Are you trying to say had Ben Roberts played those 13 games you would've magically made the top 8? Please, this is Ben Roberts we're talking about not Jonathan Thurston and his injury did not derail your season. The writing was on the wall in the earlier rounds when you lost to two struggling clubs in Newcastle and the Warriors.
I find it absolutely astounding Dogs fans would complain about injuries especially in comparison to the other teams in the competition who went without their stars at critical points of the season. To say the Dogs had an injury crisis when they had only lost Ben Roberts for any substantial period is a joke.
Tim you do make a good point about the Bulldogs depth. For the most part it did suck, especially in the forwards but I'd say in the halves you were pretty sweet with Barba as your second string option. Again why it leaves me bewildered that some Dogs fans act like Roberts was such a loss. It's not like it was anywhere near as bad as losing Lockyer and replacing him with Gillett/Norman.
I think you missed the point I was trying to make.
I'm not suggesting "having Roberts there" per se would've catapulted us to stardom. My point was about halves stability, which we lacked for much of the time Roberts was out with Moore trying a ridiculous amount of combinations, and favouring Green too much.
Warriors struggling? :lol: They finished 5th didn't they? :lol:
Actually coming back to Roberts, we'd started gelling just as he got injured - R6 and R7 wins over WT and Brisbane... and then we went on to lose 6 games after that.
I find it astounding that people can't try to find reasons a team might've suffered. With severely tested depth as a result of many injuries throughout the season - Ben Hannant is another big name example. The fact you're thinking you're some sort of authority on whose injuries can and can't be used as an excuse is hilarious. Furthermore, how is "big names players being injured" the only criteria for a team suffering injury problems? 33 players speaks for itself, the Bulldogs had random injuries to fringe players that meant even more had to be blooded. Admittedly toward the last few rounds it was blooding for the sake of it but most of the year it was depth-testing fringe injuries.
As for Barba... in hindsight you might make an excellent point, but Moore was right in suggesting he wasn't ready for the week-in-week-out rigour of the NRL, hence why he wasn't a superb halves option earlier in the season. You're forgetting he was practically a rookie this time earlier in 2010.
This "my injuries or their injuries were worse than yours" is pretty pathetic all-told, the only fact I argued earlier in this thread is that the Bulldogs used the most players in 2010, which is cold, hard, simple and real fact. I'm well aware the Bulldogs weren't the only team to be affected by injuries.
