What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Rumours and Stuff

Glenneel

Bench
Messages
3,428
Prob for Storm is Braondom Smith. He is a capable hooker.

Tigers also have Jacob Little.

We wont be getting either. We will commit to Mahoney and chances are Schneider will be on bench next season at some point
At Storm I'd say Harry Grant to hooker and Brandon Smith to lock.
 

Glenneel

Bench
Messages
3,428
The problem is he hasn't the exceptional passing game of C. Smith or even Harry Grant's at this stage of his evolution. It is solid to good with the occasional brilliant pass like the one to Stone on the weekend. But generally he doesn't engage the markers enough, or deceive the defense enough with his passing game.

I put this down to the massive workload that he does in defense. Now it is up to him and the coach to a lesser degree what type of player he wants to ultimately become. If he wants to be known as a tenacious defensive terrier like a McInnes, then fine he should keep doing what he is currently doing and he will achieve that goal. But if he wants to be a lethal ball playing and running dummy half that also has a running game and can do his fair share of tackles, then he needs to put more into that side of the game.

The problem for him at this young age is that if he doesn't focus more on the offensive side of his game, he will eventually feel comfortable to just make 50-60 tackles a game and as long as he has fed the ball out to the dominating voice on the field at speed and correctly, he will be content with his game. He will find it very difficult to switch over and do the magical little things the really great 9's do in attack. Andrew McCullough is a perfect example of this. When he first started out, for those who remember will remember that he too had a great little kicking game on occasion and his selective passing here and there was brilliant, and the occasional scoot that would light up the team off the back of it. Well what has happened to his offensive game? Has it progressed and flourished or has he bogged down to become a defensive workhorse?

Like I said, it is all up to him as to how he wants to evolve. More so then the coach, because no coach will tell a player to stop playing like C. Smith or Harry Grant, or Robbie Farah or Michael Ennis. I believe he has it in him to be a very, very good distributer and runner of the ball if he puts his mind to it and he has a kick in him too. He shows glimpses of it here and there that tell us that he has the skill set for sure. He needs to do it now though or in a couple of years he will have set his football brain to defender so to speak and for mine that would be a total waste of this players potential.

I get why he has turned into the player he is evolving into, but I don't believe it is warranted now. When he first came into our NRL squad, he was playing in a team that were lousy defenders of the ruck and quite frankly lousy defenders as a team depending on the personnel and game, right across the park. So the coach would have been on all the players backs big time on fixing their defensive lapses and drummed into the young and new number 9 that he needs to tackle, tackle, tackle, if he wants to stay in first grade. So now, his massive defensive workload is a symptom of those early couple of years and he has gotten into a groove of what is expected of him.

But I say, he needs to blow his game up to a certain extent and now focus on his attack more then his defense. It is not to late if he starts now. A year or two down the track will in my opinion be to late and players like Grant will have well and truly overtaken him like so many players have over taken McCullough and McInnes now. Sure McCullough is a handy hooker, but hardly a prized possession. When you defend that hard, just like McCullough, injuries will start to occur and eventually take their toll. As for McInnes, he will never let you down, but who would you rather have as your 9, McInnes or Grant?

In short, he needs to do less tackles and more heads up footy with the ball in hand or the die is already cast and in two or three years he will be considered as a great little defensive hooker but not much else. I for one don't want to see him go that way. If he make and average 10-15 less tackles a game, he will be much fresher and mentally alert and with that extra energy start to use it in his attacking game.

It's all about that little be of extra speed in picking up the ball off the deck, that one step at the ruck to engage a marker and then going the other way, or that healthier head space to look up and count the numbers correctly, and override the call from the 7, and go to the 6 that has a 4 on 3. The stronger and faster scoop and run from dummy half that splits the middle and pulls the defensive line out of shape. There are countless opportunities that can go missed or wasted, if our dummy half is massively under fatigue due to him just constantly getting of the turf from making that many tackles and then needing to be fresh and energized to make all the right calls at the play the ball. Not to mention late in the game he can become a liability in defense in a brutal game just like the one against the Roosters were he dropped off that tackle on Keary.

Anyway, time will tell, but unfortunately, I think he is already on the way to becoming primarily a defensive player and I know coaches love that, so I don't think he will be getting any real push from the coaching staff to change his game a little and that will be that.

Sorry, I know it is a very long rant, I just lost myself a little.
 

TheRam

Coach
Messages
13,457
The same Keary who touches the ball more than his 'halfback' most weeks? Keary and Flanagan play left-right, with the team attacking from centrefield most of the time.

Agreed, hence why I said I believe that he is more of a 7 then a 6 in the previous paragraph in my same post mate. Jeez.
 

Glenneel

Bench
Messages
3,428
Jenkovic has been good for us for the vast majority of games he has played. Even in 2018 (?), some of the crap he copped was for making errors when trying to ground the ball and shit like that. That stuff happens. It wasn't his best year, but I think he has been a great signing for us (salary cap debacle notwithstanding).
Hasn't played much better with us than this year imo.

For this to happen it means when Penrith offered to let Blake go no other clubs where interested hey and they thought they'll need to chip in to get rid of him. Same as DWZ. I reckon a host of clubs would of been keen on both these two. My guess is Panthers took a hit on them both last season but now their current clubs are paying 100% and my guess is about 500k for Blake and 600k for DWZ who the dogs purchased as a fullback only to find out he is just a winger who wants to play fullback.

RCG is a different case. He would of been on about 750k.He had a few injuries and playing bad. Not many clubs would of wanted him for that price. But my guess is around 500-550k a few would of been interested. If it was 400k then most the comp would want to chat. They where not players nobody had any interest in.
I dare say Panthers are paying around the 150k for him for perhaps 3yrs of his contract and RCG may of been happy to wipe 50k off a year himself.
A club can't dictate to a player under contract that they leave and play for a certain club that may be interested. The player can pick and choose their new club, or even remain, but probably play in reserve grade. Obviously Blake and RCG chose Parra as the closest club to where they are living, and Parra agreed to have them. From what I've heard Penrith are paying a large chunk of RGCs salary, much less for Blake.
 

TheRam

Coach
Messages
13,457
Plodders are necessary to assemble a competitive team under the cap. We are currently running first with how many current Origin players?

It's a team sport, and a team full of plodders with a couple of stars will kill the team with half a dozen stars and the rest reserve graders. The irony is that people like you look at these great teams and overrate most of their players. Guys like Shaun Lane and Joseph Manu would look like nobodies in a weaker team

Mate, the same Joseph Manu who played for his national side New Zealand and scored a winning try against Australia and has starred in many major games at the pointy end of the season and even outshone LM at times?

Or the same Shaun Lane that many keen judges keep touting is great a back rower due to his ability with the ball and that he offers more than your typical big backrower and that he is knocking on the door of SOO?

Sure each squad needs plodders but 1. neither of the two that you offered up come anywhere near plodder class and
2. plodder should never be the description of your half. Period.

So you just stick to admiring your pinup boy Luke Kelly and let the grownups talk about player recruitment and retention. Honestly, sometimes you just plain embarrass yourself.
 

TheRam

Coach
Messages
13,457
Pou is right and wrong.
Lane and Manu both have some of the best offloading capability in the comp. They are great players.
But in a weaker side they wouldn't be noticed. Look at Tyrone Peachey as a great example. I doubt every player who goes to the gold coast turns bad. They get less chance to shine.

Yes but that hardly makes them plodders Hindy and this is where the good judge can see the greater potential in them and pick them up at a decent price and bring them to full bloom.

So Pou calling them plodders is bullsh*t. They are both quality that need quality around them to do what they do best otherwise their talents are wasted and then they themselves would drop off a gear or two. Then plod lovers like Pou go hard and label them as plodders.
 

TheRam

Coach
Messages
13,457
Well Lane was nothing special before he came to Parra and Manu has never played for a weaker team.

But look at the players who leave the Storm and Roosters and come back to the field. Scott and Proctor, Pearce and Latrell Mitchell. Even Michael Jennings when Parra is going average. He was the best centre in the game when he left the Chooks and now magically looking nearly as good when his team is firing.

The Storm is a unique case in the NRL, due to their structures and C. Smith. They rely on a big and powerful pack that can defend well and bend the line. Then as long as you can follow direction by the coach and the great one you just have to do your simple job, depending on your position and that they set out for you. But they too can't get away with this tactic all that much anymore due to not having the big 3 or 4 that they had the luxury of having for so long.

Yes they could in their better years slot in a few extra plodders then the average team, around those top 3-4 players in their team and it worked brilliantly. But to suggest Proctor, Pearce, Latrell and Jennings are all plodders is to again display your ignorance to the value and quality of players.

But even the Storm need a quality organiser in the halves, which they don't have at the moment and at times is very obvious and telling.

As for Jennings, if you genuinely believe he is a plodder then you have rocks in your head. You should never mistaken a guys attitude when playing in an average to bad team. Fans may not like it but many if not most players that have great ability, especially backs, will drop right off from their best game and just fill in time. We have seen this time and time again. They just won't bust a gut when they know it is a futile endeavour.

Look at Seibold at the Broncos, he just dropped Corey Oats. What a joke. His team is struggling big time and what does he do? He goes to the RL School of Pou and drops a winger. Yeah that will fix it. Never mind that he has been drinking heavily from the deep well of RL knowledge Pou style and surrounded his team with plodder playmakers.

No matter what he does at the moment it will not change the teams fortunes by much until he gets a playmaker worth his salt. He needs to do this even if it means letting a star or two go, otherwise they will never, ever be a contender. I said it before I would offer Chad Townsend a contract and yes I know he is signed to the Sharks, but I believe he would jump at the chance to steer that team of potential superstars around the park. The Sharks wouldn't like it, but tough, dog eat dog in this world and they do have some salary cap concerns I believe.

I was also thinking that Jackson Hastings would maybe be a decent option too for them but now I heard the Warriors are looking at him. But he has plenty of talent and if he has got his head together now and matured, he might be a revelation for them. He has been killing it over there from what I understand.

But anyway, Pou you have no freakin idea mate. Just keep gazing into the eyes of that Luke Kelly poster on your wall and keep a good supply of tissues by your side.
 

TheRam

Coach
Messages
13,457
It's just a f**ken jersey number. If you pay with split halves one of them has to wear 7 and one has to wear 6.

Again shows how little you know mate and no it isn't just a number.

For most 7's practically and mentally the 7 jersey is significant to them and allots them the main playmaker duties. There are the exceptions though and Keary is one of them where he has assumed the head playmaking duties due to his superior abilities compared to a rookie 7 just gaining his feet in the NRL.

Also if the Roosters had signed a top notch 6 junior, they would have had no hesitation in moving Kerry to 7, because he plays like one anyway with the 6 on his back. He really is an out and out 7 that doesn't need the jersey number to dominate the playmaking duties. Even with Cronk there last year he was the dominating half because that is what he is.
 
Last edited:

TheRam

Coach
Messages
13,457
It's just a f**ken jersey number. If you pay with split halves one of them has to wear 7 and one has to wear 6.

Or even a better example is our very own Moses. He used to play all his footy at 6, but when he came to Parra, what did BA say? "I see him more as a 7 then a 6" and moved him there pronto. Now he could have moved the more experienced Norman to 7 and kept Moses at 6 if he believed like you do that it is JUST a number, but he didn't. He wanted Moses to take on more responsibility and assume the main playmaking duties.

It maybe just a number to some, but to most players it is a different psychology.
 
Top