What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

We should have kept forward Nathan Brown

souths_reborn

Juniors
Messages
471
Brown has made 17 for 144 metres and 3 offloads.

I feel sick Shadow!!!!!

I'm nearly bringing my slurpee back up alien!!!!!!

Someone at Souths has to be held accountable!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Fug me!!!!
There was never any question about Brown's playing talent, its just that Parra offered him more money. Its one of the unfortunately consequences of the salary cap that we cannot keep everyone despite how good they are and having to let Nathan Brown go is indicative of that.
 

rabbitohs95

Bench
Messages
4,711
I completely agree with you about Keary not being that good. Its almost like people are kidding themselves simply because he scored two tries. While he did do reasonably well in the first half, I thought he completely went missing in the second and reverted back to being his crazy, erratic self when he did get his hands on the footy.
Exactly. He and Pearce are too erratic. Great if you can win by 20, but come the finals (if they do make it) there's no way those two are performing in the pressure cooker.
 

Rabbits20

Immortal
Messages
41,757
There was never any question about Brown's playing talent, its just that Parra offered him more money. Its one of the unfortunately consequences of the salary cap that we cannot keep everyone despite how good they are and having to let Nathan Brown go is indicative of that.
We should've let Clark go.
 

callmack1

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
11,856
souths_reborn has really been truth telling over these last couple of days. Great post after great post
 

foreverinourshadow

First Grade
Messages
9,400
We should've let Clark go.


we should had let clark with tyrrell go and kept nathan brown it makes sense right r20, its best to keep a goer as in brown than to keep paying 2 non-goers id suggest we need a stronger 13 on the park in the run on side than having a far weaker 17 players in the top squad with 2 or 3 duds sitting on the bench as in tyrrell,clark,and turner....Shadow...
 

Rabbits20

Immortal
Messages
41,757
we should had let clark with tyrrell go and kept nathan brown it makes sense right r20, its best to keep a goer as in brown than to keep paying 2 non-goers id suggest we need a stronger 13 on the park in the run on side than having a far weaker 17 players in the top squad with 2 or 3 duds sitting on the bench as in tyrrell,clark,and turner....Shadow...
Yep 2 for 1.

Clark and Tyrrell out for Brown is what should've happened.

He makes double the metres they do on his own.
 

DiegoNT

First Grade
Messages
9,378
Brown is a young and upcoming forward. He wants a pay-rise and to start in 1st grade. Neither tyrrell or clark would have stopped that. But the twins would have. It's not a case of we should off signed brown instead of Clark or tyrrell. Clark and tyrrell are squad forwards who due to the bad form others are having an extended run in 1st grade. They wouldn't have opposed a threat to brown
 

Vic Mackey

Referee
Messages
24,768
Brown is a young and upcoming forward. He wants a pay-rise and to start in 1st grade. Neither tyrrell or clark would have stopped that. But the twins would have. It's not a case of we should off signed brown instead of Clark or tyrrell. Clark and tyrrell are squad forwards who due to the bad form others are having an extended run in 1st grade. They wouldn't have opposed a threat to brown

i feel for you mate. when the tigers were shopping simona around (pre betting scandal) i was tearing my hair out trying to explain why we were shopping him around instead of rankin.
 

Rabbits20

Immortal
Messages
41,757
Brown is a young and upcoming forward. He wants a pay-rise and to start in 1st grade. Neither tyrrell or clark would have stopped that. But the twins would have. It's not a case of we should off signed brown instead of Clark or tyrrell. Clark and tyrrell are squad forwards who due to the bad form others are having an extended run in 1st grade. They wouldn't have opposed a threat to brown
The twins wouldn't have stopped it as we play one off the bench usually.

In fact we could've started with:

8. Musgrove
10. Brown
 

Pommy

Coach
Messages
14,657
The twins wouldn't have stopped it as we play one off the bench usually.

In fact we could've started with:

8. Musgrove
10. Brown

Brown would command a better wage than those two. What your ignoring is the money tied up in the twins in stopping us sign other forwards. At least the bears are getting two rep players though.
 

foreverinourshadow

First Grade
Messages
9,400
george will be a late inclusion but i also want to see tom to be included also and now that manlys pack is decimated why would madge not have the 3burgii on the paddock at the same time pushing their weight?please explain? ......Shadow...
 

Rabbit toes

First Grade
Messages
5,315
george will be a late inclusion but i also want to see tom to be included also and now that manlys pack is decimated why would madge not have the 3burgii on the paddock at the same time pushing their weight?please explain? ......Shadow...
Because they can't hold a f**king football!
 

foreverinourshadow

First Grade
Messages
9,400
if kelly plays we are going to get smashed he cant guide us around brooky or at any other venue he aint got the goods.....i doubt ar will play but if medically passed pls put kelly in the nsw cup and leave him there,i pray we win but madge keeps using the ""4 duds kelly,tyrrell clark and turner""...oi madge its a nightmare snap out of it your picking the wrong team...Shadow...
 
Top