- Joined
- Apr 8, 2008
- Messages
- 10,328
- Reaction score
- 1,729
No reason why he couldn’t play the first 20 minutes there - it’s hard for the #9 to play the full 80 with all the tackling required..Looking forward to seeing him go again next year. Would like him to start at 9 though but don’t see it happening.
Agreed mate.No reason why he couldn’t play the first 20 minutes there - it’s hard for the #9 to play the full 80 with all the tackling required..
Yep, it’s not like we’re wasting a bench spot for nothing neitherNo reason why he couldn’t play the first 20 minutes there - it’s hard for the #9 to play the full 80 with all the tackling required..
anything to keep brailey off the fieldLooking forward to seeing him go again next year. Would like him to start at 9 though but don’t see it happening.
You can be the one to tell him. I’ll stand back and watchShould never be allowed to take a crash play run ever again.
Yeah I definitely think he needs to do less one out hitups.He is what he is. I reckon that's about the 10th one he's come up 1 inch or a bobble from scoring for us. A more composed PTB with 24s before HT 3m out would be great but again, he is what he is.
Need to use that redlining run more, make him a little more space. Turn him under a bit. Outside inside ball round the middle.
Agree , yet many on here want him replacing Brailey or being our starting No 9 .This guy gives me 2013/14 Gal vibes. Tries really hard but overplays his hand by making dumb errors too regularly
For the first 15 minutes it actually makes sense him playing 9.Agree , yet many on here want him replacing Brailey or being our starting No 9 .