You need to be a member of 1Eyed Eel to add comments!
This reply was deleted.
More stuff to read
"Good blog, Super. Bert, very well said.
As long as the club stays internally aligned and is repairing relationships damaged by our dysfunctional past, I'll have hope in this new era.
I still feel R&R over the next year or so, especially in the pack…"
As long as the club stays internally aligned and is repairing relationships damaged by our dysfunctional past, I'll have hope in this new era.
I still feel R&R over the next year or so, especially in the pack…"
"Yeah good point. Kearney didn't have a plan to bring juniors along or have an idea of who he wanted to bring in really. Just seemed like they made the GF 2 years prior, just a bit of polish and all good. I actually think Kearney came in a bit…"
"surely his dad wont be giving away intel like this. You will havew to be pretty stupid "
"Truthfully SK looked out of his depth here and combined with completely inept recruitment was never going to turn things around. Unlike SK, JR does seem to have an understanding of where he wants to take the team and we've made a group of signings…"
Replies
Secondly even though I believe he is adept at both 6 and 13, I believe at 13 he is much more beneificial to the team. With him being at 13 we have a rangy bloke with skills who can roam both sides of the ruck to get the ball out to the centres, and also having Hayne, Morts and KK sniffing behind him. Mateo is so good because he puts the defence in 2 minds, he has the ability to slice right through or use his ball playing abilities to get it too our quality outside backs.
Also with Mateo playing at 6, we instantly sacrifice another ball player to the team. Why have a spine of 1. Hayne 6.Mateo 7.Mortimer 9. MK 13. Smith when we could have 1. Hayne 6. Morts 7. KK/Robson 9. MK 13 Mateo. I know which one would worry me more if I was an opposition coach. Alot of teams would kill too have one game breaker in their team, well I honestly believe we have 4 in Hayne, Mateo, KK and Morts.
Also at this stage I honestly don't think Mortimer has the ball playing ability to handle being a 7 at NRL standard. At 5/8 where he can play his natural game of running off the 7 and sniffing around the ruck he has proved himself to be quality. Why would you put pressure on the young guy by chucking him at 7? This also would put alot more pressure on Mateo and Hayne to do the ball playing.
Lastly we tend too forget that Hayne pretty much plays as a second 5/8th anyway, thus another reason why Mateo isn't needed to slot into the halves.
Rothfield is assuming that Morts and Mateo are the best pairing because he is an outsider looking in, he wouldn't have seen alot of KK thus doesn't know his potential. He also probably see's Robson as any other plugger who doesn't add the threat of Mortimer, but as we all know as Parra fan's Robsons strength is that he is solid and does his job, allowing the flashier players to do the magic.
I am merely saying that Mateo is our best five eigth. The bloke prefers playing there and, in my opinion if he ended playing at the Bulldogs would play there.
He is a rangy player and a good attacker but;
1. He is not a great defender, usually a pre - requisite for a lock forward and;
2. The typical job of a six is more in line with you what you have described above than a 13.
The fact that Hayne chimes in doesn't affect my argument at all, however the fact that Hayne takes on a lot of the kicking responsibilty would be beneficial because Mateo doesn't have a real good boot on him.
I don't think we are short backrowers because I think Moi Moi, Ben Smith, Shackelton, Horo, Hindmarsh will all play there this year, not to mention Brendan Oake.
KK and Mortimer won't work as a usual halves pairing, but I would bet my house (if i had one) that they will kill it together. Does Hayne play like a typical fullback? No, but he took the position to a new level last year and killed it. The game is changing and there are more and more ball playing locks in the game, Mateo could become the prototype for it. IF he went to the Dogs I reckon he would slot straight into 13 where the dogs had Eastwood playing last season (another modern day ball playing lock) with Roberts at 6 and Barba at 7.
Mateo will get targeted in defence whether he is at 13 or 6, that's not an argument. DA can always change the defensive structure of the team if need be.
I do get your point in saying that he is our best 6, and yes he probably is. But I think I have given enough evidence to show that at Parra he will be most effective at 13.
Daniel Anderson seems to think so, and in the end that's the only opinion that matters.
How can you say defence is not a factor in whether someone should play at lock?
I think your points are totally valid but I won't change my opinion that mateo should be at 6, and should be the focal point of the teams attack.
Furthermore, as devastating as it was to lose Mateo to injury early in the season against Manly, did we not excel with Mortimer at 6??
In my book, based purely on last years form and under the structure we'll no doubt play under, Mortimer is our best option at 6 and Mateo our best at 13.
Because its not anymore, as I said you can always change the defensive structure around. I would bet that Mateo would be doing the same amount of tackles whether he was at 6 or 13, there very similar positions these days. I'm honestly not that worried about it, Hindy as we all know does thrice the amount of work as a typical back-rower and Shack and Benny Smith are also good defenders.
Mateo's worst defense is close to the line anyway, thus opposition are going to be picking him out wherever he is in the defensive line, so let's just hope he's improved in that department.
Also as much as Mateo has the ability to be the focal point of attack, you are forgetting that we have the best attacking player in the game in the number 1. Hayne carried us to the GF on the back of being the focal point of attack, why the heck would you want to change that :S ?
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next