Parramatta Eels Supporters Website
In recent years Beau Scott was a formidable opponent. I have no qualms about that.
But i have ask when does it become apparent that the minutes you play(less then 16 a half last year) vs the impact you and culture you bring wear thin?
Iam of the opinion that he is taking up a spot in the 17 where we could have a player who will have greater effect or should i say more value then what we are getting from Beau. I know what some will say or but in defence we tighten up and his experience helps. Now that is true but for what a whole 30minutes a game? I see better value elsewhere.
So tell me your thoughts on Beau and if his value in our 17 is worth it and why?
Beau will be in the 17, how many minutes he plays will be interesting. Go back and watch the loss to the Cowboys in the prelim qualifier. When B Scott was on the field we defended really well and held the Cowboys. When he was off the field we lost a lot of the sting out of our defence. Even more interesting go and watch Beau's body language for the 15 mins he was left on the bench............he was not a happy camper being replaced !!!!
There certainly is some mixed responses. Thats why Ba gets the bigbux. Time will tell.
If Nathan Brown, Manu Ma'u and the dummy half are playing 80 minutes that only leaves three 80 minute spots (240 minutes) to be shared among the three remaining starters plus the four on the bench. 240 divided by 7 is 34 minutes.
Exactly, which is why I would have Will Smith on the bench, not just for back up purposes, but also for impact reasons. When he comes on he really lifts the tempo.
I agree we’re better off having another dummy half on the bench. Mostly because 80 minute hookers become a defensive liability late in each half. All the blokes they have to tackle get a rest. Why shouldn’t they?