- Messages
- 77,904
That would make Jack A Williams ahead of him in the pecking order. Good luck with that.Jake shouldn't be anywhere near the 17 or even top 40. Period
That would make Jack A Williams ahead of him in the pecking order. Good luck with that.Jake shouldn't be anywhere near the 17 or even top 40. Period
Maybe needs some practise.
Jake shouldn't be anywhere near the 17 or even top 40. Period
Whatever happens he will just get a concerning act letter from the NRL.You need to bash them Niggle Munster he is good for one brain explosion each game .you will get them back end of the game
Maybe. I know I'm getting slower.I thought Jake had good speed over distance before his intercept last week. Im pretty sure he did a fantastic cover tackle in the 2s last year where he sprinted in cover to force the attacker into touch just before the try line. That speed certainly wasnt there last weekend. Are our players getting slower. Sprint training urgently required me thinks.
Apologists: “I’m not defending ja’s inclusion in the team or agree he warrants selection, or believe he should be in the 17”.
but then they go on and defend his inclusion with anyone that makes a comment. Lol
Just went and watched the last 15 or so, wanted to see the poor pass from JA.
JA actually did a pretty decent job at dummy half, his passing was decent and his was defence ok.
Potentially could be better defensively then Mahoney due to his size. Only a small example but reckon he went good enough to potentially get more game time there. He could be a long term option there and may be the plan next year. Go back and watch…..
Anyhow that poor pass, wasn’t a poor pass, it was a good pass, but Moses was being a lazy merkin and didn’t push up into our attack shape. We had the decoy runner then JA had the option of Matterson or Moses. If Moses pushes up, the pass actually gives some space…So it wasn’t JA’s fault.
I have the video of the pass, but can’t insert, will when I learn how too.
*“comment”Apologists: “I’m not defending ja’s inclusion in the team or agree he warrants selection, or believe he should be in the 17”.
but then they go on and defend his inclusion with anyone that makes a comment. Lol
You need to bash them Niggle Munster he is good for one brain explosion each game .you will get them back end of the game
I reckon hes probably a better 9 than 7. Passes ok and Id suggest he would adhere to the calls from his 6 and 7. Quicken him up, add a few kilos and with experience he might have a decent future there. He would be a road block to his brother though.Just went and watched the last 15 or so, wanted to see the poor pass from JA.
JA actually did a pretty decent job at dummy half, his passing was decent and his was defence ok.
Potentially could be better defensively then Mahoney due to his size. Only a small example but reckon he went good enough to get more game time there. He could be a long term option there and may be the plan next year. Definitely gives reasons why he is being included. Go back and watch…..
Anyhow that poor pass, wasn’t a poor pass, it was a good pass, but Moses was being a lazy merkin and didn’t push up into our attack shape. We had the decoy runner then JA had the option of Matterson or Moses. If Moses pushes up, the pass actually gives some space…So it wasn’t JA’s fault.
I have the video of the pass, but can’t insert, will when I learn how too.
Did I say that it had to do with Jake losing our games? I don't think I did.Well us not already in a 4 spot is more about giving the Sharks game away. Losing to Tigers, Bulldogs and Broncos. Has Jake’s selection or his selection over another influenced the results in those games ? We’ve only lost 8 games this year.
I can see us going out in straight sets vs Storm then vs Roosters or Souths, so is that got anything to do with Jake ?
It’s kind of the same deficiency holding him back in both positions - acceleration. If he can’t get quicker, at hooker he’d have to cover it by “running” less (basically play Reed style) or at half he’d need to start deeper and receive the ball at speed (that adds pressure on the passer)I reckon hes probably a better 9 than 7. Passes ok and Id suggest he would adhere to the calls from his 6 and 7. Quicken him up, add a few kilos and with experience he might have a decent future there. He would be a road block to his brother though.
Interestingly do you realise MA wasn’t never selected in the Matt’s side last year? Matt’s is under 17’s, but a lot of the 16 year olds are picked. The club didn’t pick him, so much for the clubs nepotism towards the Arthur’s…..I reckon hes probably a better 9 than 7. Passes ok and Id suggest he would adhere to the calls from his 6 and 7. Quicken him up, add a few kilos and with experience he might have a decent future there. He would be a road block to his brother though.
His acceleration/Speed issues are overrated…..It’s kind of the same deficiency holding him back in both positions - acceleration. If he can’t get quicker, at hooker he’d have to cover it by “running” less (basically play Reed style) or at half he’d need to start deeper and receive the ball at speed (that adds pressure on the passer)
Maybe he could just run around hunched over to save a bit of time and effort.... Quasimodo style...I reckon Jake is too tall to be a long-term hooker; at 188cm tall, that's a long way to bend down, and pick the ball up.