Mortimer holds Kearney's faith

[mrpwnd]

Our halves are so f**ked I wouldn't mind pissing them off and going with 2 extra forwards instead.

Sounds like 2010.

 

[Casper The Ghost]

Our halves are so f**ked I wouldn't mind pissing them off and going with 2 extra forwards instead.

This is bullsh*t mate, you have no f**king idea what you are talking about.
How the f**k did they let you in on this Forum.
Why just two extra forwards.... the top 25 should be all forwards.
f**k the backs, there useless, they all go backwards.
We need forwards mate, they all go forward.
We can only win games going forward.
Any player over 94 kilos is a forward, doesn't matter what number is on his back. :shock::crazy::sarcasm::roll:

 

[lingard]

"DANIEL Mortimer at No.6 or No.7 — that was the main news when Steve Kearney had his first official day as Parramatta Eels coach last week.Kearney said Mortimer would be one of the starting halves in the 2011 NRL premiership."

Wow, is Stephen Kearney a magician as well??? :shock:

In all seriousness - and as a long-suffering Parramatta fan, I hope Kearney's faith in Mortimer is rewarded with the mighty Eels doing well in 2011. It will be riveting viewing.


...And Delboy, for the record, I would take Robson over Mortimer any day of the week. ;-)

WOE

Absolutely agree with you. Robson at 7; Humble at 6 would be my choice.
I also agree, this is a stupid statement by Kearney - unless he has been misquoted, taken out of context, or it was just a throw-away line. As I said in another thread, IF Mortimer is being given special treatment because of a special contract or whatever, then whoever is responsible deserves the full brunt of the fans anger. At this early stage, it still seems more likely that Anderson did all of that selecting last year. We`ll just have to wait and see. I suppose another possibility is that the kid has loads of potential, but Anderson was unable to coach him properly. I would be reluctant to espouse that view, because Mortimer didn`t show a great deal in the lower grades. Time will tell, I guess.

 

[lingard]

That will do me, you are in no way wise if you believe that you goose

Raudonikis. What did you think of Daniel Mortimer`s 2010 season? You haven`t commented yet. After talking him up big at the end of 2009, you`ve been strangely quiet. What gives?

 

[lingard]

I think Haynes just going to end up playing 1, 6 and 7 again.

I think if we don`t buy or develope a decent 9, 7, 6 real soon, Hayne will leave the club when his contract is finished.

 

[mrpwnd]

I think if we don`t buy or develope a decent 9, 7, 6 real soon, Hayne will leave the club when his contract is finished.

At least he'd have played 1, 6, 7 and the 9 for us before his contracts done, we certainly got a good bargain haha.

 

[lingard]

Spartan's comment was completely justified. Morts shouldn't be handed a guarenteed starting spot just to boost his confidence. He should earn his spot like every else.

Back in 2003 Michael Witt made his debut in the second half of the year and we had a good run with him playing in the halves just missing the finals after a terrible start to the year. But in round 1 2004 Brian Smith correctly decided NOT to use him as there were parts of his game that he didn't improve in off season training. Kearney should be going with the same kind of attitude.

Correctly? I wonder. Michael Witt was a damded good player. But I get your point. And I think Mortimer has more to work on than Michael Witt did.

 

[lingard]

with the lost of keating, the lack of availability of another half, I think it's pretty clear Mortimer will start round one in the 6 or 7 because who are the other options?

A journeyman who isnt up to it in Robson?
Tom Humble who there are genuine question marks over?
Or Brad Murray who hasnt even played first grade?

Two of those blokes are halfbacks, meaning IMO it's Morts or Humble for the 6. I'd start Morts.

What question marks do you mean? Because I`d have him as my first choice five-eight, with Robson the half - and then gradually phase out Robson.

 

[bartman]

with the lost of keating, the lack of availability of another half, I think it's pretty clear Mortimer will start round one in the 6 or 7 because who are the other options?

A journeyman who isnt up to it in Robson?
Tom Humble who there are genuine question marks over?
Or Brad Murray who hasnt even played first grade?

Two of those blokes are halfbacks, meaning IMO it's Morts or Humble for the 6. I'd start Morts.

I'm still interested in Ossie/Kearney's plans for Casey Maguire.... we didn't buy him for nothing.

We're talking about 4 spots - 6,7,9,14 - that can be fairly interchangable the way the game is played these days. But the choices made will have implications for other positions.

At 9, you need people that can give reliable passes and hopefully bring something else to the plate. Last year we had Keating, Mitchell and I think Robson having a go, and Maguire has played there as well. Personally I'd stay with Mitchell or Keating.

At 7, as a minimum you should be able to move a team around a paddock, and connect with others in attack as well as bring something of your own to the plate. Robson did the job sufficiently in the back end of 2009, Morts wasn't up to it imo, and Maguire has played there as well. Personally I'd start with Maguire.

At 6, you need to connect with your outside backs in attack, and bring some of your own moves o the mix as well. Morts did OK in late 2009 (but was over-hyped), and wasn't up to it in 2010. Robson can do enough there imo, but Maguire has also played there before. Personally, I'd leave Morts there to learn off Maguire for the future.

At 14 you have whoever is left, usually someone who gives the 9 a break. Hence it would be Keating or Mitchell if the usual gameplan is followed.

But that leaves Robson with a place... I think his defence is too valuable to leave out of the side, and he can be handy to take some pressure off others in the playmaking department (but maybe not be expected to carry it all himself like he was in 2010). Personally, with Mateo's departure I'd think about playing Robson at 13 this year, and change our structure a bit so our attacking options are less predictable.

Move Hindy to the prop rotation (which is how his attack has been for a while anyway), and have Ben Smith, Shackleton and Horo rotating the second row positions (and include Robson in the rotations for this).

So Round 1:
6. Morts
7. Maguire
8. Mannah/Poore
9. Keating/Mitchell
10. Hindy/Moimoi
11. Ben Smith
12. Shack
13. Robson
14. Mitchell/Keating
15. Horo
16. Moimoi
17. Poore

and then tweak the starters/bench depending on the qualities of that week's opposition :thumn

 

[mrpwnd]

with the lost of keating, the lack of availability of another half, I think it's pretty clear Mortimer will start round one in the 6 or 7 because who are the other options?

A journeyman who isnt up to it in Robson?
Tom Humble who there are genuine question marks over?
Or Brad Murray who hasnt even played first grade?

Two of those blokes are halfbacks, meaning IMO it's Morts or Humble for the 6. I'd start Morts.

To be honest, there are genuine question marks over all of our halves options atm.

 

[Eels Dude]

What question marks do you mean? Because I`d have him as my first choice five-eight, with Robson the half - and then gradually phase out Robson.

I agree with that. Humble is a work in progress, but he plays a more natural 5'8ths game and has the playmaking ability that Mortimor lacks. If Robson is going to be our halfback I'd have Humble at 5'8th as he complements him better.

 

[mrpwnd]

I agree with that. Humble is a work in progress, but he plays a more natural 5'8ths game and has the playmaking ability that Mortimor lacks. If Robson is going to be our halfback I'd have Humble at 5'8th as he complements him better.

Nope.
Humble is doomed to be stuck in Wenty, signed by Manly and come back to bite us in the ass.
That's how it's been for a while now.

 

[boxhead]

Let me guess, if I say I think Mortimer is the more talented as a five-eighth the usual jockeys will come out and say "oh you are an idiot", "oh your opinion counts for nothing", or "I'm right you are wrong"?

:crazy:

:lol: Some people are just too hard to please.

 

[bartman]

Everyone will never agree on the one opinion Boxie. The internet (or real life) just doesn't work like that.

Imo it's best just to state your opinion and not care about who agrees or doesn't agree. That's not worth worrying about. If anyone comes back at you and disagrees, then continue the conversation if you wish, or not bother if it's not worth it.

If anyone - and there are a few prominent ones on here - comes back at you with replies that imply your opinion is not as equal as theirs, then call them out on it - and watch them squirm. Don't worry about pleasing them :lol:.

This approach works for me - it's quite funny watching people here who claim not to be bothered by what others think, but go out of their way to belittle people who happen to disagree with them.... And then claim that they didn't do it (or that they didn't really care) when their hypocrisy is pointed out to them.

As for Morts, I happen to agree with you - he's a far better five eighth than halfback.

 

[Eels Dude]

Correctly? I wonder. Michael Witt was a damded good player. But I get your point. And I think Mortimer has more to work on than Michael Witt did.

I wonder where Witty is these days... I'm surprised we haven't been linked to him given we've been linked to every other halfback floating around.

 

[bartman]

Witt was with Celtic Crusaders this year.

Must be spewing that he didn't get an Eels contract for $250K, and that he didn't have the media-friendly surname, nor a family wine business with the ability to become a club sponsor. Put it down to bad luck?

 

[yy_cheng]

WHat about Steve Witt?

 

[boxhead]

Everyone will never agree on the one opinion Boxie. The internet (or real life) just doesn't work like that.

Imo it's best just to state your opinion and not care about who agrees or doesn't agree. That's not worth worrying about. If anyone comes back at you and disagrees, then continue the conversation if you wish, or not bother if it's not worth it.

If anyone - and there are a few prominent ones on here - comes back at you with replies that imply your opinion is not as equal as theirs, then call them out on it - and watch them squirm. Don't worry about pleasing them :lol:.

This approach works for me - it's quite funny watching people here who claim not to be bothered by what others think, but go out of their way to belittle people who happen to disagree with them.... And then claim that they didn't do it (or that they didn't really care) when their hypocrisy is pointed out to them.

As for Morts, I happen to agree with you - he's a far better five eighth than halfback.

I jest, I jest.

 

[Schiltzenberger]

What question marks do you mean? Because I`d have him as my first choice five-eight, with Robson the half - and then gradually phase out Robson.

That's what I'd do too.

Hopefully Murray might start looking good and get in the rotation to eventually take Robson's place. Or even more radical, Macguire at 6 and Humble at 7. "Oh he's not a 7" I hear starting to build up in the background. Well that combo couldn't do any worse than the Robson-Morts combo.

Robson is, at best, a back up player, and yes he is a lock trapped in a halves body.
Mortimer though is a cheerleader trapped in a weak kicking, no organising, bad passing 10 year olds body. Actually, I heard Hagrid turned up on his 10th birthday and said "you're a 5/8 Daniel", then they just threw him in there. Maybe they should've sent him to Hogwart's School of 5/8-ary first.
Morts is a back up player as well, well maybe a bench player, IMO he'd be good coming on when the forwards are tired and running out of dummy half.

Have a look at every other team in the comp and imagine if Morts played there, then count how many teams he'd be the starting 6 on. Then you get your answer about whether he really is any good.

Maybe if we had one decent 6 or 7 then Robson or Morts wouldn't look as bad, a good half could carry them. Both of them starting together though, we're stuffed.

 

[mrpwnd]

That's what I'd do too.

Hopefully Murray might start looking good and get in the rotation to eventually take Robson's place. Or even more radical, Macguire at 6 and Humble at 7. "Oh he's not a 7" I hear starting to build up in the background. Well that combo couldn't do any worse than the Robson-Morts combo.

Robson is, at best, a back up player, and yes he is a lock trapped in a halves body.
Mortimer though is a cheerleader trapped in a weak kicking, no organising, bad passing 10 year olds body. Actually, I heard Hagrid turned up on his 10th birthday and said "you're a 5/8 Daniel", then they just threw him in there. Maybe they should've sent him to Hogwart's School of 5/8-ary first.
Morts is a back up player as well, well maybe a bench player, IMO he'd be good coming on when the forwards are tired and running out of dummy half.

Have a look at every other team in the comp and imagine if Morts played there, then count how many teams he'd be the starting 6 on. Then you get your answer about whether he really is any good.

Maybe if we had one decent 6 or 7 then Robson or Morts wouldn't look as bad, a good half could carry them. Both of them starting together though, we're stuffed.

Don't go giving JK Rowling strange ideas for her new book now.