manlyfan76
There is no A.I. Just better computers
Rubs is not in our best 4 centres
Garrick general news thread
- Thread starter Mark from Brisbane
- Start date
Barry Hogan
Member
Enough is enough. He is not a centre and most likely never will be.
Put him back on the wing or move him on if he wants to play centre/fullback.
Second time this season he has been forced off with HIA, out next week with the grade 1.
Ray Ray most likely back on the wing and Talaubto centre.
Ray Ray most likely back on the wing and Talaubto centre.
Our new 9 simpkin going ok
Better than anything Gordan or Lawton has offered this year
Nothing flashy but solid
Better than anything Gordan or Lawton has offered this year
Nothing flashy but solid
Brookie Bob
"I come back to you now at the turn of the tide"
Yes and no - yes for some stability, no for picking players from the Dutch league
Heckenberg
Reserve Grader
It’s a shame we gave in to pressure to sign him on centre/fullback money. Should’ve held strong on that one.
frank stokes
I discriminate indiscriminately
Served cold @Woodsie
LeonardCohen
Bencher
I’m a Garrick fan but he’s had attacking masterclasses on many occasions…the tongue in cheek can be reserved for his defensive masterclass against a top side in September.
Also, not suggesting he is a terrible defender, nor that every try down his edge is his fault, but I do think he has work to do.
You give food for thought ... I'm racking my brain and memory of the past 60 years of watching footy to come up with a centre who didn't have tries scored down his edge ...
LeonardCohen
Bencher
What prompted you to do that? Certainly not my post, that never alluded to anything of sort? Are you suggesting that all centres defend equally as well and improvement is not a requirement?
frank stokes
I discriminate indiscriminately
It’s funny because I have been critical of Garrick and just as I started to rate him as a winger, Seibs moved him to centre…
My opinion (which is all it is) for the most part of last year was that his defensive decisions at centre were generally not great BUT the one statistic that Reubs improved last year (honestly about the only one) was his tackling percentage (85% which was the best in his career)… I know that does not include misreads but it tells you that he has worked on it (and he is not having to tackle bomb-contests and acrobats as much I guess)
If he continues to play like he has for the first 3 rounds of 2025 then I will be happy to eat your humble pie…
…cold… 😉
Hi feathered friend . This is how I understood Woodsies post
He just said that all centres have tries scored down their end
He did not say that all centres defend equally
He did not say that improvement is not required
Every player has room for improvement as Excellence is an on going quest .
forums are funny because we all favour differently
I think the sun shines out of Garrick's arse . I think he is a Great centre
You have been a Critic .
I have been a Critic of Brooks .
Not all fans and Coaches favour the same players in their team
The moral of the story
We all crave a different flavour
What I'm suggesting is that people see what they have a preconceived bias of ... (not aimed at you) ... If you believe for example a player has bad hands. then every time he drops the ball stands out in your memory .. even if stats say he makes less errors than anybody else.
Does he need to improve his defence .. yes ... is he any worse than 90% of other centres .. not IMO.
Did you see what you have done ..... you have @BOZO agreeing with you.....
Bomb Voyage
Reserve Grader
Can we change the thread title for god sake, and every other “clever” title there is on players? They’re so lame.
That is what common sense posts do feathered friend
Even Bozo the clowns like me agree to them 🙂
Users who are viewing this thread
Staff online
-
DanKim Jong Dan
| Team | P | W | L | PD | Pts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
2 | 2 | 0 | 44 | 6 |
|
3 | 3 | 0 | 32 | 6 |
|
3 | 2 | 1 | 38 | 4 |
|
3 | 2 | 1 | 36 | 4 |
|
3 | 2 | 1 | 36 | 4 |
|
3 | 2 | 1 | 33 | 4 |
|
3 | 2 | 1 | 6 | 4 |
|
2 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 4 |
|
3 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 4 |
|
3 | 2 | 1 | -4 | 4 |
|
3 | 2 | 1 | -12 | 4 |
|
3 | 1 | 2 | -6 | 2 |
|
2 | 0 | 2 | -9 | 2 |
|
3 | 1 | 2 | -38 | 2 |
|
3 | 0 | 3 | -28 | 0 |
|
3 | 0 | 3 | -64 | 0 |
|
3 | 0 | 3 | -72 | 0 |
