Ben Hannant

[Big Pete]

I've seen Hodges spend more time than Hinchcliffe at dummy half - doesn't make him a hooker.

 

[Dazzat]

I've seen Hodges spend more time than Hinchcliffe at dummy half - doesn't make him a hooker.

Honestly Pete ... I thought I could expect more from you than this type of argument. You know that Hinchcliffe was once being touted as a NSW bench player because of his dummy half work. But let's just leave that aside.

Saw footage of Ben Hannant ripping it up the Queensland Cup, and news is he played for 75 minutes. There is still no news at all about any injury to Kennedy. Maybe he broke a fingernail. Maybe he's totally exhausted after reeling off 20 tackles in 20 minutes.

The 120 kg human hulk hurled himself at the North Queensland with all the force of Kate Moss scooting down the catwalk.

Can't wait for Griffin to front the Brisbane fans this week with his full explanation of why Hannant was dropped. You know through his weekly pre-game video teasingly called "Final Word with Anthony Griffin". One can only hope.

 

[Big Pete]

Being touted by representative selectors for a certain position doesn't necessarily mean you've been playing that role at club level. Hinchcliffe was being touted because the selectors were desperate and the options were sparse. It essentially was Farah and sparse and Ricky was going through one of those phases where he'd convince himself a player didn't belong in his side (eg. Hayne is a five eigth for Game 1 2011). Ryan had a background as a hooker and was in good form as a loose forward, they thought his rugged style would be made for Origin and since there weren't any other options he got the nod at Country level.

So the point doesn't resonate.

It doesn't resonate with Ballin, Ennis or Farah either. In fact, it appears there is a trend of players playing the full 80 in 2014 with McCullough, Peats & J. Friend walking proof.

 

[Dazzat]

Souths - played Luke and Peats last year. Roosters - playing Friend/Mortimer. Despite your insistent on ignoring the truth, Storm does play Smith and Hinchcliffe in dummy half. It's fairly common to have a nippy option on the bench Pete - it's been going on for a while. You know ... like a lot.

My point is that if you go the "horses for courses" line, then we have some trouble. Why? Because we just don't have the forward power to play the Canterbury type game. When teams don't have the go forward from big boppers, your next option is to catch the big boppers out in the middle of the rock - as GRANVILLE has done (please note my ignorance has disappeared - I'm healed!).

Griffin doesn't have a plan for either. No power game. No nippy-round-the-ruck game. Just boring.

 

[Big Pete]

Well hang on. Ignoring the truth? The only evidence you have is that Ricky Stuart thought of him as a hooker. Since when is trusting Sticky's judgement iron clad proof? I know we've been going back and forth like two old stubborn codgers but perhaps it's time to take a step back.

I don't deny that it (Smith/Hinchcliffe) never happened, but it wasn't a predominate facet of the Storm's play and wasn't something that occurred on a weekly basis. To use that as a basis isn't going to cut it.

Mind you, I don't even think the idea of 'well it works for this club, why not ours' is necessarily the best argument either. Namely because at the end of the day, those clubs aren't using our players McCullough or Granville to prove that it's a successful formula.

In my view, McCullough has been one of the best players at the club and I believe his form and as a result the side has benefited from the decision of him playing the full duration.

I don't like the idea of playing a bloke for 10 minutes or having McCullough off the field for too long a duration. I don't believe we can have either on the field at the same time either, not with the ruck defence the way it is.

I'll leave it at that.

 

[Pierced Soul]

http://www.news.com.au/sport/nrl/br...-brisbane-player/story-fndv2w3r-1226914815720

Broncos unhappy with advice Ben Hannant gave to young Brisbane player
11 HOURS AGO MAY 12, 2014 10:00PM
Image Video

Brisbane Broncos Forward Ben Hannant playing for Ipswich Jets.
Brisbane Broncos Forward Ben Hannant playing for Ipswich Jets. Source: News Corp Australia
SAM Thaiday has declared Ben Hannant must return to the Brisbane Broncos team for the Gold Coast derby after their forward pack was “beaten up”.
The Broncos maintain Hannant was dropped due to form but it can be revealed club management were unhappy Hannant gave advice to a younger Broncos player about his market value.
Hannant was unaware the Broncos were already negotiating with the player when he innocently told him what a realistic contract offer for next season would resemble.
I STILL HAVE A FUTURE AT BRONCOS: HANNANT
Brisbane Broncos Forward Ben Hannant playing for Ipswich Jets.
Brisbane Broncos Forward Ben Hannant playing for Ipswich Jets. Source: News Corp Australia
Hannant’s words were then twisted back to Broncos officials who were concerned he was persuading the player to demand more money.
But the veteran prop was only trying to mentor a teammate.
Hannant is a Rugby League Players’ Association representative and is a sounding board when players want to discuss their rights.
Hannant is off-contract at year’s end and is now the only player on the Broncos books who has not been signed by Griffin.
Former Broncos captain Gorden Tallis said Hannant was sorely missed against the Cowboys and confirmed the Broncos were unhappy with the advice Hannant he gave his teammate.

Johnathan Thurston recovered from a first-half head injury to inspire the Cowboys to a 13-point win over the Broncos in Townsville on Friday night.
“He gave some advice to one of the young kids who is renegotiating and the Broncos are disappointed with that advice,” Tallis said on Triple M radio.
“That’s what happens when you are at a club as a senior player and you will get a young kid moping around asking, ‘What do you think I’m worth’.
“With a coach that is under-pressure and the way they played on Friday night … Matt Scott had one of the best front-rower’s performances.
“I’m not saying Ben Hannant would have changed the result but he’s played at the highest level and he had been getting outstanding stats.”
The Broncos clearly missed Hannant in their loss to North Queensland, with Cowboys prop Matt Scott running for more than 200 metres while his front-row partner James Tamou ran for more than 150 metres.


Hannant was dominant for the Ipswich Jets a day later, playing 70 minutes straight in their victory over Central Capras.
Brisbane coach Anthony Griffin can’t afford to play the Gold Coast Titans on Friday without Hannant, especially considering Thaiday left training early again on Monday as he struggles with a calf injury.
Thaiday is rated a 50-50 chance of playing on Friday but he said Hannant should be an automatic inclusion.
“If he is fit and ready to go he should be in our team,” Thaiday said.
“We are very proud as a Broncos forward pack but we got beaten up on the weekend.
“It’s hard to see guys miss out. Hopefully it has pepped him up for the weeks to come.
“We need to get back into winning form. We need the best team on the field — I will be doing everything I can to get right.”

-------------

*if* this is the reason hannant was dropped then griffin needs a boot up his arse

 

[Big Pete]

As I said elsewhere, if that was a contributing factor, I've got no qualms with Hannant being dropped.

From a club's perspective, why would you reward a player who's making life difficult and is apparently using his status at the club to willfully inform young players to hold out for more money, making the lives of recruitment and retention more difficult than they have to be?

I'm sure he didn't necessarily mean any harm but a player of his stature should know better and given his past and other factors, I can't really blame the club.

Would be one thing if this was a player who had built a ton of good will at the club. Another to be the guy who shipped out at the first sign of a great contract.

 

[Dazzat]

One player tells another player he's worth more money. He should be shot, just not dropped (being sarcastic).

Really? Is this where we are at as a club? Sacking players because they give some advice to another player. Just shoot me.

"Making life difficult for recruitment and retention" ... not if they are doing their job! Should my manager be sacked if he tells the boss I'm worth more money?

We have officially entered the "Weird Zone".

 

[Pierced Soul]

From a club's perspective, why would you reward a player who's making life difficult and is apparently using his status at the club to willfully inform young players to hold out for more money, making the lives of recruitment and retention more difficult than they have to be?

if hannant was encouraging a player to leave by going "go to this club they'll pay you x amount" its one thing, but if a young player asks him what do you think my next contract should be worth and hannant offers an opinion i dont see why he should be blasted for that. if hannant was deliberately undermining the coaching staff etc then i have no issues being dropped, but 2 employees anywhere have a right to have a discussion about their salaries.

the club really needs to look at why we've struggled to attract decent talent in more recent times. if this is the way they deal with their players then you can see why we struggle

 

[Dazzat]

Agreed Pierced. There is an obvious problem with the club attracting top notch players. Sure we have brought Barba and Milford to the club ... but guess what ... both came to the club more for family reasons than voluntarily.

Ben Hannant is the most senior of the forward. If he can't give a word of advice to a young player, then we are in big trouble. Griffin should be deputising players like Hannant and Thaiday to mentor and guide young players.

Inglis, Folou, Hunt,

 

[Nightward]

If the story as printed in the Courier Mail today is correct, Griffin needs to go.

Apparently Jarrod Wallace approached Ben Hannant in his role as RLPA representative for advice on what to do when his contract expired. Hannant said if he should decide tp stay at the Broncos he was in a position to negotiate for a pay raise since he'd been part of the first grade squad this year. Which, one would assume, is A: Common sense, and B: What you'd expect the RLPA representative to advise an up and coming player to do with his contract coming up for negotiation.

If Griffin did blow his stack over that, or Gee did and they took it out on Hannant, that's pretty ordinary.

Usual disclaimers about news articles apply. If the CM is wrong, then I still wonder what the hell Hannant could have done to deserve being dropped.

 

[Dazzat]

Griffin never out and told the Brisbane fans why he sacked our best front rower. This is not good enough. If the reason doesn't pass "the pub test" then why the heck sack such a player?

Griffin needs to go yesterday, but he won't because that would mean Kearney stepping in - and that won't happen.

 

[Nightward]

What I forgot to say is that if the article is correct... in any other field of employment, taking punitive measures against a union official for doing their job would almost certainly result in workers being on strike faster than you could say "snap strike vote." Probably with some other sanctions aimed at whoever it was that ordered punishment handed out, legally or driven by the union.

If it is true, it might well explain Gee's absence.

 

[Dazzat]

If recruitment was going sweetly, Hannant's encouragement wouldn't be a problem. But when the club is struggling to recruit and retain good players ... well Mr Gee is getting a little sensitive about these issues and Hannant pays the price.

 

[Nightward]

Yeah, but if what's reported was accurate, Hannant was telling Wallace he might be able to get a bigger pay raise on the open market, but that family was a bigger concern- Wallace supposedly went for advice since his partner was about to have his second child. Hannant was saying he could get more than his old contract at the Broncos and have more stability in his personal life by staying, or risk upheaval in favour of chasing bigger dollars. And Wallace went to Hannant not just because of the RLPA thing, but because he'd been in the same position earlier in his career.