TrueBlueWarrior wrote:Well one thing is for sure I have never seen Roby 'bully' or even play well against MM!! Correct me if I am wrong!!
I don't think I've ever really seen any hooker 'bully' another. They rarely come into contact on the field. Most hookers won't make more than 5 or 6 runs from dummy half, half of those will result in a pass before contact and any smart hooker would run at retreating props rather than their opposing hooker.
Okay, going back the last 2 years. I thought Roby was better than McIlorum last week, but I thought he was poor when they faced each other in May this year, despite Saints getting the win. Then you have to go back to 2015 since Mickey missed most of 2016.
In the Super 8's in 2015, I thought we pretty much hammered them in the forwards in that game, Mickey had a decent game too, Saints won largely due to their strong defence and the phenomenal defensive effort from Roby. We should have been out of sight in that game but Roby was everywhere.
When we played them in summer 2015, Roby and McIlorum played against each other and Roby was hands down the best player on the pitch. He even came into the game with a hand injury and was still head and shoulders above Mickey. It was probably the best performance either of them has had when playing against each other.
The last 2 years? When MM has been injured and recovering for most of it? What about the 8 before that?
Like I said when we play Stains and MM is playing I never worry about Roby at all! I don't think any team does actually at the business end, hence why one grand final win in what 10 years, against 12 men for 77 minutes! If Roby was that good surely he should have led his team to more success! Yes he has played in some average teams but he has also played in some good teams, he is not a bad player, far from it but just not as good as some think and in my opinion like I keep saying, when the going gets tough and you need a performance he always falls short!!
'If you start listening to the fans it won't be long before you're sitting with them.' - Wayne Bennett
TrueBlueWarrior wrote:The last 2 years? When MM has been injured and recovering for most of it? What about the 8 before that?
Like I said when we play Stains and MM is playing I never worry about Roby at all! I don't think any team does actually at the business end, hence why one grand final win in what 10 years, against 12 men for 77 minutes! If Roby was that good surely he should have led his team to more success! Yes he has played in some average teams but he has also played in some good teams, he is not a bad player, far from it but just not as good as some think and in my opinion like I keep saying, when the going gets tough and you need a performance he always falls short!!
If I claimed to be able to remember what happened in games any further back I'd be lying to you. You asked for any examples so you I gave you the ones I could remember clearly.
Saints have reached plenty of Grand Finals though, so they must have done okay at the business end to get there. That is the place where everyone is trying to get to and only the best 2 at the business end get to Old Trafford.
However, as I said previously, players don't win games on their own. A hooker could help his team charge down the field with every set but if the halves mess up the last tackle play does that mean the hooker hasn't done enough? Saints problem throughout their repeated Grand Final failures has had more to do with poor halves who failed to manage the game appropriately. Trent Barrett never led his teams to much success, was he overrated too?
What league did Barrett play in most of his career? If Roby had played in the NRL he would have been distinctly average! So no Barrett wasn't overrated he was as good as people suggested, Roby isn't....in my opinion! He is good but not that good!
The year Roby won MOS, Barrett was by far the best player that year, a player at the end of his career compared to one in his prime, all about levels!!
'If you start listening to the fans it won't be long before you're sitting with them.' - Wayne Bennett
TrueBlueWarrior wrote:
I agree about MM he will never destroy a team and look like a world class player because he isn't, but what his strength is is stopping good/dangerous players playing like Roby and many other good hookers over the years. Someone like Cam Smith who is a top top player would get the better of MM because he is a top top player, something Roby struggles to do and has done for many years. Yes I agree he looks more extravagant and a more fluent hooker than MM but he flatters to deceive in my opinion!
What sums it up for me is this and DaveO touched on it earlier, when we play Stains and MM is playing I don't worry about Roby at all and never have, if we were playing against Cam Smith I would be and back in the day KFC, even Houghton, Buderus etc. in recent times in a nutshell when the going gets tough I would have MM all day long in terms of SL.
For me, the debate about MM's ability (or not) to play a full 80 minutes will always be the one defining factor fans will judge his impact/performance on.
The key for me is, when replaced, the replacement makes so little impact that the real points being thrown up are that; it is fine to have MM in the team, however it is at a detriment to have to purposely have a replacement on the bench ready to spell with him at fixed intervals AND that the replacement (whoever it has been) has been so bang average or mediocre coming off the bench, that the momentum drops and inevitably the opponents make good position/points scored to force a reshuffle
If we had a player like Roby coming off the bench I am sure this side would be almost unbeatable at times
TrueBlueWarrior wrote:
I agree about MM he will never destroy a team and look like a world class player because he isn't, but what his strength is is stopping good/dangerous players playing like Roby and many other good hookers over the years. Someone like Cam Smith who is a top top player would get the better of MM because he is a top top player, something Roby struggles to do and has done for many years. Yes I agree he looks more extravagant and a more fluent hooker than MM but he flatters to deceive in my opinion!
What sums it up for me is this and DaveO touched on it earlier, when we play Stains and MM is playing I don't worry about Roby at all and never have, if we were playing against Cam Smith I would be and back in the day KFC, even Houghton, Buderus etc. in recent times in a nutshell when the going gets tough I would have MM all day long in terms of SL.
For me, the debate about MM's ability (or not) to play a full 80 minutes will always be the one defining factor fans will judge his impact/performance on.
The key for me is, when replaced, the replacement makes so little impact that the real points being thrown up are that; it is fine to have MM in the team, however it is at a detriment to have to purposely have a replacement on the bench ready to spell with him at fixed intervals AND that the replacement (whoever it has been) has been so bang average or mediocre coming off the bench, that the momentum drops and inevitably the opponents make good position/points scored to force a reshuffle
If we had a player like Roby coming off the bench I am sure this side would be almost unbeatable at times
It's a very good point BM! I actually think the 2 would compliment each other very well and in my opinion they should have played more together at international level to give us the best chance to compete against Australia and NZ! I think starting with MM would nullify the early threat and then Roby can come on fresh!!
'If you start listening to the fans it won't be long before you're sitting with them.' - Wayne Bennett
