The Sad Decline of Darren Lockyer as a Player and Leader

[tallis12]

Lockyer is a legend and still the best player in our squad today, name a better one ?

Even with all the injuries this week i would make major changes to the forwards.

 

[lynx000]

Lamenting Lockyers' demise as a player is premature I believe. The evidence says he is alive and well. In a poorly performing team he is still a class act and is playing to a good standard. Brisbanes problems are not the result of poor play from Lockyer rather they stem from a small and inexperienced forward division. We have the worst defence in the league and our attack is mid pack. We score at least as many points as 6 other teams and are only a very small margin off being truly mid-field. Someone in the Broncos is scoring and setting up trys !!!

Our attack, and Darren Lockyer , would certainly be better if our defence was not required so often. Stating the obvious but we spend extra time defending thereby costing ourselves time with the ball. More time with the ball, more opportunity to score and seeing as we are already scoring competitively our stocks will inevitably rise.

As a positive it can be seen that even though we are weak defensively we are at least capable of being 'average' in offence. That indicates Lockyer as the linchpin of the attack must be going 'average'. Average meaning he's achieving class standard as the school teacher might say. If presented with more opportunity and required to defend less often than he currently must, then in my mind Lockyer would be perceived by the public and media alike to be in good form.

Lockyers form is not so much as poor rather his team-mates are not defending to an 'average' standard. If they were we would be mid table and not rock bottom in defence. Defence not attack is the problem area.

By the way, Locky has always been pretty average in one on one defence even when he was truly the worlds best player in two positions. At fullback he had all the skills required with the only flaw being his one on one. The other skill areas he excelled in so much so that any flaw was quickly forgotten. I'm not implying he was hopeless just that it was an area that was not as good as all his other skills. He was average in only that area.

A legend still playing well. Not to blame.

Huge for once I must say that was a sensational assessment and I totally agree with your analysis. I quite enjoy the various agendas that populate this site and at the moment the anti-Lockyer or Lockyer is over the hill crowd are in full voice.

 

[Nashy]

+1. Huge nailed it.

 

[OXY-351]

Lamenting Lockyers' demise as a player is premature I believe. The evidence says he is alive and well. In a poorly performing team he is still a class act and is playing to a good standard. Brisbanes problems are not the result of poor play from Lockyer rather they stem from a small and inexperienced forward division. We have the worst defence in the league and our attack is mid pack. We score at least as many points as 6 other teams and are only a very small margin off being truly mid-field. Someone in the Broncos is scoring and setting up trys !!!

Our attack, and Darren Lockyer , would certainly be better if our defence was not required so often. Stating the obvious but we spend extra time defending thereby costing ourselves time with the ball. More time with the ball, more opportunity to score and seeing as we are already scoring competitively our stocks will inevitably rise.

As a positive it can be seen that even though we are weak defensively we are at least capable of being 'average' in offence. That indicates Lockyer as the linchpin of the attack must be going 'average'. Average meaning he's achieving class standard as the school teacher might say. If presented with more opportunity and required to defend less often than he currently must, then in my mind Lockyer would be perceived by the public and media alike to be in good form.

Lockyers form is not so much as poor rather his team-mates are not defending to an 'average' standard. If they were we would be mid table and not rock bottom in defence. Defence not attack is the problem area.

By the way, Locky has always been pretty average in one on one defence even when he was truly the worlds best player in two positions. At fullback he had all the skills required with the only flaw being his one on one. The other skill areas he excelled in so much so that any flaw was quickly forgotten. I'm not implying he was hopeless just that it was an area that was not as good as all his other skills. He was average in only that area.

A legend still playing well. Not to blame.

Hang on. Just so I make sure I didn't miss it, are you saying that Lockyers and the Broncos problems stem from poor defence?

 

[Anonymous person]

By the way, Locky has always been pretty average in one on one defence even when he was truly the worlds best player in two positions. At fullback he had all the skills required with the only flaw being his one on one.

at the start of his career, agreed. but towards the end of his fullback days he was up there with the best one-on-one tacklers in the game, and easily the best fullback at it.

 

[Kimlo]

Lockyer is a legend and still the best player in our squad today, name a better one ?

Even with all the injuries this week i would make major changes to the forwards.

Thaiday is our best player in the squad, no way in the world Lockyer is. Thaiday is the form player for the Broncos and has been awesome in every game this year.

 

[Huge]

I also agree that Thaiday is in rare form and that's not true of Lockyer. However Lockyer is not playing poorly.

 

[Kimlo]

I also agree that Thaiday is in rare form and that's not true of Lockyer. However Lockyer is not playing poorly.

Poorly by his standards but IMO still playing good and still our best playmaker.

 

[Professor47]

[quote="Huge.":ujbnootf]
By the way, Locky has always been pretty average in one on one defence even when he was truly the worlds best player in two positions. At fullback he had all the skills required with the only flaw being his one on one.

at the start of his career, agreed. but towards the end of his fullback days he was up there with the best one-on-one tacklers in the game, and easily the best fullback at it.[/quote:ujbnootf]

Yes - and I think someone mentioned this ages ago... the reason he has had so much trouble in the line is because when he was a FB... people were running AWAY from him... and he would be the best cover tackler in the game because he would use his brain and quickness to engage at the right time... e.g. DeVere in origin.

However in the line you've got Creaghs running directly at him - even when he does tackle them it is totally sapping his energy.

 

[OXY-351]

still our best playmaker.

It's not like there is too many other candidates there though

 

[Kimlo]

still our best playmaker.

It's not like there is too many other candidates there though

And that's my point, while he may not be in red hot form he's still the best we have to offer so we will have to put up with it.

I would take Cooper Cronk in a heartbeat but for some reason I don't think Bruno will even consider him.

 

[Anonymous person]

Yes - and I think someone mentioned this ages ago... the reason he has had so much trouble in the line is because when he was a FB... people were running AWAY from him... and he would be the best cover tackler in the game because he would use his brain and quickness to engage at the right time... e.g. DeVere in origin.

thats easily one of the best one-on-one tackles youll ever see. firstly to stop him dead in his tracks, and to literally carry him over the sideline....just brilliant.

 

[Coxy]

Yes - and I think someone mentioned this ages ago... the reason he has had so much trouble in the line is because when he was a FB... people were running AWAY from him... and he would be the best cover tackler in the game because he would use his brain and quickness to engage at the right time... e.g. DeVere in origin.

thats easily one of the best one-on-one tackles youll ever see. firstly to stop him dead in his tracks, and to literally carry him over the sideline....just brilliant.

Another great example of last gasp defence from Lockyer was in the 2000 Grand Final. Shannon Hegarty had literally got over the line, Lockyer held him up and was pushing him back when I think Sailor and someone else got involved and shoved him into touch in goal.

Generally the difference with fullback defence though is you're either coming from the side, almost parallel to the attacking player, a la the De Vere tackle; or you're coming head on as a last line of defence, moving towards the attacking player - the Hegarty tackle, and the ones Hoffman and Norman have pulled off this year.

Where Lockyer struggles is one on one where he is either stationary or sliding and a player is running on an angle to or around him. He simply isn't big enough or strong enough to make an effective tackle in that situation.

Even at five-eighth he's made plenty of great one on one tackles, but usually when he's read the play and the attacking player is running straight at him, or away from him and he can hit them with confidence.

It's why he needs a "minder", because those plays where big back rowers or centres run at the gap between him and his inside man he simply can't make himself. And he's not the only one. Soward, Pearce, Thurston etc, all the same.

 

[Flutterby]

I think both Rocky and Huge have made excellent summaries/analysis and agree for the most part with both of them

Of course Lockyer is no longer as great a player as he once was - (age takes care of that with most players), but I think it is very premature to say he has reached the stage where he is "playing on a season or 2 too long".

 

[Coxy]

I think both Rocky and Huge have made excellent summaries/analysis and agree for the most part with both of them

Of course Lockyer is no longer as great a player as he once was - (age takes care of that with most players), but I think it is very premature to say he has reached the stage where he is "playing on a season or 2 too long".

Agreed, to a point. I think quite likely he's playing rep one season too long. Fact is with age and the damage done to that knee of his, he's lost one of his most potent weapons from his hey day - his running game. The ability he had, especially on the last tackle, to notice if the defence was rushing on him expecting a kick to just nonchalantly step and then accelerate through the gap was poetry in motion.

He can't do it now.

At this stage, form wise, his kicking game is not up to its usual standard, and whether it's him or the team (I think the team), he's either not choosing the right option or it's being poorly executed.

 

[Charmamba]

[quote="Huge.":1bde7qzd]Lamenting Lockyers' demise as a player is premature I believe. The evidence says he is alive and well. In a poorly performing team he is still a class act and is playing to a good standard. Brisbanes problems are not the result of poor play from Lockyer rather they stem from a small and inexperienced forward division. We have the worst defence in the league and our attack is mid pack. We score at least as many points as 6 other teams and are only a very small margin off being truly mid-field. Someone in the Broncos is scoring and setting up trys !!!

Our attack, and Darren Lockyer , would certainly be better if our defence was not required so often. Stating the obvious but we spend extra time defending thereby costing ourselves time with the ball. More time with the ball, more opportunity to score and seeing as we are already scoring competitively our stocks will inevitably rise.

As a positive it can be seen that even though we are weak defensively we are at least capable of being 'average' in offence. That indicates Lockyer as the linchpin of the attack must be going 'average'. Average meaning he's achieving class standard as the school teacher might say. If presented with more opportunity and required to defend less often than he currently must, then in my mind Lockyer would be perceived by the public and media alike to be in good form.

Lockyers form is not so much as poor rather his team-mates are not defending to an 'average' standard. If they were we would be mid table and not rock bottom in defence. Defence not attack is the problem area.

By the way, Locky has always been pretty average in one on one defence even when he was truly the worlds best player in two positions. At fullback he had all the skills required with the only flaw being his one on one. The other skill areas he excelled in so much so that any flaw was quickly forgotten. I'm not implying he was hopeless just that it was an area that was not as good as all his other skills. He was average in only that area.

A legend still playing well. Not to blame.

Hang on. Just so I make sure I didn't miss it, are you saying that Lockyers and the Broncos problems stem from poor defence?[/quote:1bde7qzd]

I think he is, I also think he is right.

 

[Professor47]

Yes - and I think someone mentioned this ages ago... the reason he has had so much trouble in the line is because when he was a FB... people were running AWAY from him... and he would be the best cover tackler in the game because he would use his brain and quickness to engage at the right time... e.g. DeVere in origin.

thats easily one of the best one-on-one tackles youll ever see. firstly to stop him dead in his tracks, and to literally carry him over the sideline....just brilliant.

Where Lockyer struggles is one on one where he is either stationary or sliding and a player is running on an angle to or around him. He simply isn't big enough or strong enough to make an effective tackle in that situation.

Even at five-eighth he's made plenty of great one on one tackles, but usually when he's read the play and the attacking player is running straight at him, or away from him and he can hit them with confidence.

It's why he needs a "minder", because those plays where big back rowers or centres run at the gap between him and his inside man he simply can't make himself. And he's not the only one. Soward, Pearce, Thurston etc, all the same.

Yup - that is pretty much it... he's made some great tackles but his big weak spot is the inside... I reckon age is playing a huge factor here though because he just lets it go now... (because he knows he aint going to get him) and sort of just stands there flat footed and lets them in... this was the TC factor that countered this. Othertimes he'll rush up to stop this play but get totally beaten (e.g. B Roberts last year).

Other halves do stuggle with this as well but i suppose Lockyer's is heightened because of the 04/05 D but generally other halves are a bit stronger except for Soward.

IMO D is not his problem right now... it was back in 04/05 but if anything it is the least of his weakness right now

 

[Bodhi75]

I actually think that Lockyer will benefit from this current period we're going through when we get other troops back on the field. He's far from a spent force.
At the moment he's trying to everything himself and lacking certain combinations that were there in the past. He's missing being able to hit Karmichael at will (Norman doesn't get deep enough and I'm not sure Hoffman's that style of player) , and as was in evidence the other week some of the forwards are getting in his way (as good form as Sammy has been showing - there are times he was getting in the way of Lockyer hitting outside runners who were in space).
One big thing that I have noticed is that he appears to be running and taking on the line more - and when we have a few more attacking options back I believe that this will make him a lot more dangerous - oppositions can't hang of him abd target his runners as much as they have in the past.