halves for next year?

[boxhead]

Unless the kid suddenly develops abilities he simply does not have, I highly doubt that.

He has a big heart, he backs up well after someone else creates a break and a tenacious kick-chase. That is it. You need much more than that to be a half/five eighth in an NRL team (or any Rugby League team for that matter). The side managed to carry him through the latter stages of 2009 because of the huge roll they were on. In 2010, the other clubs were able to lift a gear against the Eels because they knew what to expect. This highlighted Mortimer's (in particular) deficiencies. You can't continue to carry baggage when you're travelling up hill. Unless we unveil some gun halfback who will do all the skilled stuff & allow Mortimer to just pick up the scraps, we will struggle in 2011.

Here's hoping I am wrong. Go the Eels!

WOE

I strongly disagree here. You discredit Mortimer and say he was "on the roll" last year, but this year it doesn't matter that the rest of the team played badly?

Can someone explain to me why in a team game, supposedly only two players were great last year (Fui and Hayne-according to some people here)?
It is 17 V 17. Don't any of you guys remember the commentators last year saying "Daniel Mortimer is the best player of the finals series". I'm sorry, but that sort of takes that "he was on a roll" argument right out the window, if experts thought he was the best out of all 17 of our players.

What about Todd Lowrie? Joe Galuvao? Joel Reddy? Krisnan Inu? All these players had great seasons in 2009, individually they were brilliant!!

Can anyone also explain why Mortimer's individual success is taken away from him, but his individual failures are highlighted? The argument is flawed; I'm sorry, but how can we sit here and honestly say he did nothing in 2009 but is the sole blame for 2010?
Yes he had a terrible Season 2010, but we can't sit here and tell people the team "carried him" in 2009 when pretty much everyone acknowledges he was in our top three-five players last year.

I'm sorry, but this argument is getting a bit ridiculous. Mortimer was good in 2009 no matter which way we slice it, Mortimer was terrible in 2010 no matter which way we slice it. Those are cold hard facts that I think we do all agree on.

Are we going to sit here getting the sh*ts with each-other because none of us can just accept what has happened and move on?

Come on guys, if we are going to at least agree on something, we have to support our players. Sitting here on a forum calling everyone "nuffies" and "useless hacks" can satisfy your amusements, but how does that help our players when they struggle?

GO THE EELS!!! That's the spirit we should ALL take, not sitting here ridiculing our own players who wear the BLUE AND GOLD!!!

I hope he does improve WOE, and I hope we can all sit here and applaud all our players onwards, whoever they are.

 

[boxhead]

Anyway, once again, I hope I get proven wrong & we have a great 2011. I just don't see it happening without different personnel in the halves.

WOE

That's the spirit mate, hope we have a great 2011!!! They took us to the grand final in 2009, let's see if they can do it again In the end guys, it doesn't matter who wears the jersey, we will support them to the end!!!!

 

[caylo]

I strongly disagree here. You discredit Mortimer and say he was "on the roll" last year, but this year it doesn't matter that the rest of the team played badly?

Can someone explain to me why in a team game, supposedly only two players were great last year (Fui and Hayne-according to some people here)?
It is 17 V 17. Don't any of you guys remember the commentators last year saying "Daniel Mortimer is the best player of the finals series". I'm sorry, but that sort of takes that "he was on a roll" argument right out the window, if experts thought he was the best out of all 17 of our players.

What about Todd Lowrie? Joe Galuvao? Joel Reddy? Krisnan Inu? All these players had great seasons in 2009, individually they were brilliant!!

Can anyone also explain why Mortimer's individual success is taken away from him, but his individual failures are highlighted? The argument is flawed; I'm sorry, but how can we sit here and honestly say he did nothing in 2009 but is the sole blame for 2010?
Yes he had a terrible Season 2010, but we can't sit here and tell people the team "carried him" in 2009 when pretty much everyone acknowledges he was in our top three-five players last year.

I'm sorry, but this argument is getting a bit ridiculous. Mortimer was good in 2009 no matter which way we slice it, Mortimer was terrible in 2010 no matter which way we slice it. Those are cold hard facts that I think we do all agree on.

Are we going to sit here getting the sh*ts with each-other because none of us can just accept what has happened and move on?

Come on guys, if we are going to at least agree on something, we have to support our players. Sitting here on a forum calling everyone "nuffies" and "useless hacks" can satisfy your amusements, but how does that help our players when they struggle?

GO THE EELS!!! That's the spirit we should ALL take, not sitting here ridiculing our own players who wear the BLUE AND GOLD!!!

I hope he does improve WOE, and I hope we can all sit here and applaud all our players onwards, whoever they are.

Mate because in a team game every player has different roles.
Last year we had one of the best defences in the comp, our forwards were rarley dominated and made more meters then most packs. They aso conceeded the least offloads and tackles breaks.

The halves of any side need to lay the platform in attack and our halves didnt do that. Hayne was our leading in TA and LBA and was pretty much the best of any fullback in that department. He also lead for most meters and was up there with leading LB from an fullback.

You look at our team and replace it with any halves combo in the NRL and our team looks so much better. Mortimer, Robson and Keating brothers were amoung the worst halves/hookers last year and they were our main problem.

Think about it, if we had a decent halfback or 5-8 we probably would have won both games against Cronulla, the game against St George in round 1, game against the tigers in round 24 and the game against brisbane in round 16, knights in round 14. These are all games where we were camped on the oppositions line for extended periods and couldnt score,

If we win 3/6 of those games we finish 7th, 4/6 of those games and we finish in the top 4 and 6/6 of those games and we are minor premiers.

Our team showed up and put in, that wasnt the problem, it was our inability to finish sets off and that comes down to 3 individuals 6,7 and 9.

 

[boxhead]

Mate because in a team game every player has different roles.
Last year we had one of the best defences in the comp, our forwards were rarley dominated and made more meters then most packs. They aso conceeded the least offloads and tackles breaks.

The halves of any side need to lay the platform in attack and our halves didnt do that. Hayne was our leading in TA and LBA and was pretty much the best of any fullback in that department. He also lead for most meters and was up there with leading LB from an fullback.

You look at our team and replace it with any halves combo in the NRL and our team looks so much better. Mortimer, Robson and Keating brothers were amoung the worst halves/hookers last year and they were our main problem.

Think about it, if we had a decent halfback or 5-8 we probably would have won both games against Cronulla, the game against St George in round 1, game against the tigers in round 24 and the game against brisbane in round 16, knights in round 14. These are all games where we were camped on the oppositions line for extended periods and couldnt score,

If we win 3/6 of those games we finish 7th, 4/6 of those games and we finish in the top 4 and 6/6 of those games and we are minor premiers.

Our team showed up and put in, that wasnt the problem, it was our inability to finish sets off and that comes down to 3 individuals 6,7 and 9.

Mate whatever a decent half would have done, it doesn't change the fact that off the complete lack of effort and inconsistency by most of our players, we did not deserve to be in the finals. People can go on about how a "decent halfback" would have got us into the finals, but it's quite obvious to me that we did not deserve to make the finals because of the team's efforts. Would Cronk really have led us to the finals? Would he? You can assume he can, but what can he do if our whole team plays like crap for most of the year?

And again with the bashing of our halves. I'm trying to stick up for our team and encourage some positive thinking and you come and ignore those positive sentiments, come on mate, surely you would hope we do better next year instead of staying here and bickering? That was the whole point of my post, the rest was just bread and butter.
It's about staying positive and supporting our players, Carl Webb will get as much support as any of our other players, why don't Robson, Keating and Mortimer; who in the past have been great for us and always try their best, why should we not support them either? And don't throw out that "they are useless" card, that is not what a good supporter does. My point is that it doesn't matter who wears the blue and gold, they wear the blue and gold and we should support them, not sit here and insult them.

I couldn't care less whoever plays in our team, that doesn't matter to me. But everyone in our team deserves respect and deserves to be cheered and supported. Sitting here and complaining won't make a lick of difference unless we actually try to help our players, as they are sticking with the Eels.
I do not understand at all why people only come on here to be negative and say bad stuff about our players because they are unhappy with them, what we should do is stick by them and help them through tough times.

 

[Maroubra Eel]

I reckon Morts stinks!

 

[Forty20]

I reckon Morts stinks!

Maybe a shower would help then?

 

[caylo]

Mate whatever a decent half would have done, it doesn't change the fact that off the complete lack of effort and inconsistency by most of our players, we did not deserve to be in the finals. People can go on about how a "decent halfback" would have got us into the finals, but it's quite obvious to me that we did not deserve to make the finals because of the team's efforts. Would Cronk really have led us to the finals? Would he? You can assume he can, but what can he do if our whole team plays like crap for most of the year?

And again with the bashing of our halves. I'm trying to stick up for our team and encourage some positive thinking and you come and ignore those positive sentiments, come on mate, surely you would hope we do better next year instead of staying here and bickering? That was the whole point of my post, the rest was just bread and butter.
It's about staying positive and supporting our players, Carl Webb will get as much support as any of our other players, why don't Robson, Keating and Mortimer; who in the past have been great for us and always try their best, why should we not support them either? And don't throw out that "they are useless" card, that is not what a good supporter does. My point is that it doesn't matter who wears the blue and gold, they wear the blue and gold and we should support them, not sit here and insult them.

I couldn't care less whoever plays in our team, that doesn't matter to me. But everyone in our team deserves respect and deserves to be cheered and supported. Sitting here and complaining won't make a lick of difference unless we actually try to help our players, as they are sticking with the Eels.
I do not understand at all why people only come on here to be negative and say bad stuff about our players because they are unhappy with them, what we should do is stick by them and help them through tough times.

Box our team wasnt crap, that is he point. We had one of the best peforming packs in the comp. Don't they deserve some credit for the way the played. I think Poore, Cayless, Fui, Mannah, Hindy, Smith and Horo performed well all season. Mateo performed in parts but was inconsistant and had some shockers. That there is an honest opinnion and why is it wrong to say that.

I thought Hayne was pretty good all year, Burt, Tahu and Reddy were fair and Tahu had some real brain explosions thou. Inu was most parts pretty average and Wright played better then i expectedin most parts.

Our haves/hooker were probably the worst in the comp, im not being negative but rather honest. I want mortimer and robson to do well but im not going to sit here and say that mortz is the next big thing, IMO he has major flaws in his game that he must work on before being an NRL standard player. He does have good qualities but ATM they are not making up for his deficiencies.

Most people here will suuport anyone wearing the blue and gold but if you want to pretend that everything is all good and roses then you go ahead but it is everyones right to disagree and stipulate their own opinnion.

 

[Wise Old Eel]

I strongly disagree here. You discredit Mortimer and say he was "on the roll" last year, but this year it doesn't matter that the rest of the team played badly?

Can someone explain to me why in a team game, supposedly only two players were great last year (Fui and Hayne-according to some people here)?
It is 17 V 17. Don't any of you guys remember the commentators last year saying "Daniel Mortimer is the best player of the finals series". I'm sorry, but that sort of takes that "he was on a roll" argument right out the window, if experts thought he was the best out of all 17 of our players.

What about Todd Lowrie? Joe Galuvao? Joel Reddy? Krisnan Inu? All these players had great seasons in 2009, individually they were brilliant!!

Can anyone also explain why Mortimer's individual success is taken away from him, but his individual failures are highlighted? The argument is flawed; I'm sorry, but how can we sit here and honestly say he did nothing in 2009 but is the sole blame for 2010?
Yes he had a terrible Season 2010, but we can't sit here and tell people the team "carried him" in 2009 when pretty much everyone acknowledges he was in our top three-five players last year.

I'm sorry, but this argument is getting a bit ridiculous. Mortimer was good in 2009 no matter which way we slice it, Mortimer was terrible in 2010 no matter which way we slice it. Those are cold hard facts that I think we do all agree on.

Are we going to sit here getting the sh*ts with each-other because none of us can just accept what has happened and move on?

Come on guys, if we are going to at least agree on something, we have to support our players. Sitting here on a forum calling everyone "nuffies" and "useless hacks" can satisfy your amusements, but how does that help our players when they struggle?

GO THE EELS!!! That's the spirit we should ALL take, not sitting here ridiculing our own players who wear the BLUE AND GOLD!!!

I hope he does improve WOE, and I hope we can all sit here and applaud all our players onwards, whoever they are.

Not everyone. You really do wear rose coloured glasses where Morts is concerned, don't you? ;-)

I honestly believe he just does not have the skills required. It has nothing to do with form. His passing is attrocious. His kicking game is one of (if not THE) worst in the comp. He just does not have it. People used to bag out Tim Smith for "poor form" that was because he had the skills & "poor form" could be blamed when he was not "performing" (I think that sentence made sense). Mortimer possesses NONE of the skills Tim did yet some think he is the future of our club. I just don't get it.

The team overall did not perform as poorly in 2010 as some of you would have us believe. There were many games we were right up to our necks in but the halves could not get the side over the line. Mate, people say Hayne had a quiet year but his stats are superior to those of Darius Boyd for season 2010. Check them out. Our defence (up until we could no longer make the finals) was ranked 3rd in the comp. Our forwards were doing a good job keeping us in games. The icing on the cake is supposed to come from the halves in particular. Mortimer is no "icing". He is more like the "sprinkles" on top of the icing. Not really needed.

I judge a player's worth by the impact it would have on the team if he was unavailable. I believe the side would be better off without Morts (at least at this stage of his career). I know that upsets you to hear that but nothing will change my opinion short of him proving me wrong. - And if that happens, I will have no problem posting how wrong I was but I think I am pretty safe. :sarcasm:

WOE

 

[mrpwnd]

Not everyone. You really do wear rose coloured glasses where Morts is concerned, don't you? ;-)

I honestly believe he just does not have the skills required. It has nothing to do with form. His passing is attrocious. His kicking game is one of (if not THE) worst in the comp. He just does not have it. People used to bag out Tim Smith for "poor form" that was because he had the skills & "poor form" could be blamed when he was not "performing" (I think that sentence made sense). Mortimer possesses NONE of the skills Tim did yet some think he is the future of our club. I just don't get it.

The team overall did not perform as poorly in 2010 as some of you would have us believe. There were many games we were right up to our necks in but the halves could not get the side over the line. Mate, people say Hayne had a quiet year but his stats are superior to those of Darius Boyd for season 2010. Check them out. Our defence (up until we could no longer make the finals) was ranked 3rd in the comp. Our forwards were doing a good job keeping us in games. The icing on the cake is supposed to come from the halves in particular. Mortimer is no "icing". He is more like the "sprinkles" on top of the icing. Not really needed.

I judge a player's worth by the impact it would have on the team if he was unavailable. I believe the side would be better off without Morts (at least at this stage of his career). I know that upsets you to hear that but nothing will change my opinion short of him proving me wrong. - And if that happens, I will have no problem posting how wrong I was but I think I am pretty safe. :sarcasm:

WOE

It's pretty ironic that people say Hayne's overrated and look who gets the dally M fullback of the year for 2010.
But honestly, our forwards were absolutely fired in attack, but I really question our defense around the middle of the ruck, we are 3rd best defensive team on paper, but that's more or less because we have to defend so much, it's definitely no indication on the amount of points we give away at the end. Did you also notice the amount of very easy metres we give away whenever teams do simple runs from dummy half or when their forwards come in as first reciever, we're easily one of the worst in that area.
I have no problems whatsoever with the attack potency of our team, barr our halves, but our defense is atrocious, not on the goal line, but on the middle of the field.

Also, I wouldn't say Morts was the sprinkling on the cake, more like the annoying fat boy that'll spit on the cake as a prank. People say the Raiders had the worst halfback in McCrone, I bet to differ, at least that ranga can run fast, for mine, the only assets I see i Morts is an unpredictable and wild kicking game and that sort of randomness while backing up during broken play.
We could play him like Lachlan Coote at fullback once Hayne gets too old for that position, the kid can chase kicks pretty damn well.

 

[Eelementary]

1. That argument [in my opinion] may have had more validity 10 years earlier when there was only a sprinkling of NZ players with ability in the NRL. These days, every club has a few. They are big, strong & have been playing under Aussie conditions for most of their careers. It was only a matter of time before they caught up. This was the whole point of the inclusion of the NZ Warriors in the NRL. The other obvious point is that he had the assistance of Wayne Bennett. The guy hasn't done anything on his own, yet there are those out there hailing him as the next supercoach in waiting. The word going around is that he is seeking Wayne's assistance again for the 4 Nations. Surely, he would want to prove himself by going it alone so as to quell the Parra fans' anxiety (mine included) about 2011?

2. Then we will struggle big time. Robson is barely a first grader (but can do the basics) & Mortimer is no where near one as yet.

WOE

1. Good points. However, how can one explain the Kiwis not doing well before-hand when they had blokes like Stacey Jones, Ali Lauti'iti, the Cayless', etc. at their disposal? Sir, your argument obviously has merit. But I think Kearney did a good job, because not many were able to make the Kiwis respectable even though they boasted a fair roster.

2. I agree. I like Morts but he isn't ready IMO. and Robbo is solid and honest but not a halfback.

 

[Eelementary]

And regarding Morts, IMO he has skill. Maybe he is woefully inconsistent but he has talent. That try he scored against Cronulla at Parra this year and the try he set-up for Burt last year against Canterbury (ducking under a tackle, making a half-break and kicking for the corner off balance) show me that he is inconsistent but has talent.

Flame away. I honestly don't care.

 

[caylo]

And regarding Morts, IMO he has skill. Maybe he is woefully inconsistent but he has talent. That try he scored against Cronulla at Parra this year and the try he set-up for Burt last year against Canterbury (ducking under a tackle, making a half-break and kicking for the corner off balance) show me that he is inconsistent but has talent.

Flame away. I honestly don't care.

I think he can kick, short much better then long but his passing game has always been sub par which means that the opposition is never in two minds and can close down his running and kicking game.

Tim Smith has a beutiful passing and kicking game and oppositions worked him out to an extent, look at the best halves they have all 3 pretty pat down. If morts can work on passing game that will give him more time in attack to run and kick. It is just so odd to have a first grade half that lacks a passing game, that is normally the first thing they learn. He needs to improve this aspect in Wenty before he can come back IMO.

 

[boxhead]

Not everyone. You really do wear rose coloured glasses where Morts is concerned, don't you? ;-)

WOE

Reading the rest of your post is irrelevant. This is one of the most foolish things I have ever read. People who disagree with me about Mortimer always say I am biased. Wait, so automatically I am "biased" and not allowed to support my own players? So you guys are automatically unbiased and always right about our players?

Mate, I think I know who is wearing the glasses, whether they are negative or positive. I am allowed my opinion, and insulting me is a bloody low act.

If you are going to argue with me, don't insult my intelligence. It is generally conceived as the wrong way to argue with someone.

Now, lets all have some scotch ;-)



Hint Hint: (ehem) JOKES BRO (ehem)

 

[yy_cheng]

1. Good points. However, how can one explain the Kiwis not doing well before-hand when they had blokes like Stacey Jones, Ali Lauti'iti, the Cayless', etc. at their disposal? Sir, your argument obviously has merit. But I think Kearney did a good job, because not many were able to make the Kiwis respectable even though they boasted a fair roster.

I think in the past it was their mentality and fitness that let the kiwis down.

They didn't pace themselves.

They always went hard early and ran out of puff.

Basically, there were NEVER COMPOSED it's like wasting energy as they always wanted to put the big shots on.

 

[mrpwnd]

And regarding Morts, IMO he has skill. Maybe he is woefully inconsistent but he has talent. That try he scored against Cronulla at Parra this year and the try he set-up for Burt last year against Canterbury (ducking under a tackle, making a half-break and kicking for the corner off balance) show me that he is inconsistent but has talent.

Flame away. I honestly don't care.

Honestly, I think most of what he does is off the back of improvisation and huge luck.
Take that Cronulla try for example, we were going nowhere and you could tell in his body language he thought 'hell i'll just throw in a random kick and see what happens', lucky for us Cronulla did nothing and he got the luck of the draw.
He has some shred of skill....But honestly, it'll be a long while before he hits a consistent standard for first grade.
The one mistake every team made against Morts and MK last year was overestimating their abilities. They all thought they'd go for the 'smarter' decisions i.e. Kicking longer, cutout passes and less stupid dummies, this year, they pretty much know the bread and butter strategies that the 2 use now and realise that our 6,7 and 9 are really just the average reserve grader.
Of course, i'd love for Morts and MK to completely prove me wrong next year, this is simply what i've observed throughout 09 and 10.

 

[Wise Old Eel]

Reading the rest of your post is irrelevant. This is one of the most foolish things I have ever read. People who disagree with me about Mortimer always say I am biased. Wait, so automatically I am "biased" and not allowed to support my own players? So you guys are automatically unbiased and always right about our players?

Mate, I think I know who is wearing the glasses, whether they are negative or positive. I am allowed my opinion, and insulting me is a bloody low act.

If you are going to argue with me, don't insult my intelligence. It is generally conceived as the wrong way to argue with someone.

Now, lets all have some scotch ;-)



Hint Hint: (ehem) JOKES BRO (ehem)

Ha! No offense taken. Everyone is entitled to their opinion & to express that opinion (popular or not) in whichever manner they see fit as far as I am concerned. My "rose coloured glasses" reference was simply a way of saying I do not see what you see (regarding Mortimer).

We should support all the players who wear our beloved blue & gold - and I do. I am just of the opinion that Mortimer (in particular) is still not ready for such a privilege. Maybe, some day, he will be but not yet. In my opinion, someone like Tom Humble should be given a shot at the 6 jersey. And he should be given as much of an opportunity to make it his own as Mortimer got. He seems to me to have a higher skill set, speed and toughness. Who knows? Maybe it is I who wears the rose coloured glasses!

WOE

 

[lingard]

I reckon Daniel Mortimer is the little bits of shredded coconut you put on lamingtons.

 

[Wise Old Eel]

I reckon Daniel Mortimer is the little bits of shredded coconut you put on lamingtons.

:lol:

Does this mean we can officially nickname him "Sprinkles"??? :sarcasm:

WOE

 

[Eelementary]

Honestly, I think most of what he does is off the back of improvisation and huge luck.
Take that Cronulla try for example, we were going nowhere and you could tell in his body language he thought 'hell i'll just throw in a random kick and see what happens', lucky for us Cronulla did nothing and he got the luck of the draw.
He has some shred of skill....But honestly, it'll be a long while before he hits a consistent standard for first grade.
The one mistake every team made against Morts and MK last year was overestimating their abilities. They all thought they'd go for the 'smarter' decisions i.e. Kicking longer, cutout passes and less stupid dummies, this year, they pretty much know the bread and butter strategies that the 2 use now and realise that our 6,7 and 9 are really just the average reserve grader.
Of course, i'd love for Morts and MK to completely prove me wrong next year, this is simply what i've observed throughout 09 and 10.

But where do you draw the line? People wanked on and on about the try Hayne scored in round 25 last year - was he simply lucky the Tigers fullback screwed the bounce up? Was it class? A little of both?

He's shown me glimpses of talent. They have been few and far between, but they are there IMO.

 

[Eelementary]

Ha! No offense taken. Everyone is entitled to their opinion & to express that opinion (popular or not) in whichever manner they see fit as far as I am concerned. My "rose coloured glasses" reference was simply a way of saying I do not see what you see (regarding Mortimer).

We should support all the players who wear our beloved blue & gold - and I do. I am just of the opinion that Mortimer (in particular) is still not ready for such a privilege. Maybe, some day, he will be but not yet. In my opinion, someone like Tom Humble should be given a shot at the 6 jersey. And he should be given as much of an opportunity to make it his own as Mortimer got. He seems to me to have a higher skill set, speed and toughness. Who knows? Maybe it is I who wears the rose coloured glasses!

WOE

Morts is pretty tough, though....Like him or hate him he's a tough little bastard.