I'm not saying there's a clique, but Andre was good mates with Patton & Livett already. They all went to Newman.

Correct. Russell and Brown are obviously well within Smiths Clique and find themselves (Especially Russell) undropable.

I bet its wonderfull for team morale seeing Russell on the team sheet week in week out no matter how awful his performances are. I bet its awful for Dec, turning up to training and putting the hard graft in just to get dropped as and when Kevin Brown decides if he can be d that particular week.

I don't think its so wrong for someone to challenge Smith on why his favorites are constantly getting game time, no matter how frigging abysmal they are, at the expense of lads who are pushing for a starting spot.

I just wish I knew how things worked.

We hear Smith doesn't run tactics when it comes to attacking play.

We hear Smith doesn't run coaching sessions and leaves to Agar.

So what does he do and if the above is correct, what qualifies Agar to have such a hands on approach.

Skents! Get the video recorder out!

It does appear to the outside world that Brown is picking and choosing the games he plays in. The interview with him last weekend after getting 'injured' in the warm up was cringeworthy.

It's now reported that he has a ruptured plantar fascia in his foot picked up in the Huddersfield match. It takes around a month to heel, and it's difficult to put pressure on, especially when trying to move off.

Don't know how Brown and our medical staff thought he'd be alright after less than 2 weeks.

Perhaps he knew all along he couldn't play. That would at least go some way to explaining the 'awkward' interview.

It will be interesting in the off season what happens, I hope we don't panic buy and fill up on average players to wash the minutes out of the young guys.

I think we all saw enough of Livett to see he has every chance of becoming a star if we give him time, next season I'd like him to have one position and play there every week (even if he's a little bit out of form, stick with him and let him build) Ideally, him in one second row, Currie in the other. We've seen how dangerous Currie is as a big fast runner, who can pass and kick, one on either side would be a massive bonus.

Be great if all players could stick in one position and stay there. For that to happen need to have very few injuries. This year we would have needed about 3 players for every position on team. That not possible under current salary cap.

I think Russell fits in perfectly seeing as scooting seems to be Smith's plan A for getting upfield. It is effective up to a point and avoids chances of losing possession by passing the ball between attacking players & resulting knock ons.

again, as has been repeated as nauseum. His scooting does not outway the poor defence, the poor turning after kicks, the lack of ability catching high balls, the lack of ability picking up bouncing balls, poor defence on the line,

I'd wager Paul white was a more well rounded "rugby league player" then Matty Russell is.

Well Jimmy White is also an option, he is a really good ball player.

There are times when scooting is effective, when it is at its least effective is when it is almost every time, which seems to be our remit. We lack imagination, yet have some very creative players meaning we are being coached incorrectly and in my opinion our attacks are being run and coordinated through the wrong players (include Brown in that). Clark is brilliant but he needs to do more passing from. Dummy half for me, ratchford and Patton need to be more involved and Russel needs to be a bench player at the very most, he has some useful attributes but I don't see improvement in his considerable weaknesses, he's the sort of player that would get away with his deficiencies if he turned momentum in games and was a try machine but he offers neither of those things.

I'd like to see Gidley at 1, ratchford and Patton in the halves and the game being played through the halves as much as possible with plenty of support runners,we have the players to operate like this it's foolish to keep churning out the rubbish that isn't getting us anywhere.

Gidley can't play 1. Too slow now and mostly out of position when at full back. Patton not ready for super league. Poor defender, poor decision maker, can't organise people around him doesn't take line on with any speed. Generally speaking if offence is poor it's generally cause half backs poor. We also have a full back and hooker who are creative individually but don't really have a lot of vision. Can't see us making the 8 with our current on field decision makers. Just hope enough to scrap through middle 8's

Gidley has looked his best at fullback and or best defensive efforts have come from when he's played there





Patton is more than ready for superleague and he's the only player who takes the ball to the line. He often gets caught ball in hand because our forwards stand around instead of hitting a line for him.

Yo also implied that clark and Ratch aren't decision makers.

You can call the team all you want but leave out the players who look interested. luckily its only the spine of the team which seems to care, that's a good sign. its also easier to replace forwards, centres and wingers than it is to replace fullbacks, halves and hookers.

ratch, patton, Smith, Clark and Westerman is a strong spine to model a team around. We just need a good half to partner Patton. either that or put ratch at 6 and find a fullback

Can't argue with that.

Could agree more, well said

In a season when weve scored the least amount of points in the whole league you'd have thought he would have tried some different options. Last year when Sandow was injured we looked decent when Ratch moved to 6. Obviously Smith has a very short memory!

Imagine being a stellar prospect like Morgan Smith... and not being able to get a game behind this shower of 5hite....the mind boggles!

If you can't say your 'F's and your 'T's...

So we have offered Savelio a 1 year deal, Leigh have offered him a 3 year deal, 2 NRL sides are in for him aswell West Tigers and 1 other i cant remember right now. Seems the upshot is we dont really want to keep him or they think 1 year deal is enough.

When Harvey Livett was available he kept Savelio out of the side. I would think that Tony Smith has other ideas & they don't include Savelio.

Possibility of back to Saints also I think?

Really don't know what to make of him, has his moments but can be anonymous at times during the game, he had a big chance here given the amount of injuries we've had in the back row, and back rowers covering centre to really make a shirt his own. As it is, currently I'd probably rather keep Julien over him - even if Savelio has the greater potential (I'd argue that potential tag can't last much longer for him, he's only 12 months younger than Currie and look how established he is).

If he did stay he wouldn't be a first choice starter as far as I'm concerned, possibility of offering some impact off the bench.

If he did move on it 'could' be one of those departures that comes and haunts us, but as things stand, I'm a bit 'meh' about him staying. If he does fine, if he doesn't lets move on.

I'm just hoping we have a couple of forwards on our shopping list, some established ones and not one year chancers that Smith has a hard on for.
I agree I would keep Jullien I think a 2 year deal is more then fair, he hits well above his weight and never slacks off. I'm hoping we do pull our fingers out soon and re-sign him

Savelio to Bronco's is a done deal this morning apparently, 2 year deal. Just hope we've got a decent prop/backrow replacement lined up who can break a tackle!!

I have had this info as well this morning, good luck to him, Brisbane will be a great learning curve for him

Correct

[urlhttp://www.5thtackle.com/andre-savelio-joins-nrl-club-for-2018/[/url