What's new
By:
Advanced search…
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!

Confirmed Signings - 2012/13

Status
Not open for further replies.
cb4

cb4

First Grade
Messages
9,582
i get what your saying skeepe, but it needs to be looked in the bigger picture.
hall was good in the back row for them, but bradford breed back rowers.
he was also cheap and not a marquee player.

if/when they do release orford, they have no halves what so ever, thats why they want compensation, and i dont blame them for one minute
 
skeepe

skeepe

Immortal
Messages
47,164
cb4 said:
i get what your saying skeepe, but it needs to be looked in the bigger picture.
hall was good in the back row for them, but bradford breed back rowers.
he was also cheap and not a marquee player.

if/when they do release orford, they have no halves what so ever, thats why they want compensation, and i dont blame them for one minute
Click to expand...

Given that they have already signed a replacement for Orford, I have to conclude you have no idea what you're talking about.
 
B

Bman26

Juniors
Messages
1,539
AB129* said:
Other way round. Sharks are actually looking for a backrower, Parra aren't but they sell more Telegraphs.

It can go in next to the Dan Mortimer redemption story.
Click to expand...


Redemption story out today on foxsports.com.au

halfway there!
 
cb4

cb4

First Grade
Messages
9,582
QUOTE=skeepe;7109390]Given that they have already signed a replacement for Orford, I have to conclude you have no idea what you're talking about.[/QUOTE]
if your talking about marc herbert as his replacement, it is you who has no idea.
herbert is on a minimum wage, they want compensation for their marquee player to sign a new marquee player
 
skeepe

skeepe

Immortal
Messages
47,164
cb4 said:
skeepe said:
Given that they have already signed a replacement for Orford, I have to conclude you have no idea what you're talking about.
Click to expand...
if your talking about marc herbert as his replacement, it is you who has no idea.
herbert is on a minimum wage, they want compensation for their marquee player to sign a new marquee player
Click to expand...

That's not what you said. You said:

if/when they do release orford, they have no halves what so ever, thats why they want compensation, and i dont blame them for one minute
Click to expand...
You said that they wanted compensation because if they release Orford they need to sign a half because they won't have one. Not the total lack of the word marquee anywhere.

You can't just change your story because the first one didn't work.
 
Dragon Slayer

Dragon Slayer

Coach
Messages
15,159
skeepe said:
That's not what you said. You said:

You said that they wanted compensation because if they release Orford they need to sign a half because they won't have one. Not the total lack of the word marquee anywhere.

You can't just change your story because the first one didn't work.
Click to expand...

Nothings changed your still an idiot!
 
E

Evil Homer

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
7,178
cb4 said:
i get what your saying skeepe, but it needs to be looked in the bigger picture.
hall was good in the back row for them, but bradford breed back rowers.
he was also cheap and not a marquee player.

if/when they do release orford, they have no halves what so ever, thats why they want compensation, and i dont blame them for one minute
Click to expand...
I'm guessing you didn't watch many games if you think Hall was good in the back row for Bradford. He was one of the worst players in the league.
 
cb4

cb4

First Grade
Messages
9,582
78.3m per game
20 tackles per game
92% effective
less than 1 miss per game

yeh he really wasnt one of the worst, and i watched nearly every game.
michael worrincy was one of the worst, glen hall was pretty good
 
E

Evil Homer

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
7,178
cb4 said:
78.3m per game
20 tackles per game
92% effective
less than 1 miss per game

yeh he really wasnt one of the worst, and i watched nearly every game.
michael worrincy was one of the worst, glen hall was pretty good
Click to expand...
Hall missed more tackles and made more errors than Worrincy. He also gave away more penalties and made 0 line breaks compared to Worrincy's 4. Hall was a hopeless plodder that couldn't manage more than 15 minutes of average graft without getting tired and needing to be substituted. If you think he was good, you must expect a pretty low standard of players. Apparently he was a good bloke behind the scenes, but I'm pretty thrilled that he's left. Imports like that have no place in Super League. I'd take Worrincy any day of the week.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top