Eelementary
Post Whore
- Messages
- 57,230
We are different individuals, and we look for different things.
To use a football analogy:
Should the striker who tapped two goals, in an unmarked goal, win the Man Of The Match?
Or should the midfielder who dribbled past two defenders, and put the lovely through-balls in for the striker, he given the Man Of The Match?
Should the striker who slots a penalty to give his side a 1-nil victory be given the Man Of The Match?
Or should the goalkeeper, who saved 5 legitimate shots on goal, and thus afforded his team the chance to get the lead, be given Man Of The Match?
In my eyes, Gutherson was fantastic (and maybe I should have awarded him 1 point, over Davey) - but Matterson defended like a man possessed, ran with aggression, and put in some beautiful kicks to win us repeat sets.
Mahoney controlled the ruck in both attack, and defence, and was astute around the ruck.
I often feel that the guy who scores 4 tries in a game gets more accolades than the guy who made 50 tackles - but they're both crucial aspects of the game.
The plays that get you noticed - tries, try assists, linebreak assists, etc. - are no less important than the 1%er plays (Will Smith's chargedown is a great example - it got us the ball back, in good field position).
For me, it's not always the guy that scores the tries that was best player; Gutherson was fantastic, but he was also woefully out of position for Brisbane's second try.
Cheers.
