nope, i get it, you just reminded me, i was critical of longstaff, because what i try to base my assessment of academy kids coming in, what do they have that makes them stand out? longstaff had tenacity, but he was undersized, didn't tackle that hard, didn't hit it up hard, didn't offload.

What do they do, or can they potentially do better than the person they're replacing, nicholson is falling a little into that category for me, after a first season.

him being moved to 13 is interesting, one would expect him to play completely differently next season

His immediate predecessors at right second row were Holmes and Hughes. He contributes far more than those two.

very very low bar

But surely an improvement.

Would you like James Harrison at right second row?

I’m glad I’m not alone.
I’m a big fan of Currie.
He’s been trying to play above his weight. The like of Currie and Peanut trying to take up the mantle and make up for the deficiency in the front row.
The fatigue finding them out with mistakes.

to be fair the first choice starting props were missing.. and the others are mediocre at best.

As for the Nicholson/Currie thing.... i think we have all seen the best Currie has to offer... Nicholson could improve massively in the right team... its a long term thing really.

unless I've been watching a different game,Curries meters have come out wide.... not trying to make up for the deficiency in the front row.

And as for Peanuts meters I don't have the stats but not many of them were towards the opposition's line

its almost as if... duckies post...makes no sense....

But can anyone else replicate the “Peanut Skip”, was worth signing him just to see how it bamboozled the opposition*

*said no one, ever

Maybe Peanut was just too brittle at this stage of his career?

We never really got to see Peanut butter the opposition.

If only Ratchford had the nickname “Jelly” I believe they are a highly rated combination

And so a very long day comes to an end…

That’s my point though, we’ve signed 9 props in 2 years, and retained Philbin. That was because the middle was our weakness. But we’ve actually gone backwards. Missing Vaughan is huge, but Mikaele has been lacklustre at best since he returned.

We absolutely have seen the best that Currie has to offer, behind a decent pack. And he’s been held to that regard since. The point is, if his job is to create width and to be a dynamic back rower, not an extra prop, then he is doing that. The issue is we’re not on the front foot, have no momentum and can’t manipulate numbers or make space because the middle is getting bullied.