- Messages
- 77,669
It appears that Ryles thinks differently (based on him not going after May or Thompson) as maybe believes one of the juniors will step up or going for light weight props in Lane, Williams, Moretti and Matterson. Although none of them appear to have any mongrel as Penrith has/had in Moses and JFH. To me mongrel is the missing ingredient needed to win a grand final (can we clone Ray Price?).
Junior Paulo has lost 10kgs,
Zac Lomax the favourite to take over the goal-kicking.
Ryles has identified early, his intention to improve their defence.
Players have also revealed how the former Melbourne Storm and Sydney Roosters assistant coach had simplified their defensive structure, making it easier for players to understand their roles.
I think news outlets are assuming Lomax is moving to the left. From all I’ve heard penisini is training next to the fox on the left edgeMost interesting thing I found in that article is Lomax has apparently stated he is moving to left centre (no actual quotes) to be inside Fox. Interesting as I've read previously that Penisini has been training on the left.
Maybe Ryles hasn't liked what he has seen with that combo and is going to change it up.
I think it was a bit of a myth that he failed in that spot at the Dragons, they were dogshit prior and Hook threw him there as a Hail Mary and I think he was probably trying too hard to make things happen.
In saying that I would prefer they split Lomax and JAC just to even out the edges a bit. Otherwise we are going to be super left side dominant, Brown, Tuilagi, Lomax, JAC.
The NRL didn't allow Souths back in the comp. The High Court did.
You can't appeal the High Court merkinThat was reversed on appeal wasn't it?
So in the end yes the NRL did allow the Rabbitohs back in.
“Tackle the merkin with the ball.”
Only netballhave you coached before ?
The High Court overturned the Federal Court decision to force News to allow Souffs back in so yes, in fact the NRL let them back in.You can't appeal the High Court merkin
The legal arguments around exclusion and eventual reinclusion were fascinating. And I think anytime anyone thinks of mentioning restraint of trade on here perhaps have a look over this case beforehandThe NRL didn't allow Souths back in the comp. The High Court did.
The High Court overturned the Federal Court decision to force News to allow Souffs back in so yes, in fact the NRL let them back in.
The legal arguments around exclusion and eventual reinclusion were fascinating. And I think anytime anyone thinks of mentioning restraint of trade on here perhaps have a look over this case beforehand
You’ve already proven you don’t actually know the legalities of restraints of trade so perhaps you should read both casesI think anytime anyone thinks of mentioning the Federal Court Case News Ltd v South Sydney as pertinent regarding restraint of trade should have a look over the High Court case that overturned the Federal Court case because of.....you know.....lack of restrain of trade. Fascinating.
No need to “lay the boot in” for a bloke that’s no longer there. If we are doing well next year we can just enjoy it.