kris_man said:also, Tidus - i notice you left Mogg out (btw, i did too). what were your reasons for this? do you think, like me, that he's a hog? and inconsistent?
excellent, i have an ally in the anti-Mogg campaign (great defender, but zero spark). its funny, because most of you think the opposite: great attacker but poor defender.Tidus_Raider said:kris_man said:also, Tidus - i notice you left Mogg out (btw, i did too). what were your reasons for this? do you think, like me, that he's a hog? and inconsistent?
I just think that Frawley, Graham and even Ale are better prospects. The guy is a solid first grader but he hardly lights the world on fire. I prefer more strike power outwide and I dont think he has that try scoring instinct that we need. I would have Lolesi back over him anyday.
Edwahu said:Which games have you guys been watching? Mogg created most of our tries this year and is easily our most dangerous back. His defence is the problem and he gets targeted big time but he will still be the first threequarter picked next year.
exactly, :lol: , that's what i mentioned. i am bedazzled that people say Mogg is a bad defender #-o , because he's a great one-on-one defender, but i really think that we've got much better attackers in the team. like i said before, i don't think he's totally crap - i wouldn't mind having him on the wing (with Phil inside him in attack, and Mogg defending as centre), but i do think he's a bit of a hog. i think he was hopeless in 2003 apart from the great game he had against the Roosters in rd 26, and he hasn't done enough this year for me to start believing that hes' a good player. he always gets in and does those annoying dummy-half runs, and although that suits Elliott's game plans to a tee, i don't like them.Timbo said:Has anyone noticed what's going on here?
The anti-Moggies are saying he's a great defender with no attacking prowess.
The pro-Moggies are saying he's a great attacker with defencive issues.
:lol: :lol: :lol:
i didn't see him miss many tackles. i think it's more to do with our "compressed defence" which was brought up somewhere else. by the time the opposition gets the ball outwide, there's usually an overlap of more than one man, and there's not much moggy or anyone else can do about it. right now i think: mogg = blunt attacking weapon + top defender. if you're tight abuot his defence, it would change to: mogg = blunt attacking weapon + poor defender, in which case it would be bye bye Mogg.Edwahu said:Why do you think oppositions targeted Moggs side of the park so heavily, especially in the last 10 or so weeks? Its not because he is a great defender.