Right, lads, our centre channel leaks like a colander
Watched the 12-13 channel get carved up again on the weekend and thought, right, enough of this. Word is someone's been quietly sounding out a ball-playing second five-eighth back home, nothing signed, nothing even close, just whispers from a mate who knows a bloke. Apparently the ask would be around NZ$600k a season, which sounds steep until you remember how many line breaks we've leaked through there compared to every other Aussie side.
Meanwhile our blokes keep defending that channel like it's an optional extra 🤡 I'd happily chuck fifty on the TAB that whoever comes in actually makes the tackles the current lot miss - easy money, surely. Wait for the fanboys to pile in saying we're fine with what we've got. 😏
9 posts
-
✓A mate who knows a bloke, that's the sourcing standard now, is it? I'll want receipts before anyone starts budgeting NZ$600k off pub whispers. Show me the player's name, the contract status, anything, and I'll happily eat my words. Until then the 12-13 hole is real, but the "sounding out" story is doing more leaking than our centre channel.
-
-
I could be wrong, but I'd pump the brakes on the NZ$600k figure before anyone gets excited. A ball-playing second five-eighth of genuine test quality in that age bracket, mid-twenties, contract with an NZR deal already banked, likely Super Rugby Pacific leverage on top - doesn't move for less than NZ$800k all-up, and NZR have shown all year they'll match or better anything we table to keep the profile up. Add in that the raid only works if he's a free agent or genuinely squeezed out of his current depth chart, and the pool of candidates who'd actually fix our 12-13 channel shrinks to two or three names, maybe fewer. Chur to Diehard's enthusiasm, but the fix might be cheaper and closer: shift what we've already got, run a proper 10-12 double playmaker and protect the channel with structure rather than a marquee signature. My table on line breaks conceded shows most of our leaks came off second-phase where the drift fell apart, that's a coaching fix first.Do the math before you argue.
-
FrontRowFan, I'd want to see the actual sample before we price this bloke out of reach. Three or four negotiations involving NZR-contracted playmakers is a thin base for a flat "won't move under NZ$800k" claim, and one recent deal below your line blows the whole model. Small-sample pricing has burned smarter punters than us, and Diehard's point stands: even an overpaid fixer beats another season of the 12-13 channel leaking like ours does. 📊Numbers > vibes.
-
Funny how quick we are to price blokes out of a move we haven't even started yet 😄 Back in my day every second playmaker shifted across the Tasman for pocket money and a bag of pies, and I've seen worse channels defended than ours this season. If the whispers get a name attached, BootToBallGuru's right, one real deal under that big figure and the whole argument folds like a deck chair at Eden Park.Watch as long as I have and you'll get it.
-
Watched the Chiefs trial through that channel last month and their second five-eighth held his line all arvo, that's the sort we pinch 😏 Sounding out is one thing, who's actually signing on? 🤡It's a lottery, not sport.
-
heard whispers like this a few times over the years, and half of them died quietly by round three 😄 still, time will tell ayeBeen here longer than some have followed.
-
If the centre channel keeps leaking like that, it makes my head spin when I'm trying to nail down a solid multi. You can't build a consistent ROI when the structural integrity of the defense is that poor. I’d be nervous betting on a clean sheet or a flat victory for them, regardless of what the current price suggests. It feels like the market is pricing in resilience they just haven't shown yet. Until there’s genuine movement in that area, those lines feel a bit too generous to a potentially chaotic fixture. 🔥Bankroll discipline wins.