Discussion in 'State of Origin 2017' started by Big Pete, Jun 1, 2017.
The Boyd v Slater argument was weird, at least from the loyalty perspective.
Who do you go for?
The guy who is arguably the greatest fullback ever to come out of the state but hadn't really made an impact at this level since 2013?
Or one of your greatest try scorers who happened to be the best player from the last series?
In hindsight it's easy to say Slater because the team didn't win, but shoe on the other foot we're probably saying the other thing.
Regardless, Billy has his spot back, it's a wonderful achievement and I'm hoping we see his best in the coming days.
Guess their going with the so called big 3, Slater, Cronk, and Smith.
It's easy. You put the greatest fullback at fullback, and the greatest origin try scoring winger on the wing :D
Like I said, it's easy to say now in hindsight, but Billy hadn't lived up to that reputation in a long long time and Boyd was not only great for Queensland, he was great for Australia too.
If Billy was to play, the only room for Darius was in the centres.
Only because he'd been injured for so long imo. Given some of the other nuffies in the QLD team that have been riding on past glory over the past couple of years, I would have thought Slater deserved a bit of it as well.
I just think the QLD team is stronger with them both in it. I don't see why they both couldn't have been in game 1. Even if QLD had won in game 1, I'd still think the team is better for having Boyd and Slater in it.
Even before his long lay-offs OXY, Slater looked like a spent force in Origin. When he went down in Origin II 2015, the Maroons looked drastically better with two different fullbacks in his stead.
I can understand wanting Slater in the team for what he offers as a player, but can you see why the loyalty argument is odd?
You realise how old he is yeah? He shouldn't be there, we should be moving on from the old guard, not embracing it.
The counter argument to that is Slater's club form is on another planet compared to what it was in 14/15 so there's no reason it would carry through to the origin arena.
I would still rather the back 3 from Origin one and finding a centre from somewhere.
Can Slater do this
We finally did that in the pack by dropping Thaiday, Myles and Lilyman ... only to panic and rush Slater back into an area that wasn't broken
Wasn't he injured in 2015 too? Didn't he play in origin 2 after being told it could end his season?
No, I don't think the loyalty argument is odd. He's been a great player for QLD over the years. He's in good, some would say great, form. Other players have been selected on loyalty over the past couple of years when they were in nowhere near the form Slater is currenlty in. If he was playing terrible, I wouldn't think he should be selected on loyalty alone, but with his current injury free form, I think his past performances for QLD should earned him a chance to prove himself again in game 1.
If it came down to a decision between Boyd and Slater, in terms of only one being in the team at all, then I can understand Boyd over Slater, given Boyds form over the last year. I mean if I'm going to talk about loyalty, then surely Boyd deserves some too. But they were able to play in the same team for many years, and I don't see why they still can't. So for me, it's not even a Boyd vs Slater form or a Boyd vs Slater loyalty argument, it's probably a Slater vs Someone Else argument.
So in game 1, I think a player like Slater, based on his current form and performances for QLD over the years, deserved to be in the team much more than someone like Justin O'Niell, even if that meant having to move Boyd from his preferred position to elsewhere.
It probably makes a much sense as using a someone's try scoring feats on the wing in an argument about fullback :p
Yeah, he's the same age as the other 3 members of the spine, isn't he?
the other 3 members of the spine haven't had nearly 2 years out of the game ...
Yeah, I did think about that and it could be a worry at the higher level of origin, but is club form is good enough to warrant selection. Age shoulnd't be a completely limiting factor.
Look, Boyd vs Slater at FB has probably been one of the biggest selection calls in the last decade. It's polarized opinion. Plenty agree he should have been there, plenty disagree. On the basis of loyalty and current form, it's just my opinion he should have been, but I can see the counter arguments to that. I'll happily eat my words if SLater has a shocker next Wednesday night.
I don't have an issue with anybody preferring Slater, I just find the loyalty tangent sketchy and a fun philosophical exercise. Is it disloyal to stick with the players who did job for him in his first ever series, or was it more disloyal to leave out a player who is considered a legend even though he hadn't won a series since 2013?
Was I imagining things, or did Kevie have fears over Slater lasting an entire series? I tell you what, leaving Billy out of Game I may have been a blessing in disguise. Not only did Slater avoid that catastrophe, he also got a chance to prove the selectors wrong against Newcastle where he produced his best personal performance in god knows how long. I've come around on his inclusion in Game II, but leaving him out of Game I may have been the right call.
The 2 years virtually out of the game has done him the wonders. Before he done his shoulder he looked like he was getting slower. He has came back in better form before he left. It is the right selection imo. Just offers more in attack then Boyd. The amount of try assists he has already is phenomenal. Not to mention the smith Cronk combination
We have also bought in Milford and Morgan. Younger players. The future.
Couldn't agree more Jay and I'm not one of the Slater lovers. Before his long layoff he was nowhere near his best and appeared on the slide while living off past glories.
I've watched a fair bit of him since his return and he has been getting better and better every week. His speed and evasiveness is back and he is sniffing around the middle looking for chances like he used to.
His try to win the game against the Sharks the other night was a great example of what he brings and what QLD were missing (apart from 3-4 damaging forwards) in Origin I.
Boyd rarely shows up in broken play in the middle and while he is great at the extra man in the backline his timing has been a bit off lately for the Broncos and he keeps stuttering into the defensive line. Slater will put doubt in the Blues defensive line. They'll be thinking "where is he" all the time which might buy us some options in attack.
Coopers combination with Thurston is legendary. Thurston makes Cooper a much better player and the Storm combos will also add to the attacking options and potency with Slater sniffing around the ruck and chasing Smith/Cronk kicks on cue.
A much better balanced team. Just need the forwards to aim up and someone to take out Fifita and remind him he is human and can be hurt. Napa needs to do to him what he did to Sam Burgess last year and we will be in a
much better position to compete with the Blues
Yep, and his inability to tackle with his busted shoulder pretty much cost us the game.
Separate names with a comma.