halves for next year?

[Springs]

Fine that's your opinion, mine's different.

 

[Delboy]

Springs, Robson is an honest toiler and would not play 7 at any other club

A really nice bloke, but not an NRL standard 7 by a long way

 

[Springs]

Fine. I disagree.

 

[Delboy]

I realise you are from Robbos part of the world, but here is a question, name a 7 that he would start in front of at another club .

No argument he is a genuinely good bloke

 

[mrpwnd]

Robson and Morts try so damn hard that they should get a Dally M every year.
The world isn't that nice, your either good or your not, Robson and Morts weren't good this year and should have been replaced.

 

[Springs]

The whole team wasn't good this year so let's replace the whole team.

 

[Maroubra Eel]

The whole team wasn't good this year so let's replace the whole team.

I reckon what we've done might work. Get rid of a few players. Recruit next to no one and cross our fingers.

 

[mrpwnd]

The whole team wasn't good this year so let's replace the whole team.

Your kidding yourself if you think the halves weren't the reason we lost our games.
Our forwards were great, can you dispute that? I doubt it, suspect in defense on occasions but our defense wasn't the problem this year.
Our backs were average, although that's a given considering our halves and the lack of ball passage that came to our edges, never let us down when the opportunity to put in a good finish came though.
Hayne was our best player this year, went off his ass and had to do all the work for our inept halves, take a look at the stats, I don't think any team in the NRL has a fullback with more try/linebreak assists than their respective halves.
In short, our inability to do anything to score points and play footy was primarily due to our halves poor form.
But hey, let's give your suggestion a go and just replace the whole team because our halves are mighty great.

 

[lingard]

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.



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.

1. I completely agree with you.
2. Mortimer has played one and a half seasons in the NRL; Humble has played six games - five of them out of position. You do the maths.

 

[lingard]

Springs, Robson is an honest toiler and would not play 7 at any other club

A really nice bloke, but not an NRL standard 7 by a long way

Hi, Delboy. How about answering a question for me? Give me your honest appraisal of Daniel Mortimer 2010. I don`t think you will, because you are too focussed on criticising Jeff Robson. But I`ll await your answer anyway. Cheers.

 

[Delboy]

Morts was basically a workhorse, tackled and had nothing else.

He is not a creative player and ahould not have been looked at as a 7, think he may best be suited to a PJ Marsh style 9.

As for Robson, a wholehearted player who has played to the best of his ability, he and Morts did not step up to the mark in 2010 and in my opinion were a major reason why the team were awful. Add some ordinary coaching to that.

As I have said before, Robson is a back up 7, and I would prefer to judge him as that, not a full fledged NRL 7. Just my honest opinion, also not unhappy at the players we have not retained, even if they perform OK away they did not get to where I expected them form their junior days.

 

[Springs]

Your kidding yourself if you think the halves weren't the reason we lost our games.
Our forwards were great, can you dispute that? I doubt it, suspect in defense on occasions but our defense wasn't the problem this year.
Our backs were average, although that's a given considering our halves and the lack of ball passage that came to our edges, never let us down when the opportunity to put in a good finish came though.
Hayne was our best player this year, went off his ass and had to do all the work for our inept halves, take a look at the stats, I don't think any team in the NRL has a fullback with more try/linebreak assists than their respective halves.
In short, our inability to do anything to score points and play footy was primarily due to our halves poor form.
But hey, let's give your suggestion a go and just replace the whole team because our halves are mighty great.

For Barney's sake you obviously have an agenda and won't quit pestering someone who disagrees with you.

Fine then, I'm kidding myself. Our halves weren't the reason we lost all our games., that's just stupid, just like Hayne wasn't the reason we won all our games last year. Think about it, if Hayne was as good as he was last year, our best player blah blah blah, and the halves have been (as you people say) crap both in 2009 and 2010, then how did we go from 2nd to 12th?
Either the halves played GOOD in 2009 or Hayne played BAD in 2010. You can't just give Hayne all the credit for the wins and the halves all the credit for the losses.

And I can easily dispute it, our forwards weren't as good as 2009 and the backs did let us down many times. Considering how much crap is/was said about Tahu and Inu I thought it was obvious.

 

[caylo]

For Barney's sake you obviously have an agenda and won't quit pestering someone who disagrees with you.

Fine then, I'm kidding myself. Our halves weren't the reason we lost all our games., that's just stupid, just like Hayne wasn't the reason we won all our games last year. Think about it, if Hayne was as good as he was last year, our best player blah blah blah, and the halves have been (as you people say) crap both in 2009 and 2010, then how did we go from 2nd to 12th?
Either the halves played GOOD in 2009 or Hayne played BAD in 2010. You can't just give Hayne all the credit for the wins and the halves all the credit for the losses.

And I can easily dispute it, our forwards weren't as good as 2009 and the backs did let us down many times. Considering how much crap is/was said about Tahu and Inu I thought it was obvious.

It came down to a few thing,
1. Hayne was heavily marked and he had less of an influence but he still was very good.
2. We were unable to produce as much second phase play, but put forwards were better in making yardage and in defence.
3. Teams worked out that our halves had little skills under pressure. Mortimer had more footy form the dummy half and got tackled with the ball too many times.

Comparing last year to this year, we only lost two more games.remember we came 8th in 09 and in the big moments it we hayne, fui or mateo making the wining plays not morts or robson.

 

[Springs]

Agree with those points.
Except that Mortimer did make winning plays, Mateo didn't as he was injured for many of the games.

 

[caylo]

Agree with those points.
Except that Mortimer did make winning plays, Mateo didn't as he was injured for many of the games.

Early in the run it was very much Hayne with mortimer and robson paying supporting roles. Even your forward were making big play passes too set up tries but out was hayne and burt doing majority of the kicking and they were the only two to kicks 40/20s in 09. When Mateo came back he was more influential then either of our halves, in the gf it was mateo and fui who brought us back into the game.

Mortimer isn't a game breaker and didn't have the skills to create points on his own, I don't think he will be any better the Finch. TBH atm Finch is 5 times more skilled then him. He had ample oppurtunity this year and failed so why persist and just ruin him completely, time for him to him to go back to wenty and improve his skills. If he is of NRL quality (which he has the right attitude),he will come back a better player

 

[Springs]

I wouldn't say that. Considering Mateo came back in the Tigers game and played limited minutes, plus it was a fantastic team effort. In Round 25 Mortimer scored three tries and in the Quarter Final Mortimer played great again while Mateo almost threw the game away. In the Preliminary Final Mortimer and Robson were both fantastic which ended with Robson getting Man of the Match. In the Grand Final though Mateo did play better.

 

[boxhead]

I agree with a lot of points from both sides in this argument. There's no denying Robson and Mortimer were great last year, there's no denying they both had horrible seasons this year in comparison to the last, etc.

 

[Wise Old Eel]

Look, we can all agree to disagree on whether or not Mortimer & Robson were so fantastic in 2009. You all know my view on the matter.

My point is this. If Kearney thinks Mortimer (& to a lesser extent, Robson) is the man to guide the team, create opportunities in the opposition 20, win us enough games to get into the finals and then go on & win the comp in 2011, then he is deluded. It ain't gonna happen.

Someone mentioned a few posts ago (apologies, I forgot to look back at who that was before I started typing this post) that Tim Smith was terrific in 2005 but his game dropped in 2006 & people were calling for his head. Mortimer plays half a season of decent "back-up play" & then, when given more responsibility the next season, shows he simply does not have the skills to do the job. Why is it some people are STILL willing to say he is the answer for our future??? Much better players than Mortimer (or Robson for that matter) have been let go by this club. I just don't get it. Changes NEED to be made with our 6 & 7 or we will struggle again in 2011.

WOE

 

[caylo]

Look, we can all agree to disagree on whether or not Mortimer & Robson were so fantastic in 2009. You all know my view on the matter.

My point is this. If Kearney thinks Mortimer (& to a lesser extent, Robson) is the man to guide the team, create opportunities in the opposition 20, win us enough games to get into the finals and then go on & win the comp in 2011, then he is deluded. It ain't gonna happen.

Someone mentioned a few posts ago (apologies, I forgot to look back at who that was before I started typing this post) that Tim Smith was terrific in 2005 but his game dropped in 2006 & people were calling for his head. Mortimer plays half a season of decent "back-up play" & then, when given more responsibility the next season, shows he simply does not have the skills to do the job. Why is it some people are STILL willing to say he is the answer for our future??? Much better players than Mortimer (or Robson for that matter) have been let go by this club. I just don't get it. Changes NEED to be made with our 6 & 7 or we will struggle again in 2011.

WOE

 

[lingard]

Morts was basically a workhorse, tackled and had nothing else.

He is not a creative player and ahould not have been looked at as a 7, think he may best be suited to a PJ Marsh style 9.

As for Robson, a wholehearted player who has played to the best of his ability, he and Morts did not step up to the mark in 2010 and in my opinion were a major reason why the team were awful. Add some ordinary coaching to that.

As I have said before, Robson is a back up 7, and I would prefer to judge him as that, not a full fledged NRL 7. Just my honest opinion, also not unhappy at the players we have not retained, even if they perform OK away they did not get to where I expected them form their junior days.

Do you think Mortimer would get a gig at any other club in the NRL in first grade? My point of course is that while you have continually stated that Robson is not a first grade half-back, you have never mentioned anything about Daniel Mortimer, who is one of the worst five-eight/half-backs I have ever seen in my life, judging on his 2010 performances. I was disappointed in Robson because I thought he would improve, even if only a little bit, on his 2009 season. He didn`t. But then again, he had a dreadful five-eight outside him. I still think if we had Robson at half and a really good five-eight, we would do better than if we had a really good half-back and Mortimer at five-eight. And please don`t try to tell me that Mortimer can tackle. Not one on one. He`s simply a speed hump who slows players down a bit so someone else can tackle them.