A national disgrace. Hindmarsh is ruled out -Mason plays unfit!!!!

[Mr Saab]

bennnett and the selectors do owe mason for what happened last yr.
Mason suddenly isnt a crap player because of missing 17 games or so and playing in a struggling dogs team for 2005. Australia do show loyalty and shouldnt chop and change a team just because of some johhny come lately.
Mason is not carrying any injury. All that he lacks is good match time.
Mason has been a virtual mainstay in the test team since his debut in july 2002.

 

[League Freak™]

Over the last fews years....Im prepared for anything from the selectors.


I guess Im passed getting worked up about it.


Yes I'd like things to change, but they wont. Not until we get beaten and that isnt going to happen any time soon.

 

[The Colonel]

bennnett and the selectors do owe mason for what happened last yr.
Mason suddenly isnt a crap player because of missing 17 games or so and playing in a struggling dogs team for 2005. Australia do show loyalty and shouldnt chop and change a team just because of some johhny come lately.
Mason is not carrying any injury. All that he lacks is good match time.
Mason has been a virtual mainstay in the test team since his debut in july 2002.

As has Hindmarsh. Given they believe he is three - four weeks away, which would mean he would only miss one game at best, shouldn't some loyalty have been shown for him? Given the amount of backrowers selected in the team surely a player who, on last years tour, was second only to Minichiello in the POTT standings and saved a couple of games for the Kangaroos should have been afforded tyhe chance to prove his fitness rather than being dropped on the first day?

Ryles has been given the same opportunity, as much it seems as has Mason...

I'm not against Mason's selection. But to use fitness as an excuse for the sacking of a player while two others are given the chance to prove their fitness, on the back of comments about not playing anyone who isn't 100% is highly hypocritical.

 

[Mr Saab]

i agree colonel...he should have been given a chane to go. But the same thing happened to Wally in 1990 and Misty had no problem laughing about it so i find the whole thing laughable too. As i said, i just find it ironic.

 

[AuckMel]

Looking at the speed and swerve of Nathan Hindmarsh's departure, it seemed there was nothing wrong with his knee. But looks are deceptive. Hindmarsh hot-footed it to his four-wheel drive, beating cameramen and photographers, and sped off, furious at being ruled out of the Tri-Nations tour by the team doctor who reckoned he would be sidelined for at least a further three to four weeks.

That playing field continues to remain distinctly unlevel.

 

[League Freak™]

That playing field continues to remain distinctly unlevel.

I agree.


If only New Zealand could reach a similar level of professionalism....amybe players wouldnt be tripping over themselves to avoid playing for the Kiwi's.

 

[AuckMel]

I agree.


If only New Zealand could reach a similar level of professionalism....amybe players wouldnt be tripping over themselves to avoid playing for the Kiwi's.

No wonder your team wears yellow.

 

[ali]

What a bunch of sooks some of you are. This is the strongest Australian squad we've had in years.

I think the only way we are going to shut up the whinging club fans is to sign an extremely nuetral national coach. Give him a full time job. Make sure he can have no allegance to any club. Seeing the reaction to selections every year, it's obvious that a percieved bias is stopping some fans going through the gate.

 

[j_tig]

its not the fact that bennet is the broncos and aus coach that is the problem here (well for me anyway). its more the selection of a player that has admitted not being 100% at the exclusion of skandalis and now the exclusion of hindmarsh. the selectors are supposed to be club neutral.
and to say that one of the main reasons that mason is touring is because he got injured lasty yr? please, i thought the teams were picked on form

 

[Mr Saab]

and to say that one of the main reasons that mason is touring is because he got injured lasty yr? please, i thought the teams were picked on form

what makes you think that? they never have primarily.
An incumbent 8/10 times will always win a selection argument over a player who has had one good yr. There are exceptions sure, but not its not very common.
If test teams were picked on form then instead of the 734 (thereabouts) that have played for australia since 1908 we would have had 2000 play for the green and gold. Thats not australian

 

[j_tig]

sorry let me rephrase that, i thought the teams were supposed to be picked on form. u would hope that the incumbent is in form but!

 

[aqua_duck]

I'd hope the incumbents would be fit to begin with.
I mean they didn't pick Johns for the anzac test, and fair enough because he hadn't fully recovered from his injury but what's mason done to suggest he's fully recovered?

 

[League Freak™]

No wonder your team wears yellow.

My team completely dominates the best youve got.....and its been that way since 1908.

 

[AuckMel]

My team completely dominates the best youve got.....and its been that way since 1908.

I don't blame your mob for not wanting to face a full strength Kiwi team these days.

You actually pay us the ultimate compliment by having two sets of rules.

 

[colonel_123]

I'm happy to see selectors rewarding players who have performed for Australia in the past, but there has to be some sort of a limit.

The picking of Mason goes beyond this limit.

Why pick some one who is:

1. not fully fit
2. not played in a recent finals series (meaning he has not played a game of football in a month and it will be 6 weeks since the end of the season when he runs out for Australia)
3. played very little football over the past year
4. was terribly out of form in the most recent games he played
5. the player himself admits that there are others who are fitter, in better form and more deserving of selection

Especially when it comes at the cost of someone like John Skandalis who has just won a premiership and was one of the form forwards of a finals series and is certainly not short of experience. (He's played over 200 games, trust me, he wouldn't let anyone down)

Picking a player who has done the job at rep level before is one thing, but picking some one who is not fully match fit and is out of form is another thing entirely. Incumbancy shouldn't come at the cost of common sense.

Besides, while rep selectors tend to reward incumbency, it's never the be all and end all. Firstly, if incumbency was the only thing considered why was Wing dropped from the side? Obviously form comes into it at some point.

Secondly, consider the selection of Trent Waterhouse who was picked for the Australian side after only a year in first grade which he had played almost entirely off the bench. Again there is a precedent there for rewarding form, especially from a grand final winning side.

Finally the suggestion that Mason should be rewarded because he missed an entire season through injury whilst playing for Australia sets a pretty dangerous precedent. Are we going to select every player that gets injured during a rep match the next time the rep side is selected, no matter how out of form they are?

 

[Misty Bee]

I knew, when posting, that Charlie Saab would bring up the old Wally Lewis Rothwell style conspiracy. The difference between Hindy and Lewis is that Hindy is fit and ready to go. Lewis wasn't.

The other difference is that Hindy, while extremely dissapointed and rightly feeling betrayed, has copped it on the chin. Lewis, meanwhile, carried on like there was a grassy knoll, 4 UFO's and Arko dressed up as Brutis brandishing a meat cleaver!

Nathan Gibbs - like every doctor, would know what a broken arm is. Orthapedic surgery is a far more specialised field. And Wally never had a medical clearance to play, and short of getting Barry Gomersall tizzed up in a stethescope, he wouldn't have got one from anybody.

Other points:

Hindmarsh was also in that US test. Where was Bennets loyalty to him?

Why was Ben Creah the replacement - and not Skandalis? How is Creagh better than Skandalis?

Both Colonel's points are spot on. It's not right that Mason goes unfit when Hindy doesnt, even with medical clearance from a specialist.

Rewarding players with a gimmee because of an injury suffered in a previous test is a very dangerous precedent. Will Russell Smith go easy on Morley because he was sent off early in a test?

And Charlie, the only way you'd get an idea is if you borrowed one.

 

[lockyno1]

Why was Ben Creah the replacement - and not Skandalis? How is Creagh better than Skandalis?

One is a second rower the other is a prop! There are enough props already!

 

[bartman]

It all doesn't seem to make any sense. When you put all the quotes together, something doesn't add up. If you make a rule about not risking unfit players, then it should stand for all players, not just certain ones.

A few people are saying even without Hindmarsh this is the strongest Aussie squad in years, and that we're not going to lose anytime soon. Maybe it's the ashes that has me feeling less confident, but I'm not so sure this sqaud is all that great...

Would be surprised if we go through this without losing at least one game, despite all the usual nationalistic carry on about how great we must be.

 

[Twizzle]

In my opinion, this is no where near our strongest team

 

[Mr Saab]

you know what misty brain? If Hindmarsh went and did further damage to his knee and was to miss 20 weeks of 2006 you and every other eels supporter would have been up in arms whinging and complaining about why they played a "non fit" player. I cant just see it now. The ARL is in a no win situation with the bum crack from parra.
Hindy is fit to go :lol: :lol: The eels played cloak and dagger stuff the last 3 weeks saying he will play the prelim final etc etc. Then he will play in the GF "IF" they make it :lol: They didnt make it. Hindmarsh is not fit as he has a knee injury. I dont think he was ever going to play in the finals series contrary to the fairy tales to the eels were preaching.
Mason is not suffering any injury whatsoever...Hindmarsh is.
Mason played the last 6 games of the yr and didnt suffer any injuries.
All that was wrong with him is that he couldnt run until recently and was doing alot of cross training.