Jump to content

Victor the Inflictor


Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, bobbruce said:

If Australia want to say if you’ve played for country X then you can’t play Origin that’s up to them. Playing Origin has no effect on your international eligibility. 

I think they are begining to realise dinner of the consequences of Origin eligibility rules. The RL world down under is changing 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


1 hour ago, Dunbar said:

Yes, Knowles is a machine.

I would have Radley in the England squad in a heartbeat.

In a nutshell . I don’t see it as Knowles v Radley . It’s great squad depth in a long hard tournament where that depth is often key . With the attrition it’s a 24 man squad tournament . Radley ticks the boxes with his quality experience and versatility , and whatever his size on paper he sure doesn’t play that size.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Young Blood said:

I'm not sure if he is eligible, I may have read somewhere being named in a Origin squad makes you ineligible for NZ or England. 

SOO has no bearing on the international game whatsoever. It has no power to do that. It is a state All-Stars game.

  • Like 2

new rise.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Exiled Wiganer said:

Bateman, Knowles, Radley is some back row. 

Which of Knowles and Radley are you expecting to play as an edge forward? A role they don't play in club rugby.

  • Like 2

"The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, SydneyRoosters said:

I think he should be England’s starting 9 he is a great ball player and has played there several times for the roosters

I don’t think this is out of the question to start a game with a Clark type player on the bench when there’s a bit of fatigue creeping in . Radley and Knowles are both middle players and it gives options and versatility with your rotation and both are 80 minute players 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pulga said:

SOO has no bearing on the international game whatsoever. It has no power to do that. It is a state All-Stars game.

It does, why can't Ponga play for NZ or Taumalolo  who played for NZ can't play for Queensland. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Young Blood said:

It does, why can't Ponga play for NZ or Taumalolo  who played for NZ can't play for Queensland. 

The NRL or Australian Commission set rules for Origin - that is entirely up to them because Origin is their 'all star' game.

IRL set the rules for internationals.

The rules that have been set for Origin are that if someone has played for England or NZ, they are not eligible for Origin. That is why Taumalolo (having played for NZ) can't play for Queensland.

People like Ponga decide not to make themselves available for NZ because they know it would rule them out of Origin. They are not band from playing for NZ, but choose Origin instead - forsaking NZ in order to remain eligible for whichever state.

IRL rules have no concern for Origin which is an internal Australian matter.

  • Like 9
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Young Blood said:

It does, why can't Ponga play for NZ or Taumalolo  who played for NZ can't play for Queensland. 

There is no mention of State of Origin at all in the international Rugby League eligibility regulations. 

What Australia do with eligibility for State of Origin is for them to decide.

  • Like 3

"The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Young Blood said:

It does, why can't Ponga play for NZ or Taumalolo  who played for NZ can't play for Queensland. 

Ponga can play for NZ if he wants to but as suggested above chooses not to so he can continue playing for QLD. 

We have an example of this happening already, Chris McQueen played 6 Origins for QLD and then chose to represent England ruling him out of potential Origin selection from that point forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, UTK said:

Ponga can play for NZ if he wants to but as suggested above chooses not to so he can continue playing for QLD. 

We have an example of this happening already, Chris McQueen played 6 Origins for QLD and then chose to represent England ruling him out of potential Origin selection from that point forward.

Ponga cant play for NZ, as he played for Australia in the 9s World Cup. 

Edited by Young Blood
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Young Blood said:

Ponga cant play for NZ, as he played for Australia in the 9s World Cup. 

He can’t but players like Nanai, Fotuaika or Taulagi could still as they haven’t played for Australia. If they did play for NZ they wouldn’t be able to play Origin again though.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Barley Mow said:

The NRL or Australian Commission set rules for Origin - that is entirely up to them because Origin is their 'all star' game.

IRL set the rules for internationals.

The rules that have been set for Origin are that if someone has played for England or NZ, they are not eligible for Origin. That is why Taumalolo (having played for NZ) can't play for Queensland.

People like Ponga decide not to make themselves available for NZ because they know it would rule them out of Origin. They are not band from playing for NZ, but choose Origin instead - forsaking NZ in order to remain eligible for whichever state.

IRL rules have no concern for Origin which is an internal Australian matter.

Spot on. Except Taumololo not playing origin is because he isn't eligible. Not because he played for NZ. He moved to Australia too late.

new rise.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Pulga said:

Spot on. Except Taumololo not playing origin is because he isn't eligible. Not because he played for NZ. He moved to Australia too late.

No he is eligible he moved at 13 to Australia. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, for the purposes of this discussion, playing internationally may effect Origin eligibility but playing Origin doesn't effect international eligibility. 

(That's not to say Australia may have some selection policy based on Origin but that is not the same as international eligibility).

  • Like 2

"The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

So, for the purposes of this discussion, playing internationally may effect Origin eligibility but playing Origin doesn't effect international eligibility. 

(That's not to say Australia may have some selection policy based on Origin but that is not the same as international eligibility).

I don’t know if it’s only me , but I’m staying out of it as I’m confused 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, DavidM said:

I don’t know if it’s only me , but I’m staying out of it as I’m confused 

It's really simple. State of Origin makes no difference to what country you can play for. 

It's only complicated in the other direction. 

  • Like 1

"The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DavidM said:

I don’t think this is out of the question to start a game with a Clark type player on the bench when there’s a bit of fatigue creeping in . Radley and Knowles are both middle players and it gives options and versatility with your rotation and both are 80 minute players 

My England 17 would be this

1- Tomkins

2- Makinson

3- Connor

4- Farnworth

5- Handley

6- Williams

7- Welsby

8- Walmsley

9- Radley

10- Thompson

11- Bateman

12- Farrell

13- Knowles

14- Leeming

15- Burgess

16- Oledski

17-McMekenn 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Dunbar said:

Which of Knowles and Radley are you expecting to play as an edge forward? A role they don't play in club rugby.

Either,it’s not a massive transition especially for 2 players who seem to be pretty switched on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Davo5 said:

Either,it’s not a massive transition especially for 2 players who seem to be pretty switched on.

You think so? Personally I think it is a big transition in the modern game and I don't think Radley or Knowles would be anywhere near as effective there as a specialist edge forward.

  • Like 2

"The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Young Blood said:

Radley will be wasted at 9. Needs to play 13 his biggest strength is his ball playing and linking with the halves. 

So is Morgan Knowles.  

Both are also very strong middle defenders.

Having Radley at 9 for the the start of the game then playing him as a ball handling middle later and a specialist 9 coming on means we could have both Knowles and Radley shift the ball both sides of the ruck when the game opens up allowing the halves/full back to play a pass wider.   I think that could be an exciting option.

  • Like 5

"The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Young Blood said:

Radley will be wasted at 9. Needs to play 13 his biggest strength is his ball playing and linking with the halves. 

But Knowles is a better all round player.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...