84 Baby
Referee
- Messages
- 29,809
Dolphins 13-18 is good odds
Dolphins 13-18 is good odds
I think its better to have asi there in case of an injury or head knock in the backs.I’m not convinced of Asi as a bench spot outside emergency cover so if we were going to be super aggressive a bench of:
14. Matterson
15/16/17. Pick three of Ofahengaue, Greig, Makatoa, Ogden or Davey
Makatoa, Ogden & to lesser extent Davey for mine have been in superb form.
Well he’s not going to replace the Penis or Superman, so chances are pretty good he stays in reserve grade barring injuries.Seeing Waqa Blake on the reserves list scares the daylights out of me. He's creeping closer to 1st grade. Like a zombie who just won't die.
I’m not convinced of Asi as a bench spot outside emergency cover so if we were going to be super aggressive a bench of:
14. Matterson
15/16/17. Pick three of Ofahengaue, Greig, Makatoa, Ogden or Davey
Makatoa, Ogden & to lesser extent Davey for mine have been in superb form.
They can still shuffle the run on side. Plus knowing Fittler, he’ll probably only get a dozen minutes tomorrow anyway
Seeing Waqa Blake on the reserves list scares the daylights out of me. He's creeping closer to 1st grade. Like a zombie who just won't die.
Zombies are already dead.
He's proving more resilient than his own hair, which is some feat.Seeing Waqa Blake on the reserves list scares the daylights out of me. He's creeping closer to 1st grade. Like a zombie who just won't die.
No room for Hodgson? Or would you keep Hodgson and punt Hands to Cup...?Get everyone back and we have a possible bench of:
14. Asi
15. Joffa
16. Matto
17. Wiremu/Makatoa/Ogden
Seeing Waqa Blake on the reserves list scares the daylights out of me. He's creeping closer to 1st grade. Like a zombie who just won't die.
I dont think the style of game we play needs 2 dummy halfs in the 17.No room for Hodgson? Or would you keep Hodgson and punt Hands to Cup...?
Agree with the reasoning for one dummy half in the 17. So for clarity you're proposing sticking with 9. Hands and Hodgson returning through Cup then?I dont think the style of game we play needs 2 dummy halfs in the 17.
As long as we have someone on the bench that can step into dummy half and distribute the ball to our halves and our middles when they are hitting it up one off the ruck, we dont need to specialist 9's regardless of their name.
And I have never adovcated for changing a winning side just for kicks.
If we keep winning with Hands then I don't see a reason to change. But I am not on the coaching staff and don't see everything else that the coaching staff do. It might be they consider Hands' limit at 8-10 games straight before he needs a break, given he is new to FG and plays in a demanding position. It might be that we lose a couple and BA decides to bring Hodgson back into FG... lots of reason why they might not stick with Hands and go back to Hodgson and I won't necessarily doubt the validity of any decision the coaching staff make without know all the facts of why they might make it. Same if they decide to stick with Hands for the rest of the year.Agree with the reasoning for one dummy half in the 17. So for clarity you're proposing sticking with 9. Hands and Hodgson returning through Cup then?
I think my opinion was pretty clear, in both my comments about not changing a winning side.Whoah... so was a that a long splinters answer, rather than offering an opinion?
Or just a parody of a Pou answer?