NRL Podcasts

Highlights Only (5)
jonesy101 said:
Quite a lot of head knocks from that era. Kevin Walters called a Raiders player Joey Tapeenie in the weekend.
Click to expand...
Honestly Freddy and Joey are an absolute joke on TV and analysis. They go off on tangent, say things that are just completely untrue. A classic example of thinking great player makes a great commentator....
 
Beastmode said:
He agrees with me

Players are rewarded on performance. Not potential or what they did last year.

Boyd is our 7.

Long may it continue.
Click to expand...
Then why did you ask? The difference is he isn't putting a line through options like the rest of the forum and actually discussing the options with reason. Rather than 'we win, must be same team' or 'we lose, blame anyone who came in this week'
 
Lance155 said:
Then why did you ask? The difference is he isn't putting a line through options like the rest of the forum and actually discussing the options with reason. Rather than 'we win, must be same team' or 'we lose, blame anyone who came in this week'
Click to expand...

Oh please. No one is putting a line through Metcalf. You started the debate my unequivocally believing Metcalf walks straight back into the 7 jersey no questions asked. You justify it by comparing him to more experienced proven players which quite frankly is ridiculous. Not only did Metcalf play badly in his return exhibiting all the annoying traits he had at the start of last season, but goes an injuries himself AGAIN. Now you’ve conveniently changed the narrative to say that we have all given up on him . Which is furthest thing from the truth. He’ll get his chance. Just has to wait in line now.

Nothing wrong with Joey Johns and Brad Fitler. They’re great for a laugh.

And it was a rhetorical question 🙋🏻‍♂️
 
Last edited:
Teets said:
I remember cracking up when Ridgey was talking about how overweight Kiwis are compared to the French and then the big guy asking "are we big?"

His critique of Stacey as a player i thought was harsh, but on Stacey as part of the coaching staff I thought he had a valid point. Good to see Stacey answering a lot of us doubters with the Pac Champs win last year and the Wahs attack much better this year.
Click to expand...

Ridge gets 35K to play for Manly and they gave zinzan 110K but he turns it down thinking Ridge was getting more… my god.. what a laugh 😂

I do agree with Ridge that Zinzan would have struggled with the intensity and speed of playing league though. However it would have been awesome seeing him suit up in Manly colours…

That taxi story was also insane…
 
Fonzie said:
Hi mate, where I’m at with this is:
- the pair with the best ceiling in theory is Boyd 7 Metcalf 6
- but Metcalf wants to play 7 and the team loves playing with Chanel, so that’s not going to happen
- which means it’s Chanel 6 and Metcalf and Boyd fighting for the 7
- imo Boyd keeps the 7 unless his form dips and Metcalf is killing it in Cup
Click to expand...
There's no incentive to change the halves pairing at the moment. We can beat anyone (except maybe you-know-who) with this pairing and the disruption of a change could have us lose to anyone. Injury or form will give Metcalf his chance. For what it's worth I actually think CHT is still underrated.
 
Beastmode said:
Oh please. No one is putting a line through Metcalf. You started the debate my unequivocally believing Metcalf walks straight back into the 7 jersey no questions asked. You justify it by comparing him to more experienced proven players which quite frankly is ridiculous. Not only did Metcalf play badly in his return exhibiting all the annoying traits he had at the start of last season, but goes an injuries himself AGAIN. Now you’ve conveniently changed the narrative to say that we have all given up on him . Which is furthest thing from the truth. He’ll get his chance. Just has to wait in line now.

Nothing wrong with Joey Johns and Brad Fitler. They’re great for a laugh.

And it was a rhetorical question 🙋🏻‍♂️
Click to expand...
You have my arguement all wrong. All I pushed back on was the sentiment of Metcalf being done and we don't need him, Boyd is our man etc. You can't claim noone was saying it. Will literally mentioned how hard the fanbase turned on him in their last pod. That was and is the overall narative
 
Fonzie said:
Hi mate, where I’m at with this is:
- the pair with the best ceiling in theory is Boyd 7 Metcalf 6
- but Metcalf wants to play 7 and the team loves playing with Chanel, so that’s not going to happen
- which means it’s Chanel 6 and Metcalf and Boyd fighting for the 7
- imo Boyd keeps the 7 unless his form dips and Metcalf is killing it in Cup
Click to expand...

Good on ya Fonzie.

Keep up the good work, mate.
 
Fonzie said:
Hi mate, where I’m at with this is:
- the pair with the best ceiling in theory is Boyd 7 Metcalf 6
- but Metcalf wants to play 7 and the team loves playing with Chanel, so that’s not going to happen
- which means it’s Chanel 6 and Metcalf and Boyd fighting for the 7
- imo Boyd keeps the 7 unless his form dips and Metcalf is killing it in Cup
Click to expand...
This is definitely the most sound logic but, one revered NRL coach has stated that you pick your best players first and in that once Metcalf is match fit and on song he will absolutely demand selection.
The question is in what position, he is versed in 6, 7 and 1..

Boyd and THC are playing too well to be dropped.
 
FormerlyJamesW said:
Best by what metric? What's the context for comparison?

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just wondering how you're coming to this conclusion.
Click to expand...
My lazy answer..

That specific phrase is a hallmark of Wayne Bennett.
While many coaches share the sentiment, Bennett is the one most famously associated with the "pick your best players first and find a position for them later" philosophy. He has consistently used this logic throughout his career, notably when moving fullbacks to the centers or halves (like Darren Lockyer) or when justifying State of Origin selections.
More recently, Andrew Webster—who I know you've been following closely with the Warriors—has echoed similar sentiments regarding his spine players. He often emphasizes that the best players need to be on the field, even if it means they aren't in their "preferred" jersey number, to ensure the team's highest-quality talent is utilized.
It’s a classic selection headache, especially for a team like the Warriors when you're trying to fit talent like Metcalf and Tuivasa-Sheck into the same 13!
 
Brightman said:
My lazy answer..

That specific phrase is a hallmark of Wayne Bennett.
While many coaches share the sentiment, Bennett is the one most famously associated with the "pick your best players first and find a position for them later" philosophy. He has consistently used this logic throughout his career, notably when moving fullbacks to the centers or halves (like Darren Lockyer) or when justifying State of Origin selections.
More recently, Andrew Webster—who I know you've been following closely with the Warriors—has echoed similar sentiments regarding his spine players. He often emphasizes that the best players need to be on the field, even if it means they aren't in their "preferred" jersey number, to ensure the team's highest-quality talent is utilized.
It’s a classic selection headache, especially for a team like the Warriors when you're trying to fit talent like Metcalf and Tuivasa-Sheck into the same 13!
Click to expand...

Appreciate the answer, mate.

I've obviously been very vocal about all these topics, so I won't repeat any of my answers around the specific headache we're all talking about.

But I definitely see the logic. I just wonder if it puts the club in danger of 'doubling down' on something that might not work.

Then again, they have access to far more data and insight than we all do and so there's obviously method to what we may perceive as 'madness'.

I trust Webster. He definitely sees the game in a way that is highly beneficial to the club and has the boys playing out of their minds.

The reason I asked about the metric is I see a lot of hesitation to consider Metcalf's injury rate, when assessing his playing abilities. His ceiling is so incredibly high, but his floor, in the context of full season assessment (purely injuries), is low.

Obviously, these have always been accidental and out of his control, however I still believe that these need to be factored in, if they regularly affect they club negatively, as the simple case is - some players are more prone to injuries than others.

My absolute hope is that I get to look back on my concerns and laugh at myself for being an idiot.

But.

All the talent in the world is useless, if you can't stay on the field to use it.
 
FormerlyJamesW said:
Appreciate the answer, mate.

I've obviously been very vocal about all these topics, so I won't repeat any of my answers around the specific headache we're all talking about.

But I definitely see the logic. I just wonder if it puts the club in danger of 'doubling down' on something that might not work.

Then again, they have access to far more data and insight than we all do and so there's obviously method to what we may perceive as 'madness'.

I trust Webster. He definitely sees the game in a way that is highly beneficial to the club and has the boys playing out of their minds.

The reason I asked about the metric is I see a lot of hesitation to consider Metcalf's injury rate, when assessing his playing abilities. His ceiling is so incredibly high, but his floor, in the context of full season assessment (purely injuries), is low.

Obviously, these have always been accidental and out of his control, however I still believe that these need to be factored in, if they regularly affect they club negatively, as the simple case is - some players are more prone to injuries than others.

My absolute hope is that I get to look back on my concerns and laugh at myself for being an idiot.

But.

All the talent in the world is useless, if you can't stay on the field to use it.
Click to expand...
I agree, especially with the last sentence.
That is why for me and with the team and players are performing so well and getting results(wins), is get Metcalf back to some sort of positive form in the NSW cup predominantly at 7 but also at 1 and maybe even 6 until such a time as either injury or form to the incumbents or after Origin is concluded and the best teams shape up for the finals and aiming to win a Grand Final..

Metcalf has the X-factor for the finals, we have a general guiding the team around the field of the back of a grouse forward pack that can dominate and backs that are slowly becoming threatening.
It's a long season but the pieces are there and the depth too..
 
Brightman said:
This is definitely the most sound logic but, one revered NRL coach has stated that you pick your best players first and in that once Metcalf is match fit and on song he will absolutely demand selection.
The question is in what position, he is versed in 6, 7 and 1..

Boyd and THC are playing too well to be dropped.
Click to expand...
I've also heard the wisdom that you pick your best 13 not the 13 best. 🤷
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom