Ben Hannant

[Big Pete]

Do you pull up everyone on this forum who makes spelling mistakes? Or just those who may have an opinion that differs from yours.

Forget about the spelling, that isn't what this is about.

It's about fans calling for the selections of talent they clearly seen very little of and being critical of the coach and the alternative at every opportunity when they don't get their way. It isn't a specific call against Broncos fans either, every fan is guilty of it at some point and there isn't anything constructive to gain from it.

Spelling is just an indicator.

 

[Dazzat]

No ... placing one letter in place of another is NOT an indicator. It's a mistake.

Dumping Ben Hannant in preference of Kennedy, and then playing Kennedy for 20 minutes - that's an indicator.

 

[Dazzat]

So I am willing to listen. So you want everyone on these forums to only express positive opinions about their team and to never have an opposing thought to the coach?

I will remind you that in 2006 (if memory serves me right) I copped a lot of abuse when I stood by Wayne Bennett when the season seemed to be lost. All was doom and gloom on this forum, but I could see some positives and some basics in place that would see us through.

It was a sweet victory for me because of this, when we won the Premiership.

So I will stand by a coach if they are losing or going through a hard time if they show some positive signs in other areas. But sorry ... I don't see this in Griffin. His decision making is become more random, harder to understand, and definitely with no regard to the long term.

My prediction at this stage. Griffin to stay on until the end of the year and for Brisbane to finish either third or fourth last.

 

[Big Pete]

Either way, my point rings true.

Easy to bag out, much harder to suggest an alternative and put forward a good case.

Just a general thought.

 

[Dazzat]

Ben Hannant played 75 minutes for the Ipswich Jets, and by all accounts was very enthusiastic. Apart from reaffirming his love for the Broncos, he said this:

“People have to remember football is not the be-all and end-all. It can play with your head and your emotions ... but my family will always come first.”

I saw in a report this week, that some thought Hannant wasn't a team man. Well I put this to you. Hannant has four or five children I believe. He also has beliefs that probably restrict him from "drinking with the boys". If that's the case - so be it!

There is obviously more to this than meets the eye. The thing that irks me, and I know many other fans, is that Griffin doesn't have the decency to come clean about the reason why Hannant was dumped. No, he just denies there is any problem.

Sorry Pete. But this is totally unacceptable. You cannot dump a player of Hannant's stature in the game and just tell fans you did it because you felt like it. Fans are stakeholders of the club. We pay for the tickets, the merchandise, and everything else. Griffin cannot treat us like we don't matter.

If Hannant is not re-instated this week, without an explanation, I don't think I could be bothered watching another game this year. And I don't think I'm alone.

 

[Big Pete]

But Hook did provide an explanation, he said that Hannant hadn't met the expectations required of a player of his calibre and he was sent to Queensland Cup to work on his issues.

While I believe there is more to it than just that and imagine there is an element of truth to the rumours doing the rounds, I don't expect the coach to address those rumours in front of the media ahead of Game Day.

EDIT: By the by you don't have to like that reason. I thought the timing was perculiar especially since Hannant delivered his best performance of the season against the Rabbitohs but to suggest he offered nothing isn't true.

Perhaps you missed it in the sea of nothing articles from News Limited? It was a fairly slow week for them.

 

[Packy]

But Hook did provide an explanation, he said that Hannant hadn't met the expectations required of a player of his calibre and he was sent to Queensland Cup to work on his issues.

You don't believe that line do you?

 

[Big Pete]

I don't know, you tell me?

While I believe there is more to it than just that

 

[GoTheBroncs]

While McCullough is obviously having his best season and playing very well (which must be something since in the past I have not rated him), having Granville come on in our last couple of games has made a real difference and I think he should have played.

This does not mean I am against the Lowrie signing. I assume he came cheap and we have to play somebody during origin. But it's not origin yet, and Granville deserved another chance to build on the last couple of games he played.

Just like Hannant deserved to build on his Souths game (at least ahead of Kennedy).

 

[Big Pete]

At the end of the day though, not selecting Granville didn't really cost us the game or really even contributed to the loss given he only plays 10 minutes and I don't think Macca necessarily struggled having to play the 80.

It wouldn't even make a top 10 reasons list.

 

[Dazzat]

But that's the thing Pete ... by your own admission there are at least 10 reasons why the team is not performing. Really? Are all these reasons beyond the coach's control. Probably some are. But at the end of the day, the buck stops with him (and Andrew Gee).

After watching the attacking brilliance of the Bulldogs last night, I pondered how many games over the past two years you could say were entertaining and great to watch. Just a handful.

There are too many players playing average football week-after-week, and not being addressed by the coach. And THAT'S why the sacking of Hannant is so hard to take.

Because on one hand Griffin continues to support mediocrity; and when a player shows signs of improvement he sacks him. No wonder we perform like we do.

 

[Bulldog Force]

Just wondering when he is off contract, he hasn't had a very good few years, in fact I would say his last 3 have been ordinary compared to his standard, or the standard he should be playing. He has clearly lost his starting spot because of it, and there have been whispers of him heading to the Titans. I can't say I think it would be a bad thing if he left to be honest. Would mean guys like J Wallace ( who I think has had more impact the Hannant this year when played ) would get more game time.

If I was selecting the side for this week, Hannant wouldn't be there, J Wallace would be.

Would any Bronco fans still keep Hannant at the club given the choice?

We currently have the Polar Bear twins at our club (Tolman and Graham). Wouldn't mind the triplet coming back... but doubt it lol.

 

[Dogs Of War]

We currently have the Polar Bear twins at our club (Tolman and Graham). Wouldn't mind the triplet coming back... but doubt it lol.

Do we need a prop in NSW Cup?

 

[Bulldog Force]

Do we need a prop in NSW Cup?

Fair point.

 

[Big Pete]

But that's the thing Pete ... by your own admission there are at least 10 reasons why the team is not performing. Really? Are all these reasons beyond the coach's control. Probably some are. But at the end of the day, the buck stops with him (and Andrew Gee).

Not necessarily, it just goes to show how insignificant I consider the omission of Granville and also how fans can really nit-pick a performance if they wanted to. I'm not interested in debating the merits of Griffin as a coach, I've already made my position clear so there is no need. I just don't see this particular selection as an issue in this situation, more of a personal preference than anything else.

 

[Pierced Soul]

At the end of the day though, not selecting Granville didn't really cost us the game or really even contributed to the loss given he only plays 10 minutes

no it didnt but consistently picking an underperforming, overpaid lump called kennedy does

granville has a lot to offer the team, playing him for 10mins every 4 months doesnt exactly help to develop him. If macca ever got injured i reckon lowrie or stagg would get picked at hooker ahead of him

 

[Big Pete]

no it didnt but consistently picking an underperforming, overpaid lump called kennedy does

Agreed.

granville has a lot to offer the team, playing him for 10mins every 4 months doesnt exactly help to develop him. If macca ever got injured i reckon lowrie or stagg would get picked at hooker ahead of him

The problem is, Macca has more to offer as an 80 minute player. Sure, Granville may have a cameo every now and then but the reality is he is behind a better player.

Also don't be ridiculous, Granville would be ahead of both.

 

[Dazzat]

Agreed.



The problem is, Macca has more to offer as an 80 minute player. Sure, Granville may have a cameo every now and then but the reality is he is behind a better player.

Also don't be ridiculous, Granville would be ahead of both.

As I mentioned before - the world's best hooker possibly of all time and an 80 minute player - Cam Smith - is moved out of dummy half by Melbourne to bring on Ryan Hinchcliffe.

And what happened? At one stage Hinchclife was being touted as a NSW player - that's what tends to happen when you show faith in players.

Cameron Smith moves into a No. 6 type of position for Melbourne when Hinchcliffe comes on. But na ... using McCullough that way would make way too much sense. After all, we have a perfectly good No. 6 (cough).

 

[Big Pete]

As I mentioned before - the world's best hooker possibly of all time and an 80 minute player - Cam Smith - is moved out of dummy half by Melbourne to bring on Ryan Hinchcliffe.

Except he doesn't, Hinchcliffe plays as a lock forward and that's predominately been his role for his entire tenure at the Storm club.

 

[Dazzat]

For some games. I have seen plenty of games where Hinchcliffe has come on a dummy half and Smith moved to first or second receiver ... as recent as the weekend.