Four Nations Week 2

Ah you did too - sorry to make you jump through more hoops. Guess it just blended in for me since you didn't have an avatar. I'm definitely an avatar supremacist and reckon it'd be a good idea to get one up there because your 17 is definitely something that deserved more recognition.

I agree with a lot of your team. I'm not too concerned about Mata'utia v Johnston. Both are around the same edge, I reckon Sione has a bit more class about him at this stage but can see an argument for Johnston based on his experience playing with a GF winning side.

Klemmer should come into the team, but in a perfect world, he'd be struggling to make the bench, let alone the starting team. I say keep him on the bench, let Australia blunt the Pommies charge and bring him on for impact. It's where he specialises in at Club and Rep level - save him for that role. That would mean I'd have Parker at prop, Bird at Lock with Thaiday in the second row. Klemmer obviously sitting on the bench.

I reckon you're being a bit harsh on Papalii. He made a big mistake in the play the ball off the kick off to kill the Kangaroos momentum but he's one of the few middle forwards we have and I thought he was better than Guerra for instance. I would probably still keep Aidan there because of his versatility and experience but I'm just making the point. So I'd have both with Papalii coming in for Jackson who I like the look of but I believe is the odd man out on this equation.

I do like the exclusion of Farah. Unlike others, I thought Robbie was fine on the weekend. It may have been better to have Hunt there to cover DCE but I don't think his inclusion was a contributing factor at all - I thought if anything he was one of the better players for the Kangaroos. However, I don't think it's necessary to carry him and if anything I'd rather carry a back off the bench like a Matt Moylan or an Alex Johnston who can cover an injury if need be or be used as an ace in the hole to score points. Now, I don't think this is the type of game you use that type of selection, but I believe it'd be more preferable than Farah.

But that's just my opinion.
 
Picking MattUtai is a goddamn joke. I don't care how talented he is, gifting someone an Australia jersey after 7 matches is disgusting.

Papalii dropped makes little sense, especially as they haven't even replaced him with a front rower. I thought he was good off the bench.

Thaiday at prop is another joke once again.


Go Brittanica, purely for Australia's future's sake.
 
God save the queen
God save our gracious queen
 
No big loss, tbh.

You guys have been acting like Poms for months now. Just glad you could accept and embrace it.

A watershed moment on BHQ.
 
No big loss, tbh.

You guys have been acting like Poms for months now. Just glad you could accept and embrace it.

A watershed moment on BHQ.

"I don't care that they start pissing in my favourite coffee, it's still my favourite coffee"
 
Touche. :laugh:

But I'd never cheer against Australia because they happen to be missing 20+ players and have to make do.
 
Touche. :laugh:

But I'd never cheer against Australia because they happen to be missing 20+ players and have to make do.

Whilst I agree with your sentiment, there were far more options to "make do" with than Sheens selected.
 
No big loss, tbh.

You guys have been acting like Poms for months now. Just glad you could accept and embrace it.

A watershed moment on BHQ.

Packet of crisps?
 
Touche. :laugh:

But I'd never cheer against Australia because they happen to be missing 20+ players and have to make do.

To be fair BP I wouldn't be doing this if sheens was making the obvious fucking choices with the players they have to make do with.

I want us to lose because it's the only way sheens will get the arse... It's for the greater good
 
How many changes would you realistically be making?

As far as I can tell, the only change of actual consequence would have been bringing in a prop or two.
 
Quantify 'far'.

Ok 'far' may have been taking it a little far. However, we've gone into the tournament too light. Not only are we light on props, the ones chosen are far too inexperienced. Hannant, Lillyman, Shillington hell, even Mannah are far more experienced props than the 2 he selected and 1 or better yet, 2 of them should have been selected to help the 2 rookies. We needed 3 props minimum in the squad and Sheens sure as hell needed to pick at least 2 of them to play a team like NZ. I was never a fan of the Klemmer selection, but if you pick him, play him.

That's my biggest gripe. He couldn't do much about the backs and the halves but he could have done a whole lot more in the engine room IMO.

Edit: Doh! McGuire.
 
Last edited:
How many changes would you realistically be making?

As far as I can tell, the only change of actual consequence would have been bringing in a prop or two.

Lol, as I'm typing my reply to you.....
 
Yeah but that's a problem too.

It isn't like there was an obvious choice he skipped out on. So far as I've seen all these different team lists with the likes of Tolman, McGuire, Mason, Lawrence, Napa, Shillington, Mannah & Hannant on them. To me that doesn't suggest he had a lot of choices, to me the fact that nobody could agree on one suggests that people were stretching to come up with options.

It's a problem but I'm not going to quit supporting my country over it.
 
Yeah but that's a problem too.

It isn't like there was an obvious choice he skipped out on. So far as I've seen all these different team lists with the likes of Tolman, McGuire, Mason, Lawrence, Napa, Shillington, Mannah & Hannant on them. To me that doesn't suggest he had a lot of choices, to me the fact that nobody could agree on one suggests that people were stretching to come up with options.

It's a problem but I'm not going to quit supporting my country over it.

Oh neither am I. **** those guys.

I just think that if you're missing your top picks for props, you bring in your next most experienced guys....not a couple of rookies. Even if you feel the need to blood some rookies, at least have some experienced guys around them.
 
How many changes would you realistically be making?

As far as I can tell, the only change of actual consequence would have been bringing in a prop or two.

Farah has no place in the team. I don't buy the line of thinking that says hunts a great half, shit hooker/Farah great hooker shit half. IMHO hunt is a better hooker than Farah is a half but besides all that Farah is there to cover a guy that is virtually unbreakable.

They really needed just to name hunt at 6 or at the very least on the bench.

Also we are way too light in the forwards, and we have other options
 
Oh neither am I. **** those guys.

I just think that if you're missing your top picks for props, you bring in your next most experienced guys....not a couple of rookies. Even if you feel the need to blood some rookies, at least have some experienced guys around them.

International experience seems over-rated to me. It's a lower standard compared to Origin and also finals footy. As long as players have those things and play in their normal positions then save for maybe their debut I don't see it mattering at all.

We'll still win this easily, despite having an idiot for a coach.
 

Unread

Active Now

  • Gaz
  • Justwin
  • Lurker
Top
  AdBlock Message
Please consider adding BHQ to your Adblock Whitelist. We do our best to make sure it doesn't affect your experience on the website, and the funds help us pay server and software costs.