Jamie Humphreys

[Ohgeez]

Walsh. If we are calling for Bunting and Walsh, then we are basically calling for Mullane and Ferris to be our next halves

You also said last week that that Navale ‘wasn’t a answer’ to being a first grade player & that all the juniors we have are all crap even tho we have 1 of the most promising rookies of the year in Hopoate. Let’s hope for the clubs sake another 1 of those junior half’s can prove you wrong. I will say Humphreys was very impressive on debut & if you are right the club will look like idiots

 

[LeonardCohen]

My Step Brother knows the Chooks lower grades VERY intimately. Think a Chooks version of @Smokin Joe (possibly even more obsessed). I'll take his word on Joey Walsh.

For the record, I also add very little value to the quality of Rugby Union players. Consider this - Tom Wright is one of their best players. Remember him? Couldn't crack first grade here basically. Their top line internationals are dumping them to have a shot with the Titans and Chooks (who knows if they'll even make their top 17).

I saw this signing as nothing but PR spin, made to deflect the ineptitude of our recruitment and retention. That's my take - it may be very right, or very wrong, but it's mine.

If Walsh is our succession plan (or Bunting), I honestly hope DCE plays until he's 50. They won't be in Humphrey's shadow. Dumb, DUMB recruiting. And I was calling for his re-signing a year ago.

I haven't liked what I've seen from Bunting and know nothing about Walsh but I am always skeptical of Union players. But...

Humphreys is 22. You'd have to think he will be 24-25 at least before DCE retires. That's the reason he is leaving, not Manly's inept recruitment. He looks like a first grader and is going to a club that has an opportunity. We have two really experienced halves that have plenty of footy still in front of them and that's the reality.

After seeing what Humphreys is capable of yesterday, it's disappointing. Does that means it's wrong? Maybe not. It is what it is.

The only argument that can be made is potentially we should have given Humphreys his shot this year and not gone after Brooks...but that's a brave assumption to make after (a) one FG cap for Jamie and (b) against a really poor Knights side and (c) in a game where Brooks arguably outplayed the same player in question.

When you look at Illias, he has had some absolutely fantastic games for Souths; a pressure cooker semi-final against Cronulla springs to mind. He looked a serious career halfback and is now on the scrapheap. Basically, it's really hard for young and inexperienced halves and we will learn their true worth over a prolonged period against quality opposition, not a strong debut during the Origin impacted rounds on a flat track.

This is in no way an attempt to undersell Jamie's great performance yesterday, nor am I suggesting his loss to Souths is not disappointing. He looks a good prospect. I am just rationalising everything.

 

[themanwithnoname]

Everyone on the winning team can look like a potential star when you are dominating the whole game. He certainly played well and didn't look out of his depth. That said, I have seen him play in the lower grades and never really thought he stood out. I don't think he has the speed, athleticism or game management to be a first choice NRL half-back. I suspect he'll remain a fringe first grader/back-up player, but who really knows?

 

[Ryan]

I haven't liked what I've seen from Bunting and know nothing about Walsh but I am always skeptical of Union players. But...

Humphreys is 22. You'd have to think he will be 24-25 at least before DCE retires. That's the reason he is leaving, not Manly's inept recruitment. He looks like a first grader and is going to a club that has an opportunity. We have two really experienced halves that have plenty of footy still in front of them and that's the reality.

After seeing what Humphreys is capable of yesterday, it's disappointing. Does that means it's wrong? Maybe not. It is what it is.

The only argument that can be made is potentially we should have given Humphreys his shot this year and not gone after Brooks...but that's a brave assumption to make after (a) one FG cap for Jamie and (b) against a really poor Knights side and (c) in a game where Brooks arguably outplayed the same player in question.

When you look at Illias, he has had some absolutely fantastic games for Souths; a pressure cooker semi-final against Cronulla springs to mind. He looked a serious career halfback and is now on the scrapheap. Basically, it's really hard for young and inexperienced halves and we will learn their true worth over a prolonged period against quality opposition, not a strong debut during the Origin impacted rounds on a flat track.

This is in no way an attempt to undersell Jamie's great performance yesterday, nor am I suggesting his loss to Souths is not disappointing. He looks a good prospect. I am just rationalising everything.

Totally disagree. We let Lawton walk. Humphreys could easily play 14 waiting and developing until DCE moves on.

My love of Humphreys isn't based on one game LC. It's from watching him live many times.

 

[Ryan]

Both made junior Blues camps in Rugby League though.

I see more upside in Bunting than Humphries personally but that is not to say he is a sure thing either.

My prediction, Humphreys doesnt get 20 first grade starts in the duration of his Bunnies deal.

How many times have you seen Bunting play, and what matches ? I'd love to know and to compare views. What I've seen has been very, very average.

 

[LeonardCohen]

Totally disagree. We let Lawton walk. Humphreys could easily play 14 waiting and developing until DCE moves on.

My love of Humphreys isn't based on one game LC. It's from watching him live many times.

Relax dude, never said your love of Humprehys was based on 1 game haha. Also, when I talk about 'assumption' I am referring to my 'assumption' about Brooks, not your love of Humphreys. It's hard to talk footy with defensive posters.
You're entitled to disagree with his impending departure but I assume the potential starting halfback position at Souths is more appealing than playing as a makeshift 9 off the bench. Who knows?!

 

[Ryan]

Relax dude, never said your love of Humprehys was based on 1 game haha.
You're entitled to disagree with his impending departure but I assume the potential starting halfback position at Souths is more appealing than playing as a makeshift 9 off the bench. Who knows?!

I'm relaxed. I just disagree.

End of the day it is what it is (my view being the club totally ****ed up, seconds after screwing up with Josh Schuster).

I just hope there's some accountability for these screw ups.

 

[LeonardCohen]

I'm relaxed. I just disagree.

End of the day it is what it is (my view being the club totally ****ed up, seconds after screwing up with Josh Schuster).

I just hope there's some accountability for these screw ups.

Not saying relax because you disagree, saying relax because you jumped to a conclusion that I was suggesting your love of Humphreys is based on one game. More than happy with your contrary opinion. You could very well be right and it will be a mistake. Time will tell.

 

[Disco]

How many times have you seen Bunting play, and what matches ? I'd love to know and to compare views. What I've seen has been very, very average.

Half a dozen times for Bunting a couple more for Humphrey's.

Not claiming to be right or wrong on either, just my opinion.

Really we just need one of Arthur, Bunting, Walsh or Alexander to hit and statistically speaking it would be one at best.

 

[Disco]

You're entitled to disagree with his impending departure but I assume the potential starting halfback position at Souths is more appealing than playing as a makeshift 9 off the bench. Who knows?!

Cant see him starting at 7. They have signed Dodd and they also seem to be going well with Wighton and Walker in the halves atm.

He'll have a better shot than behind DCE for sure but I see him 3rd at this stage at Souths.

They were also at pains in that media release to talk utility covering hooker and halves.

I think he is more like Mamazoulous cover.

 

[mave]

I think all you cam do is have some faith in recruitment and retention tbh.

I reckon we are on the up.

If Jamie isn't seen as part of that plan, so be it.

 

[LeonardCohen]

Cant see him starting at 7. They have signed Dodd and they also seem to be going well with Wighton and Walker in the halves atm.

He'll have a better shot than behind DCE for sure but I see him 3rd at this stage at Souths.

They were also at pains in that media release to talk utility covering hooker and halves.

I think he is more like Mamazoulous cover.

Absolutely. I’m not suggesting he is a walk up start for 7 but given Dodd is a complete unknown, there’s the hint of an opening there for him. He doesn’t have that at Manly. I imagine like any young footballer, they have a different perspective to us fans that can watch objectively. He’d be backing himself and would absolutely believe he is a chance if he can train well, get an early opportunity and perform so well that the spot becomes his.

 

[wombatgc]

Ran fairly deep into the line and straightened the attack on a number of occasions. Not spectacular but nice to watch, a little Foz like, creating space for his outside men. Tenacious defence and faultless goal kicking so an excellent debtut all round. Well done.

That’s pretty much how I saw him too. Dug deeper into the line before squaring up and popping the ball. Very much Foz like.

Also, as a follically challenged man, I could only marvel at his head of hair. Does he go to the same barber as Cameron Murray? Is that why he’s going to Souths?

 

[wombatgc]

I just wanna wish him well and say he played an honest first game when Manly needed it
At south's next season I wish him well but don't give a rats
We have options better than most think in the next few years and can't keep them all...only decision I was dirty on is should have played against South's but that's gone and just gunna get behind this team on the road home - we have as good a shot as most in this Competition

Damn you @maxta with your positive outlook/s.

 

[Terry Zarsoff]

You never know. He could be back in a couple of years.

Disappointed to read how he considers the game a business (ok, yes it is) as part of the reason why he is leaving, looking for opportunities elsewhere. You would never hear Jurbo say that.

Then I thought, “well he is a Humphreys.”

 

[The '47ers]

Manly rookie won his mates thousands … and may never play for Sea Eagles again

Jamie Humphreys’ long-awaited Manly debut is every chance of being his one and only game for the club. So his mates loaded up and won big by betting on the NRL first-gamer.

www.smh.com.au

 

[Ryan]

The most disappointing thing is, he'd make the perfect 14 with Lawton leaving us next season. Continue to play there, develop, get nurtured for a few years.

So for those using "opportunities" as the excuse for a ****ed up (again) recruitment and retention balls up, I'm sorry, you're wrong in my opinion.

Play 14 for a few years. Cover both halves or hooker. Learn. But 100% play. During Origin, first choice halfback.

Be DCE's succession...

But no, Walsh and bloody Bunting. God I hope Alexander comes good. I always thought we'd moved in from Mullane and Ferris , but apparently not.

 

[mave]

The most disappointing thing is, he'd make the perfect 14 with Lawton leaving us next season. Continue to play there, develop, get nurtured for a few years.

So for those using "opportunities" as the excuse for a ****ed up (again) recruitment and retention balls up, I'm sorry, you're wrong in my opinion.

Play 14 for a few years. Cover both halves or hooker. Learn. But 100% play. During Origin, first choice halfback.

Be DCE's succession...

But no, Walsh and bloody Bunting. God I hope Alexander comes good. I always thought we'd moved in from Mullane and Ferris , but apparently not.

I think you may be being a little harsh on R and R here.
You've been calling for Arthur to play 14, Simpkin/Croker needs a spot when both available. Lehi needs a spot.

We can't have 4 blokes fitting in at 14.

DCEs form, and extension has put a roadblock in front of the two young halves.
Our owners need for instant success has put a player like Brooks as another roadblock.

Who could blame them to look elsewhere for opportunities. Jamie especially, given he is a couple of years older than Arthur.

And to add to that, Arthur was seemingly ahead of Jamie in the pecking order as well, though that may well have changed after last Sunday.

 

[Disco]

Ferris played 123 first grade games.

By the time he was Humphrey's age he'd played approx 30 first grade games.

 

[Disco]

Also on Walsh, and I'll admit I've not seen him play.

But do you really think a club signs a 18 year old 3 year deal as PR spin because they have had a 22 year old yet to play first grade sign elsewhere?

Or is it more reasonable to suggest an 18 year old who has made junior Blues development squads and was captain over the under 18s Wallabies may be seen as a exciting talent by the club?

Article and timing of the article aside.....a three year deal is not done to in some sort of attempt to appease fans.