The Phelan Folly
Juniors
- Messages
- 2,376
Fantastic stuff.hey all, Forty and I just updated The Cumberland Throw - gave the old girl a facelift.
let us know what you think - www.thecumberlandthrow.com
ps - happy new year etc.
Fantastic stuff.hey all, Forty and I just updated The Cumberland Throw - gave the old girl a facelift.
let us know what you think - www.thecumberlandthrow.com
ps - happy new year etc.
If James Roberts isn't made sit a few weeks and go to rehab by the NRL then every other player ever fined or suspended should sue the NRL for any lost income.
Roberts has had enough chances it's time the NRL stood in.
Just because we were over paying dickhead Foran and theUseless Knights were overpaying Sims (and a host of others) doesn't mean every other team has to
Because Brisbane can pretty much do as they like, and if they get all upset they will just start their own comp again.I agree. However, the NRL have set precedent in the past by not allowing a big gap between a players first season's payment and the subsequent years. Sims is set to play for considerably less this year and larger amounts of the cap in the future. We weren't allowed to sign Folau to such a contract, so why is it now ok?
Not at all. I really do think 'playmaker' is an over-used term and I thought it would be interesting to get other people's views on what they thought it meant. If you don't, then fair enough.
So do you want them to fix bad decisions or stick with them for the sake of consistency? The NRL missed out on a crowd puller for the sake of salary cap 'fairness' with the Folau kerfuffle. Now there's a chance a solid nuffy like Simms would be lost to the game because no other club can afford his false market value. The fact is, if he is off contract then any club can offer more than the Broncos if they want him. Likewise Barba re-signing with the Sharks. If another club wanted him they would only have to offer slightly more than the alleged peanuts Cronulla have offered.I agree. However, the NRL have set precedent in the past by not allowing a big gap between a players first season's payment and the subsequent years. Sims is set to play for considerably less this year and larger amounts of the cap in the future. We weren't allowed to sign Folau to such a contract, so why is it now ok?
No. I knew everything I ever needed to know about rugby league in the late 60s. I'm not about to start learning new shit now.Wanna know who the playmakers are or what it means as a term?
No one's saying the Sharks offered Barba peanuts, only that it's significantly less than what he was on. And they're the club left in limbo by his absence, so they are one of the clubs needing his services most, hence likely to pay top dollar. Plenty of clubs have had similar situations yet none have taken this course. I might be wrong but I doubt it's because none of them thought of doing so.So do you want them to fix bad decisions or stick with them for the sake of consistency? The NRL missed out on a crowd puller for the sake of salary cap 'fairness' with the Folau kerfuffle. Now there's a chance a solid nuffy like Simms would be lost to the game because no other club can afford his false market value. The fact is, if he is off contract then any club can offer more than the Broncos if they want him. Likewise Barba re-signing with the Sharks. If another club wanted him they would only have to offer slightly more than the alleged peanuts Cronulla have offered.
You're a fair bit older than I thought. Did Scanlens even make crap chewing gum at that time?No. I knew everything I ever needed to know about rugby league in the late 60s. I'm not about to start learning new shit now.
Perkins is my preferred way of being pasted.Shut up gary
Didnt know Perkins brewed Wanky Craft beers???Perkins is my preferred way of being pasted
I agree. However, the NRL have set precedent in the past by not allowing a big gap between a players first season's payment and the subsequent years. Sims is set to play for considerably less this year and larger amounts of the cap in the future. We weren't allowed to sign Folau to such a contract, so why is it now ok?
Ben Hunt rumoured 6 year near million per year deal with the Dragons starting in 2018
No wonder we backed away .... very good player, but very big contract .... maybe in 5 years time a million might be cheap?
No. I knew everything I ever needed to know about rugby league in the late 60s. I'm not about to start learning new shit now.
Mmmmmmmm, sticky.....Didnt know Perkins brewed Wanky Craft beers???
I guess you could if you wanted to. But most people seem to be in broad agreement as to where the cutoff line is for who is and isn't a playmaker. Are Corey Norman and Cooper Cronk playmakers? Absolutely. How about Brad Takairangi and the late Jamie Lyon? I think so (though it isn't/wasn't their primary role) - more than most non-spine players anyway.
It is probably helpful to think of it (like most things) as a continuum rather than a binary (i.e. playmaker vs not).
If he can't set up the plays himself what f**king use is he? The game plan is set by the coach before the team even gets on the field, so it's not up to any player to make it up as he goes along. Some have the freedom to capitalise on opportunities - every coach would have a player or two in the team who has the authority to call the ball when he sees an opportunity, and these are usually playmakers. If you're going to call the ball you need to do something with it. If you're just going to catch and pass to a better playmaker then maybe he should be the one calling it. In that case anyone can step in and catch-pass him the ball if he feels he should be staying a pass wider (rather than coming into first receiver). We see middle forwards catch and pass to a half at second receiver all the time. I'm certain that in every case it was the half that overcalled the play. That vision is part of why they're in the team.
But as for it happening several rucks ahead, you can't rely on defences making a mistake that far in advance. They train full time to make sure their defence stays organised, and if they start getting rolled you'll usually see them concede a penalty rather than give up a quick play-the-ball. But when they do concede a quick ruck that's when the playmaker needs to capitalise, because they can't rely on the opportunity being there on the next tackle or the one after that. Like I said, some experienced defender will see the quick play-the-ball looming and just lay in the ruck and concede the penalty. Then they can reset their line. It's usually safer than letting some merkin play the ball while your defensive line is all over the place.
I just think in the modern game there isn't much room for players with vision but not the skill to capitalise on opportunities. If they do exist they are probably playing at dummy half and bringing a massive defensive workload to their team as well, e.g. IDG or Andrew McCullough.
Wanna know who the playmakers are or what it means as a term? It's very simple.
Look at who gets or demands the ball when you need points. 9 times out of 10, that's your answer.