Rd 17 v Knights

[WestyLife]

That’s a great term in This woke world we live in. Love it.

Not sure I can be so eloquent but I just think we support whoever is part of our 17 selected for any given game. That’s just me I know.

Am I woke for thinking the name calling is a bit much? Maybe.

 

[GongPanther]

He is too old for Flegg, Been in St Marys all year.

Came from the Canberra comp, He is very raw but should get more time. Particularly with the injuries down there

Thanks. I've noticed he is on the reserve extended bench for this week's game.

 

[GongPanther]

Jesus can you school kids take your bullshit to private messages. Every thread is just back and forth for pages about your petty bullshit.. Take it to facebook

This. All we want two talk about is the football.

 

[GongPanther]

I think it is the way criticism is dished out to certain players. It is not confined to this forum, our forum here, you see it on almost all fan boards. A couple of examples of former Panthers say Jed Cartwright, Billy Burns cop heaps on there respective fan forums.

My own personal view is the players entrusted with a spot in our 17 should be supported. If a player has a poor game, there is nothing wrong with pointing that out, but it is the generic criticism that such and such a player is hopeless, useless whatever that certain fans get upset with. Mitch Kenny is perhaps the best example we have. Gives 100% every week and rarely gets any credit albeit there seems to a softening on the stance in recent weeks.

[thumbs up] We played in our third straight GF last year, yet the ongoing criticisms at times baffle me.

 

[Black Diamond]

[thumbs up] We played in our third straight GF last year, yet the ongoing criticisms at times baffle me.

And sitting in 1st place currently

 

[Iamback]

Well said Kilkenny.

What gets me is that we have one player on 1.3m and others on about a tenth of that. I don’t begrudge Nathan his money, but the reality is that we have players with widely different skill sets and on widely different money, but there is little of that nuance in the commentary on here sometimes; just that so and so isn’t fit to be a first grader etc.

Using Api and Mitch as examples, many are upset we let Api go and promoted Mitch and Luke; but it is neither API’s, nor Mitch’s, nor Soni’s fault but instead the club needed to make a decision about how to fit 30 players into the cap. I appreciate that people might not agree with that decision, but can we please a) articulate our disagreement without having a go at Kenny and Luke (both of whom many on here like, try their guts out and are improving rapidly) and b) not mention it every, damn game.

It’s as repetitive as the constant criticism of Edwards used to be.

Most of the criticism is constructive though.

I am yet to see a person say x player is useless. Without giving reasons

 

[WestyLife]

Most of the criticism is constructive though.

I am yet to see a person say x player is useless. Without giving reasons

Yep. I'd understand the upset if it was pointless bagging for the sake of piling on a bloke but right or wrong we generally try to explain our points.

 

[Black Diamond]

Yep. I'd understand the upset if it was pointless bagging for the sake of piling on a bloke but right or wrong we generally try to explain our points.

Generally you are correct. However, there is some definite pointless bagging going on in this forum.

 

[Iamback]

Yep. I'd understand the upset if it was pointless bagging for the sake of piling on a bloke but right or wrong we generally try to explain our points.

Take the Api example from above.

Taking on the line as an example is something he did better, the discussion can then move on to how can Kenny cover for lacking that. Then the side as whole need to develop their attack a different way.

It is all linked as far as I see it.

Unless it is x player is a wanker which offers zero

 

[BxTom]

Take the Api example from above.

Taking on the line as an example is something he did better, the discussion can then move on to how can Kenny cover for lacking that. Then the side as whole need to develop their attack a different way.

It is all linked as far as I see it.

Unless it is x player is a wanker which offers zero

Or continually calling players 'plodders'.

 

[Iamback]

Or continually calling players 'plodders'.

Every team needs a plodder though, Not everything is an insult

 

[BxTom]

Every team needs a plodder though, Not everything is an insult

Do you make this up as you go along or do you have a script writer?

 

[Iamback]

Do you make this up as you go along or do you have a script writer?

What team doesn't have a tackling machine in their side?

The issue is having too many of them

 

[MugaB]

Every team needs a plodder though, Not everything is an insult

Correct we dont have many "plodders" in ours tho
Nathan brown at the roosters is still plodding along, aswell as Aaron Woods at Manly, there's plenty of old school plodders still roaming around the grounds of the NRL

 

[martielang]

Plodder is a term of endearment imo.

 

[MugaB]

Plodder is a term of endearment imo.

Plod,plod,plod,plod... mwa
Plod,plod,plod,plodplod

 

[Iamback]

Plodder is a term of endearment imo.

I see it as a no thrills player that puts in 110%.

Usually will make 50 tackles a games but offers little with the ball.

Jake Trbojevic is probably King Plodder