Round 18: Team List V Warriors @ Commbank

[IFR33K]

I have to say for someone who has served our club so well Nathan Brown is being treated very poorly. Not picking him despite being one of the best 17 players in the team is akin to bullying. I don’t see how we’re any shot at the title if Brown isn’t in the side considering how much of a drop off in forward quality there is after the starting 13.

ba did the same with moi mOi and mannah. But MJ had a free ride in 2018. Doesn’t make sense.

 

[Twizzle]

According to the Eels Insta last night, Matto is definitely playing next week.

 

[Snoochies]

Brown is someone Bellamy will pick up then will go on to become a Blue and win a premiership.

 

[Cloeel]

I have to say for someone who has served our club so well Nathan Brown is being treated very poorly. Not picking him despite being one of the best 17 players in the team is akin to bullying. I don’t see how we’re any shot at the title if Brown isn’t in the side considering how much of a drop off in forward quality there is after the starting 13.

How do you no that?

Who knows what has happened. Ever thought there could be more to the Nathan Brown situation?

 

[Gronk]

No logic selecting Opacic last week. Off the bench. An no logic picking his son this week. Does not make sense.

Of course it does. He likes to have cover for the backs. When Matto is back, Marata will start from the bench and be that cover.

So you might not agree to a back on the bench, but plenty do it, so he's not Robinson Crusoe.

You don't like it that #17 does not get used ? But why take someone off, if your 13 on the paddock have gas ?

 

[IFR33K]

Of course it does. He likes to have cover for the backs. When Matto is back, Marata will start from the bench and be that cover.

So you might not agree to a back on the bench, but plenty do it, so he's not Robinson Crusoe.

You don't like it that #17 does not get used ? But why take someone off, if your 13 on the paddock have gas ?

Didn’t you recently mention pick your best 17, and run with it?

There’s no way in the world this is our best 17. There’s a few players that should be picked ahead of ja.

 

[lucablight]

ba did the same with moi mOi and mannah. But MJ had a free ride in 2018. Doesn’t make sense.

You could argue that Moimoi and Mannah weren’t part of the best 17 and the coach was looking towards the future. Brown is still part of the best 17 and this seems like a ploy to force him to leave.

How do you no that?

Who knows what has happened. Ever thought there could be more to the Nathan Brown situation?

There could be but we can only go off the information we have. He did play last week though when we were short on forwards so it’s not like he’s unplayable. He seems to be not considered part of the best 17 for whatever reason when other players are available.

 

[hybrideel]

Of course it does. He likes to have cover for the backs. When Matto is back, Marata will start from the bench and be that cover.

So you might not agree to a back on the bench, but plenty do it, so he's not Robinson Crusoe.

You don't like it that #17 does not get used ? But why take someone off, if your 13 on the paddock have gas ?

The problem is they don't have the gas. How many times have we seen Lane put out lazy efforts in defence because he is buggered but has to stay on there. And while Jnr CAN play 60, I would argue he would be more effective if he played 45-50 and gave a fresh player the other 10 as once again it's in defence that we noticed them being tired. And Rheed could absolutely do with a spell in games

 

[Soren Lorenson]

When Matto is back, Marata will start from the bench and be that cover.

Marata can still cover the backline if he starts.

 

[Gronk]

The problem is they don't have the gas. How many times have we seen Lane put out lazy efforts in defence because he is buggered but has to stay on there. And while Jnr CAN play 60, I would argue he would be more effective if he played 45-50 and gave a fresh player the other 10 as once again it's in defence that we noticed them being tired. And Rheed could absolutely do with a spell in games

I'm not disagreeing with you, but we only have 4 bench spots. The coach reckons (and this is the debate) that he needs a back on the bench because stats show to him that there is a high chance that we will lose a back during the match due to injury or head bin. So that leaves 3 spots and hooker can't be one of them.

Marata can still cover the backline if he starts.

Then you're weakening your pack because you shifted one of the only impact players away and relying on your bench. Who can take up that impact role so we don't get dominated ?

 

[TheParraboy]

Brown is someone Bellamy will pick up then will go on to become a Blue and win a premiership.

At a huge paycut id imagine? (beyond next year)

 

[Soren Lorenson]

Then you're weakening your pack because you shifted one of the only impact players away and relying on your bench. Who can take up that impact role so we don't get dominated ?

Nathan Brown

 

[Gronk]

Nathan Brown

Yes well something is going on there, but without the full story....

Shit like that seems to be common around this time of year.

 

[Gazzamatta]

ba did the same with moi mOi and mannah. But MJ had a free ride in 2018. Doesn’t make sense.

And French and probablyAlvaro. A bit of a fu*k wit think to do. If he hadnt been on my Sh*t List these past 8 years he definitely be on it now.
I agree about MJs free ride but what about BAs 500k per season K. Evans.

 

[Incorrect]

Yes well something is going on there, but without the full story....

Shit like that seems to be common around this time of year.

Lol. Justifying one piece of petty behaviour by comparing it to the behaviour of King Petty himself Ricky Stuart isn't quite selling me the idea... In CNK's case, Stickys nose is probably out of joint because f**king off to the Warriors next year....Has Nrown done the dirty on BA and signed elsewhere for next year?? Oh hang on, that's right....

 

[the phantom menace]

You don't like it that #17 does not get used ? But why take someone off, if your 13 on the paddock have gas ?

That seems to have been an issue, particularly in games we've lost through the forwards.

 

[Gronk]

That seems to have been an issue, particularly in games we've lost through the forwards.

Is that a perception or a fact ?

If that was the case then there would be results were we have been run down or rolled over in the last 20 mins.

Which game is a perfect example of us losing and having an unused back on the bench that cost us the match ? Is there one ?

We've lost 6

Sharks on the bell.
Tigers on the bell.
Cowboys by a cricket score.
Roosters in a tight match.
Dogs by a cricket score.
Bunnies by a cricket score.

 

[hybrideel]

Is that a perception or a fact ?

If that was the case then there would be results were we have been run down or rolled over in the last 20 mins.

Which game is a perfect example of us losing and having an unused back on the bench that cost us the match ? Is there one ?

We've lost 6

Sharks on the bell.
Tigers on the bell.
Cowboys by a cricket score.
Roosters in a tight match.
Dogs by a cricket score.
Bunnies by a cricket score.

That's not necessarily going to be the case. A player being buggered causing failures in play doesn't have to be in the 70th-80th minutes. It would all depend on the possession flow of the game as well as when each played gets replaced.
For example, if we keep Junior out there for 35 minutes in the first half and he is buggered from minutes 25-35 causing the other defenders to need to compress to cover for him and the opposition scores 2 tries on our right edge, that wouldn't be shown in your example

Or, Lane is bludging to get his breath back from minute 55-65 because we had to do a ton of defending, leaking in a few tries in the process, but we had all the ball for the last 20 and still managed to win. Does that make it all OK?

I think the pace of todays game makes 17 players a necessity. Sure you can get by with 16, but some of their output for a period of the game would be so low that a bench player being on for a few more minutes would give more, and let those players have more of a break providing higher output for the time they are on

 

[Gronk]

That's not necessarily going to be the case. A player being buggered causing failures in play doesn't have to be in the 70th-80th minutes. It would all depend on the possession flow of the game as well as when each played gets replaced.
For example, if we keep Junior out there for 35 minutes in the first half and he is buggered from minutes 25-35 causing the other defenders to need to compress to cover for him and the opposition scores 2 tries on our right edge, that wouldn't be shown in your example

Or, Lane is bludging to get his breath back from minute 55-65 because we had to do a ton of defending, leaking in a few tries in the process, but we had all the ball for the last 20 and still managed to win. Does that make it all OK?

I think the pace of todays game makes 17 players a necessity. Sure you can get by with 16, but some of their output for a period of the game would be so low that a bench player being on for a few more minutes would give more, and let those players have more of a break providing higher output for the time they are on

I am not necessarily disagreeing with you and think you are making all good points. But clearly it's a subjective view, rather than there being any hard facts that point to it as being the reason we lost any particular game.

 

[hybrideel]

I am not necessarily disagreeing with you and think you are making all good points. But clearly it's a subjective view, rather than there being any hard facts that point to it as being the reason we lost any particular game.

Yes it is totally subjective, as we don't have access to the telemetry data that the club does. You would hope that they read it and act accordingly however I do remember one game this year where it was plain to see that lane was absolutely buggered but stayed out for another 10 minutes before he was subbed.
And BA has gone on record to say that his starting 13 could all play the 80 if needed.
Given the time he gives the subs, it seems he doesn't trust his 14-17 too much, with the exception of Marata when he is there