Before diving in, it's important to acknowledge where we currently sit on the ladder. We must acknowledge as fans that our position is far from ideal nor acceptable, however, we must also consider the challenges we've faced throughout the early part of the season:
The extended absence of Mitchell Moses, both at the beginning of the season and more recently
Mid-to-long term foot injuries to key players Zac Lomax and Bailey Simonsson
The off-field distraction and uncertainty surrounding Dylan Brown’s contract situation
A wave of suspensions, including two for Kelma Tuilagi, along with bans for Ryley Smith and Josh Addo-Carr
The inexperience of a rookie head coach still finding his feet at NRL level
The departure of several experienced and influential players — including Clint Gutherson, Reagan Campbell-Gillard, Maika Sivo, and Joe Ofahengaue
A very raw and inexperienced squad — at the start of the season, players like Iongi, "Kit Kat", Sam Tuivaiti, Ryley Smith, and Joash Papalii had fewer than 10 first-grade games combined. And with inexperience inevitably come error
Positives:
Signings:
Our recruitment for the season has undoubtedly been one of the brighter aspects. With signings including; Jack Williams, Iongi, Kit Kat, Lomax, JAC, Dylan Walker, Dean Hawkins, Joash & Jordan Samrani. Across the board, each player has at the very least met expectations, while many have exceeded expectations. Jack Williams, Iongi, and Kit Kat have stood out with consistently strong performances. There was initial scepticism — myself included — around the signings of Josh Addo-Carr and Dylan Walker. However, both have proven to be excellent additions. Addo-Carr has added a new dimension to our edge attack, offering a different style to what we were accustomed to with Maika Sivo. Meanwhile, Walker has been exceptional off the bench, regularly shifting momentum with his impact and versatility. Importantly, there hasn’t been a signing I’d categorise as a “miss.” Even those brought in primarily for development or Cup-level depth — such as Hawkins, Joash, Samrani, and Volkman — have shown encouraging signs when given the opportunity at NRL level.
Style of Football:
Gone are the days of Parramatta relying mainly on our left edge to generate points. While the Gutherson sweep play to Maika Sivo was highly effective, over time it became predictable and overused. This season, however, we’ve shown far more variety and creativity in our attacking structures. We’re now threatening across the park — not just down one channel. Through the middle, we’ve seen promising link-up play, often sparked by a Dylan Walker burst or a smart tip-on from Junior Paulo. On the right edge, we’ve found success through short balls to Kelma Tuilagi/Jack Williams or well-placed last-tackle kicks targeting Zac Lomax. Meanwhile, the left side continues to fire, with Isaiah Iongi and Josh Addo-Carr combining dangerously. Overall, our attack has evolved into a far more balanced and unpredictable system, capable of striking from multiple areas of the field.
Player Development:
A key example of our Player Development this season is Sean Russell. I’ll be the first to admit that over the past two years, I wasn’t a fan — whether he was on the wing or in the centres, I often felt he offered little in either attack or defence. But credit where it’s due: this year, Russell has taken a clear step forward. While he’s still not among the elite centres in the game, he’s become far more reliable defensively and noticeably stronger in attack.
Luca Moretti is another standout. He showed glimpses of promise in previous seasons, but before his injury this year, he was truly beginning to deliver on that potential with consistent, tough performances through the middle.
The emergence of young players like Ryley Smith, Sam Tuivaiti, and Joash Papalii has also been a welcome boost. All three have shown encouraging signs in their early NRL outings and bring much-needed energy to the squad.
We’ve also seen a resurgence in Junior Paulo’s form — back to playing with real intent — and continued strong contributions from players like Bailey Simonsson when fit.
Player Rention:
When the decision was made to release Clint Gutherson to the Dragons, it was met with heavy criticism. Many viewed Gutherson as the “heart” of the team — a leader whose effort and presence were invaluable. However, coach Jason Ryles saw things differently and placed his trust in Isaiah Iongi at fullback. So far, that call has paid off. Iongi has shown immense potential and looks every bit a future star. While Gutherson, as we saw on Saturday, can still be effective, it’s clear he’s beginning to slow down. I wouldn’t be surprised if next year is his last season at fullback.
Other key departures include Reagan Campbell-Gillard, who has struggled for form and impact this season, and Maika Sivo, who had become a shadow of his former self. Joe Ofahengaue was averaging just 65 run metres per game — a significant drop-off for a middle forward. Shaun Lane, ruled out indefinitely, had unfortunately not returned to his best football over the past two to three years.
Additionally, players like Wiremu Greig and Ryan Matterson have reportedly been encouraged or granted permission to explore other opportunities — a move many fans would agree is overdue given their limited impact in recent seasons.
Negatives:
Jmaine Hopgood & Will Penisini:
Throughout the Brad Arthur era, J’maine Hopgood was one of our most consistent performers — regularly punching out over 60 minutes with minimal errors and a strong defensive work rate. However, this season, he’s looked a shadow of that player. His minutes have been reduced, and he's become more prone to handling errors and giving away unnecessary penalties. That said, there’s no doubt the talent is still there — which is likely why Billy Slater has kept faith in him, selecting him in Queensland’s squad for Game 3. If Hopgood can rediscover his best form, it would go a long way toward stabilising and strengthening our forward pack.
As for Will Penisini, I was anticipating a breakout year. With two of the game’s most powerful wingers outside him, I expected a significant boost in both his attacking output and defensive stability. So far, though, that lift hasn’t materialised. There's still time, but he’ll need to find another gear in the back half of the season to reach the level many were expecting.
Lapses:
While the team is still relatively inexperienced, that can’t fully excuse some of the lapses we've seen in both attack and defence this season. The most recent examples — our abysmal first half against the Dragons and Chris Randall’s try last week — highlight just how costly these moments can be. Randall’s effort, in particular, was one of the softest tries you’ll see a back-rower score at this level.
These kinds of breakdowns can be momentum-killers and swing games dramatically. While there has been some improvement in addressing them, there’s still a long way to go before we become a consistently disciplined and resilient side.
Replies
Ah Nos my friend.
Don't take me too literally as a genuine alternative, but then again could we do anything worse as human beings, than what we have seen, even outside of our personal microcosyms of life? People like ourselves would seem to be well settled in our culture of peace and harmony. Our form of idealism, especially the aspirants in this discussion are well entrenced in same.
As i wrote that I thought of culture (there goes my wandering mind again).
Racism is supposedly endemic in our society and whilst I won't argue it exists, in our part of the world I believe it is more "culturism" that causes such influences. Anti_Semitism in recent times may belie that.
Use of AI in the context I espoused is still reasonable i believe. Why? Availability, Affordability, Reasonability all have situation that would not put Physcology out the door from a personal practicing point of view.
In a perfect world there would be no shortage of any medical specialists available, but reality says its probably a need.
Sorry we are getting into Philosophy now and that becomes an agenda by itself. I am happy to discuss this, rather than argue it is. I had not even thought of any of this until I mentioned "her" LOL
Pops, for sure!
Its a good discussion, & of course respect your opinion highly, definitely not trying to be argumentative, just discussing... Completely understand your balanced approach.
NOS/ Pops, Here is an example of what you guys are talking about.
Just now, I was thinking about something but couldn't remember the name of that psychologist (Suler) who studies our online proclivity to be agressive and super-critical on soical media — which seems self evident. So I asked AI (voice is quicker) for the details of the studies and sources. Wallah. Five seconds later (see pdf attachment from Chat GPT). It needs checking, but it gives us a gist of it.
Online Disinhibition Effect and Anonymity.pdf
Warning: It's an academia sheet-show nightmare facing Sharia-styled stoning (if caught, ooops). If only I had a week, a truck to carry around my old Brittanica library that has seen better days, and bought newer versions that might have Suler et al's studies. My Brittnica understands how the 19th century Luddites felt.
Very well said, NOS. Poetic. I don’t disagree with your concerns in principle. And thanks for the kind thoughts too. Ditto brother.
Do you remember those old, pricey Encyclopaedia Britannica volumes that weighed a few tonnes and were sold door to door around 40 years ago? That was my internet and AI growing up. Sitting and reading them as a youngster. I loved those quiet moments of learning. There was no social media, no World Wide Web. Just analogue brick phones and backyard cricket with oranges.
But here's the thing: I barely remember what I learned. And now, I could cram three lifetimes of that reading into three seconds of ChatGPT.
What hasn’t changed is that I still love learning, which is where AI appeals to me. For me, a lot of this comes down to nature and personality. If you lean toward creativity, you’ll express it whether it’s the Britannica days or today. Just in different forms. If you’re a hedonist, you’ll seek modern pleasures. If you’re a knowledge-seeker, you’ll seek knowledge, then or now in different ways. If you’re a truth-seeker, you’ll keep hunting for truth. If you’re a short-cut plagiarist (studies show most humans lie), you’ll find other ways in different times. They'll get caught out eventually.
Agree with everything you said about creativity. Your point on knowledge is intriguing. There’s definitely something to be said about the “effort” and “struggle” to obtain knowledge or wisdom as it gets to your bones and is etched into your pysche. Immediate knowledge not so much. But it would be the same as a student thinking they'll learn the keys to the kingdom just by sitting in a lecture hall listening to a lecturer (not AI at all, similar issue). Not really. Effort, drilling, repetition are the ways we learn. As well as making mistakes. And if we’re relying on AI too much for knowledge, that'll be another lesson we need to learn the hard way. Again, that's just life and human nature.
You’re right: many are intravenously hooked on smartphones, video games, porn, wild rants, shredding each other on social media, hedonism, needing wake up calls and love but hooked on everything but. And I can’t bring myself to blame AI, Elon Musk, Joe Rogan, Zuckerman, Trump or the Kardasians for that.
Maybe it’s a flaw, but I find it impossible to genuinely settle down in either techno-utopianism or the AI-doomster bunkers. Just realism and adapting to the uncontrollable, appeals more. We’re about 70 years late on AI bans. It's everywhere in some many industries and software, operating many systems.
From my limited experience, it’s best to use AIs like ChatGPT more as a critical-thinking creator and collaborator and less a consumer swallowing whatever it spews out on an umbilical cord. Ask for and check AI's sources. The key here is using it wisely. Same as it is in life.
Moral of the Story: Drive GPT responsibly.
I see both positives and negatives in AI often clashing in an evolving, messy war. All a reflection of its imperfect creators, us humans, neither perfectly good nor bad. High-tech advanced AI creators & the most-skilled users who are good, might be the only thing that stops us from destroying ourselves in the highly-armed digital modern world with powerful tools like nukes and AI.
PS: Funny story. A few weeks back I experimented with AI, creating a romantic image for my better half. I transplanted a photo of us into a lush Twilight-like garden (she loves gardens), with some exotic text about undying love beyond this lifetime (she loves that). It was near-perfect except for one thing: I looked like me or an identical twin, but she looked like a completely different woman. Could've been the next door neighbour! Another lesson learned!
Hahaha HOE, sorry will get back your post here, but that last paragraph is great.
Moral of the story: don't let HOE make romantic images of us.
PS: unless the neighbour was rooly hawt. Or, maybe, especially if that is not the case
He is clueless.
Retention is terrible. You need to have replacements lined up first. And he recruited Debelin.
How anyone can be content with the rubbish we have served up....
I would sack him. The sooner the better
Ethan Martyn has gone to the Bears apparently.
I wanted to take up HOE's claim that there is an irony to us complaining about AI while on a site powered by Ning, an AI. It's less of an irony than HOE thinks and actually points the opposite direction to which HOE claims.
The irony is falling on HOE in this one, not me! Compare Ning to Facebook, for instance, and we will quickly see that the question of permitting AI content on 1EE is . . . UP TO THE 1EYEDEEL COMMUNITY!!! ON Facebook, no, you're locked in by the dweeby creep Zuckerburg.
Facebook is what is called a wallled garden social media platform. You are locked into its ecosystem. There is a flat social ontology on the site, meaning quantitative number of links determines hub effects, not clusters of affinities. What happens in real life? None of us live by quantitative links: we distinguish between good friends and acquaintences, and identify with groups according to interests. We also don't tend to monetize our relations. Facebook is busy harvesting our data (even after you leave) and has all but given up on protocols regulating exchanges (which is why the site flip flops from one cesspool of propaganda to another in between feeding you mindless influener crap).
You say 1EE runs on Ning? Makes sense. The level of control and customization is far higher using the Ning platform. So, sure, there is some SEO optimizatioin doing some grunt work behind the scenes of whatever fee Super pays. But after that, unlike Facebook or Twitter or TruthSocial, we the self-selected community of Eels Tragics get to control and optimize the site as we collectively deem fit.
If we wanted to ban posting AI reviews, we could. It's not the tech stopping us. Ning grants the power to whomever pays it a monthly fee to make their little community run as their little community sees fit.
The really deep irony here is that as ChatGPT and the other LLM's, and the AI assistants like Gemini or Grok, become more ubiquitous, so many folks respond "oh we just have to adapt, just change".
Why is that ironic? Because the tech oligarchs building these AI systems are fundamentally conservative and do not want to change. First, the social media platforms and networked hardware produced by the tech bros are fundamentally parts of monopolies and the tech bros do not want that to change at all. Second, the protocols of the AI systems are biased toward minless continuity. Write a letter starting with 'dear HOE' and your word processor will auto-suggest HOE next time you write dear. Follow someone on twitter and then you get deluged with what their followers are on about. It's fundamentally a 'no change' architecture! Or take a less amusing example. Facebook continually suggests to those stalked or harrassed by someone to follow them. Why? Because the stalker had the contact details of the victim, and Facebook is just a dumb platform wanting to maximize links without regard to normal human stratifications (like "maybe don't follow my stalker").
The issue there is that the AI is only good at correlations, and does not understand causations, which is why so many of the LLM's go haywire and become the una-bomber or a nazis or a racist and need to be 'tuned' by humans. The AI does not grasp the causal effect of perpetuating crap.
To reinforce the "don't change" thing, go back to correlations. AI can detect cars with which it is familiar and faces it already knows. Hence why automated cars routinely crash into pedestrians or parked cars, because they suck at identifying change. Or why AI pins crimes on minorities when used for facial recognition.
These AI devices are thus inherently conservative, in the specific sense of being loathe to change anything! So you see the deep irony in critics of letting AI spread being accussed of being afraid of change.
You are on fire Daz
-
23
-
24
-
25
-
26
-
27
of 27 Next