Robson Eels No.7

[lingard]

Ah but he was...



Not for a rookie who hasn't done anything for 12 months.

Ah, but that`s where you`re wrong, Springs. In six games, Humble showed a lot of things. He showed he has a very good long and short passing game; he showed he can back up well; he showed he has speed; he showed he is tough; he showed he is a very good defender; he showed a calm and level head; he showed he was not over-awed at all by first grade; his kicking game was inconclusive (ie: not sure yet); he showed an ability to get the ball out to the backs; he was just as keen/eager/motivated to get involved as Mortimer. AND, in all of that, he only had the opportunity to play ONE game in his favoured position. The guy is a five-eight pure and simple; but he was forced to play hooker, wing, fullback, half and centre as well. Not a bad effort, I`d say. (And also yet to be given a proper go.) As opposed to Mortimer who, in my opinion, did not play one single solitary good game for the entire 2010 season. We`ll never agree, but that`s okay. Steven Kearney is the one who`ll have to make the call. And despite what the media have said, I think the competition for halves spots is wide open still.

 

[lingard]

Maybe his contract stipulated he be picked in firsts for 2010 only. Then we will never know.

Oh, mate. :lol:

 

[lingard]

this is good stuff......

although they are being given first crack - and rightfully so - its not a given that they will start there or stay there.......if you're good enough is the key phrase
and i want Robson and Morts to show us they are good enough

and look, Peter Sterling is my hero, hands down my hero.....and i know he gave Humble huge wraps, but really he has done nothing....ok nothing.....
so until he does and earns the 6 or 7 for Parramatta, guys please lay off the man love hor him.......

and Mr Angry needs to get a spare room, a picture of Humble and some sorborlene and a towell, i mean seriously, he has got it bad for the kid..... :crazy:

Well, if Mr Angry can organise the room, I`d be happy to share it with him. Humble has only played ONE game at five-eight. Mortimer has played - how many? - in 2010 and delivered NOTHING. It`s a no-brainer in my opinion.
Mr Angry - how much rent will you be charging?

 

[Joshuatheeel]

Well, if Mr Angry can organise the room, I`d be happy to share it with him. Humble has only played ONE game at five-eight. Mortimer has played - how many? - in 2010 and delivered NOTHING. It`s a no-brainer in my opinion.
Mr Angry - how much rent will you be charging?

Not to sure who should get the 7 spot, but I would be happy with Mortimer at 5/8. I would get Hayne and Mortimer to change the traditional roles their postions do it attack, eg;

Mortimer at 5/8 would play a "support player role" following the player with the ball, waiting for half gaps, or be ready for a short kick into the goals etc
Hayne at fullback would be one of our two main ball players with most of the attack structured around him a lot like how Locyer played fullback. Really very similar to what he does now. But the key is to have a half back who can take the pressure of him, so the oposition don't know who is going set the attack up, is in the 1/2 or the fullback etc

So who should play 1/2 is the million dollar questions it is most likely between Humble, Robson, Macguire or Murray. I like robson but he has no skills, Mcquire is more a hooker or 5/8. So it leaves Humble or Murray, I would got for Humble based on the fact he has had a small amount of NRL experience unless Murray kills it in the trials.

While I agree Humble was no superstar in his NRL games last year, he showed plently of potential, has some skills plus I like the fact he has lots of speed. Also if Sterlo thinks he is good enough to have a go at 1/2 then that is good enough for me.

With Robson I would telling to bulk up because he could have a chance at the lock position sometime during the year

 

[Springs]

Ah, but that`s where you`re wrong, Springs. In six games, Humble showed a lot of things. He showed he has a very good long and short passing game; he showed he can back up well; he showed he has speed; he showed he is tough; he showed he is a very good defender; he showed a calm and level head; he showed he was not over-awed at all by first grade; his kicking game was inconclusive (ie: not sure yet); he showed an ability to get the ball out to the backs; he was just as keen/eager/motivated to get involved as Mortimer. AND, in all of that, he only had the opportunity to play ONE game in his favoured position. The guy is a five-eight pure and simple; but he was forced to play hooker, wing, fullback, half and centre as well. Not a bad effort, I`d say. (And also yet to be given a proper go.) As opposed to Mortimer who, in my opinion, did not play one single solitary good game for the entire 2010 season. We`ll never agree, but that`s okay. Steven Kearney is the one who`ll have to make the call. And despite what the media have said, I think the competition for halves spots is wide open still.

How did he showcase his passing game with just ONE game at five-eighth?

Backing-up, speed, toughness and defending are all things Mortimer and Robson do well and so far, better.

And gee, The Warriors game was a strange way of being calm and level and not being overawed.

Another thing that is strange; after his debut game against Manly, people were saying they can't wait to see him play fullback, fullback is his preferred position etc etc. Now, after he has played badly at fullback, he is a five-eighth through and through. It's not a criticism of him I was just wondering why so many people changed their mind about him...

And I've said before that I'm biased towards Robson. As a player I think Humble is better, but as far as I know, Robson is the only player from the Group 17 area to be playing first grade NRL.

 

[mrpwnd]

And I've said before that I'm biased towards Robson. As a player I think Humble is better, but as far as I know, Robson is the only player from the Group 17 area to be playing first grade NRL.

2011 might tell a different story, but it doesn't look too good atm tbh.

 

[caylo]

Another thing that is strange; after his debut game against Manly, people were saying they can't wait to see him play fullback, fullback is his preferred position etc etc. Now, after he has played badly at fullback, he is a five-eighth through and through. It's not a criticism of him I was just wondering why so many people changed their mind about him...

And I've said before that I'm biased towards Robson. As a player I think Humble is better, but as far as I know, Robson is the only player from the Group 17 area to be playing first grade NRL.

Mate from week one on Wenty people were questioning why Humble was played at fullback and stated he look much more comfortable at 5-8.

I don't know how we will start round one but I think sooner or later Humble will replace Mortimer at 5-8 if last years performances are anything to go by. I like Robson, he doesnt have all the skills but does have a level head and with if he plays with a more skillful half patner i think he would be good enough but with mortimer at 5-8 they struggle to make plays IMO.

 

[lingard]

How did he showcase his passing game with just ONE game at five-eighth?

Backing-up, speed, toughness and defending are all things Mortimer and Robson do well and so far, better.

And gee, The Warriors game was a strange way of being calm and level and not being overawed.

Another thing that is strange; after his debut game against Manly, people were saying they can't wait to see him play fullback, fullback is his preferred position etc etc. Now, after he has played badly at fullback, he is a five-eighth through and through. It's not a criticism of him I was just wondering why so many people changed their mind about him...

And I've said before that I'm biased towards Robson. As a player I think Humble is better, but as far as I know, Robson is the only player from the Group 17 area to be playing first grade NRL.

I`ve no idea why people wanted him to play fullback. I`ve always thought he was an out and out five-eight. I don`t know. He probably can play fullback at a pinch, but he`s definitely a six.
By the way, I`m biased toward Robson as well. We share the same surname - and as far as I know, he`s the only player with that name to ever play First grade. And it`s for Parramatta! I`m so stoked! :lol:

 

[lingard]

Mate from week one on Wenty people were questioning why Humble was played at fullback and stated he look much more comfortable at 5-8.

I don't know how we will start round one but I think sooner or later Humble will replace Mortimer at 5-8 if last years performances are anything to go by. I like Robson, he doesnt have all the skills but does have a level head and with if he plays with a more skillful half patner i think he would be good enough but with mortimer at 5-8 they struggle to make plays IMO.

Humble started off at fullback for Wenty, most likely because the captain of the side, O`Grady, was the five-eight. When O`Grady was injured, Humble went to five-eight. I like Robson, too. He`s no star, but with a good five-eight, he`ll do for another year.

 

[Wise Old Eel]

How did he showcase his passing game with just ONE game at five-eighth?

Backing-up, speed, toughness and defending are all things Mortimer and Robson do well and so far, better.

And gee, 1. The Warriors game was a strange way of being calm and level and not being overawed.

Another thing that is strange; after his debut game against Manly, people were saying they can't wait to see him play fullback, fullback is his preferred position etc etc. Now, after he has played badly at fullback, he is a five-eighth through and through. It's not a criticism of him I was just wondering why so many people changed their mind about him...

And I've said before that I'm biased towards Robson. As a player I think Humble is better, but as far as I know, 2. Robson is the only player from the Group 17 area to be playing first grade NRL.

1. Mate, everyone had a shocker that game. Anyway, why is it you feel so comfortable judging Humble on one bad game and accepting Mortimer should be 5/8 after a WHOLE SEASON of crap?? If Humble had been given as much of a go at first grade as Mortimer, we would be saying "Daniel who?"

2. In my opinion, Mortimer is the only player in current squad who is no where near a first grader. Robson definitely has his limitations but they would not be so obvious if he had someone skilful like Humble partnering him instead of Mortimer. I just cannot get over the man-love for this bloke. Deadset, if his surname was not Mortimer, I bet a lot of you would have been calling for his head ages ago.

Anyway, as previously stated, Kearney is now the coach and if Kearney wants him at 5/8 (or is handcuffed by the same contractual clause :sarcasm, then I will support him there. Come on Mortimer, prove me wrong mate. And, for the love of God, come on season 2011!!

WOE

 

[caylo]

1. Mate, everyone had a shocker that game. Anyway, why is it you feel so comfortable judging Humble on one bad game and accepting Mortimer should be 5/8 after a WHOLE SEASON of crap?? If Humble had been given as much of a go at first grade as Mortimer, we would be saying "Daniel who?"

2. In my opinion, Mortimer is the only player in current squad who is no where near a first grader. Robson definitely has his limitations but they would not be so obvious if he had someone skilful like Humble partnering him instead of Mortimer. I just cannot get over the man-love for this bloke. Deadset, if his surname was not Mortimer, I bet a lot of you would have been calling for his head ages ago.

Anyway, as previously stated, Kearney is now the coach and if Kearney wants him at 5/8 (or is handcuffed by the same contractual clause :sarcasm, then I will support him there. Come on Mortimer, prove me wrong mate. And, for the love of God, come on season 2011!!

WOE

IMO we have persisted with mortimer like the Roosters persisted with Pearce, difference between the two is the large gulf in talent.
We have shown blind faith in mortimer since he has come into grade, more faith then Hayne was shown when used at fullback sparingly (and performed) then only to be shifted back to the wing for 3 years.

Kearney wasnt here last year so i dont blame him for giving Mortz the first chance but if he performes anything like he did over the last 12 months then he should be lucky to play no more than a hand full of games.

 

[Schiltzenberger]

I'd have liked to think Humble would have been thrown into the mix. Morts and Robson did nothing last season to demand automatic selection for next year.

+1
This pair were given a very good platform to work from last season did sweet FA. There is no creativity, no organising, no kicking game and a poor passing game when they play together. Don't even think of mentioning 2009, that run was on the back of offloads and support play, and Hayne. Last season I don't know how many times I had to just roll my eyes and say "f**k me" when Morts would attempt a long kick, he'd struggle to get a 40/40.

IMO, Morts and Robson deserve to start at Wenty. We may not have many other options there but they surely can't do worse. There'd be lots of park footballers out there that could play the way Morts and Robson did last season.

 

[boxhead]

So the accusers of man-love for Mortimer, i.e. lingard, WOE and caylo can't accept it when they are accused of man-love for Humble by Springs, et al, and vice-versa?

This is a hilarious discussion :lol: "your wrong, no your wrong, shut up, no you shut up".
None of ya's can agree, stop acting like you know facts; i.e. " If Humble had been given as much of a go at first grade as Mortimer, we would be saying "Daniel who?"" How do you know that? It is biased claims like that which make both sides of the argument sound completely invalid.

 

[Wise Old Eel]

So the accusers of man-love for Mortimer, i.e. lingard, WOE and caylo can't accept it when they are accused of man-love for Humble by Springs, et al, and vice-versa?

This is a hilarious discussion :lol: "your wrong, no your wrong, shut up, no you shut up".
None of ya's can agree, stop acting like you know facts; i.e. " If Humble had been given as much of a go at first grade as Mortimer, we would be saying "Daniel who?"" How do you know that? It is biased claims like that which make both sides of the argument sound completely invalid.

Nobody is telling anyone to shut up. For me, I am just saying I cannot understand the opinion of those who support Mortimer being in the starting side. It's not like he is a talented player playing poorly. He just does not seem to have the necessary skillset.

As for the man-love comment (yes, I probably crossed the line there), I have no such thing for Tom Humble. It is purely a case of logic:

On the one side, you have Tom Humble. A player with speed, talent & toughness. Someone who, if people took the time to watch him, is a gifted player being wasted in a sub-standard competition.

On the other side, you have Daniel Mortimer. A player who is tough & "tries hard" but struggles in a competition which is well above his ability. And has struggled for a whole season.

So why should Mortimer get first shot? He should be made to go back to Wenty and earn it. Why not give Humble as much of an opportunity as Mortimer & see which one offers more the to side? If not Tom Humble, then Murray or Macguire. I don't care which one, really. Mortimer needs to be held accountable for his VERY poor display in 2010 and I cannot for the life of me understand why he seems immune from any type of criticism by the club and a few posters on this forum.

WOE

 

[Maroubra Eel]

I think Mortimer is one of the few who can hold their heads high after last season. Along with Horo and Fui and of course Hindmarsh and Hayne.

 

[Wise Old Eel]

I think Mortimer is one of the few who can hold their heads high after last season. Along with Horo and Fui and of course Hindmarsh and Hayne.

:crazy: You mean for his effort, right?? Surely, nothing else.

I would never (and have never) questioned Mortimer's attitude. Just his abililty (or lack thereof).

WOE

 

[mrpwnd]

:crazy: You mean for his effort, right?? Surely, nothing else.

I would never (and have never) questioned Mortimer's attitude. Just his abililty (or lack thereof).

WOE

To be fair, Morts just isn't a halfbacks ass.
Never should've been blooded as a halfback despite having none of the pre-requisites for it.

 

[Maroubra Eel]

:crazy: You mean for his effort, right?? Surely, nothing else.

I would never (and have never) questioned Mortimer's attitude. Just his abililty (or lack thereof).

WOE

Not only his effort but his all round skills.

I reckon he will be pushing for an origin spot this season and possibly a kangaroo jersey.

 

[mrpwnd]

Not only his effort but his all round skills.

I reckon he will be pushing for an origin spot this season and possibly a kangaroo jersey.

 

[Springs]

So the accusers of man-love for Mortimer, i.e. lingard, WOE and caylo can't accept it when they are accused of man-love for Humble by Springs, et al, and vice-versa?

This is a hilarious discussion :lol: "your wrong, no your wrong, shut up, no you shut up".
None of ya's can agree, stop acting like you know facts; i.e. " If Humble had been given as much of a go at first grade as Mortimer, we would be saying "Daniel who?"" How do you know that? It is biased claims like that which make both sides of the argument sound completely invalid.

I know and it's been going around in circles since about Round 20.