Some thoughts

  • 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.
Coversely, you look at the Tigers at the moment with three creative players in Farrah, Morris and Marshall and they seem to be forever getting in each other's way. Their attack is not flowing.
Very true.
The same could be said about Sharks last year with Dykes and Kimmorley.
 
I'd rate Monas and Morris as equals.

When you look at our hugely succesful teams of the 1980s and 90s, we didn't have a hugely creative half back. We had a brilliant playmaking five eighth.

But the halves (Hasler/Toovey) were solid but not playmaking geniuses. They had just enough to make sure that the opposition couldn't spot Lyons and shut him down without risk.

A wonderfully creative lock in Kosef was our other string in the bow. His contribution was also enormous - we don't have a lock in that mould ATM.
 
Mata, Do you think Burns could be developed into the Thompson style 5/8? I thought he was great through the 70s.
 
Good point with Kosef at lock. we dont have 1 of those in our squad, but from reports from PL and memory of his debut season, Afamasaga is sounding like a devastating ball runner which will be handy for us. Stewart also seems to have a nice offload on him

Not a bad point with the Toovey example, i suppose you could liken some of Burns play to Toovey on a lower level, he doesnt possess the attack options that Tooves had. Ultimately Toovey ended up at hooker and that is where i see Burns heading.
 
How often does a five eighth out tackle a hooker over a season?

Perhaps when the five eighth plays 80 minutes per game and the hooker plays 50-60 minutes.

Assuming Monas played 60 minutes per game and tackled at the same ratio he would have made 31.7 tackles per game. Better than the 5/8.
 
Team P W L PD Pts
3 3 0 48 6
4 3 1 28 6
3 2 1 10 6
4 2 2 39 4
3 2 1 28 4
3 2 1 15 4
3 2 1 14 4
2 1 1 13 4
2 1 1 6 4
3 2 1 -3 4
3 1 2 0 2
3 1 2 -5 2
3 1 2 -15 2
3 1 2 -22 2
3 1 2 -36 2
2 0 2 -56 2
3 0 3 -64 0
Back
Top Bottom