I will never stop saying it..

[Guest]

i think this article reiterates what a lot of people have been saying

Roosters 'don't regret releasing Soward'
Ian McCullough
July 4, 2009 - 11:59AM

Sydney Roosters skipper Craig Fitzgibbon says the club are not kicking themselves about releasing Jamie Soward to St George Illawarra in 2007.

Soward has scored four tries in two games against his former team this season and was once again their tormentor in chief on Friday as the Dragons sealed a 34-12 NRL victory at WIN Jubilee Oval.

Despite this form, Fitzgibbon said the decision to allow Soward to leave midway through the 2007 campaign, having played just 22 first grade games, was sound, but admitted he always thought the 24-year-old five-eighth would fulfil the potential he showed as a junior.

"When he was with us we were struggling and he is not the sort of player who is going to go well when you are struggling," Fitzgibbon said.

"But if your team is going good he has that knack of scoring tries from anywhere.

"I think with us at that time it was always going to be hard to show his true potential, but now he is in a team that is coming first he is showing that potential.

"When you are down and out, as we were at the time, the sort of flamboyant player he is he may be able to jag a try for us but we were just trying to grind our way out of a hole.

"You could always see he had something but we had Mitchell (Pearce) at the time and we are certainly not kicking ourselves because we have him instead of Jamie."

Roosters coach Brad Fittler said he was pleased to see to see Soward doing so well at the Dragons, but admitted it was tough watching him do so well against his side.

"I am disappointed that he plays good against us, but he is a good kid and it is great to see a kid reaching his potential," Fittler said.

"I think everyone at the club saw what they are seeing now, but not so consistently he is making real good decisions and is going really well."

"As a half when your side is going well when you are kicking the ball and holding onto the ball you tend to play better, but he is going real good."

That should have read when he was with us we were struggling until he came into the team, we then won 3 of the 4 times he started before being dropped again because our coach at the time was an egotistical moron who was obsessed with Finch one day coming good.

[Guest]

The decision to let Soward go will become the worst one made by our club in the last 20 years. Even worse than the Dogs release of Thurston.

Go on Soward detractors, call him touch footy star, call him bad defender, call whatever you want to call him, then go back smoking your pot, or popping whatever you've been popping to make you so delusional.

The kid has had talent for years. he was mishandled by our coaching staff, even Brown showed his inexperience as a coach. It took a real footy coach to harness the talent and point him in the right direction.

For God's sake don't brign Pearce into this thread, this is NOT about comparison, it's about ruing our loss of a talented player who has the x factor, something very lacking in our one dimensional attack at the moment, and has been lacking since Freddy's retirement.

I think you are stretching in the comparison with Thurston. I agree the club mishandled him. I also agree with Fitzy's comments that he may not have been the one to drag us up (although I might add we are still down).

I was at the grand final when he kicked the winning field goal and thought he would really kick on. It is a shame we let him go but I am happy to see him performing so well. Even Gus came out the other day and said when Brownie called him for his opinion even he didn't know if he was a first grader. Without Bennett he may not have been.

[melon....]

Without Bennett he may not have been.

Without their forward pack, he isnt.

[melon....]

It would be 3-0 with whoever plays, so throwing him in the deep end should not matter.

Just because it shattered Pearce does not mean it will happen to soward.

Take bias and bullshit out of your answer

who are the 2 form halves that should be representing NSW in origin 3.

Forget about all the crap, we are talking form.

Kimmorley / Mullen halfback

Soward 5/8

On form that is how it should be.

Lets not forget he hepls create that dominant forward pck with his pin point kicking game, he gets them field position and repeat sets time and time again.

I know he knocked back your sexual advances all those years ago, but its time to forgive and forget, dont you think????

Shattered Pearce? You are kidding, he grew another leg. That did his confidence the world of good, as depicted in his playIts a shame he doesnt have a well coached and dominant forward pack. Ive always said it, a halfback can only play his best when his forwards get him the room to do so. As long as League is league, that will never change.

Soward is playing with confidence at the momnet so if anything I reckon he has a tonne to lose. You take him from the safe environmnet of a dominant forward pack and you expose him under a dominated forward pack - he would be the kind of player that would be shattered by a loss at that level. At least he isnt a baby any more and with the years he has now, he should be more mature mentally to handle that.

I guess the thing going for him is it s a dead rubber, so a loss or a win isnt that important.

[trewhella]

what would Fitzy know??
He rated Brett Finch.


The club has got to get the right people involved.

Not Steve Folkes.

[novice chook]

If Shack wanted to be here he would've stayed with a little less money

Why should Shack stay for less money when we had $170K odd per season to throw at a Manly NYC player??

Loyalty works both ways - and the fact is whilst the Roosters are always keen to claim 'salarcy cap pressure' when they let a long standing player go, they always come up with the big dollars when it suits them.

Shack has given 100% every game he's played for the Chooks. Pity some others haven't done the same.


NC

[Guest]

Why should Shack stay for less money when we had $170K odd per season to throw at a Manly NYC player??

Loyalty works both ways - and the fact is whilst the Roosters are always keen to claim 'salarcy cap pressure' when they let a long standing player go, they always come up with the big dollars when it suits them.

Shack has given 100% every game he's played for the Chooks. Pity some others haven't done the same.


NC

Im not saying Shack doesn't give 100% i think he does but you cant say he didnt chase the money

[Guest]

Letting go of Shack will be the biggest mistake our club has made in years.

[Guest]

Letting go of Shack will be the biggest mistake our club has made in years.

he's a huge loss, um but i dont think it'll be the BIGGEST mistake our club has made in years....

[Guest]

Im not saying Shack doesn't give 100% i think he does but you cant say he didnt chase the money

I can say absolutely that HE did not chase the money...

He knew realistically that he was never going to be a permenant part of the First grade team...always a fringe player that would be pushed aside for others.....

He has 2 young girls who MUST come first in his life and he did what any other responsible father would do....but he did NOT chase it.......he chose the more sensible and reliable option....

[Guest]

Letting go of Shack will be the biggest mistake our club has made in years.

We have plenty to cover for him

[Guest]

We have plenty to cover for him

Plenty of muscle, but none with heart.

Shack has heart, the rest? Bunch of nuffies (minus Myles and young Symonds)

[Guest]

I can say absolutely that HE did not chase the money...

He knew realistically that he was never going to be a permenant part of the First grade team...always a fringe player that would be pushed aside for others.....

He has 2 young girls who MUST come first in his life and he did what any other responsible father would do....but he did NOT chase it.......he chose the more sensible and reliable option....

He wouldve had a permanent part in 1st grade without a doubt
We only signed JWH because Shack was leaving, Parra offered more money and he took it, weather it was to look after his family or not, he left for the money

[Guest]

He wouldve had a permanent part in 1st grade without a doubtWe only signed JWH because Shack was leaving, Parra offered more money and he took it, weather it was to look after his family or not, he left for the money

that is a HUGE untruth....he knew it, we knew it, and Parramatta knew it and took advantage of it.....

We all knew JWH was comming WEEKS before Shack signed.......

You are just making it up as you go along........

Ask Shack himself, he doesnt bullshit about these things, he will tell you straight......

[Guest]

Plenty of muscle, but none with heart.

Shack has heart, the rest? Bunch of nuffies (minus Myles and young Symonds)

many of them have heart...
just not big enough this year