do you stop the 'blooding of youngsters'? Each year there is going to be a batch of new viable players coming through - as we are finding now. If you don't stop at some point you will be in a constant state of rebuild. At some point you have say we have a reasonable team - we need to let some of the up and comers go.

I think it's OK to say bring this player or that player through because they show promise, but for me it appears alot more complicated than that. i think you need a good balance and you need to manage their progression to ensure their confidence isn't broken etc. Also, the step up is bigger for some than others and it's about identifying that difference in players.

All true. It's why the re-signing of guys like Nightingale and Thompson seem so strange.

However, the part you miss is picking the RIGHT juniors and giving them the guidance to succeed. We put a lot of eggs in the Hutchison basket and allowed others to go off the boil, then didn't give him the system to be properly introduced.

 

[Home Truth Man]

It is difficult to keep pushing the juniors line when clubs like the Roosters cherry pick the best from other clubs at a young age and then buy whoever they like at the top end of the market.

Adding to this is that Mary will not bring them along slowly ie blood youngsters during the year as he is risk averse as he holds on for dear life to keep his job

 

[True_Believer]

All true. It's why the re-signing of guys like Nightingale and Thompson seem so strange.

However, the part you miss is picking the RIGHT juniors and giving them the guidance to succeed. We put a lot of eggs in the Hutchison basket and allowed others to go off the boil, then didn't give him the system to be properly introduced.

Agree Benny.

I guess the Thompson one has been answered. We're looking to move him on and not resign him (unless you are talking about when we resigned him a couple of years ago). However, as Manly seem to have gone cold on the signing, it makes sense to keep him on board for the last year of his contract. I'm guessing Nighty is just a sentimental signing - I would hope he would be used this year to support a junior in his position and share the spot with that junior or at the very least a capable player from the res team. Same with Thommo - although I imagine Sims may take that spot eventually and we'll see Host or Leilua on the bench.

Picking the right juniors is definitely an issue. I don't watch a heap of the res or junior games but based on comments on here it sounds like just about every player coming through or playing in the res team should be promoted. This is obviously not possible if you want to be competitive so identifying those that have the capability and can make the switch quickly is key.

I wouldn't be surprised to see more 1 year experienced signings in the next couple of years while we continue to transition the youngsters into first grade bit by bit. The plan is sound, it's the execution and finding the right balance of youth and experience that is the hard part.

 

[Drag Queen]

I would hang onto Field and let him develop his game in reserve grade. If he can develop his game to a high level and then come into first grade when an injury occurs to say Widdop and if he can perform very well in first grade, then we could let Widdop go early and hang onto Field. We should keep our options open. It is also very good to have 3 first grade halves on our roster, in case of an injury to one of our starting halves.

Can't see it happening mate.

I might be the only one, but I actually cant see Field becoming a long-term first grade at our club. Widdop has the 6 wrapped up for a while full time (Field at 7 would be insanity) and I'd say by the end of that contract, Sailor will be the one to take the jersey. Or some random other buy.

Reminds me of Adam Quinlan. Will probably end up in ESL and killing it.

Nothing wrong with that either. Sheens has the cheque book open. Got them out of their relegated position by poaching young Aussie talent including Quinny. Hull KR are back. Definitely an option.