Were they too frightened to ask a tough question of Opes lol

Interesting from Ando....
I didnt realise how much the 4 defections of Pay, Dymock, Smith and McCracken caused a divide and infighting in that '95 team and season. According to Opes, it really ripped the team apart, as was the fact that we didnt have a home ground. It wasnt till the return to Belmore and thrashing of NQL that he thought we are a chance.

I have alot more respect for that team to be able to put their differences aside and come away with a premiership - especially from so low in the top 8..

“That’s where I’d be training in the preseason and Dean’s really good on picking players on form and not on history so he’s given me a good shot in the preseason.

“There’s an opportunity there but there’ll be other players I’ll be competing with and that only brings good things.”

Yesterday’s announcement about Martin’s future was much-welcomed signing news for the struggling Bulldogs, who have been forced to release star players Aaron Woods and Moses Mbye this season due to salary cap pressure.

According to CEO Andrew Hill, Martin’s one year deal was the best outcome for both parties as gives the 25-year old a chance to prove his first grade credentials without the club over committing to him.

If true, it’s not a bad signing if K Elgey does come to the Dogs.

The one thing I remember about his game is his kicking.... defensively he needs work


I get a feeling that Pay will go with JMK at 9 from 2019, Pay really rates him


1 x more prop needed
1 x more backrower needed
2 x more outside backs/centres needed
1 x more backup Hooker needed

reading on zero tackle gold coast titans winger ANTHONY DON has the bulldogs the rabbits & the sharks fighting for his services i wont copy & paste it as this webb everyone says that it has trouble when doing so   

on kane elgy  i was told  that it is a rubbish rumour & the dogs are not interested for his services there you have it period 

I agree 100% Villi .. spot on on all points....

it is amazing how sensible the site has become without Dman spamming the site with nonsense.. :)

The player we need in the backs that ticks all the boxes is Valentine Holmes.
Whether it be fullback, wing or even centre, I reckon he is one of the best. He supports runners, has pace and a good football nous.

You're never going to win a comp by just lookin to unearth the next big thing. You need to make key acquisitions and I reckon he is well worth it.
If not him, i'd take Barba back. Offers similar attributes but alittle less pace and probably more baggage.

Either way, if Barba is to return to the Sharks, Holmes is out, so we can make a play at either.

All that moving players to have some room, any room under The SC, Hill saying we can't realistically compete in the market until 2021, us letting vthe Morris twins go because we can't even afford them, the price tag of Holmes and that you'd have to pay him way overs to get him away from The Cowboys 1st and if not them Cronulla 2nd.

All of that and more, much more.....

.... you don't pay any attention to any of it do you?

I suppose we could get Homes though... and surround him with 16 Branko Lees.

Probably Ogden in for injured Clay Priest this week. I don't know if there will be any other likely changes.
It's possible after losing the last few matches. We'll find out in a few hours.

Zef we cant compete with rookies in the backs, halves and only noted forwards. This mentality has been a disaster for best part of 15 years going way back to The New Breed in 2001.

The timing of Holmes going on the market this year is not great given our SC issues but in 1 years time there may not be that kind of player on the market so what do we do? Write off another year?

Efficient recruitment is just that. Strike while the iron is hot. We dont have to pay overs. We just have to pay what a QLD, Kangaroo and premiership winner is worth. In my opinion ( and i reckon yours too) the club has buried its head in the sand by saying No to back-end contracts.

Like i have said many times before. The time to back-end a contract is to keep a top team together or when operating under reduced cap. You dont do half the team. You do 2 - 3 players max and you live by that decision until their contract expires. No roll-on. 

Im sure you have mentioned previously that backend contracts are part and parcel of efficient SC management. 

Doesn't look like the club will change its stance anyway as evidenced by Martin's 1 year deal. But i think the knee jerk reaction will set us back at least 1 or 2 years.

What's the best Sim only plan these days?
Mainly interested in data. Don't talk much on the phone since getting married. 

Ogden is probably better than Priest anyway...

The only "left field" selection I would consider is Cleeland for Lichaa with JMK moving to hooker... 

IMO that is certain to weaken the defence, but may add something significant to the attack.. 

I saw some of last weeks reserve grade, IMO Cleeland was one of our better players... he is a half with a running game which is something we are lacking... Along with the reserve grade coach, I'm the only one that seems to rate him Des & Pay don't seem to and I admit his defence is suspect and he can be inconsistent... we are also letting him go... the counter argument is ... what have we got to lose?

Like to see Cleeland get a go and Woolford. 

Has the Club released any info on who is in the Top 30?

Yes, Woolford is the other viable alternative...

They don't seem to publicly announce the top 30 .. one or both of these guys could be in it.

Tariq Sim.
Don't bundle with his brothers. They're crap.

As for the top 30, it shouldn't be too difficult to work it out.
There's the current 17.
plus:
Olive, Frawley, Francis T, Chris Smith, Foran, Renouf T, Fine, Priest, Ray FM & Montoya....that's 27.
So only 3 others are eligible for selection. This is where I can't figure them out. Maybe someone else knows?

Just guessing the last 3, could be anyone, but possibly Lachlan Burr, D'Rhys Miller, Tom Carr.

No Marki, I've said you have to front end, back end and PAYG to juggle a SC and until The NRL follows the AFL and makes every contract PAYG (and I hope they do) you have to do that.

"Juggle", not the madness that we participated in for the last 5 years which was just all credit card.

And what you're suggesting is exactly that, learning nothing from what got us here.

We're gonna be on bread and butter for the next season, maybe two, maybe three AND WE KNOW THAT. So whatever you think we'll be playing Holmes or anyone else in that paypacket range would have to be backended out to the never never and beyond because we can't pay him overs next year, or the year after and probably the year after that and every year you put it out you're piling it up to put us back to where we started before even got out of it.

We are in no position for it, not now, not next year, probably not the year after.

You're just trying to find a solution to what you've already decided instead of making a decision on what solutions you got to hand. Completely @rse about.

After watching the antics after the weekends rounds, Ricky Stuart showed what a complete d!ckhead he really is. Funny how when he was on the bonus end of some dubious calls against us there was not a problem with the refereeing. And talking about problems with the refereeing, since when has Greenturd become interested in sh!t refs calls. It was all hunky dory when Sutton dropped that clanger Dogs v Gronkos and brother Bernie reckons it was a fair and above board call. It is quite obvious that the NRL needs to lift it's game and the officials need to be made accountable. I noticed Sutton (Gerard) dodged another bullet, shame that, he needs to be demoted.

I would have thought by gettimg rid of Woodsand Mbye that end of next year we would have our SC in order, so any backend deal in 2019 would only be a 1 year. Add the possible early retirement of Foran and the cap space could free up.

But i concede the club has taken a stance on the practice and we can only hope we can make better use of the cap when we can.

Issue with the refereeing and bunker is that the NRL needs to change the objective of the bunker from adjudicating from a set of rules to "making decisions for the spirit of the game".

By that, i mean continue doing what they do now, but if something seems just blatantly wrong, then no matter what they can or cant rule on, they should put the spirit of the game ahead of anything else and adjudicate accordingly. At the very least speak (off air) to the ref on the mike and let him adjudicate.

There would less criticism that way.

Interesting thought...making rulings in the spirit of the game. Wouldn't that be applying the rules as they are written not some idiotic ad hoc interpretation of the same. That is the problem....those making the rulings are just plain dumb. Do refs or refereeing officials have to pass some form of IQ test. It is a wonder they can find their way home. Too much brotherly love as far as the Suttons go and just plain stupidity on the part of the bunker people. The worst one is the one where the Rorters were given a try when the ball was pulled towards the player...along the ground...after colliding with the upright. Even knowing how much his team is favoured in all circles did not prevent the Rorters' player from thinking he had knocked on...and he had. Momentum or the opposition killed.

Gee...the Rorters' site buzzing with the news of Brett Morris' signature for 2019....NOT!!!!!

When first brought in, the bunker was to only adjudicate on what the ref had asked to check (probably still the current case). But that is the problem.....

If the ref doesn't ask for something and yet they see it as blatantly obvious, they should rule on it irrespective or at the very least advise the on field ref about it who can then make an informed decision. 

By limiting the use of the bunker to advise on X, you run the risk of them not being able to advise on Y.

I say more power to the bunkerand problems will be solved or if not, they will be 50-50's. No harm in split opinions on some tight decisions but you just want to remove the howlers.

I think in the end Captains Challenge is the way they'll have to go - and the challenge can be on anything and everything in a try scoring play. Maybe 2-3 per game or  1-2 a half I'm sure they can find the balanced number.

You might say the DRS in cricket (which works the same) still has some howlers. True, but not often. And more importantly everyone knows how it works and when there is a f***up the blame lays more on the Captain for not making or wasting a challenge rather than the Umps wearing it 100%.

AND it make refs/umps adjudicate on what they see rather than using reviews as a security blanket.

One problem is the bunker slows down the game ....

They have 2 refs and 2 touch judges .. if all think try (and are not tipped otherwise by the bunker) then rule try....

Use the bunker when the refs have a strong element of doubt.... 

Apart from that give a captain 2 (unsuccessful) challenges per half... on any decision....

You are always going to get decisions that are very hard to call either way, even with the best technology...

You are always going to get mistakes .. but in a good sporting contest the game flows...all modern sports allow too many stoppages.

Yes my thoughts are similar...

The bunker needs a couple grenades thrown in it.