On paper it sounds a good idea to pay foran on games played as incentive , but we dont need foran to be playing for next week. We need someone to go hard at the line . If he starts thinking i need next weeks coin, he might start drifting accross field and turning the ball back inside over and over again.
We dont need another one of those
He is a gamble . He is worth a risk because of the way he plays. If self preservation is his driving force, then dont worry about it i say.
The forum will be funny next year. If foran puts together 15 - or 20 games, those that endorsed him will rightly feel justified. If he injures himself the " i told ya so " brigade will be having a ball at manlys expense
But in the end the only reason foran is considered is because manly lacks what he has. And what he has costs is more than manly can afford
Schuster being the smokey in the equation, also a gamble to some extent, but it appears now , with the players under contract. On field performance manly has to gamble or be content with 6th to 12 th on the ladder
After losing AFB we need strike backs to add potentcy to a game that is pretty bland and our backs have been starved of opportunity for a few years.
Who is going to ignite them ?
I bet tom turbo would love to see foz there. Maybe taking some heat and responsability off tom who was a one man band earlier in the season might preserve tom a bit . He was essentially doing what we would pay foz to do and also play fullback
If walks goes back to centre i imagine the time he spent at 6 should make him a harder prospect to contain. He was showing the goods this stint at 6 and parker was on fire outside him.
If this comes off, suli could be sacrificed as he just doesnt get any ball so we may as well play a defender there.
