I'd like to agree - and you might be right - but jeez we've given Milford a lot of chances to shine. He doesn't seem to fit anywhere, and I can't in good faith simply blame Seibold for him not looking for the ball or setting up his troops. He should be running the show at captain. But he's not even worthy of consideration.
Does Kay Cottee masturbate.
Honestly, I thought Wayne needed to go back then and I still believe that now. Where it all went wrong is that he was supposed to be replaced by Craig Bellamy, and instead we made an absolute **** up of that.
Where exactly in the rule book does it say we're only allowed to drop one player at a time?
Sure, his performances aren't up to scratch and you'll get no arguments about that from me. But we've seen how he can play when the team is actually running shapes and has the opposition on the back foot. If we can get the team doing that again, he'll either play well or the team environment will be ripe to let Dearden come in. At present if we drop Milf the only thing that changes is it's Dearden getting rinsed every Thursday night instead, and I'd rather not ruin him just yet. Because with all the one out running and lack of support play, slow forwards getting the ball with defenders rushing up on them already, nothing's going to change with a different 5/8.
Statistically speaking, against the Roosters he only contributed marginally more to our performance than Tom Dearden did and Dearden likely watched the game from his loungeroom on TV.
Lodge could play 6 and we would have a similar score line.
If he doesn't do something about Milford very quickly it's likely they'll both be helping each other clean out their lockers before long.
Ease up, it was actually 6 runs for 29 metres mate.
That wasn't what I said. I said Milford had such a negligible statistical contribution to the Roosters game that someone who didn't play in the match at all only contributed marginally less.
