I can't help but notice every year when the dally ms happen.Theres no eels players ever winning anything significant no medals no dally m no team of the year no coach of the year nothing.Theres Bairley to none of any eels players ever there now.
You need to be a member of 1Eyed Eel to add comments!
Replies
There’s a reason no major sport uses a weekly 1–10 scale anymore. In reality, it was just a compressed 5–8 scale—nobody got a 2, and 10s were virtually non-existent. Winners always got 7s and 8s, while losing teams got capped at 5s or 6s, meaning 1–10 doesn't solve losing-team bias anyway. Plus, in an era of HD replays and micro-stats, subjectively grading 272 players every single round just creates 272 individual arguments.
Though of course players themselves loved the RLW ratings as they got recognised with a score, coaches as well as everyone is accounted for. Though the players themselves hold the RLPA Players’ Champion in higher regard. An award that uses a 3, 2, 1 voting model, granted at the end of the year but still uses it, not a 1–10 report card. If you ranked a round under both systems, the top 4 or 5 players in the 1–10 marks would almost always be the exact same players polling in the current 12 point system. Why bloat an entire award and force judges to grade 34 players a match when 90% of those scores have zero bearing on who the best player actually is? A bloke getting 7s every week isn't turning games on their head. Both systems have bias and neither is flawless, but the current system is cleaner in finding the genuine Player of the Year.
Here’s a quick math example to prove why: a player who averages 8/10 across 24 matches gets 192 points for the year. Meanwhile, an elite player who misses games for Origin, rest, or a minor injury plays 18 games and averages an 8.5/10, scoring 153 points overall. The player with the better per-game performance gets outscored simply due to game volume. Under a 3, 2, 1 setup, that higher-average player accumulates the top-tier points and finishes with the higher tally. That's just fairer. Not perfect by any means but more simpler to get the end result.
There was a system in place to take missing games into account. The bottom 5 scores were not counted, don't know exactly how the full formula worked but it was worked in.
As I have stated it was a more highly regarded award by those in the game so to totally dismiss it as you have is ignorant.
Maybe because half the team hasn't hit their peak and the other half are close to retirement
Hey at least we had the rookie of the year !. Lol Eels - the feeder club of the year 🤣
I will say Chief, not saying it for sake of arguing ill have this regardless of who it was. But Sanders shouldn't have even qualified for rookie of the year.
He played 2 games in 2024 and 2 games in 2025. This was his 3rd year in FG. I understand the rule of under 6 games or something like that but what if a player plays 1 game a year for 6 years, he can win rookie of the year in his 7th season? To me, once you have debuted, the following season you are not a rookie. If they keep it as the following year under 6 games you can still be counted then fair but 3 years since debut?
Wasnt a strong year either as I felt Harrison at least deserved a nomination.
As for Sanders, you know my thoughts on that whole thing. Don't want Blue Eel to come get me haha.
Alright Alright we've got some signings coming
I love it how some have come here to abuse the club after the Dally M's when if you ask the same people 3 months ago if we would have any involvement in the Dally M's the answer would be an emphatic no. So why is it a problem now when we knew for a while we would have no mention? Haha
Not really abusing the club, just taking the piss and we knew we would have no involvement in the Dally Ms, 3 months ago because for more then 2 years now we have been screaming and calling out for a big name signing cause we know no one on this team has the calibre to participate. It's there fault cause they've been playing with their cocks missing every single signing available🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
41 years now and counting, got to start making some serious moves in the off season
Now I wouldn't say they are just sitting there missing targets. They are trying. You can try and fail miserably too. You can try but not hard enough either. They are trying to get players. Now is what they are doing good enough? No. But not like they are sitting saying "everything is amazing" they know but have no idea how to get out of it to be fair.
You don't necessarily need Dally M players to be successful, you just need a team working together week in week out with a passion to be their very best. You don't even have to go after victories - they will come if you have the right attitude. That will eventually attract quality players who want to get the best out of themselves, and will show the young players what it takes to be a successful NRL player.
Obviously the club needs to play their part too for a club-wide passion for consistent performance.
-
4
-
5
-
6
-
7
-
8
of 8 Next