PRE-GAME Round 2 - Sharks vs Broncos

[Porthoz]

I'm expecting garbutt for round 3 based on these intelligent picks from the coach... He's giving everyone a chance to prove what they're worth so he can clean up and clear out players. He's giving those who have been on the roster longer a chance first.

I'm liking the thinking from this forum so much more when it posts thoughtful insight and trusts that the coach is doing the right thing instead of the manic keyboard / player / coach bashing that usually goes on here. I'd be more proud of this place if we kept that up.

Do you mean like Gillett to ISC? :thefinger:

 

[subsbligh]

You'd want to hope Bennett uses the bench a lot better this week. McGuire only playing 41 minutes is silly.

Is that all he played.... **** that's criminal. He and Blair were easily our best.

 

[subsbligh]

Oates and Vidot on the wings ... big and powerful but maybe suspect under the high ball.

 

[broncos4life]

Did he really need to play Whitchurch in round 1 to see if he had what it takes to play NRL for the Broncos.

He couldn't have seen that a big red line should have been put through his name after the Cowboys trial or the WCC match.

Personally, i want to see him give Garbutt a run, i like the skills he has in the ISC, lets see how he goes in the top grade.

Well I think he did, I think there was a commitment to give him a game that wasn't a trial or a mud bath. Through doing that he had also given him a chance off the bench, not just in the backline. I could understand if he had named him again or kept him for the first month, but he hasn't. He needed to see if he was worth preserving with and he isn't, at this stage at the very least

I'm sure Garbutt will get a run, it's only round 2

 

[Splinter]

Garbutt had a back injury during preseason so i would assume he needs some conditioning before he gets a go

 

[Marty Deutschmann]

Garbutt will get a go if he is fit. Same with oates. So will vidot. Everyone needs to look at Big Picture stuff and stop knee jerking.. we cab sacrifice a couple of rounds at the start of the year to find our groove and be competitive later on. (Even sacrifice a season to be competitive next year) this is a rebuilding "process" we won't see results over night. Time to get smarter :P

 

[subsbligh]

Well I think he did, I think there was a commitment to give him a game that wasn't a trial or a mud bath. Through doing that he had also given him a chance off the bench, not just in the backline. I could understand if he had named him again or kept him for the first month, but he hasn't. He needed to see if he was worth preserving with and he isn't, at this stage at the very least

Whitchurch's selection was pure Bennett "go against the grain"/piss off the incumbents/select the good trainers/my favourites BECAUSE I'M THE BOSS DAMMIT sorcery.

Bennett knew even he couldn't maintain the illusion after Whitchurch, unsuprisingly given his trial form, performed EXACTLY as he did in the trials from his first hit up of the game against Souths.

Was playing a prop-come-lock (Parker) at hooker for 15 minutes just "getting it out of his system" as well?

In typical Gus Gould-esque "after the fact" wisdom, the players outside the 17 have stepped up and the Bennett camp says: "See see, look what he did there! The mastery!"

Whatever. He's a great coach, he's picked the 17 that should have been selected for Round 1.

I hope the boys see Round 1 as an abomination and Wayne puts the wand away and plays what's actually in front of him.

 

[broncos4life]

Whitchurch's selection was pure Bennett "go against the grain"/piss off the incumbents/select the good trainers/my favourites BECAUSE I'M THE BOSS DAMMIT sorcery.

Bennett knew even he couldn't maintain the illusion after Whitchurch, unsuprisingly given his trial form, performed EXACTLY as he did in the trials from his first hit up of the game against Souths.

Was playing a prop-come-lock (Parker) at hooker for 15 minutes just "getting it out of his system" as well?

In typical Gus Gould-esque "after the fact" wisdom, the players outside the 17 have stepped up and the Bennett camp says: "See see, look what he did there! The mastery!"

Whatever. He's a great coach, he's picked the 17 that should have been selected for Round 1.

I hope the boys see Round 1 as an abomination and Wayne puts the wand away and plays what's actually in front of him.

No one is saying it like that, I have simply said this appears to be his logic, yes it is after the fact but that's because that is when it is apparent. I am not a mind reader and unlike some I'm not interested in proclaiming hat the coach will do based on assumptions, unlike your good self.

 

[Big Pete]

I get the impression that people on here had a look at our Round 1 line-up, saw Whitchurch in the 17 and come hell or high-water, if the Broncos were to lose he'd be the scapegoat.

In reality, the game was lost before Aaron even set foot on the field. Selecting an underdone Oates or enigma like Nikorima wouldn't make up the difference.

It wasn't a good selection, that much is obvious but there were worst players on the night and it wasn't like he was omitting somebody who would have swung the game our way.

 

[subsbligh]

I get the impression that people on here had a look at our Round 1 line-up, saw Whitchurch in the 17 and come hell or high-water, if the Broncos were to lose he'd be the scapegoat.

In reality, the game was lost before Aaron even set foot on the field. Selecting an underdone Oates or enigma like Nikorima wouldn't make up the difference.

It wasn't a good selection, that much is obvious but there were worst players on the night and it wasn't like he was omitting somebody who would have swung the game our way.

It was sheer surprise at his selection policy rather than assuming before kick Whitchurch would be the scapegoat. I was actually clinging to hope that the mastercoach had seen something in Whitchurch other than dropsys. But he played exactly how everyone expected him to - to the extent Bennett almost threw him to the wolves, underdone, not ready for first grade, for some bizaare reason.

I'd much rather an enigmatic player with a potential upside like Nikorima be given a crack and stuff up than a nuffie be given a crack and stuff up doing basic hit ups.

I think Bennett has manned up and more or less taken the blame with his Round 2 selection decisions.

If Ofahengaue or Wallace have good form over the next few weeks, I think it will be hard for Gavet to crack back into the squad as he's probably bracketed with Whitchurch a little.

EDIT: And the reverse-MVP was either Whitchurch or Gavet. Gavet at least had a crack after his poor first half.

 

[Big Pete]

It was a horses for courses type selection and nothing more. Wayne went into the game thinking if the Broncos could win, they'd rely on 16 with the last reserve (Whitchurch) acting as cover.

'Well couldn't Vidot or Oates be chosen instead? They're miles better than Whitchurch'

If it was a Grand Final or Elimination Final, sure but consider the context here. Vidot had played 100 more games than Whitchurch (not hyperbole either, look it up) and needed to improve some things in himself. Oates needed match-fitness and he wasn't going to get that playing off the bench as cover.

I've yet to listen to the Walters interview on Triple M where he said that they were planning to sub Macca off at the 50 minute mark for Parker but I doubt that was the intention. I think Wayne intended to play Macca at 80, but when the game went the way that it did, he opted to make changes to try something different and it just blew up in his face.

I don't think it's an indictment on Wayne and think it's waste of time holding it against him.

 

[Alec]

I still don't really understand the "drop Vidot because he needs to work on some things" reasoning. If you were to drop players because they need major things to work on, we'd be playing without any wingers. I'd almost kinda understand dropping him because they think he has the most potential and pushing him, but I really don't think Bennett thinks that. What he's done is basically drop our best available winger, and is playing much worse ones instead.

 

[Cult]

I still don't really understand the "drop Vidot because he needs to work on some things" reasoning. If you were to drop players because they need major things to work on, we'd be playing without any wingers. I'd almost kinda understand dropping him because they think he has the most potential and pushing him, but I really don't think Bennett thinks that. What he's done is basically drop our best available winger, and is playing much worse ones instead.

Bennett probably said he can play on the wing when he can actually play like a winger.

 

[Alec]

Working the ball out is now a valuable trait for a winger too. And Vidot is arguably the best at it.

That puts him far ahead of his competition.

 

[Cult]

Working the ball out is now a valuable trait for a winger too. And Vidot is arguably the best at it.

That puts him far ahead of his competition.

But that is all he did well. That is 100% it. Nothing else that wingers should do well was done well by Vidot. I like the guy and hope he does get better at the other things wingers do like catch balls, tackle their winger, score tries and outrun the opposition.

 

[Anonymous person]

But that is all he did well. That is 100% it. Nothing else that wingers should do well was done well by Vidot. I like the guy and hope he does get better at the other things wingers do like catch balls, tackle their winger, score tries and outrun the opposition.

And that was more good than Reed and Maranta have ever done, yet they got picked.

Vidot > Maranta/Reed, yet they kept their spots. It was a stupid decision to leave Vidot out then, and it's still a stupid decision now.

 

[Cult]

And that was more good than Reed and Maranta have ever done, yet they got picked.

Vidot > Maranta/Reed, yet they kept their spots. It was a stupid decision to leave Vidot out then, and it's still a stupid decision now.

Jack Reed scored more tries than Vidot and made less errors. Vidot scored 2 more tries than Maranta, but Maranta made more tackles and caught more bombs.

 

[Anonymous person]

Where's that "caught bombs" stat coming from? Is there a "number of bomb catches attempted" stat? what about a "fell over with the try line wide open" stat? "ran back in off his wing instead of trying to go down the line"?

Vidot made more line breaks (10) than Reed (8) and Maranta (7).
Vidot made more line break assists (3) than Reed and Maranta (both 0).
Vidot made more tackle breaks (54) than Reed (25) and Maranta (20) combined.
Vidot missed less tackles (14) than Reed (25) and only marginally more than Maranta (9) in 6 more games
Vidot made more hitups (389) than Reed (177) and Maranta (126) combined. Let that one sink in for a minute - he made over 3 times as many hitups as maranta, and over twice as many as Reed.

Anyone who watched Maranta, Reed and Vidot play last year knows that Vidot was the best out of them by a country mile. You're trying too hard to justify Bennetts mind boggling decisions.