Confirmed: Manly is run by imbeciles

[XV-1]

Now I wonder if it another team asking, say the Doggies??????

Last week the Eels asked and got Reed Mahony approved to play last week and he was outside the top 30.

And he is a hooker

 

[Sue]

OK different tack .... Loouie Brown has played 200 NRL games 99 at 2nd row and 99 in the centres and 2 at hooker ..... to then rate him a hooker because he has played there before would be tossed out of any sane judiciary ...

Hastings has played 50 NRL games, all in the halves .. not one starting at hooker .... but has filled in for 10min spells 3/4 times .... to then rate him a hooker .. because he has played there before ..... ditto ditto ....

PSS I just made those numbers up for the sake of a good argument ....

There is another way to look at this other than it being our fault we went with one hooker in the 30.

When Api was out against Canberra Barrett did not try to elevate Fainu. What Barrett did do was select Brown at hooker. Once he did that the die was cast.At least we could have argued a better case if we went to them for the raiders game and said Api has played every game at hooker and almost 80 minutes in each.Long shot maybe but some hope.Thry still probably would have used the fact we made the choice going with utilities and one specialist.

As soon as Barrett selected Brown when he he could have elevated Fainu his goose was cooked.By implication selecting Brown meant that Barrett thought he was the best option as it is the coaches job to select what he believes is our best side.

You can’t then go back a month later and say ok , now we want to try Fainu.The NRL would rightfully say why didn’t you bring him up earlier if you thought you had no options.Pretty difficult to argue with that.

 

[Rodo]

BREAKING NEWS: Fainu is now on the MWSE website as among our top 30 players in the position of Hooker! So, is his contract upgraded?
Also in that squad Kapow is listed as a LOCK. WTF?

30 players are listed on the website but Myles is not listed and from what we know he is taking up one of the top 30 contracted player spots so unlikely Fainu is in the top 30 squad.

 

[MuzztheEagle]

There is another way to look at this other than it being our fault we went with one hooker in the 30.

When Api was out against Canberra Barrett did not try to elevate Fainu. What Barrett did do was select Brown at hooker. Once he did that the die was cast.At least we could have argued a better case if we went to them for the raiders game and said Api has played every game at hooker and almost 80 minutes in each.Long shot maybe but some hope.Thry still probably would have used the fact we made the choice going with utilities.

As soon as Barrett selected Brown when he he could have elevated Fainu his goose was cooked.By implication selecting Brown meant that Barrett thought he was the best option as it is the coaches job to select what he believes is our best side.

You can’t then go back a month later and say ok , now we want to try Fainu.The NRL would rightfully say why didn’t you bring him up earlier if you thought you had no options.

I'm guessing we could not have used the player exemption to cover a suspension rather than an injury. Also Hastings is a much bigger reason than Brown as he has field in the role from the bench and has been unused by the 1st grade squad because Manly are being difficult and are trying to ruin his career.
And there is another possibility (if I'm reading the situation correctly):
If the rumors are correct about Hastings being moved along fairly soon then Fainu will most likely take this spot, but until that happens why not try to get him under the development cap if it is possible. But please correct me if I am wrong, as for most of us understanding the salary cap rules is harder than quantum mechanics.

 

[Under the Sticks]

I'm guessing we could not have used the player exemption to cover a suspension rather than an injury. Also Hastings is a much bigger reason than Brown as he has field in the role from the bench and has been unused by the 1st grade squad because Manly are being difficult and are trying to ruin his career.
And there is another possibility (if I'm reading the situation correctly):
If the rumors are correct about Hastings being moved along fairly soon then Fainu will most likely take this spot, but until that happens why not try to get him under the development cap if it is possible. But please correct me if I am wrong, as for most of us understanding the salary cap rules is harder than quantum mechanics.

Choc majored in quantum mechanics at University apparently......

 

[The Who]

As previously stated, Fainu is profiled on the MWSE website as among our 30 rostered NRL players. Mr Plod and Lussick are not.
It doesn't matter if you have 35 rostered players, as some clubs have. Just as long as a minimum of 30 players are under the Cap.
So, if Fainu is No. 31 or 32 is irrelevant. Therefore, Manly should be able to select him, IMO.

 

[Oracle]

So if a halfback goes down injured and the only players on the bench are forwards then the player brought on is instantly considered to be capable of playing as a half?

What a f....n mess !
Every week is the same ....just one f...K up after another !
Penns, ceo, board members now Baz have all gone quite?
The Penns need to take control and halt the damage being done
...not Gorman and not Trent.

 

[MuzztheEagle]

As previously stated, Fainu is profiled on the MWSE website as among our 30 rostered NRL players. Mr Plod and Lussick are not.
It doesn't matter if you have 35 rostered players, as some clubs have. Just as long as a minimum of 30 players are under the Cap.
So, if Fainu is No. 31 or 32 is irrelevant. Therefore, Manly should be able to select him, IMO.

Fainu is currently a development player and falls outside the salary cap but can only be played if we can justify his selection over existing members of the 30 man squad. We could upgrade his contract but currently our 30 man squad is full.

From @Chip and Chase on the Manase Fainu thread:

If you look at the Top 30 thread

https://silvertails.net/threads/2018-top-30-squad.54364/

there was a link to an article there that more or less listed our Top 30 and they included Mr Plod in that. They were saying that releasing Lussick freed up a spot for us. So that's what I'm basing my assessment on - so nothing more than speculation really. Since this article we have upgraded Suli and signed Hodzjcko - rounding out the 30

The article in question is here

https://www.nrl.com/news/2018/04/17...coach-trent-barrett-with-little-room-to-move/

 

[The Who]

Thanks Muzz, but . . .
it doesn't matter if our 30 man squad is full as clubs can have more than 30 players as long as all fit under the Cap.
I've looked at some other clubs and they have up to 35 players on their roster.
I may be missing the point, or simply dull, so I'd love clarification of the situation. It may be that Fainu doesn't fit under our Cap and can't be selected.

 

[MuzztheEagle]

Thanks Muzz, but . . .
it doesn't matter if our 30 man squad is full as clubs can have more than 30 players as long as all fit under the Cap.
I've looked at some other clubs and they have up to 35 players on their roster.
I may be missing the point, or simply dull, so I'd love clarification of the situation. It may be that Fainu doesn't fit under our Cap and can't be selected.

Does this help?
https://www.nrl.com/news/2018/02/26...revent-robbie-farah-style-wests-tigers-exile/
Like I said, quantum mechanics makes more sense than this crap.

 

[Woodsie]

There is another way to look at this other than it being our fault we went with one hooker in the 30.

When Api was out against Canberra Barrett did not try to elevate Fainu. What Barrett did do was select Brown at hooker. Once he did that the die was cast.At least we could have argued a better case if we went to them for the raiders game and said Api has played every game at hooker and almost 80 minutes in each.Long shot maybe but some hope.Thry still probably would have used the fact we made the choice going with utilities and one specialist.

As soon as Barrett selected Brown when he he could have elevated Fainu his goose was cooked.By implication selecting Brown meant that Barrett thought he was the best option as it is the coaches job to select what he believes is our best side.

You can’t then go back a month later and say ok , now we want to try Fainu.The NRL would rightfully say why didn’t you bring him up earlier if you thought you had no options.Pretty difficult to argue with that.

Agree that may create a precedent .... but it would be a precedent of being hamstrung by uncertainty ....

At the time of Api's suspension, we also lost Walker and had Jorge and Parker out injured ... the decision forced on Baz would have been to elevate Fainu for possibly one game or a centre in Suli who looked like he may be needed for many weeks for the rest of the season ..... he had to take a punt and elevate Suli, and play Brown at hooker for 1 week ....

The argument is still that we were Ok for Brown to fill in for a week ... but he is not a hooker .... certainly not a full time hooker and is not capable of performing there for 8/10 weeks ......

 

[The Who]

Does anyone realise that the Warriors have 40 players listed in their NRL squad. Forty!

 

[MuzztheEagle]

Does anyone realise that the Warriors have 40 players listed in their NRL squad. Forty!

No they have 29 that they can use and they have used 27. They can also choose another player to become part of that list by the end of the month.
The team lists posted on individual team sites are only for marketing and press purposes and I'm guessing unofficial (if that is where you are getting your information)

 

[MuzztheEagle]

Agree that may create a precedent .... but it would be a precedent of being hamstrung by uncertainty ....

At the time of Api's suspension, we also lost Walker and had Jorge and Parker out injured ... the decision forced on Baz would have been to elevate Fainu for possibly one game or a centre in Suli who looked like he may be needed for many weeks for the rest of the season ..... he had to take a punt and elevate Suli, and play Brown at hooker for 1 week ....

The argument is still that we were Ok for Brown to fill in for a week ... but he is not a hooker .... certainly not a full time hooker and is not capable of performing there for 8/10 weeks ......

There are two words to take note of; Elevate and Exemption. We could not (and still can't) elevate Fainu from a development player as we do not have room in the 30 man squad. We could (and have) asked the NRL for an exemption to play our development player, Fainu, as we have no players withing our 30 man squad who can perform that role:
"Each club is also allowed three-to-six players on a development list, who can be paid up to $60,000 each but are not permitted to play in the Telstra Premiership without approval from the salary cap auditor." -NRL.com
Regardless of when we asked for an exemption for Fainu the NRL would have given the same response.

 

[The Who]

No they have 29 that they can use and they have used 27. They can also choose another player to become part of that list by the end of the month.
The team lists posted on individual team sites are only for marketing and press purposes and I'm guessing unofficial (if that is where you are getting your information)

Got it.

 

[Woodsie]

There are two words to take note of; Elevate and Exemption. We could not (and still can't) elevate Fainu from a development player as we do not have room in the 30 man squad. We could (and have) asked the NRL for an exemption to play our development player, Fainu, as we have no players withing our 30 man squad who can perform that role:
"Each club is also allowed three-to-six players on a development list, who can be paid up to $60,000 each but are not permitted to play in the Telstra Premiership without approval from the salary cap auditor." -NRL.com
Regardless of when we asked for an exemption for Fainu the NRL would have given the same response.

Thanks ... I understand that ... but at the time of Suli's elevation ... we had one spot available ..... what I was alluding to was the decision of which development player should have been elevated ....I was simply saying that in my opinion at the time was that the need for Suli was greater than the need for Fainu .....

.... but then fate stepped in and shat on us ......

 

[Class of 96]

Shouldnt we just say we have 7 head injuries, struggling with concussion. The club has a duty of care to protect and rest them. We can do without brown and then clear matt wright 1 hour before kick off

There should be a pretty strong argument to say Brown has been suffering with concussion for the past 3 years.

 

[Woodsie]

The level of selection input by the nrl is....interesting to say the least.

The good news is soon Todd will be able to pour over each teams' roster then pick the best players available for that weekend.

Match up the two teams on paper, then he can decide which team is better and therefore which one would win.

Then he can just let us know on Monday how our team went, who won, who lost etc.

Protects the players as they don't actually have to play. (remember folks...player welfare #1)

Additionally some of the money can be used for CGI recreations of the game based on how Toddy thinks it would have gone.

These cgi games can be beamed into our home via our tv subscriptions. Saves money on actually having to have a ground to play on and the crowds can also be cgi inserted to show how full the stands are and how wonderful the game is going in Todd's leadership by intoddgrity.

You know it makes sense......

If that becomes fact .... I'm putting in an early bird bet for Manly going 0 - 26 .......

 

[Class of 96]

If that becomes fact .... I'm putting in an early bird bet for Manly going 0 - 26 .......

Is that the weekend scoreline or consecutive losses Woodsie?

 

[Woodsie]

Is that the weekend scoreline or consecutive losses Woodsie?

If @globaleagle 's vision becomes a reality that would be win/loss for the season .... then just repeat for all following seasons ...