• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

Reds 2018

Status
Not open for further replies.

Brumby Runner

Jason Little (69)
Interestingly Thorn reckons Hockings will play 100 tests.

In reality, that is very hard to see. There are quite a few still young locks who are ahead of him and who will be around the Wallabies for a long while yet. Coleman, Philips, Staniforth, Rodda, Tui, Aholelei, as well as his contemporaries in this year's U20s and Swain. It will be many years before he displaces most of those in the Wallabies and probably not sufficient time left to reach the 100 matches milestone, if he makes it there at all.
 

amirite

Chilla Wilson (44)
Interestingly Thorn reckons Hockings will play 100 tests.
I wouldn't take a press quote to be indicative of ones true feelings. I'm not saying it's a lie, but probably embellished.

Still, the coaches/staff signed him for 4 years and as much as they do make incorrect calls on occasion, they are where they are for a reason. They know their stuff.
 
T

TOCC

Guest
"Seemingly, Magnay signed the Suntory deal in the belief that he would only miss a few weeks of pre-season training but now it seems the ARU is likely to play hardball with him and make it difficult for him to re-sign with the Reds for next season.

He is regarded as too young to have earned the right to a sabbatical and indications are the national body wants to put a halt to the practice of players taking lucrative short-term contracts in Japan and then returning to Australia to resume their Super Rugby careers.

This just blows my mind, I said from day one that these flexi contracts were fools gold, for test players it meant 18month long season and not a single wallaby has played a flexi contract and come back better, they've all come back either mentally or physically drained and their form has reflected that.

However, I also said that if they are really struggling with the wages to retain players, then Flexi-contracts should be aimed at the tier below the Wallabies. Guys like Liam Gill and Mike Harris who were fringe Wallabies with a far reduced workload having not played the JuneTests/Rugby Championships/Spring Tours. Even guys like Magnays, young guys who have haven't played much rugby should be the preferred option for Flexi-contracts over guys like Folau and Foley.

ARU opened the pandora box of allowing players to go overseas and still return to Australia for the Super Rugby, now they're trying to close the lid. It's just another example of mismanagement by the ARU, if they're trying to put a halt to these kind of contracts then they need to come out and say that, not retrospectively deny contracts to players who have already signed one.
 

amirite

Chilla Wilson (44)
Yeah, but I also see the ARU's point of remaining competitive in the world rugby marketplace on someone else's dime.

I personally think Magnay should put his head down and try to get a Wallaby jersey. This would make him worth FAR more in the overseas market anyway.

It's a classic case of short term windfall V long term earnings.
 

Happy to Chat

Nev Cottrell (35)
Yeah, but I also see the ARU's point of remaining competitive in the world rugby marketplace on someone else's dime.

I personally think Magnay should put his head down and try to get a Wallaby jersey. This would make him worth FAR more in the overseas market anyway.

It's a classic case of short term windfall V long term earnings.
Well he ain't going to get there sitting on the bench all Super Rugby season. How much game time has Magnay had in the last 2 years? I know he has been dogged by injury but he needs to be playing rugby.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

amirite

Chilla Wilson (44)
Well he ain't going to get there sitting on the bench all Super Rugby season. How much game time has Magnay had in the last 2 years? I know he has been dogged by injury but he needs to be playing rugby.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
He's played little Super Rugby because he's struggled to build momentum with his injury issues. He's usually starting or getting good minutes at the start of the season, which reflects the coaches intentions.


I think he gets more value for his future having a good NRC and a great preseason (good for proactive injury management too).

It's not completely unfeasible that if he had an unreal NRC he'd go on the Spring Tour.
 

USARugger

John Thornett (49)
Trying to find a positive here..

Maybe playing against some of the smaller/quicker guys in the Top League will help him with defending against the steppers in Super. He seems to have a tendency to get turned inside out pretty easily at times by the guys with good lateral movement.
 

amirite

Chilla Wilson (44)
Trying to find a positive here..

Maybe playing against some of the smaller/quicker guys in the Top League will help him with defending against the steppers in Super. He seems to have a tendency to get turned inside out pretty easily at times by the guys with good lateral movement.

Sure, it's not the worst thing in the world. Just not ideal.
 

hammertimethere

Trevor Allan (34)
No it's not ideal but it's not a disaster. It does stink of his manager getting in his ear about the opportunity to make a few yen, when really there is nothing the ARU can do about it because he is off contract.

The worry is that he goes up there and does his knee or something like CFS did, though it is completely possible that he could injure himself in the NRC.

If I was the ARU/Reds, I'd just say right there is a contract here for you but we have a get out clause if you get injured in Japan. Puts the responsibility and risk back on the player (and manager)
 

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
I'd hate to be a Premier Grade lock who has slogged it out for years in men's rugby and to be overlooked by 2 teenagers who haven't even played Premier Grade in their lives. How can we possibly be signing these 2 young locks without having even seen them tested at opens rugby level? No doubt, they have shown promise at U20s level - I'm not denying that. But U20s level is a completely different ball game to seniors rugby. The recent article written by rugbynews.net.au hits the nail on the head.


They're not really in direct competition though. If you're in your mid to late 20s you're not vying to be the fourth or fifth lock in a squad. No team is ever going to sign you up to be that person at that age.

Presumably most of those guys playing premier rugby also understand how professional sporting teams build their squads and aren't thinking that they're in the running for an EPS or wider training squad spot because they're currently better than a teenager.
 

SamoanNo8

Jimmy Flynn (14)
BH and others,
Bottom line is - these guys are untested at opens division rugby and they have been signed. Dominance at U20s level does not translate to success in opens rugby.
 
T

TOCC

Guest
BH and others,
Bottom line is - these guys are untested at opens division rugby and they have been signed. Dominance at U20s level does not translate to success in opens rugby.

Sure, I don't think anyone is disputing that, their is an inherit risk when you sign a young player on what you assume his future potential to be. Their is also a risk that signing an older player, will result in that younger player having his development slowed or signed by another club.

Reds signed Rodda and L.Tui on similar grounds in 2015, both were untested in opens and both were only 18 with a few years development ahead but we're locked in on 3 year contracts.
 

Getwithme

Cyril Towers (30)
Sure, I don't think anyone is disputing that, their is an inherit risk when you sign a young player on what you assume his future potential to be. Their is also a risk that signing an older player, will result in that younger player having his development slowed or signed by another club.

Reds signed Rodda and L.Tui on similar grounds in 2015, both were untested in opens and both were only 18 with a few years development ahead but we're locked in on 3 year contracts.

I think his point is that our development system is flawed as a whole due to the player market in Australia. In NZ, they can afford to send these guys back to club rugby to develop them and actually select the very best players for the year.
 

amirite

Chilla Wilson (44)
I think his point is that our development system is flawed as a whole due to the player market in Australia. In NZ, they can afford to send these guys back to club rugby to develop them and actually select the very best players for the year.

I think this is a fallacy mate, NZ starts them young too.
 

USARugger

John Thornett (49)
Their young guys have significantly more game time, particularly at senior level (and in better feeder comps than ours), than ours do.

Compared to NZ the Australian player market is extremely distorted.
 

liquor box

Peter Sullivan (51)
BH and others,
Bottom line is - these guys are untested at opens division rugby and they have been signed. Dominance at U20s level does not translate to success in opens rugby.

How many successful players at Super level were not considered dominant at junior level?

If we had the money to develop players properly I would rather U20's play a season of club rugby, a season of NRC (and club) then a season training with the Super Rugby team as the "opposition" at training to prove themselves (plus NRC and Club).

If they get through then they play in the Super Rugby team, they have proven their skill for three season of club, two seasons of NRC and competed for their spot in the Super Rugby team and would only be 23 years old on debut.

The problem is having enough money to pay a kid to stay and do this rather than sign elsewhere for more money.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top