Sydney Roosters

No, I'm absolutely not.

I never said anything about matching him across a variety of statistics. I said he can be readily replaced given his type of player and implied Easts would still function relatively well. Hence why they were able to be successful with that laughable muppet Minichiello. That example alone shows my case is legitimate. RTS is a hard-working, strong ball-carrying fullback of the traditional ilk. He isn't Matt Moylan or Jarryd Hayne. His strongest assets are his work rate and his ability to break tackles. Those are not rare commodities in the world of fullbacks. If you think they are, then we're at an impasse.

 

Oh and you'd never do that would you? lol are you fucking serious, cunt?

He's a traditional fullback with a high work rate and he breaks a lot of tackles. His loss will be felt if Maloney's replacement isn't up to scratch. If he is, they'd get by with Daniel Vidot.

 

Nah it's true. They're comparable in terms of what they offer a particular side. If he had some genuine, reliable ability to manufacture points or he could kick, then I'd say you've lost someone who would be extremely difficult to replace. But he just isn't. He's a bloke who can be replaced with someone who can do everything he can just to a lower standard. Ala Minichiello. Ala Brett Stewart. Ala Josh Dugan and so on. The comp is full of them.

And I don't begrudge them. I actually prefer the traditional fullback in the more traditional setup where the halves manufacture the points. I'm just not in the habit, as practically everyone else seems to be, of overvaluing what this sort of fullback actually provides a side.

 

Early set runs, work from own end, tackle breaks and metres, they're all comparable. If you want to confuse all of this with me saying Vidot is as good as or comparably good with RTS, you can but it's just dishonest.

His ability to lay on tries is as average as it gets. What facets does he have that any other traditional fullback doesn't, which would justify this fawning?

The fact that you didn't feel the need to mention anything about error rate, defence, and positional play is quite instructive. That's pigeon-holing right there. You post a slew of stats, all of them attack-based, and all of the ones which are notable - mpg, line breaks and tackle breaks speak to the argument I've put forward.

You're arguing against yourself here.

 

Of the facets you felt pertinent to mention, none of which included reliability, yes they are. Statistics from his time on the wing substantiate it. I'm not saying they're comparable fullbacks. Vidot has shit hands, can't tackle, can't pass and god knows what his positional play would be like, but you didn't mention any of that now did you? Nah you didn't. The only thing you hinted at was his ability to create ala assists and he's fucking average at it.

 

I'll wager something with you, Magic. If you and I roughly agree about how Hastings and Pearce go together over the first 10 rounds, and it's, let's say "quite well" then I'll bet you nobody hardly mentions a peep about RTS not being there, whether it's Ferguson or Mitchell or fucking Kenny-Dowell for all I care. If they don't, then that's when the knives will come out.