1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Brett Stewart

Discussion in 'Rugby League Forum' started by Ryan, Aug 10, 2006.

  1. Ryan

    Ryan Well-Known Member

    14,911
    2,668
    Ratings:
    +6,093 / 285
    I know this is a touchy subject. (Also posted on MSE):-

    Brett Stewart to me is one of the best fullbacks I have seen in a very long time. That's the way I'd like to start this topic. He is just ruthless at the back in the number One jersey. That's when he is there.
    This year Brett has been out injured for 25% of the season 29% if he misses this week, and a fair bit last year. To me that is disruptive to the team, our combinations - and our structure. That said, I would never want to see him play elsewhere.

    My mitigant to this:-

    We have an absolute superstar coming to play for us next year in Jamie Lyon. With Burns in the team for 07l, we would have to say Lyon will be playing centre. Can anyone here imagine a combination of Stewart (2) / Lyon (3). Hicks to Fullback. It would be just utterly ruthless.

    It is a known fact that a 1, 6, 7 & 9 are the most important positions on the park. If you can get combinations and consistency out of these positions, facts are your team will probably go well.

    If Stewart plays on the wing, there would be a number of factors to consider. If he gets injured, and actually takes twice the time to recover (unfortunately), a wing spot is not too tough to cover. I then thought, jeez, he scores so many tries injecting himself into the line, we would miss out. Does anyone remember how Scott Donald fared in 2003? He almost lead the NRL in tries scored.

    For the reasons above, and mainly for consistency, combinations, and of coarse to allow Brett to recover if necessary with the bonus of teaming him up with Lyon, I'd like to say move Brett to the wing. You just can't have an injury prone player in one of your most important jerseys.

    To finish, I'd again like to clarify, that Brett is one of my favourite players, and is an excellent fullback (one of the BEST actually), but my thought's/ideas were on a potential improvement in and for the team in 07.

    I know a lot will be against the idea, but all I ask is for you to look at the pros / cons, to ascertain what you guys think. Again - Lyon / Stewart, with Hicks chiming in occasionally. Nasty.
     
  2. Disco

    Disco Well-Known Member

    1,906
    440
    Ratings:
    +1,233 / 37
    No offense, but i think its an absolutly ridiculous idea, moving our superstar fullback to the wing and putting a winger who is average at fullback there fulltime makes no sense to me

    IMO we just need to sign a cheap back-up fullback, i think David Seage would be a good option
     
  3. Ryan

    Ryan Well-Known Member

    14,911
    2,668
    Ratings:
    +6,093 / 285
    Understand your sentiments mate - but having a new player come in at fullback doesn't give ode to the notion of consistency / combinations in the 1, 6, 7 & 9. I guess that's the main thing I'm trying to promote.
     
  4. Fro

    Fro Well-Known Member

    8,337
    181
    Ratings:
    +245 / 0
    Banji Marshal is pretty important to the tigers and he is only ever in the 6.

    one of your best Ryan
     
  5. Disco

    Disco Well-Known Member

    1,906
    440
    Ratings:
    +1,233 / 37
    i'd rather have Brett miss 6-7 games at fullback through injury, than miss 26 games at fullback by having him on the wing
     
  6. Ryan

    Ryan Well-Known Member

    14,911
    2,668
    Ratings:
    +6,093 / 285
    But Fro - Benji defends in the (2) position - wing, to cover for his deficiency which is being injury prone. It also doesn't work for Benji, because he gets caught out in defence, but I think Brett Is a MUCH better defender.

    I'm dissapointed you said "one of your best". I'm trying to have a healthy debate here mate.
     
  7. Canteen Worker

    Canteen Worker Well-Known Member 2016 Tipping Competitor

    13,234
    186
    Ratings:
    +212 / 5
    You don't change a fullback to wing because he misses six games!!!! injuries happen,

    Let's put BK on the wing as he misses 4 games a season - and we struggle to cover him.
     
  8. Ryan

    Ryan Well-Known Member

    14,911
    2,668
    Ratings:
    +6,093 / 285
    Fair comments again mate. I just think he could almost be involved as much as he is now, by looking for the ball. He doesn't HAVE to stand on the wing in attack. I just think the interplay with Lyon would mean he is involved full stop.
     
  9. Fro

    Fro Well-Known Member

    8,337
    181
    Ratings:
    +245 / 0
    doesnt matter where Benji defends, but if the position he defends is relevant then Stewart would be MORE likely to get injured on the wing.

    Ireally do think you are making a mountain out of a molehill mate, and as for being disapointed, my comment wasnt abusive and didnt take anything away from your "healthy debate"

    if you want my honest opinion the idea is absolutely ridiculous. if you polled 100 people if they would play stewart on the wing or FB, i'd be very surprised if it wasnt unanimous.
     
  10. Ryan

    Ryan Well-Known Member

    14,911
    2,668
    Ratings:
    +6,093 / 285
    But Canteen - BK isn't a 1, 6, 7 or 9. That's what I'm saying. The number 1 jersey is a very important jersey, and fundamentally, and I'm being honest here, think this is a main reason The Roosters are faultering - apart from just being crap of coarse.
     
  11. Ryan

    Ryan Well-Known Member

    14,911
    2,668
    Ratings:
    +6,093 / 285
    In that case - your point is noted and appreciated. Adam Macdouggall was supposed to play fullback for The Rabbits, yet his injury toll meant they shifted him to the wing, even when his "preferred" position from his words were fullback.

    I know Souths are a tough example, but it is another case where this has happenned.
     
  12. Fro

    Fro Well-Known Member

    8,337
    181
    Ratings:
    +245 / 0
    not being able to work out who is in the 6,7 and 9 would have made a lot more sense and helped your rooters argument Ryan
     
  13. Matabele

    Matabele Well-Known Member

    23,047
    447
    Ratings:
    +466 / 6
    Amen
     
  14. Fro

    Fro Well-Known Member

    8,337
    181
    Ratings:
    +245 / 0
    Souths are a silly example, we arent running stone motherless last and shuffling positions like a deck of cards in a frantic quest for a win
     
  15. Chip and Chase

    Chip and Chase True Supporter Staff Member Administrator Premium Member 2016 Tipping Competitor

    12,810
    3,170
    Ratings:
    +6,282 / 44
    The whole concept of a player being "injury prone" is flawed. Injuries are a matter of luck, you either get them or you don't. Some players have no luck with the same injury (Kosef knee, Marshall shoulder, Papworth everything), while others may get it once in a career and than nothing. Granted that given he is a diabetic that he will take longer to recover than others, but that condition in itself does not increase his risk of injury.

    Anyway if you put him on the wing than you'll probably increase his chances of getting injured. He'll have to do a lot more one on one straight up defence on the wing, and they would probably target him because of his size with some bigger ball runners. At least at fullback he is generally making cover tackles (side on chases) or if it's on the line defence he will have help. Less toll on the body back there.

    Skill wise he would probably go alright on the wing, but it's the old adage "you don't weaken one position to strengthen another". He is much more use at fullback where he can chime in where he wants. He has been playing the second man well too, to give us an option a bit wider off the ruck.

    Basically we just need to get a decent back up coming through the lower grades, or if one exists now get Des to at least give him a go. As it is now we cover him with a winger anyway when he is out, so it makes no difference whether he is on the wing or at fullback. The real issue is depth in the fullback position.
     
  16. Canteen Worker

    Canteen Worker Well-Known Member 2016 Tipping Competitor

    13,234
    186
    Ratings:
    +212 / 5
    Bottom line is that you play the best player you have at fullback. You don't move a player because he may or may not play every game.

    If Hicks was a great fullback he would have been there for the last two games.

    This is a ridiculous suggestion!!!!!
     
  17. SilentBob

    SilentBob Well-Known Member

    1,368
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0
    He played 24/25 games last season, how is 1 game a "fair bit"?.
     
  18. Dan

    Dan Administrator Staff Member Administrator 2016 Tipping Competitor

    32,370
    3,610
    Amsterdam, The Netherlands
    Ratings:
    +5,462 / 74
    HE is our fullback and should remain there. The last few weeks have highlighted how poor we are without him in that position and that we have little adequate depth to cover him
     
  19. Stuey Davis Socks

    Stuey Davis Socks Well-Known Member 2016 Tipping Competitor

    1,040
    35
    Ratings:
    +179 / 3
    I thought Cuthbo had the wing spot all sewn up :D
     
  20. Garts

    Garts Well-Known Member

    5,482
    363
    Ratings:
    +672 / 18
    Stewart is a better fullback than a winger.

    Hicks is a better winger than fullback.

    So yeah I can see the logic in moving Stewart and Hicks :doh: Especially after you said he is one of the very best fullbacks you have seen in a very long time, then you follow it up by lets move him to the wing :lol: :lol:

    This idea has no merit at all. You do not move one of your best players and best attacking weapons to a position where he will see less ball, it makes no sense at all.
     

Share This Page