The Great Fullback Debate

[teflon77]

How will a better team around him help with his handling and positional play... Which is what most peoples gripe is with him

Easy. If you dominate the territory then your fullback has an easy job and it leads to Gards strength of kick returns as apposed to defusing bombs or goal line grubbers. There is nothing wrong with his handling. Unless you include being thrown hospital passes in no win situations as bad.

 

[slide rule]

Another thing is that there were a couple of mix-ups at the back last year. With some more experienced (and better) wingers, you would have to think that the overall communication and organisation would have to improve somewhat.

 

[SharkShocked]

Funny that because I assumed Gards had either banged your girlfriend or you mum. Maybe both.

Please do not mix your family's sexual attitudes with my own, you grub.

 

[teflon77]

Please do not mix your family's sexual attitudes with my own, you grub.

You must have misread it. I was alluding to your family's sexual attitudes. They are clearly Gardiner fans.

 

[sharks2010]

Easy. If you dominate the territory then your fullback has an easy job and it leads to Gards strength of kick returns as apposed to defusing bombs or goal line grubbers. There is nothing wrong with his handling. Unless you include being thrown hospital passes in no win situations as bad.

I blame other people for those stupid inside ball hospital passes considering we kept trying to them when they stopped working and poor Gards was getting smashed
I'm talking about his general positional play, he just seemed to be no where near the ball when it was kicked through, especially close to the line
I would love to see the peach to do some work with him

 

[teflon77]

I blame other people for those stupid inside ball hospital passes considering we kept trying to them when they stopped working and poor Gards was getting smashed
I'm talking about his general positional play, he just seemed to be no where near the ball when it was kicked through, especially close to the line
I would love to see the peach to do some work with him

I see where you are coming from. These things are easily fixed with coaching. Look at Barba. He was terrible under the highball and was considered a risk at the back. Look at him now.

 

[sharks2010]

I see where you are coming from. These things are easily fixed with coaching. Look at Barba. He was terrible under the highball and was considered a risk at the back. Look at him now.

Spot on tef and I think some people on here have completely written him off
Me I would love to see him carve it up in first grade because like you said having Gards and flash in the same side is better for the teams structure but at the moment I think having flash at the back is better for the team and for Gards to work hard on some aspects of his game and fight his way back into the team. I'm very intrigued to see how his confidence is going to be like with his knee considering he still isn't fully fit

What would please me the most is seeing him work his arse off to get back into the team because he has that x factor in which only himself and flash have and also just the general excitement and enthusiasm he brings to the team

 

[Garbs]

I don't really get the argument that says that the team would be better with both Gards and Gordon in the lineup. Fullback is generally regarded as one of the two most important positions on the footy paddock. If you've got a good one, you want them to play there.

Case in point: South Sydney. In 2011, they preferred Nathan Merritt at fullback (when first stringer Rhys Wesser wasn't around), while Greg Inglis played in the centres. There's no denying that Merritt is a fine player with a great try-scoring nous. Inglis is also a match winning centre. Johnny Lang's reasons for playing them in those positions is entirely sound - albeit strong evidence to show that Lang's coaching method was outdated. He hadn't caught up and realised just how important fullback is in the modern game.

Cut to 2012. Maguire comes in. He's much more in touch with the modern game, and immediately recognises that Inglis will be a superstar at fullback. Merritt is shunted back to the wing. It's no coincidence that Souths dominated last year - it was primarily on the back of Inglis' fullback play. Inglis' ability in positioning and particularly ball running were far superior to Merritt, and this translated directly into results.

So the question to the Gardner apologists is this: why would you play a kid who is an average fullback (I'm being generous here) and has proven inability to position himself adequately - both when collecting downfield kicks and defending kicks on his tryline - over a proven fullback who showed incredible ability both ball running, passing and positioning while playing at 50% at the back end of last season?

The argument that you want to fit both of them into your team isn't valid - it's an outdated, Johnny Lang era concept. Feel free to offer any rebuttal that doesn't go down that track, however!

 

[JimBob]

I don't really get the argument that says that the team would be better with both Gards and Gordon in the lineup. Fullback is generally regarded as one of the two most important positions on the footy paddock. If you've got a good one, you want them to play there.

Case in point: South Sydney. In 2011, they preferred Nathan Merritt at fullback (when first stringer Rhys Wesser wasn't around), while Greg Inglis played in the centres. There's no denying that Merritt is a fine player with a great try-scoring nous. Inglis is also a match winning centre. Johnny Lang's reasons for playing them in those positions is entirely sound - albeit strong evidence to show that Lang's coaching method was outdated. He hadn't caught up and realised just how important fullback is in the modern game.

Cut to 2012. Maguire comes in. He's much more in touch with the modern game, and immediately recognises that Inglis will be a superstar at fullback. Merritt is shunted back to the wing. It's no coincidence that Souths dominated last year - it was primarily on the back of Inglis' fullback play. Inglis' ability in positioning and particularly ball running were far superior to Merritt, and this translated directly into results.

So the question to the Gardner apologists is this: why would you play a kid who is an average fullback (I'm being generous here) and has proven inability to position himself adequately - both when collecting downfield kicks and defending kicks on his tryline - over a proven fullback who showed incredible ability both ball running, passing and positioning while playing at 50% at the back end of last season?

The argument that you want to fit both of them into your team isn't valid - it's an outdated, Johnny Lang era concept. Feel free to offer any rebuttal that doesn't go down that track, however!

Personally I think the main reason people don't want Gordon at fullback is because it mean Wright (Jonno) will be in the centers when he's a much better winger.

If Flanno said the backline for round one 2013 would be:

1. M. Gordon
2. B. Ryan
3. R. Leutele
4. B. Pomeroy
5. J. Wright

I think people would be happier to leave out Gardner.

 

[teflon77]

I don't really get the argument that says that the team would be better with both Gards and Gordon in the lineup. Fullback is generally regarded as one of the two most important positions on the footy paddock. If you've got a good one, you want them to play there.

Case in point: South Sydney. In 2011, they preferred Nathan Merritt at fullback (when first stringer Rhys Wesser wasn't around), while Greg Inglis played in the centres. There's no denying that Merritt is a fine player with a great try-scoring nous. Inglis is also a match winning centre. Johnny Lang's reasons for playing them in those positions is entirely sound - albeit strong evidence to show that Lang's coaching method was outdated. He hadn't caught up and realised just how important fullback is in the modern game.

Cut to 2012. Maguire comes in. He's much more in touch with the modern game, and immediately recognises that Inglis will be a superstar at fullback. Merritt is shunted back to the wing. It's no coincidence that Souths dominated last year - it was primarily on the back of Inglis' fullback play. Inglis' ability in positioning and particularly ball running were far superior to Merritt, and this translated directly into results.

So the question to the Gardner apologists is this: why would you play a kid who is an average fullback (I'm being generous here) and has proven inability to position himself adequately - both when collecting downfield kicks and defending kicks on his tryline - over a proven fullback who showed incredible ability both ball running, passing and positioning while playing at 50% at the back end of last season?

The argument that you want to fit both of them into your team isn't valid - it's an outdated, Johnny Lang era concept. Feel free to offer any rebuttal that doesn't go down that track, however!

Easy. You play Gards on the wing and switch him throughout the game with Gordon to spice things up. Thats a modern day scenario Garbs. Gards is better than Wright, Stapo, Mills and whoever else we have dragged out of the homeless shelter to play on the wing. He was a junior rep winger. An elite one at that. Your opinion of Gards ability is just plain wrong.

 

[Super Impose]

Personally I think the main reason people don't want Gordon at fullback is because it mean Wright (Jonno) will be in the centers when he's a much better winger.

If Flanno said the backline for round one 2013 would be:

1. M. Gordon
2. B. Ryan
3. R. Leutele
4. B. Pomeroy
5. J. Wright

I think people would be happier to leave out Gardner.

The problem with Ricky is some really bad missed tackles.

The one on Jennings in particular was poor.

I concede his potential with the ball however his defence is a big worry.

 

[Garbs]

You play Gards on the wing

Well that's not really playing him at fullback at the expense of Gordon, though, which is what this thread is about.

I'd be happy for Gardner to play on the wing if he showed the form to beat out the likes of Ryan, Wright, Stapleton, Mills, the other Wright, etc. I have concerns about his height and defensive capabilities in the line, but I'd be open to it pending trial form.

 

[teflon77]

Well that's not really playing him at fullback at the expense of Gordon, though, which is what this thread is about.

I'd be happy for Gardner to play on the wing if he showed the form to beat out the likes of Ryan, Wright, Stapleton, Mills, the other Wright, etc. I have concerns about his height and defensive capabilities in the line, but I'd be open to it pending trial form.

I honestly think that Gards would be lethal at the back linking up with Gordon in broken play. The positives outway the negatives. Besides, he is exciting to watch.

 

[slide rule]

I'm not really in favour of Gards on the wing, but we did have I.Gordon there for a while, and he is a 100000000000000000000000000000x better player than Ike.

 

[bluey]

Easy. You play Gards on the wing and switch him throughout the game with Gordon to spice things up. Thats a modern day scenario Garbs. Gards is better than Wright, Stapo, Mills and whoever else we have dragged out of the homeless shelter to play on the wing. He was a junior rep winger. An elite one at that. Your opinion of Gards ability is just plain wrong.

I would love to see gards do well at fullback or winger and as i haven't seen him play wing i must admit the thought does scare me.
He may be another slippery Morris rotate them in the trials between winger and fullback and see how it goes.

 

[Mark^Bastard]

Gardner rulez h8ers droolz!!!!1

 

[CHOGM]

They've also forgotten about another fullback option in Carney.

Don't think it'll happen but if they're going to include Mills and Stapleton as fullback options you may as well throw in Todd.

If you listen closely you can hear the deafening silence coming from this poster. I'm done trying to flog this pony home.

 

[DeathMoth]

Can someone take note of the Gards haters because when he makes it back into first grade and isn't the massive disaster they're making out they'll be wanting to suck his tramp stamp.

 

[19ninety9]

Just like the people who trumpeted signings like Nigel Vagana, Anthony Tupou, Ben Ross (the first time), Josh Hannay, Tim Smith, Sam Tagatese and loads loads loads more that careers died at Cronulla..

Players go to ****. Wish they didn't but it happens. We have a better option at Fullback now, not just better but a potential superstar.

Get the **** over it.

 

[gallenisgod]

It comes down to confidence I think. After Gardner injured himself that first time he lost his nerve.