Sack Nathan Brown

[Big Marn]

I just think it's irrelevant, you build the best roster you can with what you have, and develop your juniors...

Imports, whether they are Kiwis or not, are not locals the club has developed

what do you think is irrelevant?

 

[Big Marn]

Nope. It is a team 'based' in New Zealand, not a NZ team.

I wouldn't care if all 17 players were from Africa.

No its a team based in Auckland. I am from Canterbury. I wouldnt be supporting an Auckland team if it was full of Aussies. There has to be a kiwi element to it or the whole franchise can just sod off.

 

[Leber]

No its a team based in Auckland. I am from Canterbury. I wouldnt be supporting an Auckland team if it was full of Aussies. There has to be a kiwi element to it or the whole franchise can just sod off.

Well I live in Auckland and I would still support them if there were zero Aucklanders in the team. For me, it's about your local team. The team that plays for your local club that you are able to physically go and see play (covid permitting).

I don't give a toss as to where they were born. We have rep teams for that.

 

[Big Marn]

Well I live in Auckland and I would still support them if there were zero Aucklanders in the team. For me, it's about your local team. The team that plays for your local club that you are able to physically go and see play (covid permitting).

I don't give a toss as to where they were born. We have rep teams for that.

Ok. I see your stance now. The Warriors are just an entertainment option in Auckland for you, as would the Blues or the Breakers would be. You arent a tragic like most on here.

 

[Matua]

Hey for sure you should be keeping all good young kiwis, but like all teams you must top up from elsewhere, you will not keep all the young ones.

Sharks usually have a Qlder or two and we have strong kiwi connections always have.

You should definitely have a few Aussies.

I haven't argued against either of these two points, but the balance seems to be tipping over at the moment.

 

[Matua]

Well I live in Auckland and I would still support them if there were zero Aucklanders in the team. For me, it's about your local team. The team that plays for your local club that you are able to physically go and see play (covid permitting).

I don't give a toss as to where they were born. We have rep teams for that.

We have different definitions of "local team". I want a local team to have local players.

I'm from Hawkes Bay, I support the Magpies in the NPC but not the Canes in the Super Rugby because they generally have less players from Hawkes Bay than the Chiefs and Highlanders, so I don't consider them my local team.

Plus, you have a very Auckland centric view of the Warriors, their aim and support base has always been about NZ in general, not just Penrose.

 

[Blair]

I haven't argued against either of these two points, but the balance seems to be tipping over at the moment.

That should right itself once we ship back home.

 

[Aesthetics of Otara]

The team is never going to be entirely Aussie. We couldn't afford the overs to get enough good players over from Australia for a start! And looking at the potential team for the Dragons at least half of them have NZ connections, so I'm not sure what the problem is. 50-50 seems a pretty good ratio to me, because much more than that and the Kiwi players get complacent. Hell, they already are complacent enough.

 

[SpaceMonkey]

It’s a moot point because the only way the Warriors will ever win a comp is with a strong core of local talent. We simply can’t attract enough Australian talent to build a winning team without locals. We always pay overs.

 

[JJ]

what do you think is irrelevant?

Kiwis vs Aussies in this context - if we're going to have loyalties, it's either Warriors development players vs not...

I just want to win, and they have to do a better job developing our talent, and building around them...

 

[JJ]

It’s a moot point because the only way the Warriors will ever win a comp is with a strong core of local talent. We simply can’t attract enough Australian talent to build a winning team without locals. We always pay overs.

yeah, but other poorly made point is the likes of DWZ, Hiku, RTS, Wiki, Guttenbeil etc aren't local players in the sense that the Warriors didn't develop them - it's sad that we didn't do more with some of Ice, Herbert, Hingano, SST, Fus, Sipley etc etc (obviously they are part of that lack of success too, but I am struggling to think of who has developed to an elite beyond the Manu/Johnson/Mannering era)

For a long time we simply haven't developed the local talent we have

 

[Mr Angry]

Aussies poach them young too.

I look at both Nikora signed by us @16, Uele signed by the Roosters young the Nqld then us, still a young man.

Roosters in particular have better recruitment in NZ than your blokes do.

 

[jaseg]

I haven't argued against either of these two points, but the balance seems to be tipping over at the moment.

With what, 7 Aussies? That's less than a quarter of the first grade squad. If you doubled that number or something like that I'd see your point..

We're always going to be a club that has a strong NZ base of players, because that's our junior base. For every senior guy brought in, you don't think POS is bringing in multiple juniors?

This year we've seen Berry, Otukolo & Kosi make debuts so far, and we've got more guys coming through (Vailea, Kalepo, the Kepus, Glamuzina, Fakatoumafi etc). We've been recruiting from the top end of the local pool of players at school age too (those two backrowers jump out to me, totally blanking on their names but we confirmed them both earlier in the year).

 

[Sanchez]

With what, 7 Aussies? That's less than a quarter of the first grade squad. If you doubled that number or something like that I'd see your point..

We're always going to be a club that has a strong NZ base of players, because that's our junior base. For every senior guy brought in, you don't think POS is bringing in multiple juniors?

This year we've seen Berry, Otukolo & Kosi make debuts so far, and we've got more guys coming through (Vailea, Kalepo, the Kepus, Glamuzina, Fakatoumafi etc). We've been recruiting from the top end of the local pool of players at school age too (those two backrowers jump out to me, totally blanking on their names but we confirmed them both earlier in the year).

I think one was a Laban

 

[jaseg]

I think one was a Laban

Nailed it - and google now kicks in for the other name.. Jacob Laban, Zyon Maiuu

 

[Big Marn]

Nailed it - and google now kicks in for the other name.. Jacob Laban, Zyon Maiuu

are you confident our coaching system wont f**k them up once they are in our system for a couple of years? Every year we see the same fanfare about these up and comers, eg Perham, Turner, Ale and they never come on. And the ones that do progress do it in another code, eg Laumape, Saturo.

 

[Blair]

We haven't yet discussed the fact our reserve grade side is a Qld one now.

How does it work now? A prospect is recruited but then shipped to Redcliffe?

 

[Philip_Smith007]

That should right itself once we ship back home.

And Gus gets his shot an installing a development pathway. But I suspect that's a 3-6 year plan.

 

[jaseg]

are you confident our coaching system wont f**k them up once they are in our system for a couple of years? Every year we see the same fanfare about these up and comers, eg Perham, Turner, Ale and they never come on. And the ones that do progress do it in another code, eg Laumape, Saturo.

Not really confident, no. That comes with a history of failure. But it's hardly like we're not trying - and Gus is here presumably to set up a development system like the one in Penrith. Only time will tell the outcome, of course.

 

[Leber]

The team is always going to have kiwis in it on the basis of being a team based in NZ.

The point I'm making is that theres no point in signing 'kiwis' just because this is a kiwi based team. You should try to sign the best player, regardless of where they come from.