Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Who should be dropped
10-27-2013, 10:49 AM
Post: #41
RE: Who should be dropped
Jools Hudd are like every other team, they need to be in the opp danger zone to dominate. There, Brough works his trick plays and Hudd look great. Wire showed in the CC, Hudd need field position and possession to function otherwise they are stuffed. Nothing earth shattering in that, basic RL truth.

The nature of modern RL merely reinforce that reliance of field position / possession. 10 / 15 metres out and Hall / Charnley are amazing finishers BUT 80 metre dazzling breaks are increasingly not there go as they bulk up etc. Can you even afford to take the risk at the highest level these days. Once we started making errors we really struggled to get field position back other than a brief period in the second half.

Talented backs need a platform to work their magic AND no matter how well we think our forwards played I would say the tale of the game says otherwise. Australia IMO started to kill us re speed of the POTB as the game progressed.

Any player can look good against inferior opposition or at least should do!
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
10-27-2013, 10:56 AM
Post: #42
RE: Who should be dropped
The last time I looked it was a 13 player game and whomever runs the ball back is irrelevant. We were dominant for the first 20 minutes as Australia made forced / unforced errors. Unfortunately as the game developed Australia made fewer errors and we started to make them to the point they started to dominate field position / possession. No earth shattering thought there just stating the obvious, an obvious many seem to ignore for a variety of reasons.
-----
I think the errors & fractional things made a huge difference. We were firmly in control of the game but didn't push on after about 25 Australia came back but even then I didn't think they were dominant, just a fairly even game with a clever try set up by Thurston to be fair, the try on the hooter was a punisher for us IMO. Australia had a good 25 as well but apart from that the sides seemed even for a lot of the game to say they are clearly a better side. The fractional things such as the forward to Tomkins then they score from the scrum, the charnley foot on the line & they score, the mossop (or hill?) clean break that went to ground & so on came back to haunt us. They were more clinical, scoring when the chances came but overall there wasn't a huge difference in the sides overall.

The Aussies will get better no doubt but I think we can as well, if we play them again I wouldn't make drastic changes tbf. To bring it back round to the thread I'm not sure who we should drop as I don't think we were a mile off.

Graham in for burgess will be the obvious one, apart from that I don't know?
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
10-27-2013, 11:16 AM
Post: #43
RE: Who should be dropped
If the coach is willing to drop for immature antics off the field surely he should drop for poor performances on the field,that starting 13 isnt the one i would have chosen,but who am I.

Theres only one Johnny Wellies..Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
10-27-2013, 01:23 PM
Post: #44
RE: Who should be dropped
1.tomkins
2.charnley
3.watkins
4.cudjoe
5.hall
6.chase
7.widdop
8.hill
9.roby
10.burgess
11.westwood
12.ferres
13.burgess/oloughlin if burgess suspended

14.sinfield
15.farrell
16.graham
17.mossop

i wanna see chase mix it up with widdop at 6/7 and keep opposition thinking.westwood needs to stop giving penaltys away..10...burgess awesome performance and hill likewise..there my starting props...but graham off the bench is a fantastic replacement..sinfield on to cover 6/7/9/13/ if required
need to make the most of the oppotunitys...oz were lucky....burgess almost a try....charnley wasnt out...almost giving a try to oz in itself and ref pulling chase to nearside scrum almost gifted slater his try...these points alone gave oz 12 points

Sir kev and his golden forehead..have that dorn..Sleepy
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
10-27-2013, 02:26 PM
Post: #45
RE: Who should be dropped
Mossop was disappointing.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
10-27-2013, 02:32 PM
Post: #46
RE: Who should be dropped
(10-27-2013 02:26 PM)drsrhino Wrote:  Mossop was disappointing.

Yes. We looked a lot better with him off the pitch and hill back on.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
10-27-2013, 02:53 PM
Post: #47
RE: Who should be dropped
I'd swap Mossop with Graham and Widdop for Chase.

I'd like to see better discipline from Westwood, Ablett and S Burgess in the next big game!

2012 - Newcomer of the year
2013 - Best User Name and current holder of the SLFer Of The Year award
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
10-27-2013, 02:55 PM
Post: #48
RE: Who should be dropped
(10-27-2013 11:16 AM)blazingmole Wrote:  If the coach is willing to drop for immature antics off the field surely he should drop for poor performances on the field,that starting 13 isnt the one i would have chosen,but who am I.

You're the kid who nobody agrees with.

I'm interested in the school of thought that makes Cherry believe that the Aussies needed time to get in to the match based on the fact they were outplayed for a good 20 minute spell. They have known the time and date of the matches for a long period. They picked a very strong team. Sheens said they were well up for it.
Is it not just as likely that England's couple of blinding errors, especially the Slater try, were down to players being unfamiliar with each other?
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
10-27-2013, 04:55 PM (This post was last modified: 10-27-2013 04:56 PM by CherryPie.)
Post: #49
RE: Who should be dropped
(10-27-2013 02:55 PM)buggritt Wrote:  I'm interested in the school of thought that makes Cherry believe that the Aussies needed time to get in to the match based on the fact they were outplayed for a good 20 minute spell. They have known the time and date of the matches for a long period. They picked a very strong team. Sheens said they were well up for it.
Is it not just as likely that England's couple of blinding errors, especially the Slater try, were down to players being unfamiliar with each other?

You don't think it was likely that they would start off slow? They had no warm up game beforehand. They made errors early on but cut them out and dominated as the game progressed. They looked rusty for the first 20, albeit dangerous when they did manage to keep hold of the ball.

[Image: tumblr_inline_mpk2nlynBF1s49387.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
10-27-2013, 05:01 PM
Post: #50
RE: Who should be dropped
I think most NRL coaches want teams to start slow and warm into the game. I think they nearly all tell the teams to play simple with zero errors for the first 20 minutes. This flows into the Origin and Test styles. Also most of the OZ players hadn't played for over a month.

Rugby League Universe
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)