Round 9 - Broncos vs Cowboys Pre-game discussion

[Big Pete]

It's difficult to understand what the Knights game was supposed to represent in Barba's season. It was his best performance and a celebration of all his finer moments this season (eg. slick backline movements, brave try savers) but the Knights are one of the worst teams in the competition and it was sandwiched between three bad performances from Barba.

 

[Morkel]

TBH I'm lost. There are arguments for Hodges, Hoffman, Hodges & Barba at fullback. Hoffman, Copley & Maranta on the wing. Copley or Hodges at centre. And Hodges, Barba & Hoffman at 6. But looking at that, Copley is half the player at wing, and Barba is half the player anywhere but fullback. So playing to our strengths, we need:

01 Barba
02 Vidot
03 Reed
04 Copley
05 Hoffman
06 Hodges

 

[Foordy]

TBH I'm lost. There are arguments for Hodges, Hoffman, Hodges & Barba at fullback. Hoffman, Copley & Maranta on the wing. Copley or Hodges at centre. And Hodges, Barba & Hoffman at 6. But looking at that, Copley is half the player at wing, and Barba is half the player anywhere but fullback. So playing to our strengths, we need:

01 Barba
02 Vidot
03 Reed
04 Copley
05 Hoffman
06 Hodges

I could live with that lineup

 

[rnabokov]

It's difficult to understand what the Knights game was supposed to represent in Barba's season. It was his best performance and a celebration of all his finer moments this season (eg. slick backline movements, brave try savers) but the Knights are one of the worst teams in the competition and it was sandwiched between three bad performances from Barba.

For me, the Knights aren't as bad as you suggest.

In any case, I've posted before, the Knight's game showed me 2 things.

1. That Barba was getting back to his best; that game gave me a lot of optimism about what Barba can really do for this team. It had little to do with how the Knights played.

It had everything to do with Barba and the way he read OUR plays and got involved.

2. He was getting back to his best in largest part because he was better understanding the way the team plays, and the combinations (such as they are) with Hoffman at 5/8 playing the game he was told to by Hook, aside from his pass/kick shortcomings.

Because of this his timing was a whole lot better, and he got involved in the right plays at the right time and executed well.

He is improving as he gets to understand the way Hook has structured and coached this side.

When Hodges replaced Hoffman v Bunnies, Barba seemed lost - as did I in a way, at who was supposed to be doing what and where in the attacking structures, particularly the halves.

For mine, the structures were too complicated for their own good. Our overall game was ok, but Barba's effectiveness I thought was restricted by the game plan and it showed.

Unless Barba is unfit/injured, in which case he shouldn't play unless it's really minor (why risk him) he must be FB and Hoffman (cough, cough) 5/8.

That positional move is IMO designed to get Barba involved to the extent he becomes a serious 2nd play maker with Hunt and that side will go really well.

I think Hodges must stay at right centre - it really is his best, and only position, given his age, proneness to injury and the way he plays - as a centre/dummy half. His days at FB and 5/8 for mine should be dead and buried.

Hoffman as I said, IMO can't be separated from Barba. They seem to play like a unit with Hoffman doing what he does best - running, and Barba feeding off that, knowing Hoffman's game and thus being able to inject himself into the plays at the best times.

 

[rnabokov]

I could live with that lineup

I don't see Barba and Hodges pairing up well. Hodges is too much of a maverick at 5/8 whereas I reckon Barba needs a simple basic halves pairing like Hunt and Hoffman.

It's taken Barba 7 games to get used to a game plan structured around Hoffman at 5/8. Do we now take another 7 games to get him used a completely different style of 5/8 in Hodges (and the game plan as well would change)?

IMO, we should keep the same combinations while they are working, and they are working as I see it, and focus on defence - missed tackles, and composure focus and resolve to close out games, as well as fucking kicking to Vidot and Copley a whole lot more. Such a waste of strike power.

 

[Alec]

I don't mind Barba in the halves purely because I'd rather not waste Milford there next year.

I'd rather a real creative half there though.

 

[Cult]

Good team, Pete. I'd put Maranta at fullback and Hoffman to wing (his best position). Lowrie should start as he doesn't make much of an impact off the bench, unlike Oates.

I really do not like this idea that people have about players getting a starting spot only because of the fact that they lack an impact off the bench.

 

[rnabokov]

I really do not like this idea that people have about players getting a starting spot only because of the fact that they lack an impact off the bench.

Well, the assumption might be the bench is a place for secret weapons. Game breakers. Like Martin Kennedy.

On the other hand, if Kennedy starts, he can take the bench with him - for added impact.

 

[Porthoz]

I get a cold shiver down my spine every time someone puts Hoffman at 5/8 or fullback in our line-up...

 

[Porthoz]

While I believe Maranta is a better fullback than winger, he doesn't offer what I want out of a fullback on this occasion. I believe Hoffman is a safer option and his kick returns will be much more valuable from the fullback role. The biggest problem with Hoffman has always been his ability inside the opposition 20 but with Hodges there to fill in, I don't really see the need for Maranta.

Hodges is going to fill in for Hoffman at fullback in the last 20? And who fills in for Hodges at 5/8? :bilmem:

 

[Big Pete]

Who else?

It won't be an issue as it's an established combination that has been very succesful up at Dairy Farmers.

 

[Porthoz]

I'm sorry... what?

You want them to swap position in the last 20? Why should Hodges go to fullback if he's not gonna get the ball from Hoggman at 5/8?

 

[Big Pete]

The opposition 20, yes.

It's a fairly simple concept. Hoffman would play at fullback for the duration of the set, playing to his strengths which include defusing bombs and taking kick returns. When the Broncos are inside the opposition line, he'd stay on the left fringe while Hodges would be given his roving commission allowing him to play either side of the field.

"But Hoggman can't pass!!! Surely it'd be better to play Hodges at centre, with an unknown rookie from the Queensland Cup at five eigth?"

It's all besides the point for me. Sure, you could blood a Strasser or Paia'Aua but my main concern is giving Barba a break and going with a combination that works, and that's being able to play Hodges at fullback.

I can live with either choice at five eigth, that's all.

 

[Porthoz]

I would understand that if Hodges played centre, and swapped with Hoffman in attack like we did last season, but moving Hodges from 5/8 to Fullback in the last 20, makes no sense whatsoever to me. All you'll get is Hoffman closer to the ruck in a ball playing... I mean play killing position.

Josh has been given plenty of rope, and he successfully hung himself with it. Experiment has to be over... he is and will never be a playmaker, and should not ever come close to a spine position again.

It's really too bad he can't see it, or has someone in his ear telling him otherwise, because he can be one of the best 3/4's in the game!

Should Barba be out, I'd much prefer a gamble be taken with a 5/8 from Qcup such as Strasser or Paia'aua, and either Hodgo or Maranta to FB.

 

[Big Pete]

I fail to see how Maranta is any better at fullback than Hoffman.

Hodges would be a great choice if this was 2009 or so but it's clear he cannot handle the demands of the fullback position. So the next best solution is the one I've named where he plays a roving role.

It's all wishful thinking of course. I'd imagine that tomorrow's team will be a fairly predictable squad of 19 or so.

 

[Brett]

Pete is saying the opposition 20 meter line and Porthoz is taking that as the last 20 minutes of the match. Funny stuff.

On the left is my team if Barba, Thaiday and Glenn are all injured. On the right is if they're all fine.

1. Maranta - Barba
2. Vidot - Vidot
3. Copley - Copley
4. Hodges - Hodges
5. Oates - Maranta
6. Hoffman - Hoffman
7. Hunt - Hunt

8. Kennedy - McGuire
9. McCullough - McCullough
10. Hannant - Hannant
11. McGuire - Thaiday
12. Gillett - Gillett
13. Parker - Parker

14. Granville - Kennedy
15. Wallace - Wallace
16. Hala - Glenn
17. Reed - Reed

 

[noisetheory]

why are we all assuming barba is not playing?

 

[Porthoz]

Pete is saying the opposition 20 meter line and Porthoz is taking that as the last 20 minutes of the match. Funny stuff.

No I don't. I know BP is talking about the last 20 meters. That's why I'm arguing what sense it would make to put Hoggman closer to the play making positions when you need someone capable of something other than running with the ball.

Moving Hodgo to FB in that case is pretty much ensuring he won't get the ball if he ventures outside of Hoffman, thus killing the attack.