One man teams

[Donald]

Tonights game against souths has got me thinking. Im prepared to say that if Souths dont have Ingliss then they dont win tonight. Which teams in the Comp do you think would be gone if they lost a certain player for the year.

Mine are as follows

Cowboys - Thurson
Souths - Ingliss
Storm - Either one of but in order of importance Cronk, Smith or Slater

Any others?

 

[Son Edo]

We have a poor track record without Hodges, Steve Renouf pointed it out awhile ago and Rabs pointed it out on commentary tonight.

 

[Kimlo]

Broncos - Hodges.
He lifts our team when he plays, there's no doubt about that. Even if he individually has a poor game the team plays better when he's in it.

 

[Donald]

I was thinking about Hodges but TBH he is not as important to our team as say an Ingliss, Thurston or Cronk are to theirs. Thats my opinion anyway.

 

[Nashy]

Really unfair to say that Souths win without him tonight. They're a top side, they have plenty of talent running around. They're only going improve this year.

 

[Twiztid]

Hodges is just as important. He is usually your metre burning back, whose dummy half runs always help sustain your forwards build momentum and his defence shuts down a lot of plays his side.

 

[Son Edo]

Inglis would be more important fullback > centre.

 

[Donald]

Really unfair to say that Souths win without him tonight. They're a top side, they have plenty of talent running around. They're only going improve this year.

Im not saying that Souths are not good but what I'm saying is that without Ingliss they would not win the comp and from what i saw tonight the only back that looked half dangerous for souths was Ingliss. The rest of the side feed of him. He is involved in everything. He might not throw the last pass for the try but usually he is creating the overlaps because the defence is worried that he will get the ball.

I'd bet my bottom dollar that without Ingliss souths dont win the comp. Same goes for Cowboys with Thurston. To a lesser extent Cronk or Smith or Slater because even if they lose one they still have another two.

 

[Kimlo]

To a lesser extent Cronk or Smith or Slater because even if they lose one they still have another two.

I don't know about that, if history is anything to go by when they lose one of those 3 (which is super rare because they have insane good luck) they've played like shit.

Lost to Manly without Smith with a massively over the cap team.
Played like shit without Slater last year for the 4-5 games he missed.
I remember them losing a few games 2-3 years ago when Cronk missed the start of the year.

 

[Ari Gold]

Penrith can't win the comp
Dragons can't win the comp even with Soward
Eels can't win the comp without Hayne (though last 2 words are probably redundant)
Warriors can't win the comp without Shaun Johnson (though last 2 words are probably redundant)
Broncos can't win the comp without Justin Hodges (though last 2 words are probably redundant)
Sharks can't win the comp without Todd Carney (though last 2 words are probably redundant)
Tigers can't win the comp without Robbie Farah (though last 2 words are probably redundant)
Cowboys can't win the comp without Jonathan Thurston
Bulldogs can't win the comp without Des Hasler

For mine the Raiders are the least dependent on one single player, followed by the Roosters, Storm, Manly and Souths. The Titans are also not dependent on a single player, but realistically have no hope.

Penrith win the award for being most even across their squad. All their players are at a similar level of absolute shit, the whole side is almost interchangable with their NSW Cup team.

 

[Donald]

I was talking about sides that actually had a chance to win this year.

Out of all the teams you just mentioned Bulldogs, and Cowboys are probably the only two that i think have any chance and even those two look at far odds.

For mine AT THE MOMENT its a four horse race. Roosters, Souths, Manly, or Melbourne.

 

[Coxy]

I wouldn't call Souths a one man team. The Burgess brothers, Reynolds, Sutton, Luke all combine to make them formidable.

 

[Ari Gold]

I'm happy to call Souths a one family team!

 

[Ari Gold]

I was talking about sides that actually had a chance to win this year.

Out of all the teams you just mentioned Bulldogs, and Cowboys are probably the only two that i think have any chance and even those two look at far odds.

For mine AT THE MOMENT its a four horse race. Roosters, Souths, Manly, or Melbourne.

I probably say this most years, but I think the Raiders are a dark horse. Whilst highly inconsistent they have outstanding talent and if a player like Campese can regain form along with Robinson at fullback there's no end to the kind of damage they could do.

 

[Donald]

I know their good players but I just cant see Souths winning a premiership without Ingliss. Im not trying to fault them or anything but its just the way it is. Without Ingliss they still have a strong side and their forward pack is great. Sutton can be average at best and Luke is good but isnt by any means a player that is going to break a game apart week in week out. Reynolds is definately their second most valuable player. Only have to look at what happened to them last year to work that out.

In my humble opionion without Ingliss they are still a great side. With Ingliss their a real chance of winning a premiership.

 

[Donald]

Let me put it this way.

Be honest do you think that we are a chance of winning the premiership this year. I hate to say it but I just cant see it happening. I really want it to but at this stage I just dont see it happening.

Now add Ingliss to the Broncos at Fullback. I absoultely think we would be a chance to win a premiership. One player is all it takes.

 

[Kimlo]

I agree Donald but I also don't think Melbourne can win a premiership without Cronk, Slater or Smith.

 

[Donald]

I agree Donald but I also don't think Melbourne can win a premiership without Cronk, Slater or Smith.

I agree 100% mate.