Darren Nicholls

[Mr Red]

Well this guys no rising star like jake marketo or josh mccrone but could be handy...

 

[epDragon62]

But it shouldnt be an option. It only might be because we have no real cover for mcinnes. That's what we would have to address.

If we signed cronk would we consider him to play hooker? He could probably do it just as well as hunt maybe better. I dont think we would nor that we should. We basically see him as our cronk so why should he be moving elsewhere

Cronk is a former hooker...

 

[Overseas dragon]

I can see him playing outside of Hunt if Widdop starts running sideways again. This guy is tough and will run straight giving his outside guys bigger spaces. starting to think Widdop might be better in tbe centres.

Widdop possible fullback and throw the Duff man on the wing if your a smart coach maybe swap sometimes in attack .At this stage widdop defensively better .

 

[watatank]

Cronk is a former hooker...

Ok, and?

 

[Walpole]

Bloody hell, there's some rubbish being spruiked here. Not one coach, all of whom we consider to be better than Mary, has chosen to give Darren Nicholls one second of NRL time.

But now our 29 year old rookie will be the backup, ahead of Mann or Field, should we lose our hooker turned halfback Ben Hunt. Yep, that's up there with the 3 man bench and 98m fields so I guess it fits.

 

[watatank]

Thats irrelevant.

Point is Hunt can play the position so why not take advantage of his versatility?? Andrew Johns is an Immortal as a halfback but played many games for NSW/Australia as a 9 simply because he could and he did what was best for the team.

I don't understand the thinking not to consider him at hooker if need be, considering his abilities in the position and the fact he's made the World Cup playing hooker.

Did johns ever play hooker for newcastle?

 

[JohnnoMcJohnno]

Bloody hell, there's some rubbish being spruiked here. Not one coach, all of whom we consider to be better than Mary, has chosen to give Darren Nicholls one second of NRL time.

But now our 29 year old rookie will be the backup, ahead of Mann or Field, should we lose our hooker turned halfback Ben Hunt. Yep, that's up there with the 3 man bench and 98m fields so I guess it fits.

Cronulla were chasing him. That's a good enough reason to sign him.

 

[giboz71]

Did johns ever play hooker for newcastle?

No. Probably cause he had the Kangaroo hooker in Buderus in the same team. And Newcastle were a bloody good side and perennial semi finalists when Johns played and didn’t need to try new formations to get better.

Neither situation applies for us right now.

 

[watatank]

No. Probably cause he had the Kangaroo hooker in Buderus in the same team. And Newcastle were a bloody good side and perennial semi finalists when Johns played and didn’t need to try new formations to get better.

Neither situation applies for us right now.

Johns didn't need to, because Newcastle built a team around their best player.

If we want to be successful, then surely our best chance of doing that is a situation where Hunt plays halfback and doesn't have to be asked to move around?

Besides that, we have talked about having a genuine halfback for so long, even when we had Hornby to many he wasn't good enough- until we won. We have talked about having someone to play next to Widdop (who we have committed long term, along with Hunt) for so long...It's not hard to see why people would oppose any sort of situation where Hunt isn't halfback.

Btw Buderus was more known as a halfback and was a utility for a couple of years before he moved to hooker.

 

[Dennis Papaioannou]

So the fact that he’s the deputy for Cam Smith at hooker for Australia is irrelevant?

It`s all relevant but my point still stands - If Bennett did not experiment with Hunt at 9 then he would not have been the deputy for Cam Smith in the Australian Team.
We`re not disagreeing but there is no way Mary would`ve made that change by ~thinking outside the square~ and experimenting.

 

[giboz71]

Johns didn't need to, because Newcastle built a team around their best player.

If we want to be successful, then surely our best chance of doing that is a situation where Hunt plays halfback and doesn't have to be asked to move around?

Besides that, we have talked about having a genuine halfback for so long, even when we had Hornby to many he wasn't good enough- until we won. We have talked about having someone to play next to Widdop (who we have committed long term, along with Hunt) for so long...It's not hard to see why people would oppose any sort of situation where Hunt isn't halfback.

Btw Buderus was more known as a halfback and was a utility for a couple of years before he moved to hooker.

Hunt will be halfback. And agreed, our best chance of being successful is if he stays halfback and him and Widdop form a good partnership.

But none of us can predict how the season will unfold. As I’ve said, form, injures and rep duty will mean we can’t be inflexible when it comes to positions. Hunt being able to play hooker gives us options to try different things if the need arises. And it’s not beyond the realm of possibility that Field or Nichols demand some FG minutes.

Having Hunt able play hooker allows us to do this and I still don’t see how this can be a bad thing?

 

[loose arm]

Hunt will be halfback. And agreed, our best chance of being successful is if he stays halfback and him and Widdop form a good partnership.

But none of us can predict how the season will unfold. As I’ve said, form, injures and rep duty will mean we can’t be inflexible when it comes to positions. Hunt being able to play hooker gives us options to try different things if the need arises. And it’s not beyond the realm of possibility that Field or Nichols demand some FG minutes.

Having Hunt able play hooker allows us to do this and I still don’t see how this can be a bad thing?

Six million for five years to play dummy half...no,no,no,no,no.

 

[hazzbeen]

Most know i want mann in the 13 somewhere not as a utility. So how big is this bloke? Could he potentially back up at 9? Like mccrone did. But you know not shit. Might be a point of difference if mary is insistant on having a utiloty

It`s all relevant but my point still stands - If Bennett did not experiment with Hunt at 9 then he would not have been the deputy for Cam Smith in the Australian Team.
We`re not disagreeing but there is no way Mary would`ve made that change by ~thinking outside the square~ and experimenting.

Bingo ..

 

[BennyV]

So, given that’s where he’s currently playing for Australia, not too far fetched we’d use him there as well. Bennett had him there at the Broncos, he’s no mug is he?

Not likely I know, but I’m not willing to discount any options given how shit we’ve been for the last 5 years.

And do you know one of the #1 player reasons we've been shit? No halfback.
Ask anyone what the #1 most important position on the field to have a specialist occupy is, they will tell you. It's the halfback.
We went out and spend big dollars for a marquee player to fill that position. Sure, let's give a nod to Hunt for playing 9 for Aus, but if Corey Oates went down do you think the Broncos would throw Boyd onto the wing because he plays there for Australia? Or if Cowboys lost Linnett long term, Morgan can fill the gap because he played centre for QLD? Or if Sharks lose a winger, Holmes will slot in because the fullback position can be filled by a random 29yo reserve grader? (I really could go on if you'd like...)

Absolute lunacy!

If McIness goes down, it's more likely that Nichols would be forced into the 9 than Hunt. If McIness needs a break, you put a utility on the bench who can play in the 9 (IMO shows how dumb it was not holding onto Havili and giving him more time). In fact, I'd argue that using our starting, marquee halfback for either of the above situation and allowing either a 29yo reserve grader or a 20yo 5/8-come-fullback take the 7 would be lunacy to rival Mary's 'JDB-to-halfback' call.

Hunt gets left in his rightful position, where we actually need him the most.

 

[BennyV]

So the fact that he’s the deputy for Cam Smith at hooker for Australia is irrelevant?

Yes, it's 100% completely irrelevant.

 

[giboz71]

And do you know one of the #1 player reasons we've been shit? No halfback.
Ask anyone what the #1 most important position on the field to have a specialist occupy is, they will tell you. It's the halfback.
We went out and spend big dollars for a marquee player to fill that position. Sure, let's give a nod to Hunt for playing 9 for Aus, but if Corey Oates went down do you think the Broncos would throw Boyd onto the wing because he plays there for Australia? Or if Cowboys lost Linnett long term, Morgan can fill the gap because he played centre for QLD? Or if Sharks lose a winger, Holmes will slot in because the fullback position can be filled by a random 29yo reserve grader? (I really could go on if you'd like...)

Absolute lunacy!

If McIness goes down, it's more likely that Nichols would be forced into the 9 than Hunt. If McIness needs a break, you put a utility on the bench who can play in the 9 (IMO shows how dumb it was not holding onto Havili and giving him more time). In fact, I'd argue that using our starting, marquee halfback for either of the above situation and allowing either a 29yo reserve grader or a 20yo 5/8-come-fullback take the 7 would be lunacy to rival Mary's 'JDB-to-halfback' call.

Hunt gets left in his rightful position, where we actually need him the most.

Bennett gave Hunt the nod at 9 and left Marshall and Nikoroma to play 7 and the Broncos came within a game of the GF. That’s an actually example of what I’m talking about (as opposed to your hypothetical examples above).

And I know I keep saying it, but Kangaroo selectors thought he was good enough to play hooker for Australia (in front of all other specialist hookers in the comp).

That’s good enough for me.

And I again I say,I’m not advocating Hunt play hooker as we do need him to play half, but still can’t believe the notion that we should NEVER use him there if the need arises.

 

[hazzbeen]

Bennett gave Hunt the nod at 9 and left Marshall and Nikoroma to play 7 and the Broncos came within a game of the GF. That’s an actually example of what I’m talking about (as opposed to your hypothetical examples above).

And I know I keep saying it, but Kangaroo selectors thought he was good enough to play hooker for Australia (in front of all other specialist hookers in the comp).

That’s good enough for me.

And I again I say,I’m not advocating Hunt play hooker as we do need him to play half, but still can’t believe the notion that we should NEVER use him there if the need arises.

That is why we slid for 2 years under Marys coaching , because he would not make changes when things didn't work . Not saying mmove Hunt to 9 , but be open to try something different if needed ....

 

[possm]

If we recruited an equal or better halfback, e.g. Cronk, it would make more sense to move Hunt to 9. After all 9 is a very important position and is part of the 'spine'. If we recruit a reserve grade half then the only time we should consider a move of Hunt to 9 is if the reserve grade half is playing out of his skin and the first grade 9 is out of form or injured.

By letting Thompson and Macdonald go together with the remaining cap we are reported to have, surely Millward has a plan to recruit another high profile player; there are potentially still a few uncertain of their immediate future given the cap limit determined by the NRL.

Two hookers who played reserve grade this season have both been let go - Havili and Marketo, so I imagine that Robson is going to fill the 9 position in reserve grade. To me it therefore seems that Mary is planning on continue to use McInnes as an 80min hooker with instructions to save energy by not running from dummy half.

I can only see a Warmsley signing and four forwards on the bench in 2018. We have enough depth in the secondrow in Sims, Host, Leilua and Sele. We have enough young wingers and centres to add speed to the outside backs; all we need is good coaching during the off-season to bring them on. And so a prop rotation of Vaughan, Graham, Ah Mau and Warmsley would be the best answer to the problems we faced in 2017. With this rotation backed up with good depth in Latimore, Laurie and Kerr we should not fail to maintain momentum in the power game plan because of injury or fatigue in 2018. A remedy for the problems faced in 2017 has to be found and I believe this is the way to go.

 

[JDHD]

And do you know one of the #1 player reasons we've been shit? No halfback.
Ask anyone what the #1 most important position on the field to have a specialist occupy is, they will tell you. It's the halfback.
We went out and spend big dollars for a marquee player to fill that position. Sure, let's give a nod to Hunt for playing 9 for Aus, but if Corey Oates went down do you think the Broncos would throw Boyd onto the wing because he plays there for Australia? Or if Cowboys lost Linnett long term, Morgan can fill the gap because he played centre for QLD? Or if Sharks lose a winger, Holmes will slot in because the fullback position can be filled by a random 29yo reserve grader? (I really could go on if you'd like...)

Absolute lunacy!

If McIness goes down, it's more likely that Nichols would be forced into the 9 than Hunt. If McIness needs a break, you put a utility on the bench who can play in the 9 (IMO shows how dumb it was not holding onto Havili and giving him more time). In fact, I'd argue that using our starting, marquee halfback for either of the above situation and allowing either a 29yo reserve grader or a 20yo 5/8-come-fullback take the 7 would be lunacy to rival Mary's 'JDB-to-halfback' call.

Hunt gets left in his rightful position, where we actually need him the most.

Exactly. Hunt is not a hooker turned halfback as I've seen some people propose. He is a halfback who had six or seven good games at hooker this year because he was forced to play there. He's a natural halfback and anybody with a brain stem can see that. Brisbane lost more than they gained from Hunt at hooker because neither Milford or Nikorima could kick or organise. Nikorima's edge in particular came to a crashing halt once Hunt was moved to the middle. Also, Hunt still took on most of the attacking responsibility from hooker.

He's a halfback. Our halfback. f**k sake.

 

[Gippsy]

And do you know one of the #1 player reasons we've been shit? No halfback.
Ask anyone what the #1 most important position on the field to have a specialist occupy is, they will tell you. It's the halfback.
We went out and spend big dollars for a marquee player to fill that position. Sure, let's give a nod to Hunt for playing 9 for Aus, but if Corey Oates went down do you think the Broncos would throw Boyd onto the wing because he plays there for Australia? Or if Cowboys lost Linnett long term, Morgan can fill the gap because he played centre for QLD? Or if Sharks lose a winger, Holmes will slot in because the fullback position can be filled by a random 29yo reserve grader? (I really could go on if you'd like...)

Absolute lunacy!

If McIness goes down, it's more likely that Nichols would be forced into the 9 than Hunt. If McIness needs a break, you put a utility on the bench who can play in the 9 (IMO shows how dumb it was not holding onto Havili and giving him more time). In fact, I'd argue that using our starting, marquee halfback for either of the above situation and allowing either a 29yo reserve grader or a 20yo 5/8-come-fullback take the 7 would be lunacy to rival Mary's 'JDB-to-halfback' call.

Hunt gets left in his rightful position, where we actually need him the most.

Spot on Benny. Well said.
I'd just add though that if McInnes goes down we also have young Robson, who could come into the mix.