Are the 2024 Warriors better than the 2023 Warriors? Can we go all the way?

[nswarrior]

With the injuries our bench impact has gone with a lot of injuries. I think Walker is back next game and Afoa not long after. However SJ was limping and subbed so hopefully not another injury.

 

[Leber]

Oh we are definately being marketed to be better than we actually am for sure.

The thing is, we were shit for soooo long that when we move up from shit to average, we look like world beaters and all the fans jump on.

 

[Philip_Smith007]

We have a lot of work to do. In attack inside the 20m and defense inside the 20m.
As I've said SJ kicking game and defensive effort outside the 20m is keeping teams out of that zone in general, but our errors and penalties are letting them in.
We are not a top 4 side currently and with other teams form we may not even be a top 8.
Injuries have hampered the bench rotation, but this was never Websters strong spot.

 

[Meth]

With the injuries our bench impact has gone with a lot of injuries. I think Walker is back next game and Afoa not long after. However SJ was limping and subbed so hopefully not another injury.

Afoa's a month away

 

[Leber]

We are actually really really missing walker.

 

[Rich102]

My wife said last night "Looks like they are missing Jazz!"
She really knows how to hurt a guy.

 

[Wheeled Warrior]

We’ve added 2 more shit performances to the mix. I’m gonna keep this thread live. I still don’t see the evidence that we’re a really good team. So far it’s mostly been an incredible marketing job.

We had the best defense in the competition before this game, which must indicate an improvement since last year. We haven't managed to put together a complete 80-minute performance against a team in form. The Rabbitohs are currently struggling, so I'm not going to count that game, lol

I've noticed that SJ tends to rely on the same plays when things aren't going well. Maybe Webby should advise him to mix up his attacking strategies. The bench selections could also use some improvement. While our defense has improved, our attack is inconsistent.

 

[Beavers Headgear]

Every side will put in some dud performances during the season, especially after they have been up for a few weeks and come up against a side considered an easier match, it’s too hard a competition to fire week after week
The Warriors attach is of concern though, but I remember that being said most of last season as well. The Dragons aren’t as bad of a side as people like to point out, they won’t be consistently good, but they have enough good talent there to put some performances on, as they’ve shown against Manly and the Warriors who were off
Outside of the Panthers and Storm, the pundits have been going on about the sides coming 8th, 9th and 11th as the big contenders, shows how hard it is to read

 

[Big Marn]

The 5-1 start last season had really good offense with the defence still a concern. Sharks comeback game that we won springs to mind. I think we were starting from behind almost every game.
This season, teams arent being taken by surprise. So Webster and his little team of helpers need to come up with something better. RTS isnt really gelling. Hes trying to take the line on everytime by himself. He also needs to roam more and be ready for an AFB break. Definitely missing Walker.

 

[ozenzud]

Like a lot of warriors supporters, I've been mopping around all weekend. Is it all an illusion? There are times when I think we have this great team, then they clock off. But that St George game was really disappointing. We are far from fully strength and the team selections (bench) were unfathomable. Titans are the next game. They are really pushing teams, but are unlucky. If warriors dont put them away, then ill be slashing my wrists and the season sort of over.

 

[nswarrior]

Titans will be tricky. They have great pace on the wing and are desperate for a win. I am super nervous.

I think we need a few injured players back for the bench impact we had last year. Walker hopefully plays this week which will help.

SJ was limping and got subbed - hope he is good to go or we are in trouble

 

[Blair]

The title of this week's email from the Warriors:

'Webby and co talk all things high performance'. That wouldn't include last Friday's game, would it?

The club needs to put on a good, winning show on Thursday. I hate being narky like this!

 

[Manu Vatuvei]

A couple of things that stood out last week (that have already been mentioned to an extent).

One was that the Dragons seemed to be reading all of our attacking plays really easily. This understandably lead to a lot of criticism of SJ for taking the wrong options, and particularly for going right all the time and going short ball all the time.

In part this is fair enough, but on the flip side I would argue that SJ was just doing what has been working for us, and if anything the second man play for DWZ in the corner has been overused and he probably felt that sticking to the short ball would be more of a surprise tactic that was bound to work eventually. To some extent it may just have been a "lucky" week for St George's edge defence who kept on guessing correctly, but I think it also did expose the fairly regimented nature of our attack. Honestly, it has surprised me how successful we have been with some pretty predictable set moves.

Secondly, we had an obvious lack of punch through the middle. This of course was mostly down to injuries, but also due to Webster's strange selections and use of the bench. He seems to be insistent on going light-on with middle forwards and always carrying guys he doesn't really intend to use. It's clearly a deliberate strategy but I can't say I've ever really come to terms with it. The balance of our squad combined with the way Webster selects his 17 means we are always sort of on a knife edge between achieving parity through the middle, and getting overrun, particularly by any side which is big and athletic.

I just think these are sort of baked-in issues with how Webster chooses to play the game. It doesn't mean it's a losing strategy, just that these are our weaknesses and on a bad day they will come back to bite us.

 

[Penrose Warrior]

Secondly, we had an obvious lack of punch through the middle. This of course was mostly down to injuries, but also due to Webster's strange selections and use of the bench. He seems to be insistent on going light-on with middle forwards and always carrying guys he doesn't really intend to use. It's clearly a deliberate strategy but I can't say I've ever really come to terms with it. The balance of our squad combined with the way Webster selects his 17 means we are always sort of on a knife edge between achieving parity through the middle, and getting overrun, particularly by any side which is big and athletic.

I just think these are sort of baked-in issues with how Webster chooses to play the game. It doesn't mean it's a losing strategy, just that these are our weaknesses and on a bad day they will come back to bite us.

That was certainly a head scratcher in the finals last year, with light benches, and it appears to be continuing now.

He's gone heavier this week with Zyon there, plus Ale plus Walker so that works.

But Roache is on the bench. I know this is to cover Egan and his injury issues, but Roache played 3 minutes last week. THREE. Laban played 21 and Pompey 5. As I have and will always say, I know little about rugby league in terms of strategy, but this seems crazy to me.

 

[Wheeled Warrior]

That was certainly a head scratcher in the finals last year, with light benches, and it appears to be continuing now.

He's gone heavier this week with Zyon there, plus Ale plus Walker so that works.

But Roache is on the bench. I know this is to cover Egan and his injury issues, but Roache played 3 minutes last week. THREE. Laban played 21 and Pompey 5. As I have and will always say, I know little about rugby league in terms of strategy, but this seems crazy to me.

It's crazy. The lightweight selections on the bench are a big mystery to me. I don't understand how Webby thinks about this. Though to his credit, he has made sense with nearly everything else. Forwards that are not injured: Maiu'u, Going, Stowers-Smith etc.

 

[Leber]

Yea roache on the bench is a weird one. Walker can be the utility role. I wander if going would be a better choice than roache.

 

[Leber]

We are really getting smacked though in the injury department with our forwards. Hopefully we are injury free by the end of season

 

[Manu Vatuvei]

Slade Griffin on the radio yesterday morning confirmed that they selected hooker and outside backs cover (Roache and Pompey last week) because they prefer to have replacements ready to slot in if there is an injury, rather than doing a big reshuffle.

That all feels like a bit of a luxury, I would've thought the priority was to have at least 3 but probably 4 guys on the bench who are expected to play good minutes, with a back-up plan to reshuffle in the event of an injury to a key player.

It seems like our plan involves picking fit and mobile forwards throughout the 17 so that there's less need for minutes off the bench. It's a nice idea, but even guys like AFB, Barnett and Harris aren't superhuman. Even if they can eke out 60-80 minutes, their effectiveness clearly drops at some point.

 

[Thatwasnthighref]

It's crazy. The lightweight selections on the bench are a big mystery to me. I don't understand how Webby thinks about this. Though to his credit, he has made sense with nearly everything else. Forwards that are not injured: Maiu'u, Going, Stowers-Smith etc.

Yea I agree. Some coaches select their benches for tactical purposes only and then deal with injuries if/when they come up. But Webby, given some of his picks only get a few token minutes at the end, appears to pick almost in anticipation of an injury.

Would be cool to hear his actual thoughts on the bench make up after each round. Anyone know if he does this? I don’t usually catch the pressers.

 

[Thatwasnthighref]

Slade Griffin on the radio yesterday morning confirmed that they selected hooker and outside backs cover (Roache and Pompey last week) because they prefer to have replacements ready to slot in if there is an injury, rather than doing a big reshuffle.

That all feels like a bit of a luxury, I would've thought the priority was to have at least 3 but probably 4 guys on the bench who are expected to play good minutes, with a back-up plan to reshuffle in the event of an injury to a key player.

It seems like our plan involves picking fit and mobile forwards throughout the 17 so that there's less need for minutes off the bench. It's a nice idea, but even guys like AFB, Barnett and Harris aren't superhuman. Even if they can eke out 60-80 minutes, their effectiveness clearly drops at some point.

Oh snap. I literally posted at the same time you did so I missed this. Thanks for sharing