why cutler??

[atomic_crimson]

he's had one bad game in FG out of 8. he had a broken hand.
and his game against souths wasn't even that bad.

he was terrible against souths!

i rate cutler highly but even that game you cant say wasnt "that bad" 9 out of ten times he farked up....

 

[smarty]

oh i thought it had healed? because thats what some were saying when i asked why folkes would start an injured player....

i dont think a broken hand makes you choose to catch a high ball with you back to the field of play leading to a dropped ball in goal

i was told that he came back 3 weeks early to play first grade with a fractured hand. if he wasn't playing first grade those weeks i doubt he would have played for premier league..

he was terrible against souths!

i rate cutler highly but even that game you cant say wasnt "that bad" 9 out of ten times he farked up....

he was average at most. terrible is not a good word to describe that performance.. a terrible performance is not just a couple of errors and missed tackles..

btw no point in telling me to take my "cutler glasses" off.

 

[atomic_crimson]

he was terrible buddy - he made three mistakes but they were not small mistakes.... if patten is **** when he does nothing wrong as you lot put it.... then cutler was ****!

as for quaid saying patten doesnt make 100 mtrs a game.... that souths game he made 250!


anyways as i said i rate cutler and would like to see him start... but if patten hasnt done anything wrong i dont see him being dropped - and patten has farked up but he has made up for it in other things...

 

[smarty]

well patten was **** against parramatta. he made 3 erorrs (including 1 dropped bomb), only like 80 metres and 2 missed tackles.. so by your logic he was TERRIBLE!