If you hate Morts...

[mrpwnd]

Mortz and Robson will start round one... no arguing there

Senario 1) Mortz and Robson play well then no changes need

BUT

Senario 2) Mortz struggles, who do you play. I would have Humble and MaGuire would be the best options. If MaGuire is doing well at hooker and Humble is performing then I would play Humble in the 6 if Humble isnt performing I would move MaGuire to 6.

Senario 3) Robson is struggling, this is hard to you play Murray or Bruest with an inexperianced Mortz? I thinks that is too big a risk. I dont think Mortz is an option for the 7 so MaGuire would be the best option IMO. If Murray was in super form and pushing selection then you could consider a Murray or Mortz half pairing.

Senario 4) Robson and Mortz both are struggling then what do you do. In this senario I would possibly consider MK to partner someone like Murray or Humble because even though he lacks vision he is a strong defender and has a strong kicking and passing game so he can spread the ball and play a structured game. MaGuire would be the other option to also partner because he has experiance and has pretty good vision.

At no stage have i said that I think Murray, bruest, MK or Mitchell should start in the halves they are a last resort. Murray would probably the only one that can force his way in to the halves at full strength if he performs like T.Smith did early on.

The Halves are a choice between Mortz, Robson, MaGuire and Humble. I was of the opinion that Humble should have started ahead of because of Mortz poor performances last year but I have said that I understand why Kearney has picked Mortz. Even thou Mortz has more first grade experiance I think Humble has performed better in the juniors then Mortz and he was Wentys best back last year. If you watched wenty games you would have noticed that he distributes well to the players outwide and IMO has better vision. Most of Wentys tries came of the back of Humble or Mitchell and that is why i wanted humble there.

Does that explain it better.

Mate no one's saying Morts has a mortgage on the 6 or 7 jerseys. I'm pretty sure his spot is up for grabs as much as any player out there. But if you consider his 1 1/2 years worth of first grade experience and room for improvement then him and either MaGuire/Humble/Robson are probably the most logical choices for starting spots come trials and early rounds.

I'm with you in the whole 'Humble is probably better than Morts' idea, but I'd use Morts for the opening rounds and see whether he's up for some more first grade now that he has all that raw experience under his belt. Humble will eventually get a spot and deservedly so, but that doesn't mean Morts doesn't deserve a chance to prove himself this year, even if it is for just a few rounds.

 

[lingard]

It's not hard to understand, but I'll break it down into steps for you:

1. Take the total number of tackles completed

2. Divide it by the total number of tackles (including misses)

3. You know have a percentage of a completion rate of tackles.

Mortimer was averaging 20 tackles a game in 2010 and completing 75% of those. Defending next to Mateo.

Speed hump? That's a beauty!

How many of those 'competed tackles' did Mortimer do on his own, as opposed to having someone else complete the tackle for him? That`s my point. I don`t consider him a very good defender without assistance. Robson, on the other hand, is a much better defender (in my opinion) because he regularly brings opponents down (i.e: completes the tackle) by himself. I believe that, in this case, Mortimer`s defensive stats are misleading.

 

[The Colonel]

How many of those 'competed tackles' did Mortimer do on his own, as opposed to having someone else complete the tackle for him? That`s my point. I don`t consider him a very good defender without assistance. Robson, on the other hand, is a much better defender (in my opinion) because he regularly brings opponents down (i.e: completes the tackle) by himself. I believe that, in this case, Mortimer`s defensive stats are misleading.

Robson is a spot defender in he fact that other clubs target him and try and isolate him. Melbourne isolated him time and again in the 2009 Grand Final. 7 missed tackles and three ineffective. He made 24 tackles because they ran at him all day. At hooker when he defends in the centre of the field his missed tackle numbers decline at half and 5/8 his numbers increase. He also defends on our right side which leaks points on a regular basis.....


While Mortimer may have help in his tackles he is at least getting help rather than being regularly isolated.

 

[spartan2153]

mortimer is overated. People defending him as the next great thing are kidding themselves.

just my opinion

 

[The Colonel]

mortimer is overated. People defending him as the next great thing are kidding themselves.

just my opinion

If you can find where people are defending him as the next big thing by providing examples I am more than interested in seeing it.

 

[spartan2153]

If you can find where people are defending him as the next big thing by providing examples I am more than interested in seeing it.

i will even start a thread for you & u can read them all yourself

 

[lingard]

so hold on Keating makes 20 tackles a match and misses 1 while Mortimer makes 24 tackles a match and misses 4.

Mortimer makes four more tackles a match but misses 3 more. He may be a good defender for his size, you can consider him gutsy but he isnt a good defender. As halfback or 5-8 goes he is actually a poor defender.

Yes. The problem with all this statistic stuff is that, if a player (say Mortimer) throws himself in front of an opposition player and slows him down a bit, and then another player comes in and finishes off the tackle - as long as the first player (say Mortimer) remains in some sort of contact with the tackled player, it`s counted as a completed tackle for Mortimer AND the second defender. I think a large percentage of Mortimer`s so-called 'completed tackles' happen this way. So Mortimer`s 24 completed tackles per game is a meaningless statistic. If three defenders manage to bring down an opponent, all three are credited with a completed tackle. So it doesn`t really mean very much, does it? Are stats really better than pure observation? Mmm......sometimes, maybe. Not all the time, though.

 

[lingard]

Box do you actually read my posts, I said for his size he is a good defender and he tries hard but he is a bad defender even for a half. Even if you consider him a good defender for his size, he is sub par in so many facets of his game I couldn't justify picking him.

As I've said before I think he is easily the worst regular starting half in the NRL. If $$ wasnt a consideration I would pretty much chose every other half in the NRL over Mortimer.

I understand why Kearney has chosen Mortimer and I hope him all the best I want him to do well but I have doubts. If he fails again guys liek Humble, Murray and even MK should be given a shot in the halves. Finch was punted for much less tbh, atleast Finch was setting up tries every now and then.

Thank you! At last some stats to support the argument that Daniel Mortimer is useless. :lol::lol: (No offense, Daniel, but in 2010 you were useless.) With a bit more weight on him and a year (of abject failure) under his belt, he might be a better player this year. Good luck.

Something i looked up yesterday, in Mortimers 38 games 19 of those games he did not have any influence in attack (score a try, TA, LB or LBA) 15 of those games were in 2010. So in 2010 75% of his games he had no influence in us scoring any points and for a half that is unacceptable.

Also in 2009 when he was playing "well" he had alot of line breaks and TA but he only had 2 LBA in his 18 games. That gives the impression that Mortimer does no create but rather supports a creative player which isnt a quality you want of a halfback or 5-8 if they dont have a dominate partner.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

so hold on Keating makes 20 tackles a match and misses 1 while Mortimer makes 24 tackles a match and misses 4.

Mortimer makes four more tackles a match but misses 3 more. He may be a good defender for his size, you can consider him gutsy but he isnt a good defender. As halfback or 5-8 goes he is actually a poor defender.

You're a f**ken dope caylo.

I already showed you how Keating is one of the best defensive halves in the game.

If Morts is then worse than him it doesn't make him "a poor defender". It just makes him not as good as Keating.

Simple logic mate. Very simple.

As I've said before I think he is easily the worst regular starting half in the NRL.

Robson is worse.

Something i looked up yesterday, in Mortimers 38 games 19 of those games he did not have any influence in attack (score a try, TA, LB or LBA) 15 of those games were in 2010. So in 2010 75% of his games he had no influence in us scoring any points and for a half that is unacceptable.

Now have a look at Robson and Humble's stats.

The bloke in the club who's had the best stats as an NRL halfback is Casey McGuire in 2004.

I think he'll start somewhere on the field; probably in the halves. He's not special but he is a complete player, and he's got a lot of experience.

I think it'll be him and Morts starting in the halves in round 1. Matt Keating at hooker.

Also in 2009 when he was playing "well" he had alot of line breaks and TA but he only had 2 LBA in his 18 games. That gives the impression that Mortimer does no create but rather supports a creative player which isnt a quality you want of a halfback or 5-8 if they dont have a dominate partner.

You're right this is a concern but in 32 NYC games (most of them in the number 7 jersey) he had 22 LBA. This is decent considering he only played 9 games of NYC in 2009 (with 10 LBA). Yes this means in '08 he played 23 games with 12 LBA.

By comparison Murray had 30 in 28 games and Robert Lui had 41 in 33.

 

[lingard]

Robson is a spot defender in he fact that other clubs target him and try and isolate him. Melbourne isolated him time and again in the 2009 Grand Final. 7 missed tackles and three ineffective. He made 24 tackles because they ran at him all day. At hooker when he defends in the centre of the field his missed tackle numbers decline at half and 5/8 his numbers increase. He also defends on our right side which leaks points on a regular basis.....


While Mortimer may have help in his tackles he is at least getting help rather than being regularly isolated.

That`s an interesting observation, Colonel. I didn`t know that. Cheers. I`d still rather Robson beside me in the trenches than Mortimer.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

mortimer is overated. People defending him as the next great thing are kidding themselves.

Nobody said he'll be great (not since '09 anyway).

Those of us defending him are saying he'll be a good first grade half - like Hornby or Soward.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

That`s an interesting observation, Colonel. I didn`t know that. Cheers. I`d still rather Robson beside me in the trenches than Mortimer.

But who would you prefer setting up linebreaks and tries?

And why?

 

[caylo]

You're a f**ken dope caylo.

I already showed you how Keating is one of the best defensive halves in the game.

If Morts is then worse than him it doesn't make him "a poor defender". It just makes him not as good as Keating.
Simple logic mate. Very simple.

Ok by observation I think mortz is a poor defender, when I think of guys like Cronk, Kimmorley, Prince and Pearce who hold their own against forwards then compare them to Mortz I don't see how people consider him a good defender. He may be a good defender for his size but he is no more then a speed bum tbh.
Plus defence isnt a reason you pick a half so its not worthing arguing about

Robson is worse.

I disagree, I think Robson organises a side so much better then Mortz. He allows Hayne to more time and space and IMO he is our best half, you can disagree that is your choice.
While Robson is less creative then Mortz he is kicking and passing game are superior (not hard) and he has better vision IMO.

Now have a look at Robson and Humble's stats

Humble played one game in the halves and Robsons stats in the halves are similar to Mortimer. In 20 games Mortimer had 3 lines breaks, 3 LBA and 6 TA while in 12 games Robson had 2 line breaks, 1 LBA and 3 TA (only counting games in the halves)

The bloke in the club who's had the best stats as an NRL halfback is Casey McGuire in 2004.

I think he'll start somewhere on the field; probably in the halves. He's not special but he is a complete player, and he's got a lot of experience.

I think it'll be him and Morts starting in the halves in round 1. Matt Keating at hooker.

You may well be right, I think MaGuire could be our best option. For some reason thou I have a felling he may have been recruited as a hooker and play a Cam Smith type role in that he will control the attack from dumby half.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Plus defence isnt a reason you pick a half so its not worthing arguing about

Agreed.

In 20 games Mortimer had 3 lines breaks, 3 LBA and 6 TA while in 12 games Robson had 2 line breaks, 1 LBA and 3 TA (only counting games in the halves)

Fair point.

I'll also concede that 2010 was probably second season syndrome for Robson as well. He was decent in 2009, which was his first full season.

You may well be right, I think MaGuire could be our best option. For some reason thou I have a felling he may have been recruited as a hooker and play a Cam Smith type role in that he will control the attack from dumby half.

I rate Matt Keating tbh. Had a sh*t year but who in our team didn't? (Besides Hayne, Horo and Mannah).

I'm sure McGuire's an option at hooker (so is Mitchell) but I'm certain he's been bought as much as a halves option. There's not much he can do from dummy half that Keating can't do, whereas Mitchell can provide attacking spark off the bench.

But McGuire can run the side easier from the halves, without also needing to provide penetration or make as many tackles.

 

[caylo]

I'm sure McGuire's an option at hooker (so is Mitchell) but I'm certain he's been bought as much as a halves option. There's not much he can do from dummy half that Keating can't do, whereas Mitchell can provide attacking spark off the bench.

But McGuire can run the side easier from the halves, without also needing to provide penetration or make as many tackles.

That may be a fair point. MK has shown signs that he can be a very good hooker but there are parts of his game he needs to improve like getting the ball away quicker and communication with his halves. Now your right in that the whole team had issues so maybe he does deserve another shot. MK defence is very good and his kicking game is strong but he doesn't use it often which is bemusing.

That would be the best case senario because then MaGuire would play in the halves and partner Mortimer, Murray, Humble or Robson and gives our halves some needed experiance.

 

[Eelementary]

How many of those 'competed tackles' did Mortimer do on his own, as opposed to having someone else complete the tackle for him? That`s my point. I don`t consider him a very good defender without assistance. Robson, on the other hand, is a much better defender (in my opinion) because he regularly brings opponents down (i.e: completes the tackle) by himself. I believe that, in this case, Mortimer`s defensive stats are misleading.

I don't have stats for that.

But I do recall Mortimer bringing down Sam Thaiday and Willie Mason without help. And I also recall in the 2009 Grand Final Robson being run over by Blair a few times....

Mortimer is not perfect, but he's not that bad.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

I don't have stats for that.

But I do recall Mortimer bringing down Sam Thaiday and Willie Mason without help. And I also recall in the 2009 Grand Final Robson being run over by Blair a few times....

Mortimer is not perfect, but he's not that bad.

Round 1 (Dragons), 22nd minute: hit on front-rower Jon Green.

Round 7 (Cowboys), 62nd minute: hit on winger Michael Bani, along with Hindmarsh.

Round 10 (Sea Eagles), 44th minute: picked up fullback Ben Farrah and drove him into the ground.

Round 16 (Broncos), 24th minute: picked up and dumped front-rower Ashton Sims. However Sims got the ball away.

Also in that game, 48th minute: front-on tackle on Corey Parker forces the ball loose.

 

[lingard]

Nobody said he'll be great (not since '09 anyway).

Those of us defending him are saying he'll be a good first grade half - like Hornby or Soward.

Soward`s not a good half; he`s a very good half. And Hornby isn`t a half at all - he`s a fullback or 'specialist five-eight' (even though such things don`t exist anymore :roll: ) who finds himself playing in the seven because Saints don`t have an adequate seven.

 

[Bigfella]

And who won a comp L. We'd take that.

 

[mrpwnd]

Soward`s not a good half; he`s a very good half. And Hornby isn`t a half at all - he`s a fullback or 'specialist five-eight' (even though such things don`t exist anymore :roll: ) who finds himself playing in the seven because Saints don`t have an adequate seven.

To be fair, there's a fair few famous halves that never started out as specialist halves. Kenny didn't start off as a 5/8 and Sterlo originally debuted as a fill-in fullback and later a 5/8 before he cemented the no.7 jersey.

IMO Hornby is an excellent halfback, suffice it to say, the Dragons have an excellent halves combination - Not the best in the comp, but still very good nevertheless. When you have one-dimensional wingers like Brett Morris on your team scoring a sh*t load of tries, you know the halves are doing something right.