Parker and Slater MAY miss Origin 3 - who to move where?

[Coxy]

Ash Graham has a few too many Paul Caridge moments. I'd rather see Gavin Cooper at centre with Boyd than Graham on the wing.

I think Tate will move to centre and maybe O'neil or Neilson to wing.

I'm pretty sure they'll play Inglis at fullback. I'd like to see Boyd shift into centre and Justin O'Neill on the wing. Boyd is a strong runner, capable of getting an offload. And once in the clear, O'Neill is lightning. I think it'd be a good combination. I know Boyd hasn't played a lot in the centres, but he's capable.

My worry with Tate in the centres is that, well, he's a ball hog. So Boyd would never see any ball so what's the point?

Other more straightforward, equally safe option is Boyd to fullback and Justin O'Neill to the wing. Much less shuffling and actually puts Boyd in his favoured position, keeps Inglis in his best position and gives a rookie a go in his preferred position.

 

[Dexter]

I don't mind if Boyd goes to fullback or centre either Coxy, I agree having Tate at centre would mean two ball hogs in the centres and one thing Boyd has demonstrated is an excellent draw and pass and good quick hands.

Boyd at fullback may also allow for Inglis to drift back to fullback at some stage if need be and Boyd does run that run that second man play particularly well.

O' Neill on the wing also gives another Melb combination, someone who knows Cronk and Smiths kicking games.

 

[Anonymous person]

Not sure I'd be keen to see Barba under the high ball at Origin level.

remember, 99% of this forum didnt want Slater playing fullback in origin either. that was a pearler.

barbas been outstanding for the doggies, and we really lack attacking options. barba has to be there somewhere.

i dont want him at fullback either though, i think he'd get monstered by the NSW defense the second he catches the bombs. but he has to be there.

 

[Jeba]

remember, 99% of this forum didnt want Slater playing fullback in origin either. that was a pearler.

And you didn't want Lockyer in the Queensland team. That's the pearler of all pearlers!!!

 

[Ari Gold]

Lol!

For the record, I think Barba should be in the QLD team as a bench back. Coming on in the last 20mins of the game and just roving around the ruck, playing as either a 2nd hooker or a fullback in attack or whatever, I think he is a different type of threat that doesn't exist for QLD without Slater. And I would actually play him ahead of Matt Gillett or Dave Taylor -- as bad as Taylor was in game 2, for me I'd have Barba replace Gillett. Gillett will be an epic QLD player for years to come, but right now his form is iffy, and I think NSW have their best team in quite a while. We need more dimension in attack and I think Barba offers that.

 

[Anonymous person]

And you didn't want Lockyer in the Queensland team. That's the pearler of all pearlers!!!

Incorrect. I said he didn't deserve to be there in form - which he didn't. I can't believe how many times you keep trying to use a flat out lie just so you can have a go at me.

 

[Jeba]

Incorrect. I said he didn't deserve to be there in form - which he didn't. I can't believe how many times you keep trying to use a flat out lie just so you can have a go at me.

Blah blah ****ing blah. You wanted Cronk or Prince in the team instead of Lockyer. End of story.

 

[rnabokov]

Incorrect. I said he didn't deserve to be there in form - which he didn't. I can't believe how many times you keep trying to use a flat out lie just so you can have a go at me.

Ah, if one says that, I cannot see any semantic difficulty with its equivalence to the statement: "And you didn't want Lockyer in the Queensland team"

 

[anzac7]

I know a bit about O'Neill but maybe not enough - can anyone confirm if he is good under the high ball? Or defusing kicks? Didn't think about him on the wing.

 

[QUEENSLANDER]

Honestly, QLD would probably e best to just shift Boyd to fullback and O'Neil on the Wing. I think that's the best option for a decider. You have a debutant on the Wing and you've got an experienced and very safe player in Boyd shifting to the FB spot. That IMO is less distribution to the team.

A straight swap for Barba is risky. He'd be on debut in a decider. He's not the best in the air. He'd have to learn QLD's backbone plays and chime in. Boyd has some experience in this area being in the team for a while so he'd slot in fine.

Barba will get his chance but I really think its too big of a risk to be honest.

Hes going to have to be on debut one day. theres never an easy origin so nows as good a time as ever imo

 

[Anonymous person]

Ah, if one says that, I cannot see any semantic difficulty with its equivalence to the statement: "And you didn't want Lockyer in the Queensland team"

Really? Better go back to school and re-take English as a subject.

On barba etc - if we don't start blooding new guys we'll be left with having to debut 5-6 guys at once. That doesnt sound better than debuting 1-2 extremely in form guys now to me.

 

[Mister Wright]

I like the suggestion of Tate moving to centre and Inglis to the back. Graham could cover the wing or even Barba. But, if Barba is to play it would probably make more sense to play him at fullback. I just hope the selectors don't opt for Bowen.

 

[Mister Wright]

I don't mind if Boyd goes to fullback or centre either Coxy, I agree having Tate at centre would mean two ball hogs in the centres and one thing Boyd has demonstrated is an excellent draw and pass and good quick hands.

Boyd at fullback may also allow for Inglis to drift back to fullback at some stage if need be and Boyd does run that run that second man play particularly well.

O' Neill on the wing also gives another Melb combination, someone who knows Cronk and Smiths kicking games.

That's another great suggestion. With Slater at fullback there is no real need for Inglis to drop back there, but if Boyd starts at fullback you could easily see him and Inglis swap the fullback role at certain moments in the game.

 

[anzac7]

UPDATE:

Slater just about a certainty to be ruled out: he tweets 4-6 weeks (but still hopeful!) The way he played when facing 4-6 weeks is just unbelievable.

Parker more hopeful and putting his hand up for game 3, he thinks he can make it! (hope he does) Can't believe he was asking the medical staff if he could go back on that game!

Article here:

http://www.skynews.com.au/sport/article.aspx?id=761017&vId=

 

[Je$ter]

Hes going to have to be on debut one day. theres never an easy origin so nows as good a time as ever imo

Game one in a fresh series, not a decider for a record setting 7th in a row. I am sure the selectors have the same reservations as most people do about Barba under the pressure of Origin (frankly this game is one of the biggest deciders ever) with the high ball and defence. He'll play one day, but not this day.

The ONLY 2 options I think need to be considered:

1. Inglis
2. Boyd
3. Neilsen
4. Hodges
5. Tate

OR

1. Boyd
2. O'Neill
3. Inglis
4. Hodges
5. Tate

As Coxy said, Tate is a ball hog. He can still defence in the centres when he needs to.

If Tonga was fit he would slot straight into the centres Inglis to fullback no questions.

 

[rnabokov]

Really? Better go back to school and re-take English as a subject.

On barba etc - if we don't start blooding new guys we'll be left with having to debut 5-6 guys at once. That doesnt sound better than debuting 1-2 extremely in form guys now to me.

I lectured in English mate. You sound clever, but your reasoning is unsound, and your logic specious. I enjoy your opinions on league - stick to that and enjoy the sound of your own voice on other subjects elsewhere.

 

[Anonymous person]

I lectured in English mate. You sound clever, but your reasoning is unsound, and your logic specious. I enjoy your opinions on league - stick to that and enjoy the sound of your own voice on other subjects elsewhere.

Lol

I don't want nsw to win, but based on how the 2 teams have played so far QLD don't deserve to win the series. How's the semantics on that mr lecturer? Am I saying I don't want QLD to win because they don't deserve to? Or am I simply saying they don't deserve to win?

Like I said, if you can't see a difference you need to retake basic English.

 

[Old Mate]

It gives me a bit more confidence to only lose by four despite the injuries/refs trying to even things up from game one.