exsing wrote:
Benji wrote:
Bentley's game today consisted of fumbles and getting out muscled to every contest he was in. For the lack of a better word he gave us "nothing".
Can see what discussion would have led to the inclusion of bentley bofore Robbo, Hadley, Browne or Yarran. This is a blunder and Ratten needs to be held accountable and not make the same mistake again. I'd expect a decsion like that to be made in the "Pagan era".
Bit harsh there Benji. Ratten took a gamble. A gamble that didn't pay off and we lost by only 4 pts. We didn't get thrashed. Hindsight is great. But even with hindsight, what makes you think the inclusion of a another player instead of Bentley would have been the difference. What makes you think we wouldn't have lost by more than 4pts?
The gamble with Bentley didn't work out. But a bit harsh to get stuck into Ratten like that.
Your missing the point? What was the need to take a gamble at the stage?
When you make selctions you need to have some dort of theory behind them and unless somebody can explain to me what that theory was then Ratten needs to be held accountable.
Not an acceptable selection considering we had better player in the reserves last week and proven players at that.
Bentley wasnt selected to do a job of any sort so why we he be picked ahead of Robbo(30 os last week) and Had's (anzac medalist).
This taking a gamble at the cost of 4 premiership points does not sit well with me.