PRE-GAME Round 1 - Broncos vs Eels

[vertigo]

Yes he is

He didn't even play like one at the Storm, Smith steered the ship.

That's why they kicked him to the curb and chose Hughes who was better anyway. I don't know why I'm arguing over this, Pete's post in my sig is as salient as ever. It's shuffling deckchairs.

 

[theshed]

Croft was the better player in the trial. Milford should be the one worried about his spot going into r2 imo, because if he doesn't show any improvement I'd be replacing him with Dearden instantly.

I actually feel some optimism about Milford. If he is really shifted to that right hand side that’s a lot of strike power.

Riki
Milford
(Isaako)
Niu
Coates

defence worries me but attack is very exciting.

The first half showed that if the team plays quick up the middle, with Turpin running and kicking when needed, opportunities will arise. Haas’ return will help out roll on immensely. If they keep it simple we have a lot to offer in attack with Milf in the team on that side. It’s whether we can stick to the simple game plan, and defend for 80 or not that will **** us. Isaako needs to learn how to position himself in defence and catch bombs. He showed a lot of promise and his goal kicking is amazing. He proved us all wrong, he isn’t a Josh Hoffman clone, he’s the exact opposite - dynamic in attack and useless in defence.

1. Isaako (give him until round 2 to improve)
2. Farnworth
3. Arthurs
4. Niu
5. Coates
6. Milford
7. Dearden/Croft (same same)
8. TPJ
9. Turpin (should be captain imo)
10. Lodge
11. Glenn
12. Riki
13. Asiata

14. Paix/Croft/Dearden (Turpin plays 65+
15. Carrigan
16. Flegler
17. Teo (Bullimore very close)

When Haas returns, Lodge > bench, Teo > Reggies

 

[Foordy]

Lmfao

**** this club.

so let me get this straight ...

you believe a young player, who has yet to achieve anything in the game and was out performed in the trial, should be an automatic selection, because of his potential .

thank **** you don't make the selection decisions

 

[Tristan1990]

“I am looking at different combinations at my training sessions and I will make a final decision next week,” Walters said.

“Tom and Brodie are neck and neck at this stage. “Tom did some good things in the trial last week but Brodie was also very good so I have a tough decision to make.

“It’s a good headache to have because you want players competing for positions.”

 

[Jedhead]

I actually feel some optimism about Milford. If he is really shifted to that right hand side that’s a lot of strike power.

Riki
Milford
(Isaako)
Niu
Coates

defence worries me but attack is very exciting.

The first half showed that if the team plays quick up the middle, with Turpin running and kicking when needed, opportunities will arise. Haas’ return will help out roll on immensely. If they keep it simple we have a lot to offer in attack with Milf in the team on that side. It’s whether we can stick to the simple game plan, and defend for 80 or not that will **** us. Isaako needs to learn how to position himself in defence and catch bombs. He showed a lot of promise and his goal kicking is amazing. He proved us all wrong, he isn’t a Josh Hoffman clone, he’s the exact opposite - dynamic in attack and useless in defence.

1. Isaako (give him until round 2 to improve)
2. Farnworth
3. Arthurs
4. Niu
5. Coates
6. Milford
7. Dearden/Croft (same same)
8. TPJ
9. Turpin (should be captain imo)
10. Lodge
11. Glenn
12. Riki
13. Asiata

14. Paix/Croft/Dearden (Turpin plays 65+
15. Carrigan
16. Flegler
17. Teo (Bullimore very close)

When Haas returns, Lodge > bench, Teo > Reggies

Mate I think we need to slow down and dampen our expectations a wee bit. I mean giving Isaako two games to improve is a bit harsh. Or maybe you need to stipulate what you might accept as improvement. I mean is catching more bombs than he puts down seen as an improvement. I think Isaako (and many others) are going to need at least five to six games before they even start to get a feel for how Kevvie wants them to play. Don't forget Kevvie has built up their confidence but he still has to reprogram their muscle memory and cleanse them of the shit Pies instilled in them all. Many players went backwards under Pies. Kevvie needs to stem that momentum backwards before he can start bringing them forward and i think that will take more than a handful of games. Don't forget our opening 4 weeks is not exactly easybeats we're up against so their confidence will be as fragile as ****. What they need is for us all to bite our tongue and give them some breathing space at least until round six or so, then we should be asking to see improvement in terms of performances.

 

[theshed]

Mate I think we need to slow down and dampen our expectations a wee bit. I mean giving Isaako two games to improve is a bit harsh. Or maybe you need to stipulate what you might accept as improvement. I mean is catching more bombs than he puts down seen as an improvement. I think Isaako (and many others) are going to need at least five to six games before they even start to get a feel for how Kevvie wants them to play. Don't forget Kevvie has built up their confidence but he still has to reprogram their muscle memory and cleanse them of the shit Pies instilled in them all. Many players went backwards under Pies. Kevvie needs to stem that momentum backwards before he can start bringing them forward and i think that will take more than a handful of games. Don't forget our opening 4 weeks is not exactly easybeats we're up against so their confidence will be as fragile as ****. What they need is for us all to bite our tongue and give them some breathing space at least until round six or so, then we should be asking to see improvement in terms of performances.

I didn’t mean Billy Slater over night but if his defence is as poor as last weekend you wouldn’t want the liability for more that 2-3 games. When I say improvement the bar is set very low - a little more confident under bombs, a little better positioning in our in goal, that would be enough for me to keep giving him opportunities.

Basically after 3 games you will have a better understanding of where last weekends performance sits in Isaako’s range. Was that just a bad game for him in defence? Or was that a good game for him? It could get worse.

 

[Jedhead]

I didn’t mean Billy Slater over night but if his defence is as poor as last weekend you wouldn’t want the liability for more that 2-3 games. When I say improvement the bar is set very low - a little more confident under bombs, a little better positioning in our in goal, that would be enough for me to keep giving him opportunities.

Basically after 3 games you will have a better understanding of where last weekends performance sits in Isaako’s range. Was that just a bad game for him in defence? Or was that a good game for him? It could get worse.

For his and all our sakes - let's hope he improves then.

 

[Lockysillegitimatechild]

Dearden is the least of our problems.
Hopefully this is yet another BS story, which I believe it is.
Dearden imo is well above Croft, Paix and Milford.

I believe he is as well. The problem we have had though is that these young guys are not earning the role. Until you have more good games in the NRL then the player you're taking the spot off of, why should you have a mortgage on the spot?
Is dearden the worst culprit? **** NO. But croft played ok in the trial and dearden hasn't re-signed so why not....

 

[JungleBoogie]

Starting to remind me of last year - recycling dropped players because everyone is poor and roster is capped.

 

[Fitzy]

He didn't even play like one at the Storm, Smith steered the ship.

That's why they kicked him to the curb and chose Hughes who was better anyway. I don't know why I'm arguing over this, Pete's post in my sig is as salient as ever. It's shuffling deckchairs.

Just cause he ain’t a good one doesn’t not make him one... and kinda awkward how our future saviour in Dearden just lost his spot to this ‘such a shit halfback that he isn’t one’

 

[Fitzy]

I didn’t mean Billy Slater over night but if his defence is as poor as last weekend you wouldn’t want the liability for more that 2-3 games. When I say improvement the bar is set very low - a little more confident under bombs, a little better positioning in our in goal, that would be enough for me to keep giving him opportunities.

Basically after 3 games you will have a better understanding of where last weekends performance sits in Isaako’s range. Was that just a bad game for him in defence? Or was that a good game for him? It could get worse.

Ok let’s be real he was comfortable enough under bombs to keep his spot, yes it definitely needs to improve but still and yes he needs to improve his goal line defence/positioning real quick or otherwise you’ll find us in the loan market quicker than you can say ‘q-cup’

 

[the_next]

I believe he is as well. The problem we have had though is that these young guys are not earning the role. Until you have more good games in the NRL then the player you're taking the spot off of, why should you have a mortgage on the spot?
Is dearden the worst culprit? **** NO. But croft played ok in the trial and dearden hasn't re-signed so why not....

I get your point but Dearden pretty well got chucked into the deep end when you think about it. The kid is 19, he has no true leaders around him, has only played under a coach who had no idea what he was doing and he was then expected to come in and fix everything.
I am starting to believe that KW has basically given the keys of this team to Milf. I wouldn’t be surprised if he has asked milf who he would rather have as a partner in the halves and I am not too sure what Croft brings into this side that Dearden doesn’t.
I am not fully against Dearden going back to have sometime in cup however, there are probably 10 other players in this squad I would put back to qcup before Dearden.
Unless of cause there is something we don’t all know about yet ie Dearden signing elsewhere and to be honest, Im not too sure I could blame the kid. If that is the case them im all for him not being in the 17.

 

[Dazza 92]

i said as much last eyar when Fifita signed with the Tits....he shouldnt have played for us again. We should have provided those minutes to develop the guys to replace him...

But that was under the previous management, previous toxic culture.....perhaps its different this time?

 

[Fitzy]

9. Turpin (should be captain imo)

What’s a forum without everyone’s daily stupid opinion... this forum is built around statements like this

 

[theshed]

What’s a forum without everyone’s daily stupid opinion... this forum is built around statements like this

For the record most things I say have some level of tongue in cheek. Except this one, Turpin is goat

 

[Kooly87]

For the record most things I say have some level of tongue in cheek. Except this one, Turpin is goat

Shares the same haircut as one perhaps.

 

[Huge]

Sorry mate but that's completely the wrong way of looking at it. We're not catching the opposition offside through fast play the balls, they've already retreated as far as the refs feel like making them go then they're moving forward again. All an even slower ptb would do is let them have a longer breather in between monstering our players.

I find it weird that you think trying to go ever faster is the only answer. In case you missed it, it's been well tried.

The argument you put forward or rather what you perceive is a flaw, namely 'giving them a breather in between monstering our players' is only half the story. The way it it is is our players are already being monstered so there's no net loss by a slower ptb. I already dealt with the set defence in my initial post.

Having a stationary defensive line instead of one already in motion means the time the attacking player has is greatly increased. If you force that defence to wait your attackers switch about the time imbalance.

A perfect example of how well it works is when you see a tap restart. The attack stands looking at the ref, duty bound to hold the defence 10 metres back, the attack taps the ball and passes to a player already in motion who gains 9-11 metres every single hit up. Time and time again I've watched this, even smaller players consistently make 9-10 metres.

Why? Because a set and stationary defence line NEVER jumps quickly, the tendancy is always hold straight and true. Usually the line doesn't make more than a step forward.

Anyway, all I ask is that people pay attention to what a controlled slow ptb scenario looks like in reality and as a I say the tap restart is a version of this. Of course I understand that there's no markers in the tap restart. Next time you see a restart or a defence line forced to wait(it sometimes happens with a player stung in defence and very slow to rise) pay attention to how much ground can be gained.

If our guys are getting smashed next to the last ptb and making little ground why not trade that contact point for an extra 6--7 metres?

 

[Gaz]

I find it weird that you think trying to go ever faster is the only answer. In case you missed it, it's been well tried.

The argument you put forward or rather what you perceive is a flaw, namely 'giving them a breather in between monstering our players' is only half the story. The way it it is is our players are already being monstered so there's no net loss by a slower ptb. I already dealt with the set defence in my initial post.

Having a stationary defensive line instead of one already in motion means the time the attacking player has is greatly increased. If you force that defence to wait your attackers switch about the time imbalance.

A perfect example of how well it works is when you see a tap restart. The attack stands looking at the ref, duty bound to hold the defence 10 metres back, the attack taps the ball and passes to a player already in motion who gains 9-11 metres every single hit up. Time and time again I've watched this, even smaller players consistently make 9-10 metres.

Why? Because a set and stationary defence line NEVER jumps quickly, the tendancy is always hold straight and true. Usually the line doesn't make more than a step forward.

Anyway, all I ask is that people pay attention to what a controlled slow ptb scenario looks like in reality and as a I say the tap restart is a version of this. Of course I understand that there's no markers in the tap restart. Next time you see a restart or a defence line forced to wait(it sometimes happens with a player stung in defence and very slow to rise) pay attention to how much ground can be gained.

If our guys are getting smashed next to the last ptb and making little ground why not trade that contact point for an extra 6--7 metres?

Sometimes the situation calls for a slow PTB and sometimes a fast PTB. Having somebody on the field that instinctively knows and above all is capable of calling those shots is the difference. A difference we have been lacking.