Did you read to the end?No, the entire analysis was based on our performance with and without possession.
I did and it was suggested that maybe the time on the field that the % Hands and Hodgson spend might be best to be switched. I have no issue with that and without going back to check, IIRC BA has already done that. Last week Hands played the greater @ 50 mins ?Did you read to the end?
So the entire analysis wasn’t based on our performance with and without the ball, but in fact delved into an individual analysis of a key contributor, I.e. Hodgson has been shit?I did and it was suggested that maybe the time on the field that the % Hands and Hodgson spend might be best to be switched. I have no issue with that and without going back to check, IIRC BA has already done that. Last week Hands played the greater @ 50 mins ?
The NRL stopping clubs doing it.... there is a % they can't go under their current value And 1.1 vs 800k is a fair size difference..
It touched on Hodgson but wasn't written to be all about him. Only the blinkered would read it as that.So the entire analysis wasn’t based on our performance with and without the ball, but in fact delved into an individual analysis of a key contributor, I.e. Hodgson has been shit?
How much do the NRL say Moses is worth?
No, the entire analysis was based on our performance with and without possession.
It indicated our whole team has been shit, because we haven't controlled the ball. The one who has suffered the most from this has been Hodgson. Therefore if we complete our sets it will be better for us (and him).I’m pretty sure that analysis indicated that Hodgson is shit. Perhaps you should read it again.
I think it's only awful under fatigue. With more possession that will be less of a factor. Look at Brendan Hands' sole 80-minute defensive performance this year. Every week he has a fairly low work rate with a corresponding tackle effectiveness over 85% (on two occasions it was 100%). But against the Bulldogs, one of the weakest attacking teams, his effectiveness was down at 80%. Fatigue gets everyone, in the middle at least.There’s no doubt with more possession Hodgson would be better. IN ATTACK. But other then reduced workload, his defence would still be awful
I’m pretty sure that analysis indicated that Hodgson is shit. Perhaps you should read it again.
I'll take: Things that never happened for $400, please.We as supporters including me, but not Pou or Gronk, were scratching our heads from the moment we signed Hodgson and were lamenting the decision especially since there were definitely way better candidates on the market then him that were available.
He has only made five errors in seven games. It's not a stat that hookers typically accumulate a lot of, which is a big part of why the position is important, given they literally touch the ball more than anyone else. The only one in the top 50 in the NRL for errors is Mahoney.Actually on possession, Hodgson’s errors and penalties have been a key contributor to our reduced possession
ChatGPT didn't even think of it as central to the article. It did seem like some random digression, like the author took off his analyst hat and put on his footy fan hat. Then the criticism of Arthur was just an afterthought unsupported by the evidence presented.It touched on Hodgson but wasn't written to be all about him. Only the blinkered would read it as that.
So you have been primed to blame him for the team's struggles, no doubt like the author of the article. Because of your preconception you aren't looking at things objectively. Merkins whinging about Hodgson's defence against the Broncos and not noticing RCG's was worse, or that Paulo only made a tackle every four minutes in a game where we were targeted in the middle.We as supporters including me, but not Pou or Gronk, were scratching our heads from the moment we signed Hodgson
Does he miss his tackles because he’s shit or is that the team’s fault too?It indicated our whole team has been shit, because we haven't controlled the ball. The one who has suffered the most from this has been Hodgson. Therefore if we complete our sets it will be better for us (and him).
If souths win it this year then Poor Jack might have to settle with a possible World Club Challenge but no premiership.I think people are missing the big picture.
Wighton signs on for the 1st two years at $800K, then in years 3 and 4 his salary is bumped up to $1.2m. So this then totals over the 4 years to an average of $1m. Which the NRL will deem as an acceptable difference and fair market value, just as they did with our offer to Moses compared to what the Tigers were desperately offering. Whighton himself has reasoned that the $100K shortfall per season is something that he can live with if it gives him the opportunity to have a decent shot at a title before he dies and he gets to play with his Souths mates too.
The Rabbits will be more then capable of doing this because they expect both Walker and Cook to have retired then and there is no way that they will be paying whoever they replace them with what both those guys are currently on over those two final years of Wightons deal.
Pretty simple really and logical.
The little Devil on my left shoulder though keeps telling me what if the Rabbits win it this year, which they have a very realistic chance of doing so? What then? Will the Rabbits have the same thirst or hunger to back it up again in 2024 or 2025? I seriously don't think so, a lot of their players aren't the type. But the Angel on my right shoulder keeps telling me not to listen to the angry little red pitched forked Father of Lies and keeps yelling across my shoulder for him to shut the 'F' up.
Best laid plans and all, best laid plans.
We could offer them Hodgson too