Which is why clubs prefer young players, because they are more likely to improve from one year to the next.
There obviously are no better options.
Because the conditions in a trial match (or any match) are more random and less subject to the control required to make an objective assessment.
This is why pre-season training is so important. All the things that indicate game performance can be isolated and tested during the pre-season. Players can be compared against each other in similar situations.
This sort of thing has already been observed by the coaching staff over countless conditioning and opposed sessions prior to last week’s trial.
The decisions are already informed. If you think Brad Arthur has no idea look at how other coaches selected their trial teams this week and last. Their methodologies are all the same because they are proven.
Mataele will be a much better player than Makatoa (and is no doubt more athletic already) but he obviously still has flaws in his game that will far outweigh the positives in NRL situations. Makatoa has been around long enough that he doesn’t have these flaws.
Your problem is that you think lack of outstanding attack is a player flaw. In fact, the things considered flaws in NRL players are defensive weakness (including lack of effort) and high error rates. These flaws are tolerable (in moderation) in a team’s top attackers (e.g. Paulo) but not in the team’s role players. Those merkins just need to be safe, and leave the big plays to the stars.
Which is why I’m trusting the experts rather than trusting you.
But don’t get me wrong, I’m excited about Mataele and I’m not excited about Makatoa or Jake Arthur. I just recognise that raw talent doesn’t transfer to NRL success. Mataele would be heavily targeted in first grade much like Papali’i was, but without the several seasons in the NRL to know how to handle it.