Dunbar

It's the rules of the Internet. It's not your opinion if you give your opinion and then state it is an 'absolute fact' afterwards. Your opinions magically turn into facts.

I'm not sure he would get a run in the centre or wing unless the Knights had a pretty deep injury crisis. If Ponga has a spell on the sidelines, you would expect Pryce to be in the mix for back up #1 but I think his chance will come when (if!) Adam O'Brien finally recognises that Cogger and Hastings are too similar and Gamble is bobbins and he finally puts Pryce at 6 next to either Cogger or Hastings as a game management 7.

Manu is one of many good players in the NRL but not even close to a once in a lifetime player. In fact, I am watching the Roosters Storm game now (or working, depending on who is asking) and Manu is just one of many good players in this game.

Pryce has been named in the Knights NSW Cup side again this week so he looks OK.

If talents like Jonathan Davies , Ellery Hanley, Darren Lockyer and Joey Manu only come around once in a lifetime and I have seen them all play. I have to ask, and be honest, am I immortal... am I Highlander?

It may just be me, but I don't think Manu is anywhere close to the three you mention in this post.

I think the first of those variables is relatively easy. Most employees would change jobs for a considerable pay rise - if there is no other financial incentive involved. But the chance to live in Japan? I want to visit Japan, it is on my bucket list, but I wouldn't want to spend 2 or 3 years away from home, living and working in a foreign country can be very isolating, even if you have your close family with you. If my business wanted me to move to our Japanese office and offered me more money to do it, I would say no. All these matters are personal of course.

Winners: Storm, Warriors, Eels, Panthers, Sea Eagles, Broncos, Bulldogs, Cowboys Points: 334 Home wins: 5 Poll: Sharks vs. Cowboys

There is a lot of chat in the Aussie sports media at the moment about whether the Roosters encourage their players to leave the code rather than move to another NRL side should they want to move on or can't offer them what they want in the cap. I hope that's not true - not least because Trent Robinson has been such a wonderful ambassador for our code.

Guess you got me. I'm a big racist.

There really are far too many variables here for us to make determinations from the outside about Manu's motives. We don't, for example, know his thoughts on sushi, karaoke or indeed how bullety he likes his trains to be.

There have been some harsh things said on this site but this one takes the biscuit!

A lot to unpack there. "shown themselves up for not understanding their own sport and making excuses due to tribal loyalty." I don't see a lot of that on this thread, do you mean on here or in wider social media? "An unnecessary tackle" why was it unnecessary? We see a lot of 3rd man tackles bring a player to the ground. Are they all unnecessary? Like it of not, that is the way the game is played now. "using poor technique, which severely injured another player is a ban all day long". Poor technique is not a foul - breaking the laws of the game is a foul. "Intent doesn't come into it" apart from the fact identifying intent is stated as one of the guiding principles of the RFL disciplinary guidelines.

The tried and failed is an interesting one. If you pick your best side for an international competition and lose then will you be better off picking a side that isn't as good! I'm not sure that the England side for the semi against Samoa was the very best side Wane could have picked but it wasn't far off with the players he had available to him.

Again, I will state for the record that if the panel come to the conclusion that the tackle was reckless or careless and therefore applied unnecessary pressure to Isa’s ankle (and caused injury) then I will accept that. But I will also state that it is not an absolute fact, it is the judgement of the panel and I accept that judgement. My judgement is that not all incidents that cause injury are a foul and in the instance I believe based on the evidence that I have seen that the injury was caused by an accidental collision between the knee of the tackler and the foot/ankle of the ball carrier. I do not believe that this tackle was any more reckless than many we see in the game that have the potential to cause injury but thankfully do not. Finally, I worry that we appear to be seeking to find blame in this instance (where a player has been seriously injured) due to the outcome and not the nature of the incident itself and I think that is a slippery slope.