Luke Lewis VS Nate Myles

  • We had an issue with background services between march 10th and 15th or there about. This meant the payment services were not linking to automatic upgrades. If you paid for premium membership and are still seeing ads please let me know and the email you used against PayPal and I cam manually verify and upgrade your account.

king2213

Reserve Grader
Now I can understand the logic behind signing an experienced forward to steer the team around and help the young blokes !

But the player you choose can not be a busted PROP ( Nate Myles ) !

You would prefer a creative player like Luke Lewis or someone similar !

Luke Lewis is a similar style to Ben Kennedy !

Or if you are going to buy an experienced PROP buy one that has GAS in the tank !

SCORE
MANLY ADMINISTRATION 0
Silvertail Forums 100

EPIC FAIL AGAIN FULTON AND CO
 
I thought Luke Lewis' signing was a mistake, like Souths signing gift or Parra signing Watsisname. I'm very glad to be proved wrong as he is a class footballer, one of the best in his role in recent years and a great bloke who's been through tough times (cancer injuries etc)

Myles is a good signing. There I've said it. He puts in every week and is frequently in the top three tacklers each match. He's the guy each team must have, does his role without fuss or flair. Most of the signings have been good.

The players are not the issue at Manly. The issue is 1) the rookie coach, learning on the job and destroying players along the way, 2) letting Darth Bozo near the team, 3) signing that loser Cartwright, and 4) losing Donny Singe.

By replacing Manly's winning culture with Penrith/Titans losing culture the club has been set back years.
 
A lot of it comes down to cost. What they take from your cap and for how long because once you sign em they still cost you with an early exit. I think veterans looking for another chance are probably worth it because they aren't going to sign long term or chew up too many $$$. And you might get an experienced inspirational player like sharks did with heighington. If not move him on. But one per roster is enough.
 
Although its been denied by the club, we all know that half the reason we signed Myles was because we were trying to salvage something by getting DCE to backflip.

I agree that Myles is a plodder, but there aren't many fleet footed 30 year old front rowers out there. For the most part he has been one of our better yardage gainers in attack and as @ricardo said has been one of out top tacklers most games (though he has also been one of our worst for missed tackles with only Dylan Walker missing more).

Would Luke Lewis have been a better option? Maybe, though I think he would have been better than Brown, although probably more expensive despite our Lewis being a current Kiwi test player. We could definitely have used him as a running back rower because he still has some pace and his skills are still there and as a former winger he can easily cover the three-quarters.

In a way its a pity we couldn't afford both Myles and Lewis.
 
Myles is a good signing. There I've said it. He puts in every week and is frequently in the top three tacklers each match. He's the guy each team must have, does his role without fuss or flair. Most of the signings have been good
True, Myles was signed to provide something we lacked. How many times was Jason King ridiculed on these forums for various perceived failings? What wasn't always apparent to the casual observer was that he brought aggression and experience and those are important qualities for any successful forward pack. That is why we signed Myles.
 
Didn't hear too many complaints when he was signed so the 100 to 0 score to we forum members is standard Harry Hindsight stuff. Watching him play 3 or 4 games then jumping on the plodder bandwagon doesn't earn too many credits in my book.

Apologies to those few forum members who were vocal in their anti Myles sentiment when he actually signed and BEFORE he played.
 

Latest posts

Team P W L PD Pts
5 4 1 23 10
5 4 1 14 10
6 4 2 48 8
6 4 2 28 8
5 3 2 25 8
5 3 2 14 8
6 3 2 38 7
6 3 2 21 7
6 3 3 37 6
6 3 3 16 6
6 3 3 -13 6
5 2 3 -15 6
6 3 3 -36 6
6 2 4 -5 4
6 2 4 -7 4
5 0 5 -86 2
6 1 5 -102 2
Back
Top Bottom