Darren Nicholls

[Outlaw Pete]

Thought he played very well in the GF he played in and spoke very well after the game. can also kick goals.

 

[OurRedV]

Thought he played very well in the GF he played in and spoke very well after the game. can also kick goals.

The GF against PNG?

 

[Overseas dragon]

Correct.

Havili is gone from all accounts and Robson is a year or 2 away. Hence, I like the signing of Nichols. If we lose McInnes, I like the notion of having a Kangaroo hooker step in and Nichols may surprise at 7 if given a go. Heck we still have Field as well who may command the 17 jersey where he could step into the halves during the game with Hunt filling in at hooker. If we're chasing points (which we invariably are these days), that's not a bad formation with tiring defences.

Its all about options. During the ebb and flow of a 26 round season with injuries, rep duties, form etc, I say the more options we have the better.

Yes very good ideas the only problem is a road block named MARY.

 

[blacksafake]

Hunt has been signed to play half & for big coin & that is where he should & will be playing.
To move him to dummy half we would need to have another half of his quality to replace him, of which we don't & have not had one for decades.The only reason Bennett used him at dummy half was because of his defence in the middle which is far superior to Nikorima's or Benji's.

 

[watatank]

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?

Hunt hasn't even arrived yet and Field and Nichols have done nothing. We haven't established anything yet we are talking about changing things up. I just don't see the point.

 

[giboz71]

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 ....

100%

Thankfully someone gets what I’m saying.

 

[giboz71]

Hunt has been signed to play half & for big coin & that is where he should & will be playing.
To move him to dummy half we would need to have another half of his quality to replace him, of which we don't & have not had one for decades.The only reason Bennett used him at dummy half was because of his defence in the middle which is far superior to Nikorima's or Benji's.

I don’t necessarily think he’s signed to play half (even though that’s where he’ll likely play).

We really signed him to turn us into premiership contenders (which we haven’t been since Bennett left).

If he does it at half, that’s great. If he has to play other positions to make us better, then that’s ok too.

Again, we’re not a good enough team just yet to formally dismiss all options.

 

[giboz71]

Hunt hasn't even arrived yet and Field and Nichols have done nothing. We haven't established anything yet we are talking about changing things up. I just don't see the point.

It’s called options. Similar to when Wallace made the move to hooker to accomodate an 18 year old Cleary. This only happens because Wallace ended up being a damned good hooker.

If we don’t need to make this move, great. But as I said, I feel a whole lot better having that up our sleeve given we have no real back up for McInnes.

 

[watatank]

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 ....

You can make changes and still keep Hunt at 7.

 

[dragonssamy61]

Correct.

Havili is gone from all accounts and Robson is a year or 2 away. Hence, I like the signing of Nichols. If we lose McInnes, I like the notion of having a Kangaroo hooker step in and Nichols may surprise at 7 if given a go. Heck we still have Field as well who may command the 17 jersey where he could step into the halves during the game with Hunt filling in at hooker. If we're chasing points (which we invariably are these days), that's not a bad formation with tiring defences.

Its all about options. During the ebb and flow of a 26 round season with injuries, rep duties, form etc, I say the more options we have the better.

Giboz71
Great thinking outside the box but Mary may not be able to do that

 

[watatank]

It’s called options. Similar to when Wallace made the move to hooker to accomodate an 18 year old Cleary. This only happens because Wallace ended up being a damned good hooker.

If we don’t need to make this move, great. But as I said, I feel a whole lot better having that up our sleeve given we have no real back up for McInnes.

The comparisons are pointless because they don't really apply to us. We have committed to a halves pairing of Widdop and Hunt, for better or worse. Just because one club has done something else doesn't mean we should.

If we have no backup for McInnes then Robson needs to be ready, or we sign someone else to do that job until he is ready, not ask Hunt to play there and leave us without a halfback again.

It's too bad McCrone left really, for all the baggings he got he would have been perfect to keep around at the moment, with an ability to cover halves and hooker as a backup. Hopefully Nichols is good enough to contribute in some capacity.

 

[BennyV]

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.

There were very, very different circumstances around Hunt moving to hooker than anything we will experience in the next 5 years.

And the Australian selection means nothing because it's not his best position, nor is it the position we are lacking in (or would ever be lacking in to the extent that we'd need to move our marquee halfback, who'd then be replaced by one of many unproven players).

If we go into this year and Hunt at half isn't working, it would be the same common denominator at the last few years and changing said halfback to hooker won't make a difference.

 

[giboz71]

There were very, very different circumstances around Hunt moving to hooker than anything we will experience in the next 5 years.

And the Australian selection means nothing because it's not his best position, nor is it the position we are lacking in (or would ever be lacking in to the extent that we'd need to move our marquee halfback, who'd then be replaced by one of many unproven players).

If we go into this year and Hunt at half isn't working, it would be the same common denominator at the last few years and changing said halfback to hooker won't make a difference.

How is it different? Broncos lost their first choice hooker in McCullough for the season. Any number of people could have taken over at hooker, Nikorima, Benji someone from the 20's or Qld Cup. But Bennett chose to go with Hunt and he was a revelation at hooker, and they went deep into the semis.

If McInnes goes down or loses form, who do we slot at hooker?? Robson is still too young. McCrone and Havili gone. Even Marketo is gone now, and he was the closest thing to a back up hooker we had left.

The more I think of it, the fact they signed Nichols, and as yet have not nominated a back up hooker, currently this seems to be the only contingency if anything happens to McInnes.

 

[blacksafake]

I know he burnt some bridges etc but could Hastings be an option at back up dummy half.?

 

[Old Timer]

Half is the glaring issue in our side and has been for decades
If Hunt doesn’t play half then that just shows how ineffective we are in every facet of the game
Any notion Hunt should play anything but 7 is people starting to make excuses for a potential bad purchase
We have stuck our neck out and paid huge $$$ at the time to secure a player to fix the problem at 7 which is why our backs look so ordinary and can’t finish off the constant good work of our forwards
As much as Rein was an issue and young Mc Innes yet to really hit his straps in attack the 9 jumper is not the reason we can’t win a comp.
If Hunt doesn’t play 7 for at least the next 3 years then we are more than doomed we will be damned.

 

[giboz71]

Half is the glaring issue in our side and has been for decades
If Hunt doesn’t play half then that just shows how ineffective we are in every facet of the game
Any notion Hunt should play anything but 7 is people starting to make excuses for a potential bad purchase
We have stuck our neck out and paid huge $$$ at the time to secure a player to fix the problem at 7 which is why our backs look so ordinary and can’t finish off the constant good work of our forwards
As much as Rein was an issue and young Mc Innes yet to really hit his straps in attack the 9 jumper is not the reason we can’t win a comp.
If Hunt doesn’t play 7 for at least the next 3 years then we are more than doomed we will be damned.

I still fail to see how Hunt being versatile enough to play hooker if required makes him a "bad purchase"?

Hunt can have an equally effective influence from hooker as he does at half. If you look at the stats, the Storm's record without Cam Smith is far worse than their record without Cooper Cronk, such is the importance of hooker to the Storm. In fact they lost a GF 40-0 without him. The Broncos with Hunt at hooker were still good enough to make a prelim even with nuffies like Benji at 7, such was Hunt's impact from hooker.

People have said we haven't had a half for years which is true. Well the same can be said about hooker. We suffered with Rein for ages, and McInnes whilst being good at the start of the year, fell away badly at the back end.

Again for the umpteenth time, I'm not necessarily saying Hunt should play hooker. Our chances are better if he plays half and McInnes play a whole season.

But the notion he is too valuable to play hooker is just silly.

 

[Old Timer]

I still fail to see how Hunt being versatile enough to play hooker if required makes him a "bad purchase"?

Hunt can have an equally effective influence from hooker as he does at half. If you look at the stats, the Storm's record without Cam Smith is far worse than their record without Cooper Cronk, such is the importance of hooker to the Storm. In fact they lost a GF 40-0 without him. The Broncos with Hunt at hooker were still good enough to make a prelim even with nuffies like Benji at 7, such was Hunt's impact from hooker.

People have said we haven't had a half for years which is true. Well the same can be said about hooker. We suffered with Rein for ages, and McInnes whilst being good at the start of the year, fell away badly at the back end.

Again for the umpteenth time, I'm not necessarily saying Hunt should play hooker. Our chances are better if he plays half and McInnes play a whole season.

But the notion he is too valuable to play hooker is just silly.

How many halves partners has Widdop already had and how many more do you want him to have?
We still really don’t know how good Widdop can be and the 7 jumper is the key as it is a highly specialised position
If Hunt goes to 9 for whatever reason who goes to 7 and how do you think that will work out for Widdop and the rest of the backs?
IMO opinion it is not about him playing hooker it is all about the best option at 7 and surely that must be Hunt.

 

[giboz71]

How many halves partners has Widdop already had and how many more do you want him to have?
We still really don’t know how good Widdop can be and the 7 jumper is the key as it is a highly specialised position
If Hunt goes to 9 for whatever reason who goes to 7 and how do you think that will work out for Widdop and the rest of the backs?
IMO opinion it is not about him playing hooker it is all about the best option at 7 and surely that must be Hunt.

Yep fair point. But you're assuming no speedbumps through out the season. What do we do if McInnes gets hurt? Our only option is fast tracking Robson which is equally as risky as putting Nichols or Field at half.

 

[Walpole]

We haven't had a top line, genuine halfback in about 40 years. Who cares if Hunt can play hooker, wing or water boy. The number seven should be tattooed on his back.

And all this in a thread about a bloke who's best chance of meeting the NRL players is at an end of season function.

 

[Old Timer]

Yep fair point. But you're assuming no speedbumps through out the season. What do we do if McInnes gets hurt? Our only option is fast tracking Robson which is equally as risky as putting Nichols or Field at half.

Well that’s the job of the coach who is unfortunately asleep at the wheel
He should have already been working towards resolving that issue by blooding players U / 20 players in reggies or working out how to use Havilli
Massive failures on both fronts and is the very reason why he would most likely would contemplate moving Hunt to 9 because he thinks if it was good enough for Wayne it’s more than good enough for us.
Trouble is the circumstances at the Broncios was very different to us as they had good quality attacking players to fill 7 so they could move Hunt to 9 where we have no such luxury.