David Stagg - Why is he in our 1st side?

[TimB9670]

I cannot understand why Wayne Bennett and Co. keep backing this player. What annoys me even still is he has made some comments in the Courier Mail concerning the upcoming Cowboys match in Townsville. I personally feel Stagg has no real place in the Broncos 1st grade side let alone releasing press comments. Stagg is pretty hopeless.

Now, I know some of you will say he is a solid player as he rarely mishandles the ball and is good defensively but I reckon a top-flight NRL player should be more than this. Simply put, Stagg offers no creativity in a team that's crying out for it. Again, some of you might say well the creativity is offered by some of our other players but I beg to differ. All players should offer some form of creativity. Even a player like Tonie Carroll offers some form of creativity whereas Stagg offers virtually nil.

It's disappointing to see a player go so far in his career yet not explore other avenues the game has to offer. If Stagg goes to England as it's suggested he might by this site then it won't be any great loss for the Broncos.

Finally, on the subject of disappointing does anybody agree with me that with about 10 to 15 minutes in Sunday's match against the Bulldogs that David Stagg held onto the ball instead of giving a final pass to Denan Kemp which would have been an almost certain try on the right wing? I saw Stagg hold onto the ball instead of passing it to Kemp and was absolutely spewing that he had blown a golden opportunity, almost a gimme, for a try. This try would have tied the scoreboard and probably would have changed the games outcome as we were on a little roll at that time.

I look forward to your replies.

 

[gUt]

Finally, on the subject of disappointing does anybody agree with me that with about 10 to 15 minutes in Sunday's match against the Bulldogs that David Stagg held onto the ball instead of giving a final pass to Denan Kemp which would have been an almost certain try on the right wing? I saw Stagg hold onto the ball instead of passing it to Kemp and was absolutely spewing that he had blown a golden opportunity, almost a gimme, for a try. This try would have tied the scoreboard and probably would have changed the games outcome as we were on a little roll at that time.

Yes, I mentioned this in the Bulldogs game thread but no one commented on it. There was also the fact that, when Holdsworth scored his try, Stagg had gone in to help his inside man and did not have the pace to cover the gap on the outside that Holdsworth got through.

I really don't mind Stagg in the forwards to be honest. He's a tough defender, hard worker and every team needs a player like him. It could be argued that the Broncos already have this player in Corey Parker or even Greg Eastwood.

What I cannot understand is this constant selection of him in the backs. He looks utterly lost out there most of the time and what you highlighted in the bombing of a certain try to Kemp is but one example. When he was deputising at 5/8th his only move was to dummy and step and get tackled on the spot, every time.

So yeah I don't think he's that bad as a forward, but PLEASE keep him out of the backs.

 

[Kimlo]

I still don't see what's so special in stagg tbh.

 

[mick]

Good, solid forward. Wish he wasn't in the centres, but that's the hand we've been dealt courtesy of injury and suspension.

Most of all, though, I just really have to scratch my head about why he's been singled out after the Bulldogs game. Around 15 of our 17 played just as bad IMO.

 

[Sabu_2008]

Id also like to know why Parker is there.

 

[gUt]

Mick!, I am singling him out because of a couple of specific things I saw in the game which a) cost us a try, and b) gave them a try.

I don't really want to see him out of the team, just out of the backs forever.

 

[Bucking Beads]

Don't blame Satgg blame Bennet.. Stagg is a good Second rower or lock and it is ok to put him in centre if injuries strike in a game but to name him at 5/8th and centre gives us no hope of winning games. I bet Stagg would prefer to be named in the pack but he gets named in the centres because Bennet isn't prepared to let a young fella have a run.

 

[QUEENSLANDER]

meh, ive been on this bandwagon for ages... in fact i probably started it. dont rate him at all and wouldnt even notice if he left

 

[Russo]

Qlder you would notice if he left as someone would have to pick up the slack of 40 odd tackles a game.

Agree he is a solid firstgrader at best but all teams need one or two of those to be there week in week out, but he is a forward not a back or utility, and WB keeps using him to fill holes in the backs.

Nice negative first post too by the way Tim.......wonder who you are eusa_think

 

[Coxy]

Can't argue with too much of what they say though Russo. But tend to agree that there's nothing wrong with having him in the forwards. That said, the "workaholic" back rower job is really between him and Parker. There's not really a spot for both of them.

Unless you restructure the pack to use Thaiday as a rotating prop off the bench for impact.

eg:

8. Hannant
9. Ennis
10. Kenny
11. Parker
12. Stagg
13. Carroll

14. Thaiday (to sub on for Kenny or Hannant)
15. Clinton (to sub on for Kenny or Hannant)
16. Sims (to sub on for Carroll, Stagg to move to lock)
17. Eastwood (to sub on for Carroll, Parker, Stagg or Sims)
OR
17. Marsh (to be a roving type player)

 

[QUEENSLANDER]

Qlder you would notice if he left as someone would have to pick up the slack of 40 odd tackles a game.

Agree he is a solid firstgrader at best but all teams need one or two of those to be there week in week out, but he is a forward not a back or utility, and WB keeps using him to fill holes in the backs.

Nice negative first post too by the way Tim.......wonder who you are eusa_think

basically every 2nd rower makes over 40 tackles a game now anyway. thats not an exclusive special ability of staggs.

 

[Coxy]

True. And see my point above that we've already got Parker who makes 40-odd tackles and can play 80 minutes. We don't really need 2 in the 17, though you could probably argue that it'd increase the effectiveness of Sims, Thaiday, Carroll and Eastwood if they can come on in 20-30 minute bursts, while Stagg and Parker stay on for the full 80.

 

[mick]

Mick!, I am singling him out because of a couple of specific things I saw in the game which a) cost us a try, and b) gave them a try.

I don't really want to see him out of the team, just out of the backs forever.

I also saw around 8 knock ons out there, especially from the likes of TC (who probably was responsible for 3 of them) which cost us a try or at least a line break. Hitting holes... no excuses for not catching good passes.

I agree that Stagg shouldn't have been out there in the centres, but he WAS moved into the back row when Emmett came on. Hardly anyone's fault that Emmett broke his ankle...

 

[lyn]

WB is in love with him or he is his secret son... I agree he doesnt realy offer much to our side. I would rather Kenny.

 

[gUt]

I also saw around 8 knock ons out there, especially from the likes of TC (who probably was responsible for 3 of them) which cost us a try or at least a line break. Hitting holes... no excuses for not catching good passes.

Fair call mate but my issue is not with a player making an error (or errors), that happens, it's with a player being asked to play in a position that he simply can't handle and watching the inevitable consequences.

 

[TimB9670]

I agree with many of the statements. Basically, I rate Parker a much better forward than Stagg as he offloads well too!

Look the whole team just had a shocker and didn't gel together at all. Lockyer's passes were flat, fast and furious, that's his style. I reckon some of the players weren't used to his tempo and combinations for this match. The Broncs will be much better prepared this week I'm sure with all guns blazing.

The point I am making is we don't have a need for Stagg. I'm sure he's a nice guy but as the saying goes, "Nice guys finish last!!!".

 

[Guest]

Isn't Stagg in the top two or three in the league for one-on-one tackles?

It's not that he makes 40+ tackles that makes him important. It's the type of tackles he pulls off consistently. He makes a lot of tackles on opposition players who are making a half-break. IMO he is a valuable player, but only in the forwards. Stagg had one good game this year in the centres where he actually ran hard ... but generally he reserves his energy for tackling.

 

[Alec]

Every side needs a tackler/worker. But we don't need two. If Parker does it, we don't need Stagg.

I'm sure a lot of people prefer Parker to the way he was before, so for that maybe we have to put Stagg in the back row so he can take over the tackling role, and let Parker be more effective in attack...