Official 2024 NRL General Discussion (no off-field controversies/rumours)

[Proud Shark]

Second rowers that made it

Martin (21)
Fifita (45)
Nanai (46)
Olakau'atu (48)

Nikora was clearly better than Nanai imo.

I'd have Fifita, Olakauatu and Nikora over Martin personally. I think if you swap teams for any of them we aren't talking about Martin really.

 

[HaroldBishop]

I'd have Fifita, Olakauatu and Nikora over Martin personally. I think if you swap teams for any of them we aren't talking about Martin really.

I dunno, I do like Martin.

 

[Proud Shark]

I dunno, I do like Martin.

Not saying he's bad by any stretch, just playing in the best real estate in the comp. I think if you put any of the others there they take his spot. Martin certainly isn't getting these accolades playing at the titans.

 

[HaroldBishop]

Not saying he's bad by any stretch, just playing in the best real estate in the comp. I think if you put any of the others there they take his spot. Martin certainly isn't getting these accolades playing at the titans.

Certainly helps for sure. I don't think it would change the way he plays though, not sure what his longevity in the game will be like.

 

[Sevshark]

Was a bit bored and am genuinely curious what people's choices would be blind.

So, which player would you rather have;
Stat's all from last year.

Player A:

19 games
0trys 20tackle breaks 599post-contact metres 7offloads 370tackles 29missed 1593 total run metres 83avg metres 434 kick return metres

Player B:

18 games
3 trys 19 tackle breaks 481post-contact metres 1offload 331tackles 24missed 1305 total run metres 72avg metres 197 kick return metres

Would appreciate if you didn't try to figure out or post the actual player names.
Will reveal who in a few hours.

A

Player A is Oregon Kaufusi
Player B is Tom Hazelton

 

[Proud Shark]

Player A is Oregon Kaufusi
Player B is Tom Hazelton

Interested to know what the average minutes were?

 

[Sevshark]

Interested to know what the average minutes were?

So am I, it's the only info I didn't have access too.
@BurgoShark might have that tabled for us though.

 

[Deleted member 2543]

Carried over from the BHU thread…

Haha! Come on, Burgo, where did I say or even imply it?

Anyway, I'm questioning the current squad retention policy of which the BHU signing is the latest example. Is it the right option? I don't know. The club is convinced it is for various reasons I'm not privy of, but can be easily guessed. Fine. Hopefully they're right because otherwise we aren't going to celebrate premiership #2 anytime soon.

However, resigning everyone and their grandmother (warning, hyperbole!) to the notable exception of Moylan**, when the team has, in my opinion (and I don't even ask you to agree with it), repeatedly shown frailties that I think (once again, my opinion) can be linked to ability and attitude should be addressed. And I'm not talking merely about the finals. The team has shown in recent years the tendency to fold like a lawn chair when things don't go their way.
You don't want to put some of these failures down to attitude (or perhaps you prefer 'care factor' like Bellamy)? It simply means that we don't analyze what we see in the same way.

Will this year be any different with a virtually unchanged squad? Will they get better because they've trained the house down and/or matured as a team (with the added bonus of knowing they're going to stay together another couple of seasons)?
I'd like to be able to answer 'yes' to both, but I'm not convinced.
I guess we'll get more answers throughout the first two months of the season.

** no complaints here

An opinion based on a reasonable interpretation of the available information is one thing. An opinion based on assigning yourself super mind-reading powers is another.

If there are attitude issues in the team then you are 100% correct, but you don’t know and you can’t know whether this is actually the case.

I’m sure plenty of us share your sentiments on the importance of culture/attitude and the uncertainly of the current core’s potential to get the job done. Those are great points to make on their own, and the coach and players have spoken about the importance of the older guys on culture and attitude/preparation.

… but if your argument starts with “I can tell that there is an attitude problem and therefore..” I’ll stop reading after that, because you can’t actually tell.

(unless of course you have a lot of specific examples of players giving up on plays or cutting corners. If you show me that, I’ll change my mind and happily back you up).

 

[Deleted member 2543]

So am I, it's the only info I didn't have access too.
@BurgoShark might have that tabled for us though.

Ball in play?

Tom 17, Oregon 25.

Both at 50/50 possession.

There is a very detailed comparison of these two players on page 26 of the Kaufusi thread.

 

[bort]

Now I'm waiting for the graphs plotting mongrel and attitude

 

[Gal The Goat]

Not saying he's bad by any stretch, just playing in the best real estate in the comp. I think if you put any of the others there they take his spot. Martin certainly isn't getting these accolades playing at the titans.

I personally think Martin is arguably the best back rower. Definitely a different style to say Nikora but so aggressive in everything he does.

Was NSW best player, was one of the best players last couple years final series for Penrith and I think he was winning MOMs in the World Cup for Aus? If he’s doing all that he can still be good at Titans

 

[Proud Shark]

I personally think Martin is arguably the best back rower. Definitely a different style to say Nikora but so aggressive in everything he does.

Was NSW best player, was one of the best players last couple years final series for Penrith and I think he was winning MOMs in the World Cup for Aus? If he’s doing all that he can still be good at Titans

Each to their own. I'd have him behind the other 3 as I mentioned. Not saying he's bad, just think if you swapped him with any of the others they get picked for NSW ahead of him etc (assuming eligibility).

 

[HaroldBishop]

Odd thing for PVL to say.

V’landys also raised eyebrows when he was talking about participation, claiming the NRL needed to target private schools because that’s where “the future decision-makers come from”.

He wasn’t backing away from it. “I realise as I go through my career that the decision-makers are all from private school,” he said. “That’s not being disparaging to those from public schools. I’m an example that you can get somewhere coming out of a public school.”

A question, though: how’s all that private-school decision-making worked out for rugby of late?

Did NRL rule tweaks help Nathan Cleary put on grand final masterclass?

The six-again rule has changed rugby league for the better, but great players would have been great in any era.

www.smh.com.au

 

[Proud Shark]

Odd thing for PVL to say.

What a ****ing muppet. Sooner he's gone the better.

 

[Deleted member 2543]

Odd thing for PVL to say.

Wow.

 

[Jasonstevenswedgie]

his statement is correct.

 

[HaroldBishop]

his statement is correct.

Plenty of high achievers go to public schools. Have a look at the top performing HSC schools.

 

[Proud Shark]

his statement is correct.

Sure, statistically. But it's as pigheaded as saying decision-makers are generally men so we should be targetting more men for our back office. It ignores why they are in those decision-making roles.

Spoiler

It has nothing to do with them being better decision-makers

 

[Jasonstevenswedgie]

Sure, statistically. But it's as pigheaded as saying decision-makers are generally men so we should be targetting more men for our back office. It ignores why they are in those decision-making roles.

Spoiler

It has nothing to do with them being better decision-makers

pvl never said they are better decision makers, its just were the elite eg money will come from and we need to tap into those connections

 

[Proud Shark]

pvl never said they are better decision makers, its just were the elite eg money will come from and we need to tap into those connections

He's saying that future decision-makers will be from private schools. It's an elitist attitude that ends up with people getting opportunities due to who they know rather than what their capacity is. That's a net negative and a **** attitude to have from my perspective.