NRL General Discussion Thread - 2016

[Cult]

Why doesn't Gus ever cop the same criticism as Mal?

Or do you only get credit if you won a premiership in the NRL?

Because there's a million other issues with NSW rugby league that we can point out instead.

 

[abashii]

Why doesn't Gus ever cop the same criticism as Mal?

Or do you only get credit if you won a premiership in the NRL?

Because Mal had the luxury of coaching Queenslanders to love Queensland, the best state in the country by a long long way. Gus had to convince a bunch a pea-heart Mexicans to give their all for NSW, aka Australia's cornhole. It was a much harder task.

Plus also Gus had to keep Freddy soberish long enough to have a couple of training sessions and make it to the game. That's a hard task by any objective analysis.

 

[Broncoman]

Why doesn't Gus ever cop the same criticism as Mal?

Or do you only get credit if you won a premiership in the NRL?

Maybe because Mal's tenure at the Raiders wasn't much of a success. Granted his record isn't Langmack or Kearney bad but it isn't anything to ride home about. The Raiders lost their dominating presence under him and he was one of the reasons why Stuart and Clyde were forced out of the club and he didn't get the best out of the junior base.

Gus on the other hand won 2 premierships which were great wins (bulldogs were in big trouble behind the scenes 1988 and his 2nd was Penrith's breakthrough). He also coached some teams that were on deaths door and turned them into champions. Penrith had almost no success at all before his reign and the Roosters became a powerhouse under him after many years of failure. He is also one of the greatest origin coaches off all time, if he was QLD coach you guys would've adored him.

 

[Big Pete]

But what does club football have to do with Origin? It's a completely different form of the game which requires a different skill-set. That's why a coach like Craig Bellamy, who is so successful at club level, struggled at the Origin level (against Mal no less). It's a different challenge so to use club careers bears little to no relevance.

Besides, Gould's club career was far from smooth sailing by any means. Gould played his part in the Bulldogs missing the 87 finals, finding ways to undermine Wok before he met a similar fate in 89. His premiership win in '88 was deserved, but it wasn't like he inherited a scrub team. In fact, it was the experience of the side that enabled them to roll through teams as consistently as they did.

Similar deal at Penrith, where he came in and inherited one of the best teams in the NSWRL. They had been a work in progress and it was through the work of Sheens and Wiley that they became finals contenders. Gus came in during 1990 and built on it, but it wasn't like he remodeled the joint. What seems to be forgotten in that premiership success is that Penrith went 3 years without making the finals. Yes, there were tragedies at play but that hasn't stopped other coaches from receiving criticism in similar instances.

Easts was the one club he was able to build back up. How? How else? Money. I always like it how Gus gets up there and pretends like he was the victim of the Super League war when he made out like a bandit. He was one of the key men for the ARL and had a big say in the type of players they should target. Of course arguably the biggest star at that time, Freddy Fittler, found himself at Bondi on one of the biggest salaries at that time.

And hey, it was a great move. Freddy is a legend of the sport and one of the most talented players of all-time. Anyone in his position would have done the same thing, but it was a charmed life and if the shoe was on the other foot he'd be harping on about the advantages the other person has.

But that's just me flapping my gums. When it comes to Origin, all of that has zilch to do with it. The only pertinent information should be the results, the selections and the tactics. Gus had his moments, so did Mal. Gus' success is rarely questioned, meanwhile NSW fans always feel compelled to knock Mal down a peg or two despite clearly being the greatest Origin coach of all-time.

FYI, I adore Gus. If I could hear him geek out about Rugby League, I'd be in nirvana. However, like the greats I look up to - the Lockyers, Smiths, Morgans - they have faults.

 

[Dexter]

Surely McGregor wont be at the saints next year, they are dreadful. The place needs clean out and new eyes.

 

[Porthoz]

However, like the greats I look up to - the Lockyers, Smiths, Morgans - they have faults.

 

[Super Freak]

The scrum clock.

How many times has that been enforced this year?

I've seen so many times where the scrum clock will get down to 2 seconds then the ref would stop the clock because players are fucking around in the scrum.

It makes me wonder, what's the point of having it if you're not going to enforce it every time?

 

[Big Pete]

To answer your question Freaky, I've seen it penalised twice.

Round 2 - Broncos v Warriors
Round 24 - Newcastle v Titans

Otherwise, the referee seems to call time off whenever it gets down to two seconds and the scrum doesn't look like it's going to be packed.

It sucks, but I get the impression that it has saved us time and has made for a better flowing game overall.

Still, I'd like to see the modern game evolve and eliminate the scrums altogether. Make it a tap restart and get the game moving.

And re-introduce the quick tap. Nothing irks me more than a referee preventing a player from taking a quick tap. The referee should set the mark and let the play go. It's essentially the only time where having two referees is useful and they can't even get that right.

My rant of the day involves the magazine shows and their penchant to talk up certain players. I almost felt like making an NRL Conspiracy thread, but I knew the direction that would go in and didn't want to give myself the extra work. However, there's players in the NRL who get talked up ad-nauseum despite having little to no effect on the competition prior. It'd be one thing if these experts could share why they rate these certain players, but they typically get thrown a bunch of cliches their way and nobody ever calls their performances into question. I'm convinced at this point that one hand washes the other.

Other than that, those magazine shows are as reactionary as ever. You're only as good as your last game with that lot and unlike the American reporters who wear their bias, these jokers have the audacity to come across as impartial.

 

[Morkel]

My rant of the day involves the magazine shows and their penchant to talk up certain players. I almost felt like making an NRL Conspiracy thread, but I knew the direction that would go in and didn't want to give myself the extra work. However, there's players in the NRL who get talked up ad-nauseum despite having little to no effect on the competition prior. It'd be one thing if these experts could share why they rate these certain players, but they typically get thrown a bunch of cliches their way and nobody ever calls their performances into question. I'm convinced at this point that one hand washes the other.

Name your players so we can jump on board and take it way too far. Please.

 

[Dash]

Other than that, those magazine shows are as reactionary as ever. You're only as good as your last game with that lot and unlike the American reporters who wear their bias, these jokers have the audacity to come across as impartial.

Prime example being the Broncos after the Melbourne game and after the Roosters game.

Most of the experts, while good footy players, actually have very little understanding of the game as a whole. As such, they are only capable of commenting on what they've just seen and have no insights beyond that. Everyone's an expert in hindsight.

 

[Big Pete]

Name your players so we can jump on board and take it way too far. Please.

There's been a few, but the one that comes to mind is Mitchell Moses.

The amount of mental gymnastics they've used to declare him the best five eighth in the competition is staggering. Even when he isn't playing well, there is always some excuse and the media never goes after him.

It's why I find the Dally Ms so dubious. The journalists get an opportunity to determine who is in for a pay bonus, it rarely seems like the award is decided on merit.

 

[Morkel]

There's been a few, but the one that comes to mind is Mitchell Moses.

The amount of mental gymnastics they've used to declare him the best five eighth in the competition is staggering. Even when he isn't playing well, there is always some excuse and the media never goes after him.

It's why I find the Dally Ms so dubious. The journalists get an opportunity to determine who is in for a pay bonus, it rarely seems like the award is decided on merit.

Good call. Three or four weeks ago one of Nine's "experts" during a Tigers game said that Moses had been the best player in the competition over the previous two months.

 

[mitch222]

Good call. Three or four weeks ago one of Nine's "experts" during a Tigers game said that Moses had been the best player in the competition over the previous two months.

phil gould has an obsession with tigers youngsters

 

[Mitchell_Broncos]

Jason must be happy 1.24 million dollars a season highest paying forward :rolleyes:

Ill admit he is a powerhouse.

 

[ChewThePhatt]

Re: The random question thread

Is the Prime Ministers Xlll on free to air?
Cheers

 

[ZTop]

Re: The random question thread

What time is the Prime Ministers Xlll game
thanks

 

[ChewThePhatt]

Re: The random question thread

The game starts at 4:30pm
I can't find anywhere on radio or TV that it's being broadcast.
Fucking ridiculous!
The "Prime Ministers Xlll" FFS

 

[Mitchell_Broncos]

Re: The random question thread

The game starts at 4:30pm
I can't find anywhere on radio or TV that it's being broadcast.
****ing ridiculous!
The "Prime Ministers Xlll" FFS

If you find out what channel please inform me thanks.