Matty Bhoy
Juniors
- Messages
- 1,817
Happy to trust the club with a three year offer for Bailey. After all, he’s doing his rehab under our watch so you’d like to think they’ve a solid idea on how he’s travelling.
Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Did we offer Bailey an option? Wasn't aware of that. Either way, the ACL isn't necessarily a reason to not offer him a decent extension. Been one of our most consistent outside backs for what we paid him.
Was it in the 73rd minute?
Who hasn’t got an option ffs???
You are properly f**ked in the head. “Harper is a better defender than Talagi, blame Barrett for not picking him”. No, I blame whoever it was who gave Harper a squad spot this season and paid him a salary, because he sure as shit didn’t deserve it. Absolute merkin of a footballer.
Conceding three tries in three minutes is just downright embarrassing.
If you think Talagi was bad, McLean got absolutely destroyed last night. He was a total passenger, but because his team mates are so good he still won. Alamoti is also useless in defence. But when your defensive middle is so strong you can cover a weak edge defender.
Whatever risk the ACL represents will be a factor in negotiations. But plenty of players have injured ACLs and continued their careers.
It's alright, two of those years are player options.
We signed Dunster before his ACL/PCL/MCL injury, so the price will reflect his injury history at the time. The next contract with Simonsson will include the ACL as a factor. He will be much cheaper than if we had signed him before the injury, especially if we're offering multiple years.
That's why it's most likely a cheap three year deal. He will be 29 at the end of it, and grateful for the lifeline. There will be much less demand for him than there was in May.
Describes 80% of NRL players...Good players in good teams, average player in shit teams.
Backups at that level, yes pretty much. If you had to give them an extremely granular player rating out of say, 1000, then no they won't be exactly equal. But if you had to rate them out of five then yes, the players at the bottom of the top 30 are all about equal with the best hundred players outside the top 30. Think of player talent distribution as a bell curve. Professional rugby league is elite, so even the worst players to ever run onto an NRL field are still distributed to the right of the bell's midline (the mean). This means there are fewer top end players at the absolute right hand tail of the talent distribution, while the majority of NRL backups are in the wider pool of talent closer to the mean. At that level the backup-level nuffies are numerous and interchangeable, which is why you have clubs like ours without 30 players in the top 30, but have still used 30 players in first grade.
It's true. Pros and cons. The point is we had a backup-level player in reserve grade so depth wasn't the problem. The problem was too many unavailable first graders.
Exactly. There is more chance of me going on a float at the next Mardi Gras than Moses being allowed to leave.
Have a look at some of the backups who have made NRL appearances for these teams. McLean was garbage for Penrith last night, while the Storm have had 7 games from Bradley and Garlick. Ethan King and Zach Dockar-Clay have played first grade for the Roosters this year. All nuffies.
