NRL Round 14 Tips & Predictions 2026: Anytime Try Scorer Value Picks & Odds

The case here is the classic bench-forward try: short-side carry, quick ruck, or a crash play when the defence is still sorting numbers. Footylab’s profile likes his base scoring rate and recent try involvement more than the market does, and it’s not pretending the opponent is a turnstile either. It’s just saying the chance is meaningfully higher than single digits.

At 13.00 you’re being paid as if this lands about once every 13 games. Footylab’s fair price is closer to 11.16, and that difference matters on long shots. You don’t need him to be a weekly scorer; you just need the price to be wrong often enough.

He’s named on the interchange, which is the key difference between “fun idea” and “actual bettable role”.

Source: Round 14: Wests Tigers v Panthers

Prop tries aren’t pretty, but they’re repeatable: quick play-the-ball, short pass, and a big body landing on the line. Footylab’s ratings here are driven by a strong base scoring profile and a healthy mix of recent form and explosiveness for a middle, which is usually the difference between “runs hard” and “actually threatens the stripe”.

9.00 implies you’re basically hoping for a once-in-nine hit. Footylab has it closer to once in four. You’re still betting a forward try, but you’re being compensated properly at this quote.

Named to start at prop, which is exactly what you want for minutes certainty in an ATS play.

Source: NRL Team List | Round 14 | Knights

Interchange tries usually come from chaos: tired markers, compressed goal-line defence, and a runner who picks the right shoulder. Footylab’s support leans heavily on recent try-scoring form and a solid base rate, which is exactly what you want when you’re betting a player who might only get a limited window.

11.00 says “about 1 in 11”. Footylab’s fair price is closer to 8.42, which is a meaningful difference on a player who won’t be popular in the market. If you’re taking a bench forward, you want overs, and this is overs.

The model likes the combination of base scoring rate and a decent team attack environment, plus a matchup profile that isn’t as stingy as the market is assuming. For an interchange player, you’re basically betting on one good stint: a quick ruck, a short ball, and a defence that’s already had enough.

At 11.00, the market is saying this is a low-teens chance at best. Footylab’s saying it’s closer to a genuine one-in-four shot. That’s not a guarantee, it’s just a price that’s drifted too far from the role.

This is a middle-forward try profile: close-range opportunity, repeat sets, and a team willing to go back through the ruck. Footylab’s support points are pretty balanced here across position scoring profile, opportunity, base rate and recent form, which is what you want when you’re betting a prop rather than a highlight-reel edge.

11.00 implies “about 1 in 11”. Footylab’s fair price is around 10.11, and the bigger story is the probability gap: the market’s at 9%, Footylab’s at 23%. If you’re going to take a prop at double figures, you want that kind of cushion.

Yes, he’s a winger with strong base and opportunity indicators, and he’s always capable of finishing anything that hits the paint. But ATS is about price discipline, not vibes. Even elite finishers don’t get a 60%+ try probability in a normal NRL game unless the matchup and role are absolutely screaming.

At 1.57, there’s basically no room for a quiet night, a couple of tackles in touch, or the ball simply not going down that edge. Footylab’s fair price is closer to 1.51, and more importantly the model probability is nowhere near what the market is charging.

Centres can cash when the edge is humming, but they’re also the position that can get frozen out if the attack is either too direct (middles) or too wide (wingers). Footylab still rates him highly on base rate and opportunity, but not nearly high enough to justify a price that’s pushing towards “every second game”.

2.10 is asking you to accept a near coin-flip. Footylab’s fair price is also listed at 2.10, but the calibrated scoring chance in this matchup sits much lower than the odds imply, which is why the verdict is a strong ripoff.

Wingers can look automatic when a side is rolling, but the ball doesn’t always follow the narrative. Even with strong base and opportunity indicators, you still need repeat chances on that edge, clean last passes, and enough territory to stack sets.

1.72 is basically charging you for a try in most games. Footylab’s fair price is closer to 1.63, and the bigger point is the probability mismatch: the market is pricing him like a 58% scorer; Footylab has it around 31%.

Reserve tries are usually about role clarity: are you actually getting minutes, and if you do, are you playing in a spot that can jag one? Footylab’s support leans on a middling team attack environment and some opponent weakness indicators, which is basically saying the matchup isn’t a brick wall if he’s injected at the right time.

9.50 implies you’re getting paid like it’s about a one-in-ten shot. Footylab has it closer to one-in-five, which is why it qualifies as value even without being a slam dunk.

8.50 is not a monster quote for a player with unclear minutes. If you’re taking ATS in this range, you want either a nailed-on starting role or a very clear bench impact profile. Footylab isn’t seeing enough stability here to justify the ticket.

As a reserve, the path is about impact: come on, bring speed/footwork, and catch a defence that’s already conceded a couple of ruck wins. Footylab’s support points lean into explosiveness and recent form, which is exactly the profile that can jag one even without 80 minutes.

10.00 implies a one-in-ten hit rate. Footylab’s fair price is closer to 6.83, which is a big difference in this part of the market. If he’s genuinely getting a role, the price is doing you a favour.

If he scores, it’s probably off a short-range carry or a messy scramble rather than a designed edge play. The supporting profile is middling across the board, and the team attack environment rating is not exactly screaming “points are coming”.

16.00 is a big number, but it’s big for a reason. Footylab isn’t saying it’s a bad bet; it’s saying the market’s roughly in the right postcode.

15.00 is the market saying “unlikely, but not impossible.” Footylab isn’t pushing you to chase it or to avoid it; it’s more a neutral read unless team changes or late mail sharpen the role.

Named on the interchange for Round 14, which is the minimum requirement for this to be a live ATS conversation.

Source: NRL Team List: Round 14 | Eels

Even for a winger with strong base and explosiveness indicators, you still need volume and clean ball. And here, there’s an extra layer: availability and role certainty matters, because you can’t score tries from the physio room or the extended bench.

1.55 is the kind of quote you take when you’re convinced the player is both playing and getting fed. Footylab’s fair price is closer to 1.53, but the model probability is nowhere near the market’s implied chance, which is why the ripoff tag is so aggressive.

He’s been named in the reserves/extended squad as he pushes to return from syndesmosis, which is exactly the sort of late-week uncertainty that makes short ATS prices even harder to justify.

Source: NRL 2026, round 14, official team lists, injuries, updates, Fantasy | NRL.com

He’s a winger in a strong attack environment, so the try is always on the table. But winger tries are still opportunity-dependent: you need repeat sets, good field position, and the ball actually going down your edge. Footylab’s view is basically that the role is good, but not 65%-good.

At 1.55, you’re paying for a strike rate that even elite finishers don’t hit consistently week to week. Footylab’s fair price is around 1.54, but the key is the probability mismatch: the market is asking you to accept a much higher scoring chance than the model.