Bennett is NOT a Supercoach

[Ari Gold]

Surprisingly it doesn't seem like he did. He's definitely rep quality though. I'd take him over Mullen anyday.

I'm actually going to give Bellamy some credit too. Almost every year I look at the Storm pack and think "hahaha, that sucks". Yet every year they perform well because he has coached them well (it may not be good for the game, but coaching is about winning). I have no doubt he does some very winning things as coach, and I reckon we will see this over the coming years. The fact that he took a reject like Cam Smith, a player like Cronk who isn't the most naturally talented half and made them 2/3rds of the greatest spine in history is something worthy of note. That they may have been paid over the cap limit as a result of the good work in creating that combination shouldn't detract from the achievement of putting it together.

 

[ningnangnong]

Isn't Shaun Johnson a NZ rep already? I could have sworn he played in the 4 nations...:confused:

He was selected initially, but had to pull out due to injury.

 

[Kimlo]

Surprisingly it doesn't seem like he did. He's definitely rep quality though. I'd take him over Mullen anyday.

I'm actually going to give Bellamy some credit too. Almost every year I look at the Storm pack and think "hahaha, that sucks". Yet every year they perform well because he has coached them well (it may not be good for the game, but coaching is about winning). I have no doubt he does some very winning things as coach, and I reckon we will see this over the coming years. The fact that he took a reject like Cam Smith, a player like Cronk who isn't the most naturally talented half and made them 2/3rds of the greatest spine in history is something worthy of note. That they may have been paid over the cap limit as a result of the good work in creating that combination shouldn't detract from the achievement of putting it together.

Yes it should.

We have lost far too many good players over the year because we play by the rules. Bellamy is a cheat who tainted the entire game for 5 years, an absolute disgrace.

I simply can't respect or like him.

 

[Anonymous person]

Thank you for confirming my point that rep status doesn't necessarily equate to rep quality. DCE is rep quality but as yet has no honours due to the competition in his position. Mullen is the opposite - not rep quality but has the honours due to the dearth of competition at his position at the time he played for NSW.

....
and given you are so keen to make DCE count as a rep player, in your books that makes 12.
...

Now, a number of players mentioned I don't think are of particularly high quality, or are long past their prime (Hoffman, Quinn etc.) but it goes to show a lot of teams around the league have a high number of rep players. Does that mean all those teams should win?

lol again

like i said, "rep quality" is subjective. you might think that someone - Mullen for example - is not rep quality in the slightest. someone else might think he definitely is. whos right? well mullen played rep, so hes more right than you are - but its subjective, so it doesnt matter. subjective, cant be proven. what can be proven, however, is the number of rep players. Newcastle have 11 in the starting line, meaning that they have the MOST out of any team in the NRL along with Manly, the Dragons, and the Broncos.

i dont know why you say that im keen to make DCE count as a rep player? wtf are you on about? i pointed out why you using him as a 'never played rep but that doesnt mean hes no good' player was ridiculous, as he was literally in his first season and had the 3 best halves that the game has seen for the last !20 years in front of him for selection.

you can say "other teams have lots of rep players too" all you want, im not disputing that - im simply saying that noone has more than Newcastle. this is 100% fact. cannot dispute it.

also note that the 3 other teams with the same amount - Manly, Brisbane, Dragons - are considered 3 of the top 4 teams in the competition (along with the storm).

AP, I still want to know why you're okay with the Storm being massively over the cap and you consider their grand final wins as legit. But when the Broncos 2006 team was over the salary cap by $30,000 or whatever it was a tainted premiership that you whinged about for months?

i consider their grand final wins as legit because i watched the games, they won the games, and there is 0 evidence to suggest that they wouldnt have had those same teams if they were under the cap. they were still losing players left right and centre, and even now when theyre under the cap again they still have Slater/Cronk/Smith.

and i do consider the 2006 premiership tainted - but not for the reason youre suggesting. i have NEVER said it was tainted because we were over the cap - which we were btw. its tainted IMO by the blatantly incorrect and poor refereeing in the grand final, where it was like watching a Broncos vs Sydney City game from the early 00's, only the Broncos where Melbourne in this instance. numerous game changing decisions that were blatantly incorrect went in favour of the Broncos.

ive said it before and ill say it til i die - id rather lose than win dirty. the 2006 grand final win is, in terms of football matches, right up there with the dirtiest of wins ive seen in the last decade.

 

[Foordy]

the Broncos only have 10 players that have played rep footy as Hoffman hasn't played for NZ yet. he most likely would have at the end of last year but got injured

 

[Coxy]

Pretty sure DCE played for Australia against Wales in the four nations last year

 

[Bucking Beads]

LOL

. MIND BLOWN :haha:

 

[Bucking Beads]

Using AP logic the Parramatta forward pack is better than the Storm.

Parra International and SOO reps - Hindmarsh, Fui, Maitua, Poore, McGuire, Mannah

Storm International and SOO reps - Ryles, Hoffman, Smith, Manu

SIX vs only FOUR reps.

AP, is the Parramatta pack really better than the Storms?

Mate I think it has been established that AP has no logic at all.

 

[Browny]

Surely being picked for NSW isn't a rep honour considering Daley was a selector

 

[Dexter]

Ap I'd like to know why you don't rate WB as a coach. Here is the 98 side which supposedly didn't need coaching. Only Lazo and Smith could be rated as buys we had to have. Devere contacted the club because he wanted to be coached by Bennett and Campion was a very good pickup but hardly an essential part of that side.

Every other player came to the Broncos as a very young player and was developed under WB. Identifying and developing talent is a big part of coaching therefore that alone makes him a fantastic coach.

Broncos 1998

Darren Lockyer
Michael De Vere
Steve Renouf
Darren Smith
Wendell Sailor
Kevin Walters
Allan Langer (C)
Shane Webcke
Phillip Lee
Andrew Gee
Gorden Tallis
Brad Thorn
Tonie Carroll
Michael Hancock
John Plath
Kevin Campion
Petero Civoniceva

 

[Jeba]

I wonder if AP has ever heard the saying about a team of champions.....

 

[Jeba]

And how the hell can you suggest the 2006 Grand Final victory as the dirtiest win you've ever seen? Facts are the Broncos' defence frustrated Melbourne out of the contest that night, evidenced by the Storm trying their hand at so many clutch plays that didn't come off for them. I'm the first to admit that we had a few calls go our way, but if you can't see that we were the best team all night regardless of that then you simply don't know Rugby League.

Game changing decisions? LOL, ok then:

1) Slater strips the ball from Berrigan, penalty Broncos. Under new rules this is play on, under the rules in place in 2006 it's a penalty. He was in the process of losing it but his arm never lost contact with the ball, and under the old rule if you strip it = penalty.

2) Berrigan runs behind Hannant. Of course, that should've been a penalty, but the score at that stage was 8-all and this made it 10-8. The goal for the Storm wouldve still been to score the next try. Not a game changer by any means.

3) The King no try. Couldve gone either way, but who the hell is to say Hoffman didn't touch it with his arm? One of those ones where it's hard to argue either way.

4) Hodges knocking the ball into touch. Despite not being convinced that Geyer didn't touch it either, we didn't score any points off that set, don't think we even got a repeat set. So who gives a ****?

Champion teams are able to overcome adversity, like Queensland did in Origin 3 that year. The Storm lost control of that game in the first half when they had heaps of opportunities at the right end of the park but the Broncos' defence was too good. Broncos were the best team on the night, there's no doubt about that.

 

[Porthoz]

AP has a serious competitor to the coveted "BHQ Most Annoying Poster Award" now that Broncoman has joined us, so he's clearly putting the extra effort in now... :rolleyes:

 

[Bucking Beads]

AP has a serious competitor to the coveted "BHQ Most Annoying Poster Award" now that Broncoman has joined us, so he's clearly putting the extra effort in now... :rolleyes:

Well personally I don't think we should even vote for the most Agenda driven poster because nobody will ever get close to AP.

 

[Broncoman]

And how the hell can you suggest the 2006 Grand Final victory as the dirtiest win you've ever seen? Facts are the Broncos' defence frustrated Melbourne out of the contest that night, evidenced by the Storm trying their hand at so many clutch plays that didn't come off for them. I'm the first to admit that we had a few calls go our way, but if you can't see that we were the best team all night regardless of that then you simply don't know Rugby League.

Game changing decisions? LOL, ok then:

1) Slater strips the ball from Berrigan, penalty Broncos. Under new rules this is play on, under the rules in place in 2006 it's a penalty. He was in the process of losing it but his arm never lost contact with the ball, and under the old rule if you strip it = penalty.

2) Berrigan runs behind Hannant. Of course, that should've been a penalty, but the score at that stage was 8-all and this made it 10-8. The goal for the Storm wouldve still been to score the next try. Not a game changer by any means.

3) The King no try. Couldve gone either way, but who the hell is to say Hoffman didn't touch it with his arm? One of those ones where it's hard to argue either way.

4) Hodges knocking the ball into touch. Despite not being convinced that Geyer didn't touch it either, we didn't score any points off that set, don't think we even got a repeat set. So who gives a ****?

Champion teams are able to overcome adversity, like Queensland did in Origin 3 that year. The Storm lost control of that game in the first half when they had heaps of opportunities at the right end of the park but the Broncos' defence was too good. Broncos were the best team on the night, there's no doubt about that.

Agree with most and also Jeb do you think that the Broncos strength in expirience was a factor in that game?. Not many of the Storm players at the time had been in a massive game like a Grand Final before.

 

[Foordy]

the dirtiest GF wins were the last to by the Storm .... THEY WERE CHEATING A THE SALARY CAP BY OVER A MILLION DOLLARS FFS.

but there is no point arguing with AP once he puts the Storm jersey on.

 

[Foordy]

Agree with most and also Jeb do you think that the Broncos strength in expirience was a factor in that game?. Not many of the Storm players at the time had been in a massive game like a Grand Final before.

IMO, Berrigan won us that match, he shut down Inglis all night.

 

[Coxy]

IMO, Berrigan won us that match, he shut down Inglis all night.

Hence the Churchill Medal IIRC :P