25-man Kangaroos Four Nations Squad

Discussion in 'The Cesspit: Rugby League Discussion' started by Cribbage, Aug 19, 2010.

Page 49 of 50

  1. Sultan Pepper HG Emm

    I think Carney would be there as a plan b, if all is going smoothly you probably wouldn't use him, however if we happened to find ourselves down with our backs against the wall you might look to inject Carney into the halves to change the team dynamic a bit.

    Gidley on the other hand you would just use as a relief hooker/cover backline injuries, I don't think he's viewed as a game changer at international level.

    Gidley makes more sense than Carney given that we're the best side in the competition, he's who'd I'd be using. I'd say Carney might get the game against PNG at 5/8th.
     
    Sultan Pepper, Oct 6, 2010
    #961

  2. Boobidy BJ Gemmell

    I'd say this will be Lockyers last tour, so I doubt he will want to miss any games.
     
    Boobidy, Oct 6, 2010
    #962

  3. Sultan Pepper HG Emm

    Yeah he is the captain too I guess, I'm unsure of the scheduele, they might not use Lockyer is we play PNG the game before the final.
     
    Sultan Pepper, Oct 6, 2010
    #963

  4. jazman84 JM Eightyfour

    They could easily give Smith a rest, put Cronk at hooker and Locky at halfback to accommodate Carney. Or retain Smith on the field and have him increase his defensive workload with Cronk covering the acting half duties.

    I agree with Sultan, where Carney would actually be a tactical injection, while Kidley would simply come on to give him a run.
     
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2010
    jazman84, Oct 6, 2010
    #964

  5. Maroon_Faithful M Faithful

    That's like saying you'd rather give Gemmell a hand job than a blow job - Neither are really what I (and I hope, you) would call desirable. Gemmell might think differently...:lol:
     
    Maroon_Faithful, Oct 6, 2010
    #965

  6. Wilson SB Wilson

    I will openly admit that Gallen's origin career has fallen well short of what it should be.

    I think it's a pretty lol argument to make though, and it's pretty clear you're attacking him because you dislike him. I mean if he's making the metres, who really gives a **** that he's taking so many hitups.

    Have you ever played League before? It's ****ing easy as to get in there and do the hard yards. Civoniceva and Hannatt should have been in there getting the ball. You're a complete ****wit and devalue anything you say - purely because you think a bloke who makes 22 hitups is in the wrong because the two front rowers only make 10. Which is ****ing laughable, it really is.
     
    Wilson, Oct 6, 2010
    #966

  7. Maroon_Faithful M Faithful

    I care, as do most people who want to see the props do their regular job. That's what they're there for. They're not there to play second fiddle, in the middle (haha, that rhymes) to Gallen the hog.

    Yes, for over half my life.

    You're a ****wit mate. An absolute ****wit.

    Nothing you say about Gallen should be listened to, as it's rife with bias.
     
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2010
    Maroon_Faithful, Oct 6, 2010
    #967

  8. AVA T Delonge

    :laugh: Nice analogy. :p
     
    AVA, Oct 6, 2010
    #968

  9. Julian BJ Taylor

    Definitely rather giove the big man a wristy.
     
    Julian, Oct 6, 2010
    #969

  10. Cribbage RG Cribb

    Yeah indeed. I'd do that for a plane ticket to Humberside International Airport. Would've give a blowie for it though; **** that.
     
    Cribbage, Oct 6, 2010
    #970

  11. Julian BJ Taylor

    Take it to the gay thread.
     
    Julian, Oct 6, 2010
    #971

  12. Cribbage RG Cribb

    This conversation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wilson v MF on Gallen for the 2384283483rd time.
     
    Cribbage, Oct 6, 2010
    #972

  13. Wilson SB Wilson

    So why is it the locks fault for the props not doing their regular job? By your own omission their numbers were below their average, so why is it you attack the bloke who's picking up their slack?

    Let me answer that for you - because it's Gallen.

    As it's the same with ****ing you but on the negative side of bias. How ****ing stupid are you?
     
    Wilson, Oct 6, 2010
    #973

  14. Julian BJ Taylor

    Reckon the hand on penis would be > that.
     
    Julian, Oct 6, 2010
    #974

  15. Speirz DG Speirs

    I wouldn't really call shuffling two players around and changing the halves combiantion easily giving Smith a rest. That situation you describe though as a plan B is almost exactly the reason Gidley seemed to have been picked for in the first place, and he was widely criticised for not being able to fulfil that role. Now that he's proven to be capable of something else, people want to drop him for someone in a similar situation. It just doesn't make sense to me.

    Ftr, I probably wouldn't have either of them on the bench, but that's just because I think the bench utility role is massively overrated.
     
    Speirz, Oct 6, 2010
    #975

  16. Alec AD Funkotron

    Pretty much all the forwards we have play long minutes anyway, there's no need to have 4 on the bench instead of 3 IMO.
     
    Alec, Oct 6, 2010
    #976

  17. Speirz DG Speirs

    There's a difference between playing long minutes and long quality minutes though IMO. Guys like Thaiday and Gallen can play 80, but when they do that I certainly notice a lot more errors, missed tackles and penalties from them, especially when it's a higher intensity game. That said, the 4th bench spot for me would either go to an out and out hooker to give Smith a rest, or to Luke Lewis, who I'd pick as a backrower first and his utility value second. IMO picking someone like Gidley or Carney for their utility value (which is only going to be used if someone is injured), rather than for the likely role of whatever position you want them to come on in is a mistake IMO.
     
    Speirz, Oct 6, 2010
    #977

  18. Cribbage RG Cribb

    Fully agreed.
     
    Cribbage, Oct 6, 2010
    #978

  19. Cribbage RG Cribb

    Yeah I agree with this - the ability of players to play really long minutes at Test and Origin level without showing any signs of fatigue is vastly over-rated. Gallen could play 80, but he'd be much more effective if he only played 55 instead.

    I do agree to an extent, but probably not to the the full extent of what you're saying. The position should definitely go to someone who is effective in the role they're actually going to play when they come on - that's the first criteria. However, I always like to have the chance of injury covered with my bench.

    Before this year I'd have never picked Gidley on the Australian bench because he'd be likely to come on for Smith and play hooker (a role he was completely unproven in and had performed poorly in, in the past) or come on and play absolutely nowhere as a "rover" (something that I've never actually seen work). However, given what he did for NSW this year I'd definitely be picking him on the bench, as he's shown he can perform as an interchange hooker and provide impact with fresh legs at dummy half (something that always works at rep level when done well). The fact that he can also provide cover for fullback and the halves does weigh in on my decision a little bit, but it wasn't my primary concern.
     
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2010
    Cribbage, Oct 6, 2010
    #979

  20. Maroon_Faithful M Faithful

    There was no slack to be picked up. He just keeps lining up for runs when he should stay the **** out of the props' way and let them do their job.

    As I said before, the incentive for you to support him is much more than my incentive to criticise him.
     
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2010
    Maroon_Faithful, Oct 6, 2010
    #980
Page 49 of 50

Share This Page