We've only used 24 players

  • 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.

Chuck

Reserve Grader
Sorry if this was posted in the last few days, but I noticed a stat in the SMH showing we had the lowest amount of players used in 2010 (24).

That is a relatively low number considering how many injuries we've had this year. I would put us with only Souths and Tigers with regards to how much of an effect it has had on our season.

The Tigers have coped very well though.

I guess a more relevant stat would be how many games has your best 17 missed due to injury. Then you would be looking at 46 or so just for Stewart and Williams.
 
Backs

Stewart
Farrar
Hopoate
Whare
Lyon
Matai
Oldfield
Robertson
Hodkinson
Foran
T-Rex

Forwards


Buhrer
Seu Seu
Ballin
King
Kite
Perry
Rose
Stewart
Watmough
Rodney
Cross
Gaulavo
Bailey
Mauro

Well I count 25 for the record.
 
Chuck link said:
Backs

Stewart
Farrar
Hopoate
Whare
Lyon
Matai
Oldfield
Robertson
Hodkinson
Foran
T-Rex

Forwards


Buhrer
Seu Seu
Ballin
King
Kite
Perry
Rose
Stewart
Watmough
Rodney
Cross
Gaulavo
Bailey
Mauro

Well I count 25 for the record.
I'm pretty sure Mauro hasn't played a first grade match this year. hence the 24.
 
Chuck link said:
Sorry if this was posted in the last few days, but I noticed a stat in the SMH showing we had the lowest amount of players used in 2010 (24).

That is a relatively low number considering how many injuries we've had this year. I would put us with only Souths and Tigers with regards to how much of an effect it has had on our season.

The Tigers have coped very well though.

I guess a more relevant stat would be how many games has your best 17 missed due to injury. Then you would be looking at 46 or so just for Stewart and Williams.

a big assumption in Williams being part of our best 17.

best 25 sure, but the top team with everyone available??
 
I have read very similar threads recently. This is usually the outcome. We've got heaps of talent out back but it's all injured. We're pretty skinny up front at the moment cause of a lack of NSW reserve grade team. Coaches would be reluctant to debut many 2nd rowers let alone props strait out of toyota cup. Would have to be a pretty tough 20yr old. Bottom line i reckon is we need a NSW based reserve grade team!
 
It's the fact that we're copping it in the same positions.

We've had to play 4th & 5th string fullbacks at stages.

We've never had much speed, that's just the way it is but the two fastest blokes have been out all year.

Also, Des brings in the same blokes & reshuffles the team. Other coaches might bring in different specialists for every position.
 
Chuck link said:
Sorry if this was posted in the last few days, but I noticed a stat in the SMH showing we had the lowest amount of players used in 2010 (24).

That is a relatively low number considering how many injuries we've had this year. I would put us with only Souths and Tigers with regards to how much of an effect it has had on our season.

The Tigers have coped very well though.

I guess a more relevant stat would be how many games has your best 17 missed due to injury. Then you would be looking at 46 or so just for Stewart and Williams.

Do you really want us to use more players? Sure there have been great from Hoppoate Whare and Oldfield

but there has been Buhrer who while tries his best looks like a boy playing with men,possibly keep our young backs and outsource our forwards while the young ones get more chance to develop mentally and physically
 
Looking at some of the reserve graders doing around there are 2 stand outs for mine who we lost when we gave up a reserve grade.
Sean Meaney a good fullback at the Tigers.
Trent Rose who was a ball playing lock and now half at the Eels/
I rated both of these guys.
 
Fro link said:
[quote author=Chuck link=topic=184990.msg289347#msg289347 date=1283300138]
Sorry if this was posted in the last few days, but I noticed a stat in the SMH showing we had the lowest amount of players used in 2010 (24).

That is a relatively low number considering how many injuries we've had this year. I would put us with only Souths and Tigers with regards to how much of an effect it has had on our season.

The Tigers have coped very well though.

I guess a more relevant stat would be how many games has your best 17 missed due to injury. Then you would be looking at 46 or so just for Stewart and Williams.

a big assumption in Williams being part of our best 17.

best 25 sure, but the top team with everyone available??
[/quote]

well yes you wouldn't put an outside back on the bench if he couldn't make the first 17, but he is no worse than 19th.
 
Shane link said:
[quote author=Chuck link=topic=184990.msg289347#msg289347 date=1283300138]
Sorry if this was posted in the last few days, but I noticed a stat in the SMH showing we had the lowest amount of players used in 2010 (24).

That is a relatively low number considering how many injuries we've had this year. I would put us with only Souths and Tigers with regards to how much of an effect it has had on our season.

The Tigers have coped very well though.

I guess a more relevant stat would be how many games has your best 17 missed due to injury. Then you would be looking at 46 or so just for Stewart and Williams.

Do you really want us to use more players? Sure there have been great from Hoppoate Whare and Oldfield

but there has been Buhrer who while tries his best looks like a boy playing with men,possibly keep our young backs and outsource our forwards while the young ones get more chance to develop mentally and physically
[/quote]

No I don't want us to use more players if we don't have to, just thought it was interesting that the general perception is we have been one of the worst-off teams in terms of injuries this season, yet we have used the least number of players.
 

Latest posts

Team P W L PD Pts
3 3 0 48 6
3 2 1 45 4
3 2 1 28 4
3 2 1 22 4
3 2 1 15 4
3 2 1 14 4
2 1 1 13 4
3 2 1 10 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