What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

How will souths go without Reynolds?

DiegoNT

First Grade
Messages
9,378
Inglis needs to go back to fullback and stay there, the constant shuffling around isn't helping him or the team at the moment
 

--Storm--

Juniors
Messages
1,633
Sam Burgess is there biggest loss, Glen Stewart is a ok player but no Sam Burgess and I don't give a f**k what anyone says Keary isn't a good Player, just benefited from starting in a good team
 

DiegoNT

First Grade
Messages
9,378
Inglis has been shifted around to much and its affected his game. I'm sure slater form would drop of if he was forced to play 5-8 for the team ( or keep shifting positions mid game like Maguire had done in the past weeks)
 

footy75

Bench
Messages
3,009
Sam Burgess loss has been huge. I still expect them to click and be there and abouts towards the end. But hell just like the Roosters they drop some shit games.
 

AMD

Juniors
Messages
377
Sam Burgess loss has been huge. I still expect them to click and be there and abouts towards the end. But hell just like the Roosters they drop some shit games.

This. I think the loss of his leadership is whats hurting them most. Inglis just doesn't bring the same inspiration to the team.
 

Hutty1986

Immortal
Messages
34,034
This. I think the loss of his leadership is whats hurting them most. Inglis just doesn't bring the same inspiration to the team.

That's because big Sammy wasn't afraid to make the tough runs in get-out sets and do the dirty work. Not that a fullback necessarily should have to do the work that a forward does but Inglis just goes missing when it gets a bit tough. Barely sighted after halftime yesterday as the Raiders stormed home.
 

muzby

Village Idiot
Staff member
Messages
45,923
you don't need the same amount of years to work out a percentage muzby

lol @ muzby :p

well for a truly representative sample, it is imperative that you keep the number of variables as consistent as possible between the two..

if it makes you feel any better...

wests tigers..

2001 - played 26, won 9
2002 - played 24, won 7
2003 - played 24, won 7
2004 - played 24, won 10
2005 - played 28, won 18
2006 - played 24, won 10
2007 - played 24, won 11
2008 - played 24, won 11
2009 - played 24, won 12
2010 - played 27, won 16
2011 - played 26, won 15
2012 - played 24, won 11
2013 - played 24, won 7
2014 - played 24, won 10
2015 - played 8, won 4

355 games played. won 156. winning percentage 44% vs souffs at 39% over the same period..

funny that both have 1 title in that period, but the tigers have a better percentage..

man, did you back the wrong horse or what?


so....

in summation...


wests tigers > gallen > the entire souffs team.
 
Top