Brock Lamb suitors

mozza said:
Don’t know where everyone would fit in but geez a team with Pearce, Ponga, Levi, Watson and Lamb would have some points in them.
Click to expand...
1 Watson - has played more fullback than anywhere else
2 Ponga - has played more wing than any other position in NRL
6 Lamb - nearly always plays 5/8
7 Pearce - a 7
9 Levi - a 9
 
Last edited:
One would hope more than 6pts from that lot.
One would hope to not see 60 missed tackles either.
One would also hope to not see 20 balls go to ground.

Dont know who one is, but fark he's needy
 
If people think Watson wont defend well at centre he definatly wont defend well at lock with monsters running at him ..If Buhrer is to small for lock then Watson shouldn't go anywhere near there ...If Watson doesn't work out at 5/8 (which he hasn't had a real shot at yet ) then maybe Ponga to 5/8 and Watson to F/B...
 
In the middle you have other big bodies beside you to help, hence most teams trying to have a MINIMUM 2 in a tackle.
Out wide that luxury doesnt apply to often.
 
Ethan said:
If people think Watson wont defend well at centre he definatly wont defend well at lock with monsters running at him ..If Buhrer is to small for lock then Watson shouldn't go anywhere near there ...If Watson doesn't work out at 5/8 (which he hasn't had a real shot at yet ) then maybe Ponga to 5/8 and Watson to F/B...
Click to expand...

Robinson played him there half a dozen times

Just fyi
 
Who was it that knocked him on his arse and scored in the trial and besides that we have our 80 minute best forward playing lock as i remember and swapping him for a 5/8 f/b would be stupid imo especially when we have Buhrer and Guerra there ...Oh and Griffin might play lock to forgot about him and he is a tackling machine ...
 
I have to admit to being tired of hearing about promises to starting positions, if Esee isn't the right one, sorry back to bench and Watson was promised 5/8 before Pearce, things have changed, just put the best team on the paddock and play.
 
LEVR said:
Im not disagreeing, I played fullback/wing and centre. I know what youre saying

Im just saying that there are successful centres getting around who are no taller or heavier than Watson. The kid is pretty tough too. I dont think that it would be a real problem, and if it became a problem we could just move him elsewhere, experiment failed
Click to expand...
I know what we should do......give him a chance at 5/8 where the coaches want him
 
Joey1245 said:
I know what we should do......give him a chance at 5/8 where the coaches want him
Click to expand...

That's the thing through, I think Brown would prefer Lamb at 6. And my salvation will arrive by round 4-6

Watson isnt debuting, you know? He played half a dozen games at 5/8th next to Pearce last year. Ill let you in on a secret, he looked quite poor. When moved to fullback, however, he performed. So it seems Brown has created a hybridized role for Watson in an attmept to procure his form at fullback while sitting at second receiver

That said, it wasnt Watsons ability to score points with a 6 on his back that was the problem. Imo the Roosters looked flat and short of ideas when Watson was a 6, because apparently Pearce was the only bloke on the field who was thinking and directing. We will have the same problem until Lamb is called in to give him a hand, I reckon

We need two real halves imo
 
LEVR said:
That's the thing through, I think Brown would prefer Lamb at 6. And my salvation will arrive by round 4-6

Watson isnt debuting, you know? He played half a dozen games at 5/8th next to Pearce last year. Ill let you in on a secret, he looked quite poor. When moved to fullback, however, he performed. So it seems Brown has created a hybridized role for Watson in an attmept to procure his form at fullback while sitting at second receiver

That said, it wasnt Watsons ability to score points with a 6 on his back that was the problem. Imo the Roosters looked flat and short of ideas when Watson was a 6, because apparently Pearce was the only bloke on the field who was thinking and directing. We will have the same problem until Lamb is called in to give him a hand, I reckon

We need two real halves imo
Click to expand...


Based on this post it appears you thought he went good at 6


Prince PongaBanned
↑
Watson has not proved anything yet and is perhaps not the big name half signing the Knights need if they are planning on developing current young hopefuls. May have been worth a gamble but not at the OVERS figure toted by Tigpies.
I do tend to agree. But given his ability to play 75mins of hooker at a whim in FG and do a great job, without any experience in the position. It seems to me that he a special talent. And on account of his previous performances at 6 for the Roosters last year as a 19/20 year old, I'd be comfortable enough to pay him over 500k

And who knows, his potential for growth as a player may be enormous.

On account of his previous performances at 6 you would pay him over 500k?

You have changed your tune.
 
packo said:
Based on this post it appears you thought he went good at 6


Prince PongaBanned
↑
Watson has not proved anything yet and is perhaps not the big name half signing the Knights need if they are planning on developing current young hopefuls. May have been worth a gamble but not at the OVERS figure toted by Tigpies.
I do tend to agree. But given his ability to play 75mins of hooker at a whim in FG and do a great job, without any experience in the position. It seems to me that he a special talent. And on account of his previous performances at 6 for the Roosters last year as a 19/20 year old, I'd be comfortable enough to pay him over 500k

And who knows, his potential for growth as a player may be enormous.

On account of his previous performances at 6 you would pay him over 500k?

You have changed your tune.
Click to expand...

I think what you have demonstrated is that Ive always liked him as a player, which is consistent with that i said the other day on here

Re performance at 6:

Well i definitely wrapped him for going well at hooker. And sure I said on account of his performances at 6 keeping in mind his age, and being cognizant of his holistic set of skills (playing hooker) id be happy paying him over 500k.. that's a far cry from saying I think he should be our starting 5/8th over Lamb. I hardly even said I prefer him at 6 over 9. My statement almost reads as though Id pick him at 9 lol

Look, dont get me wrong. He will do some good stuff with the ball in hand at 6. He is an exciting player. But ive come to be relatively convinced that playing in the halves isnt his do. Ive watched a bit of footy over the off season since we signed him and noticed a big difference in the way the Roosters played with Watson at 6.

That's a concern to me. I could be proven wrong. But im pretty sure of what ive seen him do, and not do
 
LEVR said:
I think what you have demonstrated is that Ive always liked him as a player, which is consistent with that i said the other day on here

Re performance at 6:

Well i definitely wrapped him for going well at hooker. And sure I said on account of his performances at 6 keeping in mind his age, and being cognizant of his holistic set of skills (playing hooker) id be happy paying him over 500k.. that's a far cry from saying I think he should be our starting 5/8th over Lamb. I hardly even said I prefer him at 6 over 9. My statement almost reads as though Id pick him at 9 lol

Look, dont get me wrong. He will do some good stuff with the ball in hand at 6. He is an exciting player. But ive come to be relatively convinced that playing in the halves isnt his do. Ive watched a bit of footy over the off season since we signed him and noticed a big difference in the way the Roosters played with Watson at 6.

That's a concern to me. I could be proven wrong. But im pretty sure of what ive seen him do, and not do
Click to expand...

There is no problem with changing your view. Glad you agreed.
 
LEVR said:
I think what you have demonstrated is that Ive always liked him as a player, which is consistent with that i said the other day on here

Re performance at 6:

Well i definitely wrapped him for going well at hooker. And sure I said on account of his performances at 6 keeping in mind his age, and being cognizant of his holistic set of skills (playing hooker) id be happy paying him over 500k.. that's a far cry from saying I think he should be our starting 5/8th over Lamb. I hardly even said I prefer him at 6 over 9. My statement almost reads as though Id pick him at 9 lol

Look, dont get me wrong. He will do some good stuff with the ball in hand at 6. He is an exciting player. But ive come to be relatively convinced that playing in the halves isnt his do. Ive watched a bit of footy over the off season since we signed him and noticed a big difference in the way the Roosters played with Watson at 6.

That's a concern to me. I could be proven wrong. But im pretty sure of what ive seen him do, and not do
Click to expand...
Your very eloquent when you back track mate lol
 
packo said:
There is no problem with changing your view. Glad you agreed.
Click to expand...
Yea nice one mate.

I think i remember watching him burn townsend on the outside to go over himself and thought 'wow he could be really potent at 6' but I hadnt seen too much of him at 6 at that stage. I figured he was a 6 or a 7 who could do that

It was only after watching him at length later on did i see that he was more of a fullback pulling off those plays
 
Ethan said:
Your very eloquent when you back track mate lol
Click to expand...
Without misquoting me, please show me how I back tracked?

I vaguely figured, like the rest of us, that at the time given our limited options that Watson was a good fit in the halves. Since then, two things have changed:

1) we signed Pearce and so now Watson is competing with Lamb rather than competing with no one

2) I hadnt watched him properly at 6 before making the single vague statement that Packo managed to find, amongst an entire year of commentary on Watson..

You blokes are carrying on like im making an irrational hypocrite of myself. Its fkn dumb
 
LEVR said:
That's the thing through, I think Brown would prefer Lamb at 6. And my salvation will arrive by round 4-6

Watson isnt debuting, you know? He played half a dozen games at 5/8th next to Pearce last year. Ill let you in on a secret, he looked quite poor. When moved to fullback, however, he performed. So it seems Brown has created a hybridized role for Watson in an attmept to procure his form at fullback while sitting at second receiver

That said, it wasnt Watsons ability to score points with a 6 on his back that was the problem. Imo the Roosters looked flat and short of ideas when Watson was a 6, because apparently Pearce was the only bloke on the field who was thinking and directing. We will have the same problem until Lamb is called in to give him a hand, I reckon

We need two real halves imo
Click to expand...
And they won 4-6 with him at 5/8
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top