like last time someone tried using that against me, im not arguing against it. they ARE rep players, and should be better than non-rep players. doesnt mean they should be paid more than theyre worth. playing for england is different to playing origin/australia, hugely different. same way playing for NZ is nowhere near as important on a player skill level, as theyll choose any NRL player whos played more than 1 nrl game who has made a linebreak or 2 in a game.
yep, never said any different. they CAN be better than aus reps though - Benji for example, Jeremy Smith is better than a lot of formerAus Reps too IMO.Fair point. So I guess that would mean players like Nathan Fien, Jeremy Smith etc, even know they've played rep footy for NZ, are not really any better than australian born players who have only played NRL, in fact, they may actually be worse.
This morning said it was a $2 million retention coup. Now they say it is a $3 million retention coup, both from the same paper (courier mail)
Jack Reed for 4 years??? oh god
yeh it 100% wasnt, i posted the link on here at least 2 weeks ago about us already having an offer for $250k on the table for him, just being finalised.If you really think this deal got put to him after, and as a result of the Titans game, or even the Storm game, you're deluded.