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!
To be fair, he was never the same player after copping a knee right on his right ass cheek against Penrith Rd 25 last year, I think that just about shattered him.
I agree with all that, to be honest Tom Humble's form at Wentworthville and the lack of form for both Mortimer and Robson throughout the season deserved a longer test as a starting half in 2010. The problem with pairing Humble and Murray however, is they are both 21 and 22/23, and neither have any first-grade experience whatsoever as NRL halves, which can turn into a disaster. My theory is that if you want to play one of them, you have to pick one and stick with them for the whole season. I believe Tom Humble is closer to first-grade than Brad Murray, and thus I believe he should get the bone; he was one of the QLD Cup's best halfbacks in 2009, I see no reason why he shouldn't be trialled there, or at five-eighth, along with either Robson, Mortimer, Hayne, Mcguire, etc. Humble also is a great utility player, who can fill in at winger, fullback, centre, hooker (I think), and in either halves role, so using him off the bench with Mortimer and a more experienced half as the starters is also a viable option.
Consequently, if you choose Brad Murray at halfback, you need to pair him with someone who has been in first-grade and has halves experience for at least two years.....Mortimer fits the bill, but of course a more experienced or dominant half may be necessary if Murray can't adapt well at first(which is likely). If we pick Murray, it will only exacerbate the need to move Hayne to five-eighth, whilst Mortimer likely plays a role off the bench as a hooker or back-up half.
I agree with all thatHowever, using a young combination like Murray and Humble, of which neither has any real first-grade experience as a starting half, is an extremely massive risk.
I remember earlier in the year, and I was one of them, people were saying that if we trialled Humble and Murray it could be a great young combination mirroring Carney and Pearce. However, whilst there is a medium difference in ages, there is a big difference in playing experience between Carney/Pearce and Humble/Murray (if they are our 2011 halves combo). Todd Carney is 24 and has played around 100 games, having played about 80-85 games in the halves; he is already a very experienced player, and far more experienced than any of our young players. Mitchell Pearce is 21 and has played around 80 games, most if not all of them of course spent in the halves.
I believe in youthful experience of course, but the risk of pairing Murray and Humble when neither has any real first-grade experience (Mortimer has about 40 games, which isn't much better though) is probably too large, and considering neither is used to such a huge weight of expectation at being the first-grade halves in the NRL and also for a team expecting success like the Eels, it is likely to be a disaster.
However, what makes this issue complicated is the fact we now have Stephen Kearney in our team; a person who was part of the coaching staff that moulded Cooper Cronk into the halfback he is today, and a person who was part of a team focussed on bringing individual success out in every player and making them play to their potential. If Kearney uses his suppossedly great man-management skills and really coaches our team well and makes sure Humble and Murray know what to do, much like the Dragons and Storm do, then they have a big chance of doing well.
However, tossing the bone to them, whilst a good idea, is one that is far more risky than the other ideas we have. We will have to wait and see what Mr Kearney decides, I guess. It's a shame, I know, but we just have to wait.
Oh lord.....it gets even better.
Firstly, Luke Burt was the form winger of the NRL at the start of the year. You can wave his lack of an Origin record in front of my face and it doesn't change that fact; just because a player may have been the form player in a position of the NRL, does not mean they get picked for Origin or representative duties in that position or at all.
Example: Darius Boyd was the form fullback of the NRL in the first half of the season, but QLD stuck with Billy Slater there. A better example, Darius Boyd was the form fullback of the NRL but failed to get into the Australian side.
I can name a hundred examples, nay a thousand examples, but you just won't see the point so I don't care.
Secondly, I didn't say that Twizzle being a moderator gives him any special privileges in terms of argumentative advantage. Also, the fact that you called him a dribbler because he disagreed with you just makes me....well, laugh. Sorry buddy, but you are just so humorous.
Thirdly, when I say club loyalty you take it out of context. I was talking about why others didn't sign him, your response was just an excuse to talk about the 'failings' of Luke Burt as a player, when Twizzle previously indicated that Luke Burt was pretty much signed before he even came close to being off-contract because not only does the club fully recognise his services and what he offers to the club, but also because they don't want to lose a player who has been one of their best and, aside from the second half of the 2010 season, has continued to be one of their best. His goal-kicking didn't falter noticeably, did it? Or did I miss the close games we won this season on the back of near perfect goal-kicking by Luke Burt?
Finally, whether you believe we will not win the competition with the player or not is sadly irrelevant to me, because I believe we damn well have the potential to win a competition with him. We nearly won in 2009 with Luke Burt, if I can recall. We nearly won in 2001 with Luke Burt, if I can recall. His form helped to guide us into the 2007 semi's, if I recall. Each time, we have only just been beaten, and two of those times by cheating teams. I can't see how we are 'carrying' the bloke when he still contributes to us something that most other clubs envy; a brilliant goal-kicker. If Burt had been played the whole season in the form he did in the first half of the season, we wouldn't be discussing this right now, would we?
And whether or not you are on your own is irrelevant to me too, I accept others opinions, you are just a dim-wit who does nothing but troll these forums looking for an excuse to say crap about one of our club legends.
Sorry old chap, but I think the cards have suitably turned on you. Enjoy your stay.
Thanks for the tip.
Honestly...Slater is a good fullback, but throw him in NSW and Parra and he'd look like Morts playing at fullback.
On bad from no, they shouldnt get dropper.
