Why give up matterson for Carr all we need is a good centre
You need to be a member of 1Eyed Eel to add comments!
This reply was deleted.
More stuff to read
"Good post but what I think you identified in the top 2 paragraphs is always the issue I've had with our front office.The fact Ryles was never there first choice and they went in with everything to get Galvin and couldn't close.
Yes getting JR looks…"
Yes getting JR looks…"
"Ryles' instincts have been correct so far, regarding cutting players, signings, and trusting in youth. "
"100% coryn, i would even have guymer in front of kelma after how he played on the left edge at the back end of last year"
"I hope so brother I think WB is past it as far as coaching goes much prefer JR and his culture he has brought to the club either buy in or piss off I had said for years you are never winning a comp with guys only there because you paid overs for…"
Replies
Bring back the French
We definitely need a winger to replace Russell and JAC is a top tier winger.
If we have to give up a quality forward to get him, Matterson is the logical choice.
JAC should be our priority and if we land him and still have some coin available, we can go about finding a better centre to replace Simonsson as neither him nor Harper are the answer.
If we could snare Tass to go with JAC we suddenly have a top tier backline.
Tass has a tackle efficiency of over 90% compared to Simonsson who is at just over 80%.
Tass could be playing Centre if Souths move Wighton to back-row or to Halfback. Both are bad choices but it could happen. Might make Tass hold out for it.
But issue is Souths would want a forward in return also. I think now Parramatta are happy with Simonsson and Harper, with Talagi and R.Penisini nipping at their heels.
If the club wants to settle for average players like Simonsson and Harper, that's on them.
Well there goes that idea! BRL says no, but Lodge, Jenkins, Xerri can all come back. Absolute hypocrisy from the NRL as usual.
Have to agree, the heavyweight teams would have convinced the NRL but no not Parra.
It was different when the Rorters wanted Fergo back after his crime was far worse. Or Penrith with Taylan May. It seems if you bash a male the NRL views it as far more acceptable than allegedly putting hands on a woman. Sexism at its finest. Equality is a stance the NRL choose when they want to abide by it seems.
And you don't think bashing a woman is worse than bashing a man?, didn't see you as a weak gutted dog person wiz.
In principal yes , but by black and white laws , it shouldn't be . And the NRL when making these decisions go by the law . You're setting a standard wheras a males rights to not be assaulted are worth less than a woman's .
The fact you drew from my comment the conclusion you did is the problem . It's not about me saying you should be able to assault a woman , it's about me saying you shouldn't be able to get off scott free for assaulting a male . The NRL preaches equality, however they're given a free pass when it comes to not abiding by it . As we all know , equality in reality actually means extending more rights to females than males .
-
1
-
2
-
3
of 3 Next