Morts

[Noise]

well if brian plays him to his strength, he might be useful. If he wants him to be a playmaker then good luck the one with Blue blood

Media interviews???

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Morts will go alright in a team that sees a lot of broken play.

 

[Maroubra Eel]

Morts would go ok in the Harold Matts.

 

[Parramatta1947]

I don't feel for him at all. He's still going to be earning a couple of hundred grand next year to play reserve grade, and probably a decent income for 2013 too for doing the same. Not a bad life.

This.

In saying that, anything injury wise can happen and state representation means he will get a call up as well.

 

[eels81236]

Still stinks.

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

lol@morts?

 

[Suitman]

He needs to learn w to be a 9...and quick...

Too late. Can't pass, can't kick. Can't read play.

Surprised that News Ltd did not call him "eels reject".

Anyway, good luck to him.

Do I feel sorry for Morts ? As much as any other bloke on the street that isn't good enough to play NRL. So, not really.

Nailed it in one.

I'd hate to be morts dog at the moment

I doubt he'd be able to kick that.

Meh, he's their problem now.

Word.

Media interviews???

lol

Morts will go alright in a team that sees a lot of broken play.

No he won't. Just because it worked for us for 14 weeks, doesn't mean it'll work for anyone else.
He lacks the basic skills man.
Don't you get it?

Still stinks.

Yup.


Suity

 

[Poupou Escobar]

No he won't. Just because it worked for us for 14 weeks, doesn't mean it'll work for anyone else.
He lacks the basic skills man.
Don't you get it?

He has a couple of very particular skills that make him (nearly) ideal for a team that passes the ball a lot:

1. He is always there in support. Always.

2. He has a bit of speed and footwork.

As we've seen, he turned out to be a pretty one dimensional player, but it was no accident that he was so effective in the back end of 2009.

 

[Suitman]

He has a couple of very particular skills that make him (nearly) ideal for a team that passes the ball a lot:

1. He is always there in support. Always.

2. He has a bit of speed and footwork.

As we've seen, he turned out to be a pretty one dimensional player, but it was no accident that he was so effective in the back end of 2009.

Yep, you're right.

1. A dad who owns a winery, who has a familiar surname.

2. Media Quotes. Fair dinkum, that's a skill that he excel's in.

3. A surname?

C'Mon, he's rubbish.

Suity

 

[bartman]

:lol:

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Yep, you're right.

1. A dad who owns a winery, who has a familiar surname.

2. Media Quotes. Fair dinkum, that's a skill that he excel's in.

3. A surname?

C'Mon, he's rubbish.

Suity

Doesn't change the fact he made 12 linebreaks in 18 games in 2009. That many linebreaks isn't a fluke.

That said, no other team in the modern era would give a support player that many opportunities to look good, which is why we ended up in a bidding war to keep him.

Like you I'm glad he's gone because he doesn't fit into our style of play, but give credit where it's due.

 

[TheParraboy]

Morts might go ok in the UK, wouldnt be suprised if he ventured there in a year or two

 

[Suitman]

Doesn't change the fact he made 12 linebreaks in 18 games in 2009. That many linebreaks isn't a fluke.

That said, no other team in the modern era would give a support player that many opportunities to look good, which is why we ended up in a bidding war to keep him.

Like you I'm glad he's gone because he doesn't fit into our style of play, but give credit where it's due.

Can't give credit where credit is due because 14 weeks at the back end of the Hayne Train doesn't convince me that he's a first grade footballer.
I thought he was crap then, even on his high. Couldn't pass. Couldn't kick. Couldn't read a play or put a team mate through a gap. (on a regular basis)
I still thunk it.

No amount of false bollocks will convince me that he'll ever make a good/great first grader. Average at best.
Even Burt, who I've bagged for most of his career, has only shown me a season or two of NRL standard NRL.

Since he has, I've got off his back.
Still think his time is up now.\
Come on Down............Kenny Sio.

Suity

 

[born an eel]

Doesn't change the fact he made 12 linebreaks in 18 games in 2009. That many linebreaks isn't a fluke.

That said, no other team in the modern era would give a support player that many opportunities to look good, which is why we ended up in a bidding war to keep him.

Like you I'm glad he's gone because he doesn't fit into our style of play, but give credit where it's due.

that sounds to me that you are interpreting the stats to suit your desired result. I thought the stats were the stats and only fools interpreted the results.

Does that mean you have to look at things like style of play, opposition quality, weather, game plan when reading stats?

 

[Poupou Escobar]

that sounds to me that you are interpreting the stats to suit your desired result.

I'm using the stats to formulate a hypothesis - inductive rather than deductive logic.

Since the stats support said hypothesis, and nobody has furnished any stats disproving the same, then the hypothesis stands.

I thought the stats were the stats and only fools interpreted the results.

I reckon you think a lot of stuff that doesn't make any sense. Of course, that's just my hypothesis based on the available evidence.

Does that mean you have to look at things like style of play, opposition quality, weather, game plan when reading stats?

I would have thought this was self-evident but since you're asking, the answer is yes.

The fact you've asked this question indicates that you think you've made this point before and that I disagreed with you.

Silly you.

Do you really think Mortimer's linebreak stats for 2009 are irrelevent? Answer this then - if his 12 linebreaks in 18 games was due to factors entirely external to the player, then why did no other of our halves/hookers make that many breaks in 2009?

Also, why was Mortimer able to pick up a contract at another club despite being exposed in 2010 and '11 as an ineffective playmaker?

The only possible answer is that he has qualities that are suited to a particular style of play.

The same type of player (though much better) is James Maloney - this year he only made five linebreak assists, yet made 18 linebreaks.

Melbourne let him go because he didn't fit into their style of play (he made 1 LB and 0 LBA in 4 games at the Storm), much like Mortimer doesn't fit into ours. Obviously Maloney fit into the Warriors' high risk style, meaning they could allow him to play as a support runner, rather than relying on him to create for his teammates.

Brian Smith clearly intends to use him the same way, which explains why he also signed Daniel Mortimer to be Maloney's backup.

 

[CrazyEel]

Any skill can be learnt but it takes natural ability to apply it on the field. IMO Mortz does have determination and is very willing to learn but lacks any natural ability to apply what he learns, he has no vision and no timing which can't be learnt so even though he can learn the moves he will always look robotic in executing them IMO.

 

[born an eel]

I'm using the stats to formulate a hypothesis - inductive rather than deductive logic.

Since the stats support said hypothesis, and nobody has furnished any stats disproving the same, then the hypothesis stands.



I reckon you think a lot of stuff that doesn't make any sense. Of course, that's just my hypothesis based on the available evidence.



I would have thought this was self-evident but since you're asking, the answer is yes.

The fact you've asked this question indicates that you think you've made this point before and that I disagreed with you.

Silly you.

Do you really think Mortimer's linebreak stats for 2009 are irrelevent? Answer this then - if his 12 linebreaks in 18 games was due to factors entirely external to the player, then why did no other of our halves/hookers make that many breaks in 2009?

Also, why was Mortimer able to pick up a contract at another club despite being exposed in 2010 and '11 as an ineffective playmaker?

The only possible answer is that he has qualities that are suited to a particular style of play.

The same type of player (though much better) is James Maloney - this year he only made five linebreak assists, yet made 18 linebreaks.

Melbourne let him go because he didn't fit into their style of play (he made 1 LB and 0 LBA in 4 games at the Storm), much like Mortimer doesn't fit into ours. Obviously Maloney fit into the Warriors' high risk style, meaning they could allow him to play as a support runner, rather than relying on him to create for his teammates.

Brian Smith clearly intends to use him the same way, which explains why he also signed Daniel Mortimer to be Maloney's backup.

ok, you have convinced me that stats tell the whole story and Morts would have taken us to glory if the coach had only spoken to you.

As the stats for our spine were better in 2009 than subsequent years, a good coach would have gone back to that style of play that suited the most important players in the team.

I should stay at home and watch more often as it seems that by watching at home you have special insights into what the coach is intending to do and how they will play future games.

 

[lingard]

Funny, I was thinking the other day that Morts is a poor man's James Maloney. They certainly play the same style.



This.

I'm always amazed at how some footy fans can feel pity for the guys who don't have magical fairytale careers.

I was shit at footy too! Why doesn't anyone feel sorry for me?

I feel sorry for you.

 

[lingard]

In my opinion Daniel Mortimer is, without a shadow of a doubt, the WORST half/five-eight this club has EVER had. Bar none. Feel sorry for him? Why? He`ll have a good life - as opposed to a lot of other guys, with nothing else going for them but football, who don`t make the grade. f**k Daniel Mortimer.

 

[The EELiminator]

In my opinion Daniel Mortimer is, without a shadow of a doubt, the WORST half/five-eight this club has EVER had. Bar none. Feel sorry for him? Why? He`ll have a good life - as opposed to a lot of other guys, with nothing else going for them but football, who don`t make the grade. f**k Daniel Mortimer.

i could throw up a few more contenders for worst half we have ever had but i would have to search to remember the names and that would undo a lot of successful forgetting that has lowered my stress level
who was that one guy? funch? :-k don't remember \\\\/