Tommy Lee

Regardless of what they pay him, this club are still hell bent on paying "so-called" stars silly money. They under perform but get paid for the privelidge, but overlook the decent talent on their own doorstep. Whilst I think KD is a brilliant guy and can't knock what he has done for the club, the rest of the board need a shafting for letting this happen.
They are releasing 2 of the best squad members that the club has ever seen, in Andy & Danny.
I only hope for the fans, that the likes of Murphy live up to the management & board's expectations, but on the other hand maybe if it does bite them on the backside, they might just wake up from bleeding la la land!

I thought we got Greg Eden to cover full back/halves?

he may well get treated like mcnally and be brought in so no one else can have him. shame if that happens

Mable_syrup wrote:

he may well get treated like mcnally and be brought in so no one else can have him. shame if that happens

I can understand if you take that chance with a kid, but with an experienced player, that seems mad. At his age if you don't think he can be a regular player then he isn't worth any money.

Nathan Brown's okay for mine a better judge of players than most,young or experienced,or maybe that should be a better judge of when players have reached their sell by date.

like losing brett hodgson, Jackson and griffin and not replacing them adequately, whilst keeping Glimour who gets knocked out each game and knocks on at least twice a game?? I see where you are coming from.

defleppard wrote:

Nathan Brown's okay for mine a better judge of players than most,young or experienced,or maybe that should be a better judge of when players have reached their sell by date.

Well if he has judged G Horne for example to be past his sell by date , Why has he been picking him all season ahead of others with a far better defence, same for Kirmond, OK if he's not good enough he's not good enough, but why replace players like him and Raleigh with players who are not an improvement, Why let Mcnally go without being given a chance and replace him with someone who has failed to make the grade at any of his other clubs.
I f our form for the second half of the season is any sort of bench mark, i would say N Brown is looking like the one past his sell by date

Hodgson only left because of contract wrangles did he not,correct me if I'm wrong,not sure Brown could get slated for that,he'd have kept him surely,and Grix was a ready made replacement.Griffin,it became a personality clash from from I have heard.But who is in final charge the coach or the player.There aren't that many top quality prop replacements in our own domestic football.That Adam Walker impressed in short spells last year,I am hoping he could push on.Maybe NB should show a bit more faith in the juniors.Don't think anyone would have argued with Gilmour getting the 2 year deal with the form he was showing at the time.Since then admittedly Gilly dropped a touch from his own high standards.Most players say they learn much off Brown it's why they come.Murphy has said he expects the same after consulting ex Wakefield players.

It's a fair point,why keep picking players who you feel need to move on.Suppose that's down to a combination of factors when you are a coach working with a squad.Don't think DK & AR will be replaced,he's looking at Lawrence to 2nd row,and we have plenty of other options in that part of the field.

I'll be honest and say I think he's made the right choices as to who to move on.

LOL at the end bit,maybe the coach is the one past his sell by date.Guess we will find out in 2012.

defleppard wrote:

Hodgson only left because of contract wrangles did he not,correct me if I'm wrong,not sure Brown could get slated for that,he'd have kept him surely,and Grix was a ready made replacement.Griffin,it became a personality clash from from I have heard.But who is in final charge the coach or the player.There aren't that many top quality prop replacements in our own domestic football.That Adam Walker impressed in short spells last year,I am hoping he could push on.Maybe NB should show a bit more faith in the juniors.Don't think anyone would have argued with Gilmour getting the 2 year deal with the form he was showing at the time.Since then admittedly Gilly dropped a touch from his own high standards.Most players say they learn much off Brown it's why they come.Murphy has said he expects the same after consulting ex Wakefield players.

It's a fair point,why keep picking players who you feel need to move on.Suppose that's down to a combination of factors when you are a coach working with a squad.Don't think DK & AR will be replaced,he's looking at Lawrence to 2nd row,and we have plenty of other options in that part of the field.

I'll be honest and say I think he's made the right choices as to who to move on.

LOL at the end bit,maybe the coach is the one past his sell by date.Guess we will find out in 2012.

Yes It's true he will stand or fall on his achievements, He had two cracking years here, and rightly got coach of the year in his first. Perhaps if he made his mind up whether he wants to be here or not might be a help, whatever the problem, the wheels well and truly fell off for the second half of the season and is it all going to start again next year mid season.

Murphy may well turn out to be a very good buy but he will have to get some game time, or how will we know, I would expect him to be in direct competition with Grix myself, and let the better one , or the one in form take the slot, but we don't tend to do that do we, we swap the whole team about so we can play both.

Like Def Leppard, I can see logic in the players being moved on and can see a better balance in the backs, more depth and less disruption if cover is needed in those positions.

That said I do have concerns over the replacements. We were found wanting last season for depth at half back and prop, my concern is that those weaknesses remain, particularly at Prop if Griffin leaves as expected.

I am not sure Tommy Lee gives a better solution in the halves than moving Robbo, I would much rather keep Kyle Wood.

Up front are we really going to go in with only 2 established props in Eorl & Mason? Larne is not a starting prop imo, I believe he is too lightweight though he is a good impact prop from the bench when a platform has been laid. Fa'alogo may do a job, but that is a risk - look how Andy Raleigh was turned from a very good second row into a prop the same coach was reluctant to use. Tonks has been trailed as a project and young Walker has played only 2 or 3 first grade matches.

I accept the loss of Luke O'Donnel was a blow last season, not once but twice, but again we did not cover him well. In my view (with hindsight) we should have stuck Andy Raleigh in a loose to cover the defensive resolve that LOD provides, instead we used Kirmond, Horne or Cording and sometimes started Fooey, all different sorts of players who perhaps offer more skill going forward than AR or LOD but did not support the props in the trenches.

Having said all the above, I will be as optomistic as anyone come February

It would be interesting to know how much of a say Nathan Brown gets on who stays, who goes and who comes in. I get the feeling it is very much a joint decision between Nathan Brown, Richard Thewlis and the board, but when push comes to shove who is the one that makes THE CALL.

matt01 wrote:

It would be interesting to know how much of a say Nathan Brown gets on who stays, who goes and who comes in. I get the feeling it is very much a joint decision between Nathan Brown, Richard Thewlis and the board, but when push comes to shove who is the one that makes THE CALL.

Richard,depending on their wage demands,would be my guess.

Giantdee wrote:

Like Def Leppard, I can see logic in the players being moved on and can see a better balance in the backs, more depth and less disruption if cover is needed in those positions.

That said I do have concerns over the replacements. We were found wanting last season for depth at half back and prop, my concern is that those weaknesses remain, particularly at Prop if Griffin leaves as expected.

I am not sure Tommy Lee gives a better solution in the halves than moving Robbo, I would much rather keep Kyle Wood.

Up front are we really going to go in with only 2 established props in Eorl & Mason? Larne is not a starting prop imo, I believe he is too lightweight though he is a good impact prop from the bench when a platform has been laid. Fa'alogo may do a job, but that is a risk - look how Andy Raleigh was turned from a very good second row into a prop the same coach was reluctant to use. Tonks has been trailed as a project and young Walker has played only 2 or 3 first grade matches.

I accept the loss of Luke O'Donnel was a blow last season, not once but twice, but again we did not cover him well. In my view (with hindsight) we should have stuck Andy Raleigh in a loose to cover the defensive resolve that LOD provides, instead we used Kirmond, Horne or Cording and sometimes started Fooey, all different sorts of players who perhaps offer more skill going forward than AR or LOD but did not support the props in the trenches.

Having said all the above, I will be as optomistic as anyone come February

I agree the propping situation is a cause for real concern,with no big import we are gambling on things working out right with projects & switches.When you look at our opposition their go forward is built around a top ANZ import,Puletua,Lima,Leuluai and the best of British around them like Peacock (still) Graham,Coley/Mossop/Prescott.Wire don't have one but have Monaghan and Anderson backing up Morley & Carvell.Just got to hope it works out for us.

We never replaced LOD that's true,but it was an impossible task after that guy's phenomenal workrate.I'd like to see a ball handler go to 13 myself,take some of the pressure off the halves.

Money is there for a prop when one they want becomes available so i'm told by those in the know.

ponner wrote:

Money is there for a prop when one they want becomes available so i'm told by those in the know.

Great stuff,that will do for me

matt01 wrote:

It would be interesting to know how much of a say Nathan Brown gets on who stays, who goes and who comes in. I get the feeling it is very much a joint decision between Nathan Brown, Richard Thewlis and the board, but when push comes to shove who is the one that makes THE CALL.

That's a very good point Matt, It must be a bit of a juggling act with money and preferred players, can't be easy.

BO JANGLES wrote:

defleppard wrote:

Nathan Brown's okay for mine a better judge of players than most,young or experienced,or maybe that should be a better judge of when players have reached their sell by date.

Well if he has judged G Horne for example to be past his sell by date , Why has he been picking him all season ahead of others with a far better defence, same for Kirmond, OK if he's not good enough he's not good enough, but why replace players like him and Raleigh with players who are not an improvement, Why let Mcnally go without being given a chance and replace him with someone who has failed to make the grade at any of his other clubs.
I f our form for the second half of the season is any sort of bench mark, i would say N Brown is looking like the one past his sell by date

Agree with this 100%, can't wait for the annual will he wont he saga come June time grrrrrrrrrrrrrrr