halves for next year?

[mrpwnd]

Parramatta & Luke Burt is an exception to that rule.

You absolute plodder, the left wing that you worship so much isn't even played by Uate who plays on the Right wing.
Burt could play on the right wing and you'd still be blowing out of your own ass.

 

[mrpwnd]

Ah that's right, Jarryd Hayne did absolutely everything last year. Made every run and every tackle and scored every try. But yet when it comes to this year, it's all Mortimer and Robson's fault. I also forgot that Hayne was in terrific form before our golden run, ever since he was moved to fullback, it's not like he won NSW player of the series or anything. So someone else would have had to do something right, surely? What about when Mortimer grubbered through for Fui to score, oh that must have been Hayne. Or kicking ahead for Burt to score in R19? Oh, Hayne again. Robson running 50 to score against the Storm? Or who could forget Hayne's hat-trick against the Panthers where he wore number 6. Hmmm, what else? Oh yes when Mortimer set up Burt's try against the Dragons in week 1, or when he stepped through to score Parramatta's 2nd try. Not to mention scoring the winning try against the Dogs, and Robson getting Man of the Match. Mortimer must have scored all jis ten tries by a fluke.

What a stupid question, you obviously know he wasn't trying to imply that Hayne literally did 'everything', although heck one could argue that he came close to doing that feat both last year and this year.
For the record, Robson running 50 to score, was on the back of Grothe putting Hayne into space, Hayne running 50 and taking out Slater before offloading to Robson for a clear passage to the line. I wouldn't credit Robson for that at all.
Also, if scoring a few tries every now and then meant you were 'good' then heck everyone in the bloody NRL would be good by that standard alone. Morts plays in the halves, it's his job to create opportunities, throughout his career so far he's done that very few times even last year when he was supposedly 'playing good'. It takes more than a few patches of decent form to keep yourself in first grade.

 

[yy_cheng]

What a stupid question, you obviously know he wasn't trying to imply that Hayne literally did 'everything', although heck one could argue that he came close to doing that feat both last year and this year.
For the record, Robson running 50 to score, was on the back of Grothe putting Hayne into space, Hayne running 50 and taking out Slater before offloading to Robson for a clear passage to the line. I wouldn't credit Robson for that at all.
Also, if scoring a few tries every now and then meant you were 'good' then heck everyone in the bloody NRL would be good by that standard alone. Morts plays in the halves, it's his job to create opportunities, throughout his career so far he's done that very few times even last year when he was supposedly 'playing good'. It takes more than a few patches of decent form to keep yourself in first grade.

hear hear. For mine, Hayne, Fui and Hindy played above what was asked for them.

The rest were doing their jobs. Not above and beyond. When Hayne and Fui got the opposition on the back foot, it made it easier for Mortz and the like to shine. But they did not lay the platform. The big 3 did.

As you mentioned, when Mortz was asked to play above and beyond this year, he tried his damnedest but without the skills, he struggled.

 

[mrpwnd]

hear hear. For mine, Hayne, Fui and Hindy played above what was asked for them.

The rest were doing their jobs. Not above and beyond. When Hayne and Fui got the opposition on the back foot, it made it easier for Mortz and the like to shine. But they did not lay the platform. The big 3 did.

As you mentioned, when Mortz was asked to play above and beyond this year, he tried his damnedest but without the skills, he struggled.

Exactly, although to be fair Morts is at most, a running 5/8, I think this year gave us a better review of Morts and Robson as players overall, although 2011 could prove me wrong entirely and we end up with a younger Fittler.

 

[SeftonBoy]

Sefton there are plenty of small wingers in the NRL (eg K.Gorden, Locke, Kemp). Vatuvi, Grothe and bigger wingers always have problems with their ability to turn and chase etc. Burt actually save a try this year by taking an intercept a few meters from his line and setting up humble to score. He also scores tries that you dont see other wingers score from his kick chase and his vision etc.

Burt has been in the NRL for 10 years and there is a reason for that, he isnt the best winger in the world and if he was bigger he may have been up there but his speed, tanasity and brains makes for a very good winger who doesnt cost alot of $$. Burts defence is rarley an issue, how often does a winger make a one on one tackle, out wide defence slides and he will always have 1-2 men on the inside within 2 meters of him and all he has to do is make contact. Inu and Grothes defence out wide is generally horrible, Inu loves to come out of the line and shoulder charge which generlly is ineffective and grothe loves to come in and leave his winger unmarked. This year Reddy and Inu/Grothe conceeded twice the amount of tries to Tahu/Wright-Burt combo.

Burt is the best winger in our team IMO, if you dont agree I don't care because you obviously have sh*t for brains and no temper control. Before you go on a rant, telling me your a 6'3" islander who weights 130kg and has been shot 43 times... I dont care, I'm not stupid enough to get into a fight over football but im people like you dont scare me at all

Sorry tough guy. How about we meet up & discuss mate??

 

[SDM]

Sorry tough guy. How about we meet up & discuss mate??

Be careful, he loves the manboobs

 

[Gronk]

Sorry tough guy. How about we meet up & discuss mate??

Love a good threat by an anonymous person in cyberspace. :roll:

 

[SeftonBoy]

Be careful, he loves the manboobs

Didn't know Caylo's got Manboobs.

BTW it wasn't a threat. I asked him nicely.

 

[SDM]

 

[Noise]

Exactly, although to be fair Morts is at most, a running 5/8, I think this year gave us a better review of Morts and Robson as players overall, although 2011 could prove me wrong entirely and we end up with a younger Fittler.

A young fittler? wat when fitler was 12? Mortz is 22, fittler debuted at 17.

I feel sick in the stomach that i just mentioned mortz and fittler in the same sentence

 

[84 Baby]

A young fittler? wat when fitler was 12? Mortz is 22, fittler debuted at 17.

I feel sick in the stomach that i just mentioned mortz and fittler in the same sentence

It's ok just imagine you meant Chris not Daniel

 

[Wise Old Eel]

What exactly did Humble show? And explain how it was more than Mortimer. All I remember Humble doing is his try against the Sharks, his try against the Warriors, being tackled into touch against Manly and throwing the ball over the sideline against the Warriors.

In 2009, Mortimer's few tries (actually 10) were not opportunistic. He put himself in the right position to score those tries. Not matter which way you put it, Mortimer and Robson played well in 2009. They played badly in 2010, but not one member of the 2009 side improved in 2010, except maybe Tim Mannah.

And for someone who is not here to bag out the kid you seem to bag him out at every opportunity you can.

The title of the thread is “halves for next year”. Correct me if I am wrong but Mortimer played in the halves for 2009 & 2010 didn’t he (among others)? I also think Robson was poor but I believe he is a better player than Mortimer. Again, Mortimer may suddenly click this year and leave me with egg on my face. I tend to doubt it but we will see.

In 2009, he showed glimpses of what he can do when given the time and space. But really, most players are able to shine in this situation. In 2010, for whatever reason, the time and space was not there & his deficiencies became blatantly obvious. I agree with mrpwnd, yycheng, Caylo, among others. Mortimer showed in 2010 that he is not (at this stage) up to the task of creating opportunities for his team – and that task is the job of the halves, whichever way you slice it. It looks very much to me like we are trying to manufacture a half/five eighth out of this kid. He appears to be the club’s “work in progress” player but that should be done in the lower grades (Wenty) and not at the expense of your NRL side.

He definitely divides opinion amongst Eels supporters. It will be very interesting to see how much more leeway he will be given in regards to getting up to a consistent first grade standard. He has already, in my opinion, been given more than his fair share of time to prove himself on the big stage. The others (namely K Keating & Humble) were not given any such latitude. The difference is that they had the ability to play in different positions which, in hindsight, may have worked against them. Anyway, Keating is gone now. IN MY OPINION, Humble deserves first shot at the 6 this year – and a decent shot at that.

WOE

 

[caylo]

Love a good threat by an anonymous person in cyberspace. :roll:

His mother probably didnt breast feed him as a child, clearly there is some underlying psychological issues

 

[Springs]

What a stupid question, you obviously know he wasn't trying to imply that Hayne literally did 'everything', although heck one could argue that he came close to doing that feat both last year and this year.
For the record, Robson running 50 to score, was on the back of Grothe putting Hayne into space, Hayne running 50 and taking out Slater before offloading to Robson for a clear passage to the line. I wouldn't credit Robson for that at all.
Also, if scoring a few tries every now and then meant you were 'good' then heck everyone in the bloody NRL would be good by that standard alone. Morts plays in the halves, it's his job to create opportunities, throughout his career so far he's done that very few times even last year when he was supposedly 'playing good'. It takes more than a few patches of decent form to keep yourself in first grade.

Question?

Okay, so the ball just carried itself from the 50 metre line to the tryline...

Mortimer and Robson didn't have a few patches of decent form. They played consistently well from about Round 15 to the Grand Final. Mortimer scored ten tries, not 'a few every now and then'. I'm sure last year everyone thought Mortimer was great, but now it's 'oh, I actually thought he was bad last year...'

IIRC, Humble had 1 game at 5/8 and it was IMO, better than most of what Morts has done for the whole year. Mortimer did play well last year, but he played more like a spare centre/winger playing in the middle of the field IMO, coming in during support play and 2nd phase play and no, I don't think Robson played that well last year tbh, but he was better then than now.
You can discuss whether Morts deserves his first grade spot now and we could agree to disagree, but you can't deny that Humble is much more of a natural halfback/5/8 than Morts is atm.

Please say what you remember about the Round 10 game against Manly. I remember Parramatta scored three tries, Hayne set up two, Burt the other. And I do deny that Humble is more of a natural five-eighth than Mortimer. In fact, it's entirely ridiculous to say that Humble is better based on that ONE game.

 

[Springs]

The title of the thread is “halves for next year”. Correct me if I am wrong but Mortimer played in the halves for 2009 & 2010 didn’t he (among others)? I also think Robson was poor but I believe he is a better player than Mortimer. Again, Mortimer may suddenly click this year and leave me with egg on my face. I tend to doubt it but we will see.

In 2009, he showed glimpses of what he can do when given the time and space. But really, most players are able to shine in this situation. In 2010, for whatever reason, the time and space was not there & his deficiencies became blatantly obvious. I agree with mrpwnd, yycheng, Caylo, among others. Mortimer showed in 2010 that he is not (at this stage) up to the task of creating opportunities for his team – and that task is the job of the halves, whichever way you slice it. It looks very much to me like we are trying to manufacture a half/five eighth out of this kid. He appears to be the club’s “work in progress” player but that should be done in the lower grades (Wenty) and not at the expense of your NRL side.

He definitely divides opinion amongst Eels supporters. It will be very interesting to see how much more leeway he will be given in regards to getting up to a consistent first grade standard. He has already, in my opinion, been given more than his fair share of time to prove himself on the big stage. The others (namely K Keating & Humble) were not given any such latitude. The difference is that they had the ability to play in different positions which, in hindsight, may have worked against them. Anyway, Keating is gone now. IN MY OPINION, Humble deserves first shot at the 6 this year – and a decent shot at that.

WOE

Good response. Truth is, I wouldn't mind seeing a Mortimer-Humble halves combination. I really only want Robson to play as he is from my area, Group 17/Group 20. But I do think Mortimer deserves first shot at number 6, he has shown more than Humble in his career so far.

 

[mrpwnd]

A young fittler? wat when fitler was 12? Mortz is 22, fittler debuted at 17.

I feel sick in the stomach that i just mentioned mortz and fittler in the same sentence

Hey, at least gimme some chance at false optimism here and there.

 

[mrpwnd]

Question?

Okay, so the ball just carried itself from the 50 metre line to the tryline...

Mortimer and Robson didn't have a few patches of decent form. They played consistently well from about Round 15 to the Grand Final. Mortimer scored ten tries, not 'a few every now and then'. I'm sure last year everyone thought Mortimer was great, but now it's 'oh, I actually thought he was bad last year...'



Please say what you remember about the Round 10 game against Manly. I remember Parramatta scored three tries, Hayne set up two, Burt the other. And I do deny that Humble is more of a natural five-eighth than Mortimer. In fact, it's entirely ridiculous to say that Humble is better based on that ONE game.

On what basis do you say Humble is less of a natural five-eighth than Mortimer?
If you were judging by standards of the 80s-90s where there was more emphasis on 5/8s to be stronger runners then sure, maybe Morts would get the gig over Humble.
However, Humble's performance has been much stronger than Morts even before he hit first grade. Wasn't he the best player in the QLD cup?
I didn't say that Humble was a more complete player based on that one game against Manly, but more that what he did and how he played in that one game was overall, better than most of the performances Morts put on this year.
Also, what do you mean the ball just carried itself to the line? Way to go drag something out of proportion to try and prove a stupid point.
My point was that anyone could've been there to run that easy try and you still would've been blowing off your ass about Robson's apparent magic.
I don't think Morts OR Robson have lost any form from last year, more that they were severely over-estimated last year to the point that teams were naive enough to fall for some of the most stupid dummies and tactics.
Look what happens when teams get the measure of them, they show up as mediocre halves who played on the back of people thinking they could be Origin stars.
I still stand by my point that Humble is much more skilled than Morts at 5/8 and at the very least deserves more games at 5/8 over Morts.

 

[mrpwnd]

Good response. Truth is, I wouldn't mind seeing a Mortimer-Humble halves combination. I really only want Robson to play as he is from my area, Group 17/Group 20. But I do think Mortimer deserves first shot at number 6, he has shown more than Humble in his career so far.

So first it's because Robson scored a bloody 50m try and now it's because he's from your area...?
Mortimer has shown more in his first grade career so far, but it's a pointless aspect of his game to consider when you want to determine who gets the first gig. Humble gets only 1 opportunity at 5/8 and had a solid performance over Morts who was only really decent at most during the back end of last year.
Morts was rubbish this year and if ANY team in the NRL had a choice between a 5/8 that played excellent in QLD cup and an underperforming Morts suffering from 'second year syndrome', they'd sure as hell pick the rookie with more potential.

 

[Springs]

So first it's because Robson scored a bloody 50m try and now it's because he's from your area...?
Mortimer has shown more in his first grade career so far, but it's a pointless aspect of his game to consider when you want to determine who gets the first gig. Humble gets only 1 opportunity at 5/8 and had a solid performance over Morts who was only really decent at most during the back end of last year.
Morts was rubbish this year and if ANY team in the NRL had a choice between a 5/8 that played excellent in QLD cup and an underperforming Morts suffering from 'second year syndrome', they'd sure as hell pick the rookie with more potential.

Are you kidding? Of course I didn't say 'keep Robson in the team because he scored a 50 metre try in R19, 2009', it was just an example that he's not a bad player and doesn't deserve all the crap people say about him.

No it's a choice between a 5/8 that played excellent in QLD Cup in 2009 or a 5/8 that played excellent in NRL in 2009. Remember Mortimer didn't play 5/8 between Round 4 and Round 25, he played half, in fact Mortimer played half when Humble played 5/8, and didn't play badly either.

On what basis do you say Humble is less of a natural five-eighth than Mortimer?
If you were judging by standards of the 80s-90s where there was more emphasis on 5/8s to be stronger runners then sure, maybe Morts would get the gig over Humble.
However, Humble's performance has been much stronger than Morts even before he hit first grade. Wasn't he the best player in the QLD cup?
I didn't say that Humble was a more complete player based on that one game against Manly, but more that what he did and how he played in that one game was overall, better than most of the performances Morts put on this year.
Also, what do you mean the ball just carried itself to the line? Way to go drag something out of proportion to try and prove a stupid point.
My point was that anyone could've been there to run that easy try and you still would've been blowing off your ass about Robson's apparent magic.
I don't think Morts OR Robson have lost any form from last year, more that they were severely over-estimated last year to the point that teams were naive enough to fall for some of the most stupid dummies and tactics.
Look what happens when teams get the measure of them, they show up as mediocre halves who played on the back of people thinking they could be Origin stars.
I still stand by my point that Humble is much more skilled than Morts at 5/8 and at the very least deserves more games at 5/8 over Morts.

Quite simple really, overall Mortimer has played better in the NRL than Humble. And I don't know or care if Humble was the best player in QLD Cup or not, it is Reserve Grade.

And anyone wasn't there for Robson's try, Robson was there. If he wasn't there no one would be there. If anyone could have been there then anyone could have done what Hayne did, or Grothe. All they did was run, draw and pass. But of course Hayne should get all the credit because he is superman Hayne.

And if you don't think that Mortimer or Robson have lost any form from last year then it isn't their fault that we went as bad as we did. If they played exactly the same as your foolish mind seems to think they did.
And now your basically just saying that we didn't even play well last year, just every other team played stupid.
Whatever stand by your point, I disagree that's all.

 

[caylo]

Quite simple really, overall Mortimer has played better in the NRL than Humble. And I don't know or care if Humble was the best player in QLD Cup or not, it is Reserve Grade.

And anyone wasn't there for Robson's try, Robson was there. If he wasn't there no one would be there. If anyone could have been there then anyone could have done what Hayne did, or Grothe. All they did was run, draw and pass. But of course Hayne should get all the credit because he is superman Hayne.

And if you don't think that Mortimer or Robson have lost any form from last year then it isn't their fault that we went as bad as we did. If they played exactly the same as your foolish mind seems to think they did.
And now your basically just saying that we didn't even play well last year, just every other team played stupid.
Whatever stand by your point, I disagree that's all.

Firstly Tim Smith has a briliant 2005 and a avg 2005 and people wrote him off. Mortimer had an average 2009 and a very poor 2010, up to now he hasnt shown he is at NRL standard.

Watch mortimers games in 2009, not just the action highlights, he didnt play that well it was his name that got him in the papers. KK played just as well as Mortz did earlier in the year and no one said a thing about him. I was saying the same things in 2009, if KK came back before the finals I would have had him in the team ahead of Mortz and I was saying that in 2009.

Mortz can support well and he has a decent running game but outside of that he has proved that he can't create plays on his own. He lacks important skills as a half and him bing in the NRL side will just handycap the team ATM. I think Humble is more skilled half, has better defence and has just as strong a running game (runs better lines IMO, while Mortz is a stop start, jink running game). That is why I would have Humble over Mortz. Playing Murray is risky esp with Humble at 5-8 but it is that or Robson and I think that It may worth the punt and having maybe Robson on the bench is Murray doesnt start well (or vice versa, start with Robson in 7 and bring Murray on 20min in with Robson shifted to hooker).