what and hock doesnt break tackles :conf:thomo wrote: I was not critical of our current second row just feel that we are all a bit light in their in weight and size and they are all a little similar- mobile, great engines and hard workers but none have the ability to break through takcles or smash people back - ala Betts, Farrell, Fletcher etc and feel that an option or different combination could be a bit of size/impact compared with the workhorses
calls for a big prop
- superleague
- Posts: 1766
- Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 9:38 pm
Re: calls for a big prop
-
- Posts: 2394
- Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 8:26 pm
- Contact:
Re: calls for a big prop
you dont need a massive second row, saints back row arnt really big like my grandad says there just big centres, they have versatility....
wilkin and gilmour arnt huge but have pace and know what angles to run...
wilkin and gilmour arnt huge but have pace and know what angles to run...
Re: calls for a big prop
I don't feel we need a massive second row but lets be honest - Fletcher has never been replaced and we could be a little light in the second row.
If we could at the end of the season release Bailey and use his money to replaced him with a bigger second row - Hansen is a 80 minute man so we could rotate.
Here is a thought and it could happen.
Ellis not to settle in Oz - and come back here for 2010 season.
If we could at the end of the season release Bailey and use his money to replaced him with a bigger second row - Hansen is a 80 minute man so we could rotate.
Here is a thought and it could happen.
Ellis not to settle in Oz - and come back here for 2010 season.
Re: calls for a big prop
Ellis isn't exactly huge either though is he!? Westwood was the only English 2nd row down under who was bulky. I know Eastwood for NZ looks chubby but he isn't that big but is probably one of their biggest, and you don't see too many large back rowers in aus coming through these days. Like you say, we don't need a massive 2nd row, and you can't replace someone like fletcherthomo wrote:I don't feel we need a massive second row but lets be honest - Fletcher has never been replaced and we could be a little light in the second row.
If we could at the end of the season release Bailey and use his money to replaced him with a bigger second row - Hansen is a 80 minute man so we could rotate.
Here is a thought and it could happen.
Ellis not to settle in Oz - and come back here for 2010 season.
in the world of mules, there are no rules
LATEST PODCAST EPISODE
https://www.spreaker.com/user/superleaguepod
LATEST PODCAST EPISODE
https://www.spreaker.com/user/superleaguepod
- trotski_tgwu
- Posts: 2374
- Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 8:51 pm
Re: calls for a big prop
Tell you what mike that Fiji fullback is a real good hitter. He put a few of the Ozzies on their arses with massive hits.mike binder wrote:any 1 know any cook island props
Sign him :doz:
Workers of the World Unite.
You have nothing to loose but your Chains.
Karl Marx
Re: calls for a big prop
I dont feel we need a massive second row either. We already have feka to make impact and lets face it, Gaz hock normally gets the job done. I think what we need is a stand off and maybe another big prop. Or centre
OOOOOO were the greatest club in the world!!!!
-
- Posts: 1940
- Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 1:33 pm
Re: calls for a big prop
Stand-off? we have 2 how many do you want? :conf:
Re: calls for a big prop
6, 7 the same thing really. Both half backs. Tim smith to me looked good, but maybe we need someone decent with the departure of Barrett. If smith cant do the job i think we should bring in Sam Tomkins, its worth a try any way. You never know could come up with 5 trys again.
OOOOOO were the greatest club in the world!!!!
Re: calls for a big prop
6 and 7 arent the same thats the problem we have we have 2 7's and think it will be ok. We have a mediocre 7 and a very good 7 at 6.
Re: calls for a big prop
Its all gone quiet on the links to strengthen the front row - no names are currently been linked at it has all gone quiet.
Could it be that we are waiting until January to sign a player - that way he will only spend 10 months on the 2009 salary cap rather than a full 12?
Could it be that we are waiting until January to sign a player - that way he will only spend 10 months on the 2009 salary cap rather than a full 12?