Round 16 - Warriors vs. Broncos - Post Match Discussion

[Culhwch]

Not ****ed at Hoffman, who in the late stages of the game, just couldn't keep up with Hurrell after 2 consecutive runs with the ball. It's not a question of fitness, but stamina, and his muscles must have been burning trying to sprint again. On the contrary, very happy with the way he has been playing and how awesome he is on the wing. Too bad his chance at a double was stolen from him in a bad ref decision that cost us the win.

I think Hoffman's been great this year, and he had a good game yesterday. Really effective running, and almost always gets his head through the line. I'd really like to see him move into the centres to play a Hodges-type role - I was thinking while watching yesterday that his career might have a similar trajectory, from fullback/wing to a strike centre.

On taking the shot at goal at the end - wouldn't have been my preferred option, but I'm not too mad about it. It was a toss of the coin either way, I thought. The think that annoyed me was, watching the delayed broadcast, as soon as they made the decision to kick I looked at the clock, saw it was a couple of minutes to six, and immediately knew he missed it. Thanks for taking any kind of suspense out of it, Channel Nine.

 

[noisetheory]

im happy they took the shot at goal. i was fairly confident that if he nailed it we'd be able to get the better field position to then drop a field goal over. i hate games ending that way but when u need the 2 pts i'll take anything.

anyone see how parker said he had a dream the night before that he'd have a shot at goal after the siren? weird.

 

[Renegade]

After much deliberation, I have decided that although we lost, it was done for the greater good of the forum.

http://broncoshq.com/brisbane-bronc...broncos-pre-match-discussion.html#post2502892

 

[rnabokov]

If it's about options, I think the better option was for Prince to have held onto the ball a bit longer and summed up the situation better.

The kick for goal? I'm not complaining but if it was my call I would have played for the try.

I can't see how some people thought the Warriors played poorly. I thought we defended them very well, and for mine, they are looking a top 4-6 side.

Wallace kicked very well and he helped us dominate a very good side in the 2nd half with an unforgivably stuffed hooker.

The main lesson to come from this game for me is the need for composure not panic in difficult positions, and to pass pass pass that ball more.

This is where we really miss Locky.

 

[Bucking Beads]

Wallace gets caught with the ball too often. If he has fast hands who knows how much better could have looked. You would think after teams rushing up on you for months you would have figured out a way to combat that. He gets caught with the ball far too often. That said his kicking game was exceptional yesterday.

 

[Renegade]

I would've gone for the try personally.

It's brave but kicking from 43m's out, to the right of the uprights, 79mins into a game and the kicker being someone who's played two mammoth efforts in a few days? It was never going in. It's a low percentage play when considering the factors.

We would've had 3 or 4 tackles in the Warriors 20, and we actually did look semi dangerous at some stages. One last hail mary, why not? I dare say Griffin probably wouldn't have had a say in the decision, but, the decision itself sums up the coaching. Safe, negative play.

 

[noisetheory]

while i said above i agree with taking the kick when the penalty was blown it wasnt even a thought in my head. i immediately just thought, right, one set starting 20 metres out, we can do this!

it looked like parker wanted it. i wont begrudge him for feeling confident enough to step straight up. they are the breaks. if u want to go back over the game then we should be kicking ourselves for not putting the game away sooner, but thats been discussed.

 

[Renegade]

Sure, I don't blame Parker for not kicking it, just that it was a silly decision in the first place.
Prince or Norman deserve more of the flak, both of them butchered opportunities. Norman had 4, 3-on-2 opportunities and he made one count. One!

 

[broncos4life]

Sure, I don't blame Parker for not kicking it, just that it was a silly decision in the first place.
Prince or Norman deserve more of the flak, both of them butchered opportunities. Norman had 4, 3-on-2 opportunities and he made one count. One!

This is one of the many things that annoys me about norman. The team are creating so many opportunities for him in overlaps and he misses so many, yet when he actually passes the commentators lose their shit.

 

[Mr Fourex]

Sure, I don't blame Parker for not kicking it, just that it was a silly decision in the first place.
Prince or Norman deserve more of the flak, both of them butchered opportunities. Norman had 4, 3-on-2 opportunities and he made one count. One!

I'm not sure which ones were these 4 opportunities you're talking about.....I'll have to have another look.

What I do remember is that Norman got given the ball on more than one occasion with **** all time to do anything with it. His options were to throw a risky pass.......throw it to Hodges or Reed to get smashed ....or throw a possible intercept. I think on most occasions the right option was to hang onto it.

 

[Renegade]

They were all within a 15-20min period. One we scored from, one was a forward pass when Norman tried a cutout (didn't need to, just put it through the hands and we score), two others he rushed and Hoffman got it too early and couldn't do much with it.

There were a few other times he got caught with it when trying it, that wasn't his fault, just good D from the Warriors rushing out of the line and wrapping him up.

 

[Mr Fourex]

They were all within a 15-20min period. One we scored from, one was a forward pass when Norman tried a cutout (didn't need to, just put it through the hands and we score), two others he rushed and Hoffman got it too early and couldn't do much with it.

There were a few other times he got caught with it when trying it, that wasn't his fault, just good D from the Warriors rushing out of the line and wrapping him up.

I was talking about this the other week. We aren't keeping defence lines honest enough. They KNOW just what we're doing in the backline and that the guy running deep (Norman / whoever) is going to get it. We desperately need to start mixing it up with other options (cut out ball or grubber / chip kick etc etc) to keep the defence guessing.

Prince tried it yesterday with a grubber and we scored with Maranta in the corner ......who would have thunk it? :001_rolleyes:

 

[mieko]

@Porthoz -- We still lack a bit of finishing polish and some decisions should've been better, particularly Hodgo made himself guilty of involving himself too much. Not bagging him, because he was trying, as I don't bag Prince's pass at all, as it was the right play imo, even if it turned to crap.

I have to disagree with you on that mate, it was completely the wrong play. Throwing a Harbour Bridge pass when we are up with about 7 to go is just silly. Old mate was there waiting for it.

For all his experience, vision etc etc, he should have seen no one behind and rolled it in for Maranta to just fall on it or for some miracle someone got there, at the very least get a repeat set with more pressure counting down the time. Anyway, what's done is done

 

[Alec]

How many NRL halves can throw a good long cut out pass, especially when it's left to right and they are right handed? Maybe 2 or 3, and Prince obviously considers himself as one of them.

 

[CaptainHook]

About from the first sentence I can't agree with any of that. That is nearly all completely backwards. I'm not even sure you watched the game... That's bizarre

I did watch the game and caught the replay on Fox Sports this afternoon. Would love to know what guys like you and Porthoz saw that I didn't.

People are calling it a great game due to the high completions from both sides but honestly who gives a rat's. Our completion rate has been good by and large all year and it hasn't translated into a lot of points. I said the warriors were awful and I stand by that. A team with solid attack would have hammered them yesterday.

I posted that Scott Prince's defence is costing us and that's true. In the first half he had two bad misses on Mateo who managed to produce an offload, one which led to a try. I counted 5 missed tackles by him in the second half whether it be not securing the man, ball, cover tackle etc. The kicking of our halves was a mixed bag. Three of Wallace's first four kicks were taken by Locke. He fared better in the second half, with four of his first five finding space. Prince kicked three times in the first half from memory. One was taken by Locke and the other two produced a mistake and a try. He had two kicks in the second half that were largely ineffective. If we're going to beat the storm all of their kicks need to be on song.

I said our forwards were magnificent. I couldn't remember a time in the game where we were pinned in our half and struggling to get out. The scoreline did not reflect how good they were at giving us opportunities and field position. It was a physical game, I hope the toll doesn't show next week as it's starting to get into too little, too late territory.

We also didn't win the crucial moments. Tries from soft penalties are a real bane of ours and the try on half time was unacceptable. There are certain periods in a game where we just have to hold them out no matter what. That was one of them. As others have pointed out, we never look comfortable in regards to the scoreboard. Even the last game against the Tigers, being up by 20 we looked nervous. Just thank our lucky stars, the kept turning over the footy.

People here are calling it 'great' and 'outstanding' and that's cool. I think it shows how tough the year has been and how starved for success we are. I would call it 'better than we have been playing with more improvement needed'. It was a great game and I'm glad we put in considering our last game against them but let's take off our broncos blinkers and look at the game objectively.

 

[Porthoz]

@Porthoz -- We still lack a bit of finishing polish and some decisions should've been better, particularly Hodgo made himself guilty of involving himself too much. Not bagging him, because he was trying, as I don't bag Prince's pass at all, as it was the right play imo, even if it turned to crap.

I have to disagree with you on that mate, it was completely the wrong play. Throwing a Harbour Bridge pass when we are up with about 7 to go is just silly. Old mate was there waiting for it.

For all his experience, vision etc etc, he should have seen no one behind and rolled it in for Maranta to just fall on it or for some miracle someone got there, at the very least get a repeat set with more pressure counting down the time. Anyway, what's done is done

Fair enough mate, there's plenty of merit in what you're saying.
From memory though, and I would have to review the play to be sure, there was too much traffic in front of Prince for a kick. Hurrell made a positional mistake, was going to get punished for it, and got lucky.

 

[IBA]

I said the warriors were awful and I stand by that. A team with solid attack would have hammered them yesterday.

Disagree with this. Our defense was enormous. 2 tries of bombs and a length of the field intercept. I don't think many teams could have done much better than that against us yesterday. Warriors made few mistakes, few penalties, were extremely tough up the middle. Calling them awful is selling the broncs a mile short.

 

[Porthoz]

[MENTION=8315]CaptainHook[/MENTION], let's chalk this up to a vastly different interpretation of the game. :handshake: