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!

Origin 2013 NSW side

natheel

Coach
Messages
12,137
My team for you merkins at the moment. This team would be 50/50 for a win against the Qld team as it currently stands on form v form and injuries v injuries:

1. Hayne
2. Taufua
3. Jennings
4. Ferguson
5. Gordon
6. Maloney/Carney
7. A. Reynolds
8. Tamou
9. Farah
10. Mannah
11. Watmong
12. Bird
13. Gallen

14. Grant
15. Woods
16. Merrin
17. Lewis

Also I'm a bit surprised no one is talking about Sezer as a future prospect. This guy looks the goods and the Titans have done very well to poach him.

At this stage that's the team is pick. Maybe even put Fifita for woods and Reynolds at 6 with Pearce at 7.

Not sure about Taufua but with injuries he is strong and can fin the line. Josh Morris on form shouldn't be there but he will sue to his performance last year. So fergo to the wing
 

Poupou Escobar

Post Whore
Messages
91,617
The only difference between prop and lock is minutes played and number of runs per minute. There's no reason Merrin couldn't play prop, reduce his minutes and run the ball more frequently. We'd lose nothing by having him in the prop rotation.

It's also possible to play with one prop and two locks on the field, although with too many blokes playing long minutes you waste the four players you have on the bench. The drawback is a lack of size, and the benefit is increased mobility.

You can also play with three props on the field and potentially another three on the bench. Plenty of size, but mobility suffers and you're f**ked if you get a few injuries - props are up there with (most) hookers for lack of versatility.
 

RWB

Bench
Messages
2,814
You haven't watched Mannah play this year I'm guessing?

Mannah's been good but having a good run of form is nothing new to him his whole career has been patchy. Players should be selected on back of consistent performances over numerous seasons, not games.

Stuart has been good news for all of Parra's front rowers but if Mannah wants to be playing rep footy he needs to prove he can maintain his performances over long periods of time.

Even if you were to justify his selection purely on the opening to this season I think Woods, Merrin & Fifita have all been superior performers (not that I'd ever advocate picking a player on such a small sample size).
 

Spot On

Coach
Messages
13,902
Don't know what the rest of you will think about this, but Kade Snowden..

Been the Knights player of the week for 3 weeks running and putting up good numbers over the last month. Any chance?

I don't know what to say about that. The less the better I suppose. Kade Slowden would be absolutely no chance of playing at this level on what he has shown the past 18 months. None. Not even if we lose our top six front rowers.

Were you taking the piss?
 

big hit!

Bench
Messages
3,452
The only difference between prop and lock is minutes played and number of runs per minute. There's no reason Merrin couldn't play prop, reduce his minutes and run the ball more frequently. We'd lose nothing by having him in the prop rotation.
Merrin has been playing less as a prop who is attempting to provide momentum, bending the line and softening the defence early in the set, and more as a smaller forward building on the props work by trying to find the gap in the opposition defensive line, using his larger frame (relative to a half) to hit the line, offload ball and extend the attacking play. just because a back rower is playing in the middle of the field doesn't mean he is instantly a prop. they do defend in the middle of the field with the two props and the acting half, so do get through a lot of work in defence, but their use in attack is different and builds on the more physical work of props. that's why props play less time and smaller middle forwards play more.

It's also possible to play with one prop and two locks on the field, although with too many blokes playing long minutes you waste the four players you have on the bench. The drawback is a lack of size, and the benefit is increased mobility.
that was Stuart's major blunder. He consistently selected a forward unit of smaller and mobile players than Queensland, and what you would even find at most clubs. he got extremely poor use out of his interchange because of it, and also, failed to realise that it doesn't matter if a player is generally a smaller forward who is used to playing more minutes (like Gallen & Bird who he selected at prop and the smaller middle forward respectively in game 1 2012), these guys need to be interchanged when playing in the middle with the amount of work required in both attack, and particularly defence if the team is losing the set count. this was another problem for NSW last season. the only way a mobile forward unit may get on top of a bigger pack is if they dominate the set count and NSW didn't. this meant that these smaller forwards were absorbing more defensive pressure in the middle against QLD's bigger bodies and fresher prop rotation. QLD's fair dinkum props and Meninga's/Henry's effective rotation of them eventually wore down the NSW smaller fill-ins like Gallen, Watmough and Creagh, and the disproportionate game time they got from Stuart too.

You can also play with three props on the field and potentially another three on the bench. Plenty of size, but mobility suffers and you're f**ked if you get a few injuries - props are up there with (most) hookers for lack of versatility.
three props on the field is overkill and 6 in the unit is rare. you'd never see it. it'd end up making the team cumbersome and one dimensional, particularly if there isn't one or two that can hit the line hard and then offload. and as you say, it's a poor way of building a the squad. there has to be a balance of speed and size and strength. having that one smaller mobile body in the middle that can build on the momentum the props can generate provides more of an attacking threat. this is what Gallen and Merrin can do after their props have provided the platform for them earlier in the set.

problem for Merrin is if Gallen is selected as the smaller middle forward, (as he should be) the need for Merrin is reduced, particularly as Watmough is an automatic selection in the squad too. neither of those 3 should be considered as props, and all 3 cant play as smaller forwards because they play the same position. not necessarily the same way, but the same position.

our fair dinkum prop rotation to lay the platform and win the trench battle should be 4 of them from Tamou, Grant, Woods, Fifita, Mannah, etc. Props who are doing this every week and doing it very well. Origin is the last place to ask a player not regularly playing this role to step up and complete it. Give them 35-45 min of gametime each and manage the interchange properly. Most importantly, ensure Gallen sticks to the game plan and doesn't become the team.

i really hate playing a heap of players out of position. it's easy to shift a centre out onto the wing because he won't get in the way and it's just one position over, but when you start playing several guys who are used to a more prominent role at club and then expected to play a completely different role in Origin, the on-field structure eventually suffers when the game isn't unfolding perfectly. you see too many cooks in the kitchen so to speak and that is what has been happening for NSW far to often. I could imagine Pearce, Carney, Gidley, Merrin, Gallen, Bird, etc all on the field at the same time and eventually losing structure as they lapse into club role. This doesn't happen with QLD. They retain their structure and stick to their roles in every set and eventually wear down NSW and come up with the winning plays.
 

legend

Coach
Messages
15,150
Why the name calling ? Putting the broken cheekbone aside, he has not set the world on fire including the latter part of last season and the beginning of this one and it is not all about size.
Our opinions differ, why get all worked up ?

Umm, 32 tries in two seasons (with the Raiders) would suggest you are both wrong and ill informed.
 

Rod

Bench
Messages
3,752
He's looking like getting back to his 2011 form finally but there's too many guys ahead of him now. When guys like Grant, Merrin, Woods and Mannah aren't even certainties to make the team, there's just too much prop competition now.
 

Raider_69

Post Whore
Messages
61,174
I don't know why some people are disturbed when mentioning possible candidates for an origin gig ?

Obvious Souths fan is obvious
Nathan Merritt isnt an origin footballer, Fergo will be picked ahead of him because he's a better footballer in almost every sense to Nathan Merritt.
 

big hit!

Bench
Messages
3,452
Obvious Souths fan is obvious
Nathan Merritt isnt an origin footballer, Fergo will be picked ahead of him because he's a better footballer in almost every sense to Nathan Merritt.

I'm a Souths fan and I don't think Merritt should be in the squad.

I don't think A Reynolds or Sutton should be in the squad either.

If Isaac Luke, Sam & George Burgess, and Inglis were eligible for NSW, then I'd ship them in straight away. But they're not and what's leftover shouldn't get jersey.
 

Raider_69

Post Whore
Messages
61,174
Reynolds i think should be a strong consideration
I dont think Pearce is as awful as people like to pretend he is, he's a good halfback and still probably NSW's best halfback if you subscribe to the theory that it's a bit too soon for Reynolds (which im 50/50 on, i can see both sides of it) but i think if Pearce cant get the job done this year, and Reynolds form holds up, he's a shoe in for the spot next year
 

The Enforcer

Juniors
Messages
1,876
Umm, 32 tries in two seasons (with the Raiders) would suggest you are both wrong and ill informed.
I haven't been informed by anybody, I make up my own mind. It's interesting that Merritt's try scoring feats have been downplayed as just being lucky to be on the end of the final pass, yet you want to use Ferguson's try scoring as being in great form which is not necessarily the case overall.
If you care to read my posts on this topic, you will see that I don't doubt his talent, but his mental attitude. I never doubted the guys ability to get over the try line.
You suggesting that I am wrong doesn't mean that I am, just a different outlook to you.So in my opinion, Ferguson is a better player than Merritt, however i believe that Merritt would handle the pressure.
 
Last edited:

legend

Coach
Messages
15,150
I think a strong case can be made for John Sutton in the utility role, especially if Gidley is a consideration. Sutton is bigger and more skillful than Gidley and is very effective close to the line. Gidley is useless.
 

RWB

Bench
Messages
2,814
I think a strong case can be made for John Sutton in the utility role, especially if Gidley is a consideration. Sutton is bigger and more skillful than Gidley and is very effective close to the line. Gidley is useless.

He doesn't offer any utility value though, if you're suggesting he can play in the second row and cover 5/8 if there's an injury then just say that but don't sugar coat it as the 'utility role'. It's simply the second row spot on the bench which I think we can cover with far more accomplished backrowers like Luke Lewis or Wade Graham.

Gidley actually is a genuine utility.
 

gronkathon

First Grade
Messages
9,266
Do we need a utility role though?

Worse case scenario if Farah got hurt Bird, Lewis or even Pearce can cover hooker.

Other then that we have many versatile players who can adapt and make things work.

Like with Buhrer you end up looking for a reason to bring that player onto the field and it messes with continuity.

Hell Cronk came on and played back row in some Origins and they made it work and he is no backrower
 

RWB

Bench
Messages
2,814
Do we need a utility role though?

Worse case scenario if Farah got hurt Bird, Lewis or even Pearce can cover hooker.

Other then that we have many versatile players who can adapt and make things work.

Like with Buhrer you end up looking for a reason to bring that player onto the field and it messes with continuity.

Hell Cronk came on and played back row in some Origins and they made it work and he is no backrower

Do we really need a 4th second rower on the bench?

Bird is an 80 minute player and you split the other 80 with two second rowers (one starting and one on the bench obviously).

The advantages of having a utility on the bench far outweigh that of having a 4th second rower. Not to mention I think some fresh legs could work wonders out of dummy half against a tiring QLD forward pack; it certainly has in the past for us.
 

watatank

Coach
Messages
14,222
"utility" should mean extra hooker (occasionally an extra half) but this is often used to justify the selection of a versatile backrower that would only ever play backrow...
 

BennyV

Referee
Messages
24,085
Gidley actually is a genuine utility.

False. Gidley makes a passable hooker, although defence isnt up to what the top hookers are (and Farah is an 80 minute hooker), a comparable halfback (but you dont change halfbacks during the game) and is reasonably quick which I guess makes him a fullback candidate, although I would not feel at all comfortable if he had to content anyone for a high ball. He has no place in the team other than injuries; at least Sutton can play some backrow/edge running as well as covering injuries...

However, as you mention, Lewis and Graham would be adequate to cover injuries also. There is no need for Gidley in the team..
 

RWB

Bench
Messages
2,814
How does arguing he's not an elite player in any spine positions prove he's not a utility? I think you have a gross misunderstanding of the word utility.

and is reasonably quick which I guess makes him a fullback candidate

This is probably the best comment of the lot though, you don't think the fact that he played the majority of his career at fullback makes him a fullback candidate but his speed does?

Gidley can cover all the spine positions adequately & he could probably play in the centres too if needed. If he's not a utility then there's no such thing, they're a myth.

Gidley will do a good job in the 20 minutes he gets in dummy half, I have no doubt of it. Freshening Farah up for the final 25-30 minutes wont be a bad thing either, too much defence will no doubt take a toll on his attacking game eventually.
 

Latest posts

Top