Are people really suggesting that French is a better full back than Ben Barba was? I wonder what game people watch sometimes and if they cherry and white specs stay on 24/7 365 days a year.

There's been quite a few posts since I posted so I won't try and quote them all.

However...

Barba was unplayable Feb- June 18, literally on another level. His head was turned after Magic weekend that year when his agent told him of NRL interest and he stopped playing after that. He won MOS that year based on 4 months of excellence. Let's see what Field does...

Secondly I loved Holbrook and its true that we had a better attack under him. However I am way more confident in the big games under Woolf. He has only lost one knockout game in 2 seasons and gave a very good Roosters team a good game in the WCC, we could easily have won that game.

Holbrook lost the 2019 CC Final in a game where we were heavy favourites and also lost the Play off semi-final in 2018. I honestly think we would've lost the 2020 GF under Holbrook. We would've got frustated and chanced our arm. Wigan defended outstanding that night and Finals should be low scoring games anyway. We completed well and chances were at a premium.

We now have the big-game mentality that makes me confident in every big game that we play. I didn't have that confidence under Holbrook and as good as that 2019 team was we were fortunate to play Salford in the GF who didn't really turn up.

Hats off for being honest. Lets not forget also that despite all the troubles he had, he was also instrumental in Cronulla winning the NRL GF in 2016, his try scoring record and assists was ridiculous that season. French and Field are only here because they can't get a starting spot in the NRL. Barba was proven in the NRL. His defence was awful but attack wise he was on another level.

People aren't. I am. I wouldn't have Barba near my team. Feel free to disagree.

Big game mentality is something we had under Wane. I wasn't particularly a fan of our style but in a big game I would put my life on us winning regardless of the team we had out. Under Lam I think we won 1/7.

The way that Peet has been talking about the changes at the club, I am hoping that comes back but we won't know until we're in one.

His defence was awful but, perhaps more importantly, his attitude was awful. Why do you think his career went the way it did? Why was he at Saints in the first place and why didn't Cronulla keep him?

Fantastic attack, no doubt. Absolutely awful in every other respect.

I suppose you pays your money and takes your choice.

To be fair I understand your point and believe it has merit. I'm not yet sure that there is any universe where Jai Field would be selected before Ben Barba but maybe I'll change my mind.

How come it's only being honest if it agrees with your point of view. You may not agree with, or even like, what I'm saying but I can absolutely assure you it's honest.

.
Ok thats a fair point. I just meant that he/she hasn't allowed cherry and white bias to influence his/her post.

Same mate. I understand your point from a purely attacking point of view and I haven't argued against it. However there's much more to a player than that imo. I've been hugely Impressed with the change of culture at our place and, as said by Stu in the post above, by the change in winning mentality at yours. I don't think you can argue both sides of the argument though. A quitter and disruptive force like Barba is not conducive to that kind of change. It's a straight choice...one or the other. That's why he got the boot from Cronulla, amazing attacking threat or not.

I stand by what I say. Clean living, team oriented, family man (and great attacking threat ) French over wife beating druggie quitter (and slightly better attacking threat) Barba any day.

Neither have I mate. I'd have Walmsley, Paasi, Roby (well earlier in his career at least), Lomax and many others in our side in a heartbeat. Barba never.

Thats a very different argument though. In terms of culture, setting standards, influencing younger players then of course French as a man however the argument was (as I understand it) ability wise.

Purely from a RL point of view then there is no contest, IMO anyway. We all know Barba is a horrible human being but he was a better rugby league player. If French or Field go back to the NRL and rip it up over there then I'll hold my hands up and admit I was wrong.

You mean like Barba did?

The man is toxic. The argument, even if you take it solely about ability, has to be taken in the round. You can't simply say he was a better attacker therefore he was better. He was an awful...and I mean truly awful...defender. He was a quitter who, in his final season was a total liability. He was disruptive, selfish, a criminal and many other things beside. Virtually none of which, apart from his attacking threat, made him a good player to have in your team.

You can't argue for the change in winning mentality in one post and then hold up the very antithesis of that as being a good player. You're arguing opposite sides of the same argument there. Good players contribute to a winning mentality. Bad ones help destroy it. You choose which you value the most. I know which I do.