RTS- Tom Replacement? (Nope)

Seagles68

Bencher
Premium Member
Tipping Member
Choosing? He was part of swap deal because the Dragons didn’t want him anymore and needed to offload someone in exchange for a couple of prospects.

He is filling in until retirement, meaning he’ll be going at the end of the year. The same expiration date on a potential stint from RTS. Who cares what either do post the last game of the season?
I'm afraid you've taken my comment too literally. Im not saying he chose to come here too retire but he is choosing to retire. Whereas RTS is not choosing to retire, he is choosing to play for another team and not Manly. You may not care what they do afterwards but that is the crux of my issue. Having a fill in for money with a team they dont care about. So thats where we differ - I do care what they do at the end of the season. But anyway ...
 

southsideeagle

Reserve Grader
Premium Member
The odds of RTS being at Manly this year are at best 50 to 1. Savage/Laurie may 10 to 1. No one new 2 to 1. Just my thoughts. Fancy the NRL giving us dispensation. I remember Stawart/Matai/Watmough situation.
 

bob dylan

First Grader
Premium Member
Tipping Member
The odds of RTS being at Manly this year are at best 50 to 1. Savage/Laurie may 10 to 1. No one new 2 to 1. Just my thoughts. Fancy the NRL giving us dispensation. I remember Stawart/Matai/Watmough situation.

I understand its your opinion and you might well be 100% correct. But I am sure we will get a player, there is no doubt about it, and it has to be a fullback.

A couple of facts

1. The rules are we get a "like for like replacement" at the NRLs expense.

2. The Warriors tried to get RTS into their squad just last week but at $25K a match they decided it was no value to them.

So we know it wont cost us and RTS want to play this year. The only obstacle I can see is RTS mightn't want to come across the ditch but surely the money and the number of weeks involved will solve that.
 

KNUCKLES

weights before dates
I understand its your opinion and you might well be 100% correct. But I am sure we will get a player, there is no doubt about it, and it has to be a fullback.

A couple of facts

1. The rules are we get a "like for like replacement" at the NRLs expense.

2. The Warriors tried to get RTS into their squad just last week but at $25K a match they decided it was no value to them.

So we know it wont cost us and RTS want to play this year. The only obstacle I can see is RTS mightn't want to come across the ditch but surely the money and the number of weeks involved will solve that.
Boy I hope so. We could do with some positive news around this joint
 

lsz

First Grader
Staff member
When we had AFB, with the way he was developing and asserting himself as the leader of our pack, I was convinced we were on the cusp of being able to challenge for a premiership. We have not looked likely since.
He was good but without him we did not make a prelim final like we did when he left
 

frank stokes

I discriminate indiscriminately
Seibold in the presser about RTS - "He is not available".

Looks like we must have made some enquiries...
Seibs only told half the story…
“He is not available” - to us…

Manly recruitment officer: “Hi we are interested in having you come to Manly”

RTS :”HAAA HAHAHAHAHA…”

Manly: “We have 350,000 that…”

RTS: “Hahahahahaha…”

Manly: “We are still in finals contention and…”

RTS: SNORT!! “Hahahahaha… STOP IT! Hahahaha…”

Manly: “We have a premiership squad…”

RTS: Beep, beep, beep…
 

KNUCKLES

weights before dates
Don't worry all will be good. Talau will come over early as a like for like replacement.

Manly Sea Tigers
You beauty
 

nightster

Well worn member
Premium Member
Tipping Member
I've absolutely hated the fact that other clubs have been doing this sort of thing so it would be hypocritical (in my head) for us to now do it. As much as it hurts and we run the risk of a spoon, we shouldn't "rent" players from outside.
There is a legitimate dispensation for losing a marquee player due to long term injury in a rep game ...
 
Team P W L PD Pts
24 18 6 333 42
24 18 6 214 42
24 16 8 168 38
24 16 8 124 38
24 14 9 175 35
24 14 10 122 34
24 13 11 -24 32
24 13 11 -137 32
24 12 12 59 30
24 12 12 13 30
24 12 12 4 30
24 11 12 6 29
24 9 15 -111 24
24 9 15 -126 24
24 7 17 -331 20
24 5 19 -199 16
24 4 20 -290 14
Back
Top Bottom