BUT however is a more complete player with much more experience than Moa.. proper catch 22 huh

The reason the fans wanted him to stay is because he gave his all at the back of the season WHEN he was given good game time, having 10 mins is a waste of a potentially powerfull prop, were as with Cusack you get the effort but no tackle breaks and no big hits and also easy to stop.

We made a big noise about the Tongan Mafia with all three lets give the guy a proper run out with the o'MELEY AND FITZGIBBONS he can only learn and improve

very true.

Think you could be on to summat there

I'm pretty certain that Cusack will have more tackle breaks/busts and a lot more big hits . Not quite sure how you'd define that, but, however you do, he'll have more. If fact, Cusack made more breaks in the last game than Moa has made since he's been here (I don't recall Moa making a single clean break).

You got it right there,totally agree.

First poster

to much I think not watching the game or does not understand the finner points.

If this was the case then we would have let him go, small memory you have me thinks , do we think we only renewed Cusacks contract because Fizty is here, as a favour to him, we were not even talking contracts until we signed Fitzgibbon.

but would the team benifit more with 2 impact props and 3 workhorse type props including fitz. rather then 1 impact prop and 4 workhorses? ive noticed in the games this year once omeeley goes of we lack go forward and some real impact

Well there's the thing, I have a very good memory. Extremely good, in fact. And yet, for the life of me, I can't remember a single clean break by Moa, but I can remember multiple from Cusack. Weird.

Moa don't make a massive impact though.

not weird just facts!!, he is a useful replacement but nothing more, cussack on the other hand is a SOO etc real deal player

Don't think cusack ever played SOO. He's a good workhorse prop, nothing more, nothing less

James Graham this year has done 6.6 metres and Peacock 7.2 - last year Moa did 8.2 (on harder grounds)

Not sure what that proves - probably that 7 out of 9 statistics are misleading.

Maybe your stats misleading?

Think he was in the Country but not State of Origin

Four GFs (one permiership winner), World Club Challenge winner

purely by accident you understand...

Approx only 1 in 10 stats are accidental, the rest show what the person wants them to!

That might have been Long?

After last nights performance let no one be critical of Cussack again, it was only his aggresive manner and his big carries that got us going when he came on, and a massive hit on Coley as his first one of the match, cussack was outstanding last night ....

Maybe as a tribute you could do him the honour of learning how to spell his name then?



[size=85(It's written in the thread title)[/size

Right, I quite like Cusack. he doesn't set the world alight, but I think he's a pretty solid defender and should be in the starting line-up.

Although I don't feel the same way now, in the preseason I thought that we should two out of Cusack, Radford and Dowes, so, a few games into the season, I thought I'd compare their stats.

EDITED TO INCLUDE O'MELEY, IN ORDER TO COMPARE OUT 4 FIRST-CHOICE PROPS.

Metres per carry.

Cusack: 363m/60= [u6.05m[/u
Radford: 651m/51= [u6.5m[/u
Dowes: 512m/72= [u7.11m[/u
O'Meley: 568m/73= [u7.78m[/u

Tackles per match*.

Cusack: [u21.6[/u
Radford: [u22.25[/u
Dowes:[u 24.8[/u
O'Meley: [u20.2[/u

Missed Tackles.

Cusack: [u3[/u
Radford: [u2[/u
Dowes: [u8[/u
O'Meley: [u5[/u

Tackle Busts.

Cusack: [u1[/u
Radford: [u4[/u
Dowes: [u5[/u
O'Meley: [u4[/u

Clean Breaks.

Cusack: [u1[/u
Radford: [u1[/u
Dowes: [u0[/u
O'Meley: [u2[/u

It should be noted that Radford has played one less game than the rest, which is why I have worked out average tackles per match.
These stats are for the first five games. [url=http://superleague.co.uk/statistics_player.php?hs1=2010&hp1=1172&hs2=2010&hp2=274&stat=tries&season=2010Link to stats source.[/url

apart from the 8 missed tackles which could in effect lead to 8 tries.

If anyone wonders what this post was about, it's in response to my initial comment "Looks pretty good on Dowes, I'd say.", before I edited it to include O'meley.

And yeah, I agree.

Great workrate from O'Meley seeing as he spends less time on the pitch than the others