Just back for nswMCL, there is Turbo out for 4-6 weeks.
Closer to the default mode now6-8 weeks
**** me this is getting repetitive
Or at the very least… move him to centre! Something… Anything…medical retirement.
I am starting to think I am the only Manly fan that notices how bad the organisation of our defence is when Turbo is not at FB…Can we seriously start to look at moving Turbo out of our spine. His consistent on-off availability kills any spine combinations for us. Put Hoppa in there from now on. What to do with Turbo then? I'd be inclined to let him go as first option, or if we keep him, on a drastically reduced contract (which I can't see happening). Let's just rip off the band-aid and get on with a decent mini re-build. We could bring in a few key forwards next season if we let Turbo go, and with DCE on his way...
I agree with his reading in defence. But, its pointless when he spends just as much time on the sideline as on the field... and worse still, we never know when exactly that will be, so the inconsistency kills any development in our spine. I mentioned my preference would be just to let him go, rather than play him in another position. Moving his position wont stop the porcelain issue, though it will protect the critical spine impact factor. We just need to start the process of developing a new fullback (including their ability to read defence... I remember Tom was a bit of a worry defensively when he first went to fullback early years)I am starting to think I am the only Manly fan that notices how bad the organisation of our defence is when Turbo is not at FB…
Not a chance Lane waltzes in untouched if Tom is at the back and the squeals made so much more ground in the second half - INTO THE WIND!!
No idea why you would want a fit Tom at centre… we do not have a Tedesco or an Edwards to fill the organisational role…
That is what I don’t get… do centres not get injured?I agree with his reading in defence. But, its pointless when he spends just as much time on the sideline as on the field... and worse still, we never know when exactly that will be, so the inconsistency kills any development in our spine. I mentioned my preference would be just to let him go, rather than play him in another position. Moving his position wont stop the porcelain issue, though it will protect the critical spine impact factor. We just need to start the process of developing a new fullback (including their ability to read defence... I remember Tom was a bit of a worry defensively when he first went to fullback early years)
The only way I would look at keeping him in the team, and changing his position, would be on a drastically reduced contract... but even then, it's just going to continue frustrating fans as his injuries inevitably occur. Let him goThat is what I don’t get… do centres not get injured?
Imo, if you play him then you play him where he can be of greatest benefit to the team… and that is CLEARLY fullback…
I get that he looks good at centre for NSW but FFS they have pretty well-developed replacements for the FB role…
Team | P | W | D | L | PD | Pts | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Bulldogs | 4 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 46 | 8 |
2 | Sea Eagles | 4 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 52 | 6 |
3 | Broncos | 4 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 44 | 6 |
4 | Storm | 3 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 38 | 6 |
5 | Titans | 3 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 22 | 6 |
6 | Warriors | 4 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 8 | 6 |
7 | Rabbitohs | 4 | 3 | 0 | 1 | -2 | 6 |
8 | Knights | 3 | 2 | 0 | 1 | -4 | 6 |
9 | Tigers | 4 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 34 | 4 |
10 | Sharks | 4 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 19 | 4 |
11 | Dragons | 3 | 1 | 0 | 2 | -3 | 4 |
12 | Raiders | 4 | 2 | 0 | 2 | -6 | 4 |
13 | Panthers | 4 | 1 | 0 | 3 | -16 | 2 |
14 | Cowboys | 4 | 1 | 0 | 3 | -54 | 2 |
15 | Roosters | 4 | 1 | 0 | 3 | -56 | 2 |
16 | Dolphins | 4 | 0 | 0 | 4 | -36 | 0 |
17 | Eels | 4 | 0 | 0 | 4 | -86 | 0 |