Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

the pillow avoids suspension

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Tries Off Kicks View Post
    any replies as to the raiders paid massive money correctly disregarded as chookpen myth
    Like everyone else, I know little of Shillington's personal reasons for leaving, but why else would he have left?

    The move was to a smaller club alongside weaker players in a worse city. He was getting game time up here and was developing into a rep player.

    The only reason he would have moved was better money, surely? Especially at a club like Canberra that could afford to pay him more than the Roosters with a squad laden with highly played rep players.

    I'm not trying to be facetious and you know more than me but why did he move?
    FONK

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by redwhiteandbluester View Post
      Like everyone else, I know little of Shillington's personal reasons for leaving, but why else would he have left?

      The move was to a smaller club alongside weaker players in a worse city. He was getting game time up here and was developing into a rep player.

      The only reason he would have moved was better money, surely? Especially at a club like Canberra that could afford to pay him more than the Roosters with a squad laden with highly played rep players.

      I'm not trying to be facetious and you know more than me but why did he move?
      The reason he gave at the time was about consistently starting, and about the chance to offer some experience and leadership given the youth of the Raiders. Sure he probably got a bit more cash, but given the $$ this joint throws everywhere, they musn't have wanted to keep him.

      If Ryles only lasts this year, who do we buy next?

      Joel Clinton?

      Ben Ross?

      Jeff Lima?


      Sticking with young Shillo longer term was the option

      madness

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Tries Off Kicks View Post
        The reason he gave at the time was about consistently starting, and about the chance to offer some experience and leadership given the youth of the Raiders. Sure he probably got a bit more cash, but given the $$ this joint throws everywhere, they musn't have wanted to keep him.

        If Ryles only lasts this year, who do we buy next?

        Joel Clinton?

        Ben Ross?

        Jeff Lima?


        Sticking with young Shillo longer term was the option

        madness
        From what i recall, shillo was in the starting 13 for a good majority of his last season with the Roosters.

        and as of last year, the Roosters players had an average age of 21 years of age.

        Shillington had an opportunity to stay at the Roosters, cement a starting spot while he was here.

        he chose to be a big fish in a small pond by taking the easy option by moving to the raiders.

        Delecto Oriens est odio Meridianus
        To love Easts is to hate Souffs

        Originally posted by Bill Shankley, Liverpool FC
        At a football club, there’s a holy trinity – the players, the manager and the supporters. Directors don’t come into it. They are only there to sign the cheques.
        Originally posted by Andy Raymond Commentating Souffs V Manly 18/04/09
        The fireworks at the Easter show are making more noise than the crowd tonight

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Tries Off Kicks View Post
          any weighting given to the oh so rare situation we were in, whereby we've blooded and invested in a young prop for some years who's a recent a rep player, and is 25 - only to let him go

          you'd prefer a 31yo who we now celebrate as having gotten through 2 games uninjured, and O'Meley before him?

          Shillo has way more upside

          any replies as to the raiders paid massive money correctly disregarded as chookpen myth
          You asked me who i would choose, i told you.

          At this current time we needed a senior forward, i'm hoping he will play until 32-3, unless injury cruels him. By then we will either buy an established hard working prop, or by miracle, FPN will develop as we'd hoped.

          As for his injuries, no doubt as he is getting on with it, he will have a few more niggles, but provided it's nothing major, i think having him in the squad outweighs any of that. He's missed 2 matches, but i am quite confident that if it was the business end of the season, he would of played. No reason to aggravate an injury this early in the season.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Tries Off Kicks View Post
            it's not the "new standard"
            if it was Morley, your masters would have crucified him in Mondays toilet paper and he would have copped 4 weeks. Youre right. Its the same old standards.
            Alcohol never solved any life problems.....then again neither did milk.

            Comment


            • #21
              TOK,

              I know for a fact that the reason Shillington left the Roosters was because of the money offered by Canberra (which was a lot more than the Roosters).

              If you choose not to believe it then that is your option.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by supermario View Post
                From what i recall, shillo was in the starting 13 for a good majority of his last season with the Roosters.

                and as of last year, the Roosters players had an average age of 21 years of age.

                Shillington had an opportunity to stay at the Roosters, cement a starting spot while he was here.

                he chose to be a big fish in a small pond by taking the easy option by moving to the raiders.
                He may have left the Roosters to get regular starting time - in 2008 he only started 9 games and came off the bench for 14 games.
                FONK

                Comment

                Working...
                X