Re: Ben Jeffries : Tue Feb 09, 2010 9:24 am  

brickie182 wrote:

I think the thing is, a player like jeffries needs a good pack to work with. Often in his first spell at wakefield the forwards were not dominant and hence it was difficult for him to play his natural game as he rarely had the platform to do this.

This year we have a very good pack and i would think that he will be a lot more consistent and he's shown in the first couple of games how well he can play, hopefully he can carry it on.

Correct

Re: Ben Jeffries : Tue Feb 09, 2010 9:25 am  

newgroundb4cas wrote:

Nope I went to plenty of games where Bj's heart wasn't in it when it has been he is a good player. This is the same guy calling me a goon who thinks Bibb would be a star ha ha KEar obviously thinks not rather playing Hendo as a prop on Sunday. People don't listen to the fatman he knows nothing.

More daft than normal, well done

Re: Ben Jeffries : Tue Feb 09, 2010 10:23 am  

Shame he only plays well when the sun`s on his back, eh?

Re: Ben Jeffries : Tue Feb 09, 2010 12:17 pm  

It's not only a better pack that will benefit BJ but also having a more dominant half-back partner.The half back partnership we now have is the best for many a year.

The attention Broughy receives will undoubtedly create more space for BJ to work in and show his true ability.

Re: Ben Jeffries : Tue Feb 09, 2010 12:51 pm  

BIGAL1 wrote:

Bibbs not 100% fit.

Has he ever been 100% Bigal ????????

Re: Ben Jeffries : Tue Feb 09, 2010 5:11 pm  

huddiepuddies wrote:

It's not only a better pack that will benefit BJ but also having a more dominant half-back partner.The half back partnership we now have is the best for many a year.

The attention Broughy receives will undoubtedly create more space for BJ to work in and show his true ability.

I personally reckon it is the relationship (on the pitch) with Tesco that is helping his game. They know and understand each others game and are both good enough to profit from it. Long may it continue!

Re: Ben Jeffries : Tue Feb 09, 2010 5:56 pm  

Why do people seem to feel the need to go too far either way? 4 weeks ago it was he was the worst thing since Chris Thorman, now for some it seems the only time he has ever put a poor inside ball in or failed to take on the line in the past have all been down to those around. He's not changed his name to Brian has he?

He was inconsistent before, there surely can be no doubt over that. I can accept that Rooney wasn't the ideal partner for him, nor were the pack always the best. It's a bit rich expecting the best players around you though unless you deserve it on merit; I can imagine the conversation with McNally: 'get a call up for the Australian national team Ben, and then we'll start talking about signing Peacock, Civoniceva, Cunningham, Hindmarsh and Johns'.

For me the important thing is the now and next. His confidence is up, through experience he seems to know his own game better and he's gelled with players around him - far more than I as a sceptic expected, and I salute him for that and admit my own doubts. There is a long way to go though in a three year contract. If I see anywhere near the same for the rest of the season, I'll be more than happy.

Re: Ben Jeffries : Tue Feb 09, 2010 5:59 pm  

bloomers wrote:

Why do people seem to feel the need to go too far either way? 4 weeks ago it was he was the worst thing since Chris Thorman, now for some it seems the only time he has ever put a poor inside ball in or failed to take on the line in the past have all been down to those around. He's not changed his name to Brian has he?

He was inconsistent before, there surely can be no doubt over that. I can accept that Rooney wasn't the ideal partner for him, nor were the pack always the best. It's a bit rich expecting the best players around you though unless you deserve it on merit; I can imagine the conversation with McNally: 'get a call up for the Australian national team Ben, and then we'll start talking about signing Peacock, Civoniceva, Cunningham, Hindmarsh and Johns'.

For me the important thing is the now and next. His confidence is up, through experience he seems to know his own game better and he's gelled with players around him - far more than I as a sceptic expected, and I salute him for that and admit my own doubts. There is a long way to go though in a three year contract. If I see anywhere near the same for the rest of the season, I'll be more than happy.

Seems to me to be a case of Heads I win tails you lose. If he does okay fine I am happy if he doesnt then its a case of I told you so.

Re: Ben Jeffries : Tue Feb 09, 2010 6:27 pm  

mopseyslovechild wrote:

Seems to me to be a case of Heads I win tails you lose. If he does okay fine I am happy if he doesnt then its a case of I told you so.

I'm assuming you are referring to my perspective. I disagree, as chances are him doing badly would imapct upon the team I support, and I like to think that is a case epicaricacy cannot apply to.

I expressed my doubts before; I cannot deny them. I didn't see the need to completely rail against his signing though. Equally now, I'm more than happy for the optimists to wallow in their predictions. I just think it gets a little over the top either way.

Re: Ben Jeffries : Tue Feb 09, 2010 6:34 pm  

Initially at the time of the signing i think some were bemused simply because we had Scott Grix who was performing well and Jeffries was inconsistent last time around.

As others have suggested the fact he's playing behind a strong pack and coupled with Brough being a dominant halve has certainly helped Ben play his game and i'd like to hope we've seen a little of what we can expect from him. Certainly that tackle on Sunday was inspirational for the team