What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Match Discussion: Round 26 vs Raiders @ Leichhardt Oval

Who will win? Round 26: Wests Tigers v Raiders


  • Total voters
    8
  • Poll closed .
Messages
3,309
Tigerm, I was trying to be funny or just a smartarse, because of the big score in the previous game V Raiders, I wondered what lesson he 'took into the future'
 

macnaz

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
8,488
Can someone find where the scarcrow bagged previous coaches about us be being weak or soft . We have gone backwards in defence ! Yes we have won more games then last year but dont forget we played BORING TAYLOR BALL and wouldnt beat shite with that 5 and mid field bomb crap.
Some starch in the side is what is needed , Tapow , Brown etc that have our opponents worried in attack and defence not cookie cut Workers like Lolrence , Lovett , Edwards and co.
Fancy shit only wins x amount of games. Then the rest of the teams go on to play to win the premiership
 

madunit

Super Moderator
Staff member
Messages
62,358
We conceded more this year despite losing less games.

Go figure
 

Tiger05

First Grade
Messages
9,765
Can someone find where the scarcrow bagged previous coaches about us be being weak or soft . We have gone backwards in defence ! Yes we have won more games then last year but dont forget we played BORING TAYLOR BALL and wouldnt beat shite with that 5 and mid field bomb crap.
Some starch in the side is what is needed , Tapow , Brown etc that have our opponents worried in attack and defence not cookie cut Workers like Lolrence , Lovett , Edwards and co.
Fancy shit only wins x amount of games. Then the rest of the teams go on to play to win the premiership

I don't think we do that much fancy shit. If anything I think the players you mention are players that don't have an impact.

I reckon we need to focus on getting a pack that really gets us going forward and we need a quality hooker. I think Dene was great but he is gone and he was never an 80 minute hooker. We also need to get rid of Rankin. We need a gun winger. Having a back 3 who are like forwards in getting you going forward and that can score tries makes a huge difference.

Then I think our backline may really look good and we can win some games.

As for defence I think what JT said was simply stupid. We played that dumb Taylor ball and lost games and then when we started winning by playing attacking footy we gave up too much ball in attack and our defence didn't handle it.

The worst thing about JT is that I don't think he has really helped the team out at all. Moses came on this year and he looks great. ET had his moments. Woods improved. I think that is about it though. I also think as a team we didn't really develop. Our defence definitely didn't improve and it wasn't just that right edge. I don't think our attack improved either. When we didn't play Taylor ball our attack was good and we had some good plays but we still turned over the ball too much especially against Canberra which was a pivotal game.
 

simmo1

First Grade
Messages
5,520
At least by missing the 8 we didn't have to go through the rort the Titans copped tonight.
 

magpie guy

Juniors
Messages
358
At least by missing the 8 we didn't have to go through the rort the Titans copped tonight.
Probably the most one sided and terrible refereeing I have seen in quite a while.

For the record, I thought that was a penalty try. The player kicked at a hand in control of the ball, he wasn't sliding into get under the player and he wasn't trying to put his leg under the ball. The rest was complete BS. Especially the penalty where the winger jumper and put himself in a dangerous position trying to mark a ball over someone's back.
 

Tigerm

Coach
Messages
11,059
The Raiders didn't look too big tonight against a team that wanted to win, not sure why we couldn't do the same?
 

madunit

Super Moderator
Staff member
Messages
62,358
Sharks played fast and attacked the edges of the ruck. They made the props move around a lot and given their size, they were worn out by halftime and never recovered.

Sounds crazy, but we should have played Sue and Woods in the back row and Lawrence and Taylor in the front row in attack.
 

sensesmaybenumbed

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
29,225
Sharks played fast and attacked the edges of the ruck. They made the props move around a lot and given their size, they were worn out by halftime and never recovered.

Sounds crazy, but we should have played Sue and Woods in the back row and Lawrence and Taylor in the front row in attack.
These days, they should have the ability to do exactly that. Shame we have a moron for a coacch.
 

BrotherJim05

Bench
Messages
3,454
I've always liked the idea of Sue in the 2nd row but tbh we would need to sign a damaging prop to replace his strong runs up the middle.
 

BrotherJim05

Bench
Messages
3,454
If we don't sign anyone we could have something like this:
1. Tedesco
2. Nofo
3. MCK
4. Simona
5. Naiqama
6. Moses
7. Brooks
8. Woods
9. Ballin
10. Grant
11. Lawrence
12. Sue
13. ET

14. Ava
15. Felise
16. Aloai
17. Liddle
 

Latest posts

Top