NPK said:
Mr Angry said:
NPK said:
I haven't looked at many of the ability scores, but I know that Lockyer has a 7 for fitness - he should have a 10. Hindmarsh also has a low fitness rating.
I would disagree here why a 10? - the guy makes 4 tackles per match -real games.
Suggest moving Lockyer to number 6 fulltime and all the QLD fans say he will have nothing left to attack with as he will be ran at all day and would have to tackle.
I think 7 is more than fair - no fullback should be more than 5 IMO.
Fitness is something the forwards have not pussy 4 tackles per game fullbacks!!!!!
Hmmm...I can't actually see the link between the amount of tackles made per game and a player's fitness.
Well, fair enough. I do, tackling is the most energy sapping thing a player does in a match. Hmmm... I see props get a rest because they are not fit, not because they do all the freakin work. You were a back were you? How many teams that make the most tackles win the match? In fact I would say it has the most influence.
NPK said:
Lockyer is one of the fittest players in the NRL.
:lol: :lol: :lol: Do please tell how have you come to this conclusion?? I dispute it, I am not saying he is unfit, but one the of the fittest? When does he fitness even get tested?
NPK said:
By the way, the reason he makes only 4 tackles per match is because he only needs to do 4 tackles per match.
He is a fit as he needs to be, but if you play him in the frontline and make him do 30 tackles, appartently he becomes a little short of breath, like most backs.
My main point was they (the game makers) got it right. Forwards are generally 'fitter' than nancy pancy tackle shy backs.