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!

Luke Brooks

Wizardman

First Grade
Messages
8,640
I have backed Luke Brooks for years. We have given the guy plenty of time to develop. Over time, he has improved in athletic ability and defence. Sadly, he has not improved his ballplaying, kicking game, game awareness and nerve.
Against good sides, the man hides while his halves partner tries to win the game. He is okay against cracking weak opposition but pretty clueless against good sides for a long time. Granted that our packs have been weak over the years which limits what he can do. Our pack today, while not the best in the comp, does have their moments which Brooks fails to capitalize on. His main strong point (running game) should be really on point with these rules but sadly it is not.

I think we need to move on all three halves and start again.
 
Last edited:

Wizardman

First Grade
Messages
8,640
Been a steady decline since his brilliant debut....
Deadset, I thought he was going to be the second coming of Andrew Johns after that game. He had the Saints defence in absolute stitches that game.
I do get the feeling his debut game is the worst thing that could have happened to our club. Who knows if we would have hung onto him as long as we have if not for that game.
I really wanted Brooks to work. Balmain boy, appeared to have all the skills.....I've given up on him after tonight. He is not going to be the player we want and need him to be....sadly.
 

Tiger Ted

Bench
Messages
3,005
Deadset, I thought he was going to be the second coming of Andrew Johns after that game. He had the Saints defence in absolute stitches that game.
I do get the feeling his debut game is the worst thing that could have happened to our club. Who knows if we would have hung onto him as long as we have if not for that game.
I really wanted Brooks to work. Balmain boy, appeared to have all the skills.....I've given up on him after tonight. He is not going to be the player we want and need him to be....sadly.
Agree with everything u said except I gave up on him a few yrs ago.What has infuriated me is not 1 of his coaches has identified the glaringly obvious that he is not & never will b adept @ game management or taking ownership of the team.
 

BrotherJim05

Bench
Messages
3,408
Brooks is a great player, but I just do not see him being the game manager that we need him to be. We can point fingers and blame all we want but we realistically have two options:
1. Persist with Brooks as our Halfback
2. Move Brooks to 5/8 and develop a new halfback

Option 1 is a risk we persisted with and it looks like we aren't going to get anywhere with. Option 2 seems to make more sense but then we have to f**k around with a new halfback which takes a few years to really see the fruits of the labour.

One option I do see is going after a player like Burton from Panthers. He kicks goals and by all means looks like a solid, game managing halfback. I wouldn't complain seeing him as our 7 with Brooks running around as a 5/8
 

stryker

First Grade
Messages
5,277
Our club stuffed him and Moses around when they hit grade. Junior coaches got it wrong. They were playing in incorrect positions from the start.
Moses was a good 6 but he is a better 7 and he steers Parra around the field nicely.
Brooks is not an organiser. He is a runner. He is not a halfback. The good halves play chess on the field. No one taught him how to play.
We have good talent identifiers here but no idea how to develop that raw skill. I genuinely think he is one of the worst halfbacks in the comp and has been pretty much his whole career including the year he won the award.
 

Tiger Ted

Bench
Messages
3,005
Brooks is a great player, but I just do not see him being the game manager that we need him to be. We can point fingers and blame all we want but we realistically have two options:
1. Persist with Brooks as our Halfback
2. Move Brooks to 5/8 and develop a new halfback

Option 1 is a risk we persisted with and it looks like we aren't going to get anywhere with. Option 2 seems to make more sense but then we have to f**k around with a new halfback which takes a few years to really see the fruits of the labour.

One option I do see is going after a player like Burton from Panthers. He kicks goals and by all means looks like a solid, game managing halfback. I wouldn't complain seeing him as our 7 with Brooks running around as a 5/8
Brooks is a great player is a paradox.He never has been & never will b considered such a player.Hes lucky to b playing in the top grade.

I do agree with ur thoughts about Burton & penrith do have a surplus of decent halves.
 
Messages
3,320
It’s time he started to deliver or we should count our losses and move him on ,he has been around long enough and given enough chances to know how to control a game and direct the team, but he fails to do this week in week out.
Overall his defence has improved since his debut but nothing else.
 

Front-Rower

First Grade
Messages
5,297
I didn’t even watch the second half last night. After the disgrace that was Ben Cummins in the first half, it has nearly turned me off the game.

How the hell Mitchell did not get sent from the field for running in and clobbering Reynolds in the mouth like that, especially after BJ got sent last week, is beyond me.

edit - I’ll also add how the bloody hell can you challenge a high tackle penalty? It beggars belief and to have the penalty overturned is crazy. Sure, first contact was made on the shoulder but he still hit him on the chin. How else did Douehi get a cut and bleed? FMD

Luke Brooks can’t play 7. Never has been able to, never will.
 
Messages
3,233
I don't know if Billy is the answer but it might be time to at least pose the question to him. We know Brooks is not.
Yeah wizard, I don’t know if he’s interested but having his old man around for say 6 weeks just might help him and the rest of em. The good clubs have attacking coaches, defensive coaches and even halves coaches. Last good one of those was the late Steve Folkes. As I say, get his old man b4 the Broncs get him.
 

magpie_man

Juniors
Messages
1,973
Yep, I've probably been one of his most ardent apologists up until now but I think it's time to pull the plug.
It's always been clear that he lacks the chutzpah to play the role of chief orchestrator but it's now becoming apparent that he lacks the skillset and nous.
A sad sliding doors moment is what he could've become had we been able to coerce Cleary Jnr. over to Concord; he would've complimented Brooks perfectly. Instead we have Benji and Grub who are essentially cut from the same cloth.
 

Tiger05

First Grade
Messages
9,162
I really like Brooks as a player but he doesn't seem to have the ability to get in there and win games. I don't think therefore that he will ever be a great player. Great players win games and take the team on their back to do that.

I also don't think he has to be an organizer or that he has to play 6 rather than 7. Was Lewis an organizer ? Was Steve Mortimer an organizer ? To me the number on their back is completely irrelevant.

Souths were also always going to beat us. Look at their backline compared to ours. It's chalk and cheese. I mean if we had Andrew Johns we'd be better but I don't know how much better we would be.
 

Tiger Ted

Bench
Messages
3,005
BrotherJim, moving him to 5/8 would be the last chance for me, with Benji at 7 if it had to come down to keep using the 2 of em.
Problem is we have a readymade & gun 5/8 who is playing fullback.We need a speedy fullback & a halfback.

If we had another fullback option we’d b best served with AD & Benji as 6 & 7 for the rest of this season.Id b super confident of finally qualifying for the 8.
 

WA Tiger

Bench
Messages
4,389
Our backline doesn’t look good but then halfbacks make ok backlines work don’t they...Our backline has clicked (even before BJ arrived) mainly when Brookes running game was on show. Now it’s like he might as well play against us. Unfortunately he is such a key to our success this year.

I reckon he threw about 4 or 5 forward passes last night that weren’t called and that fkn short pass every time that never amounts to anything with the outside backs waiting for the ball. 6 requires some kind of organising as well doesn’t it?
 

Perth Tiger

Bench
Messages
3,077
Yep, I've probably been one of his most ardent apologists up until now but I think it's time to pull the plug.
It's always been clear that he lacks the chutzpah to play the role of chief orchestrator but it's now becoming apparent that he lacks the skillset and nous.
A sad sliding doors moment is what he could've become had we been able to coerce Cleary Jnr. over to Concord; he would've complimented Brooks perfectly. Instead we have Benji and Grub who are essentially cut from the same cloth.
I’m the same, thought he could still be a piece of the puzzle for us to find success but now think he is probably more part of the problem, always potential but never delivers
 

League WTF

Juniors
Messages
55
Why not move Brooks to full back?

Think about it. He has great speed, good defence, and puts in the effort.

The only problem...he is NOT an organising half, provides NO direction, CAN’T earn repeat sets, CAN’T get us out of trouble.

AD is a quality player but he’s too slow for a full back and I’m sure he will get caught every time he gets into an open field. His covering defence isn’t great either. He was no where near Gagai for his 3 tries down our left.

Brooks at full back will give him more space to run, which he is actually good at. It will take the game management responsibility away from him and let him focus on his running game. Most importantly, I doubt many can catch him in open spaces.

That will give us more attacking options with Benji at 7, Reynolds at 6, Grant at 9 and Brooks at 1.

I’d probably move AD to the centre (tall, safe, can contest high balls) and throw Mbye onto the bench as an utility because, quite sadly, that’s all he is good for...
 
Top