Dane hides behind 'They didn't want me' excuse for going to the Bunnies

[Apey]

I don't really believe that the amount of time bagging him has been proportional to his contribution to how bad we've been. We've had other, larger problems. When placed in the right environment, he's a valuable asset. Our team has not been that environment during his tenure.

Fair enough. I'm not convinced that he's got good consistent club footy in him. He wasn't our worst value for money player but I think he was up there which was my problem with him.

On one hand I think Souths are pretty trash and not much will change for Gagai's club input but on the other hand, Souths is a club that isn't us so he could potentially excel. No doubt Gagi would like a million dollars in a team like the Storm (and QLD) but then again most would.

 

[Spot On]

No doubt Gagi would like a million dollars in a team like the Storm (and QLD) but then again most would.

Nail on the head. Most players look better with better players around them. It's not even an argument. Just common sense. Of course he and a thousand other players will look better in 'the right environment".

However, a great player, with rep experience, will show some sort of on field leadership and do things other, non representative players can't/won't. They will stand out. We didn't see that from Dane.

I am one who does not believe Gags provided anything near the money he was paid.

Nathan Ross has managed to stand out in a shit team, as have others. Gags didn't. Part of the reason for that is the position club coaches keep playing him in.

He's a winger.

Centre's need to be able to defend.

Dane can't/won't tackle as we saw for years in a Knights jersey. This would be more than obvious to his new club and will be a priority for the coach to address, especially given the coin he on and squad he has gone to. No more excuses.

Now, where are the savouries?

 

[Dave_]

You're right Gagai, I didn't want you here. Since you left we've signed better players for less.

You'll be exposed at Souths

 

[Old dog]

I can't believe that club coaches cannot see him as we do, much better winger than a very average centre.
We lacked centres 2017 so he played in that position but once we got SKD and Gagai was not signing up for what was offered he should have played only on the wing which would have indicated to him that is his position and payment is aligned to that, SKD to centre.
If he had a option on his contract and wanted to stay, he should have accepted it and signed the dotted line, got paid the relevant amount and played where picked.

 

[Jono078]

We didn't want him enough to pay him what the Rabbitohs were willing to. That's the story and that's fine. I'm happy with that and I guess he is too.

 

[slotmachine]

Wasn't much difference in money apparently.

 

[Bring it home Knights]

A part of me hopes that Gagai is picked at centre next year for Souths. It will be interesting to see Souths going well next year however having their main defensive deficiency down Gagai's side. It will be fun to see the Souths coach having to deal with paying big coin for a player that lets in more tries then he scores or creates.

 

[slotmachine]

You don't get player of the series in the highest level league comp in the world if you can't play.

 

[Bring it home Knights]

You don't get player of the series in the highest level league comp in the world if you can't play.

That's why I said - 'picked at centre'. He's a good winger due to the defensive element.

 

[slotmachine]

I'd be very interested to see how he goes at centre in a non-historically bad team.

 

[Mr_Knightside]

I'd be very interested to see how he goes at centre in a non-historically bad team.

I imagine his deficiencies in defence won't be as obvious because he'll be playing behind a forward pack that should win the middle third and control the ruck a lot better than our pack over the last 5 years or so. This means there'll be less moments where Dane is responsible for making a crucial decision in defence. Also in attack he'll get more opportunities because he'll be running at a retreating defence more often than what he was doing here.

 

[Spot On]

You don't get player of the series in the highest level league comp in the world if you can't play.

Agreed but the team QLD play every year are not much chop. Apparently they've had one win in 12 years. In a two horse race, that means the other horse had three legs, dropped dead nearly every start or was a donkey. Unheard of. We haven't had a halfback to create anything since Joey pulled the pin. Sad..... but true.

Apparently Dane did not make 1 error in 3 games for QLD last year. Not 1. Again, unheard of.

What do you put Dane's poor defence down to when playing for us Slots??? Surely you can't rate it anything better than terrible? And why do you think QLD refuse to pick him as a centre despite having more than enough opportunity to do so?

 

[Spot On]

I imagine his deficiencies in defence won't be as obvious because he'll be playing behind a forward pack that should win the middle third and control the ruck a lot better than our pack over the last 5 years or so. This means there'll be less moments where Dane is responsible for making a crucial decision in defence. Also in attack he'll get more opportunities because he'll be running at a retreating defence more often than what he was doing here.

The new coach will be well aware of his defensive issues and it will have to be something he must improve to justify the $$$ and position if at centre. I'm sure the effort in defence will be a lot different to what we witnessed for Newy the past few seasons.

 

[Spot On]

Make sure you give us a response Slots. Always love to read your input!

 

[Noname36]

I have a lot of time for Gags but his comments here really don't make any sense.

He says he was feeling unhappy re the 3 straight spoons but then seems frustrated that the club were going out and chasing other players (I.e. trying to improve the squad so maybe they stopped getting spoons).

It seems more to me like he's feeling guilty and trying to make excuses for leaving. He knows fully well that the club and coach liked him and he would have absolutely been able to stay (on a decent contract - probably more than he deserved as well) if he wanted to.

 

[Spot On]

Wanted more coin, didn't get it. End of story.

Don't know why he bothered with contradictory quotes in the article.

Where's Slots? Interested to read his views on the queries above.

 

[perverse]

He says he was feeling unhappy re the 3 straight spoons but then seems frustrated that the club were going out and chasing other players (I.e. trying to improve the squad so maybe they stopped getting spoons).

He felt the clubs priority was signing new players over re-signing him, which is probably fair because it probably was. At least that's how I read it.

 

[Spot On]

The club was happy to sign him.

Just not at the askng price.

 

[Mr_Knightside]

Personally I think the journo who wrote this article isn't really telling the full story here. It's well known that the Knights offered Dane a deal, the length and value of that deal I'm not exactly sure of, but it was supposedly a very reasonable deal. The article fails to mention this and makes it out as if we just ignored him and there was never a deal on the table which is complete rubbish.

I feel a bit like this whole thing with Dane leaving the club has made us an even easier target for criticism because "we let our only origin rep go" and we "should have tried harder to keep him" and because "Dane tries his heart out and is so loyal and is the heart and soul of our club" blah blah blah.

I'm not denying that it's not a great look that after 3 consecutive wooden spoons our only origin rep walks out the door, but I feel like a lot of people from the outside looking in have instantly judged the club's actions on that basis without actually seeing what us as fans see when we watch every game and analyse our players performances with much more of a fine tooth comb than most.

I think that most of us agree that Dane is a great player when he's playing in the right position which is on the wing, but we can't continue to pay him $600K+ and have him sit on a wing. Paying people overs is basically what put us in the position we're in now, and although it may hurt us short term I'm glad that Brown has sent a firm message basically saying that the club will not be held to ransom by players anymore.

Dane's comments may be a little hard to stomach after everything this year but he's entitled to feel however he wants about the situation. Maybe after 6 years of sticking around while every other senior player around him deserted the club he felt entitled to be considered as the marquee player in the squad, to be honest that's probably how I would feel if I was in his shoes.

I can't really be bothered being upset over this article because I feel like the person writing it is basically taking a cheap shot because we're such an easy target right now, they're hardly putting their nuts on the line by laying the boot into the Knights are they, it's pretty much what people have been doing for years now. To be honest at this stage the opinion that I value the most is Nathan Brown's because he is the guy who is closest to the coalface and sees everything that's happening and it's his job on the line if he gets it wrong whereas a journo who is just out for an easy story has absolutely no repercussions if they write the wrong thing or if their article isn't factually accurate because at the end of the day everyone already thinks the Knights are shit and it's basically just another drop in the ocean of existing public opinion.

I hope for the sake of us as fans that in 2018 our team has a red hot crack at reaching the finals and put all these cheap shot journos in their place.

 

[Pedge1971]

Personally I think the journo who wrote this article isn't really telling the full story here. It's well known that the Knights offered Dane a deal, the length and value of that deal I'm not exactly sure of, but it was supposedly a very reasonable deal. The article fails to mention this and makes it out as if we just ignored him and there was never a deal on the table which is complete rubbish.

I feel a bit like this whole thing with Dane leaving the club has made us an even easier target for criticism because "we let our only origin rep go" and we "should have tried harder to keep him" and because "Dane tries his heart out and is so loyal and is the heart and soul of our club" blah blah blah.

I'm not denying that it's not a great look that after 3 consecutive wooden spoons our only origin rep walks out the door, but I feel like a lot of people from the outside looking in have instantly judged the club's actions on that basis without actually seeing what us as fans see when we watch every game and analyse our players performances with much more of a fine tooth comb than most.

I think that most of us agree that Dane is a great player when he's playing in the right position which is on the wing, but we can't continue to pay him $600K+ and have him sit on a wing. Paying people overs is basically what put us in the position we're in now, and although it may hurt us short term I'm glad that Brown has sent a firm message basically saying that the club will not be held to ransom by players anymore.

Dane's comments may be a little hard to stomach after everything this year but he's entitled to feel however he wants about the situation. Maybe after 6 years of sticking around while every other senior player around him deserted the club he felt entitled to be considered as the marquee player in the squad, to be honest that's probably how I would feel if I was in his shoes.

I can't really be bothered being upset over this article because I feel like the person writing it is basically taking a cheap shot because we're such an easy target right now, they're hardly putting their nuts on the line by laying the boot into the Knights are they, it's pretty much what people have been doing for years now. To be honest at this stage the opinion that I value the most is Nathan Brown's because he is the guy who is closest to the coalface and sees everything that's happening and it's his job on the line if he gets it wrong whereas a journo who is just out for an easy story has absolutely no repercussions if they write the wrong thing or if their article isn't factually accurate because at the end of the day everyone already thinks the Knights are shit and it's basically just another drop in the ocean of existing public opinion.

I hope for the sake of us as fans that in 2018 our team has a red hot crack at reaching the finals and put all these cheap shot journos in their place.

Well said.