bartman
Immortal
- Messages
- 41,022
This is my first time up here since the game on Saturday. I have now read the posts in lots of other threads, and after having had a day to think about the match I thought I'd just throw in my two cents here... even if it agrees with what has already been said!
The Coach
Trials are the time to try experiments not comp games, especially when we missed the top 8 the previous year by 2 points. I didn't see evidence of any game plan. Either it didn't work, or the bulldogs were THAT good. They were good, but even the most basic gameplan should include factors like "tackle" and "run with some heart" and "attacking options" all of which were missing. The players should take some blame, but I now have big doubts about the gameplan approach used in this week's coaching, and that's not good at the start of the season.
The Players
LUKE BURT at fullback doesn't work. He is/was a very good winger. Select him there. VAEALIKI did fine at the back when he was brought on - he is currently our best fullback option, ahead of either Ash Graham's recovery or Wade McKinnon or Ronnie Prince's elevation.
ERIC GROTHE ran hard all night, better than any of our forwards. He should keep a wing spot. WISE KATIVERATA isn't up to standard yet for mine, let him practice in PL.
JAMIE LYON missed some vital tackles, very unusual. And of course he was never given the ball in attack. MATT PETERSEN was OK for mine and kept trying, and deserves another start there next week. I think the problems in our backline defence relate more to the fact the Dogs actually have a playmaking five eighth that gets the ball to the backs, and we've forgotten how to play (and defend against) that type of football?
Five eighth was a joke. DANIEL WAGON is a good defensive player with few creative attacking skills. Yet he still couldn't contain the Dogs halves or Anasta from where he was playing. Wags is a solid lock, and should just be used for hit-ups in attack.
ADAM DYKES went OK, and kept trying things all match. Showed some spark, and I nearly keeled over when I saw... a backline move... leading to the Vaealiki try! There is potential there, and if he was five eighth I'd have more hope for our chances of mounting some attack. Which means we need a halfback (who is also a playmaker, and has a kicking game). During the year it has to be either MICHAEL WITT or Chris Thorman. Unless you move JOHN MORRIS to the halves, then we need another hooker/dummy half (James Webster).
I don't even want to talk about our forward pack at the moment. HOPKINS tried hard in defence, tried a few things in attack which didn't work. CAYLESS was just average, HINDY was just average, VELLA did great work once to chase down three players, but was crap from then on. PEARSON was just average. CANNINGS showed promise, and the potential to be damaging in attack. ARMIT tackled hard and reliably when on, but doesn't add much to the attack. STAPLETON did OK, but again nothing too special.
You don't win games with average packs, and for all the talk about our bulked up pack, the Dogs steam rolled us. Did anyone notice what a huge game Andrew Ryan had? I'm not a Willie Mason fan, but he really warmed up when the Dogs got on top, and made us pay. That Hutch bloke in 17 was also damaging when he was on. Anasta is a playmaker with finesse, and with Sherwin and Thurston they had attacking options that weren't predictable and allowed their backs to get involved to good effect.
Next Week
Smith needs to pick the best team. he needs to make changes. The Broncos are no slouch, and with Lockyer at five-eighth and more involved in their playmaker mix we can expect to come up against a similar approach. I would name the side as follows, and maybe practice some attack, and of course defensive work...
1 Vaealiki, 2 Burt, 3 Lyon, 4 Petersen, 5 Grothe, 6 Morris, 7 Dykes
8 Cayless, 9 Webster, 10 Cannings, 11 Hindmarsh, 12 Hopkins, 13 Wagon
14 Witt/Thorman, 15 Armit/Stapleton, 16 Vella/Pearson 17 Pai/Widders
It looks a bit like something we might have tried last year, and you're right. We need some attacking options, and that means playmakers with kicking games and speedy passes at 6, 7, 9. We need a reserve playmaker with spark from the bench, as well as two solid forwards, and one forward with some finesse. I didn't see this week's PL game, but I would be looking at blooding guys like Pai, Witt, Thorman, Langi, O'Dwyer, and MacKinnon if they are showing promise, and awaiting the return of guys like Graham, Tsoulos, Muckert and Muspratt from injury into the first grade mix.
The Future
Our next three games can all be considered hard - Broncos away, Newcastle home, and Raiders away - all with good wins already under their belts. If we are to be contenders this year, you would expect us to win two out of these first four rounds, even in the early stages of the year. If we don't, then the next four games (Bunnies, Manly, Sharks, Cowboys) become a lot more vital.
If we have improved and win two of our next three games, then we can look at winning three/four of those next four with good form and some confidence. So, when we come to the bye in Round 9, we should have won 5 or 6 of the eight games if we are to be quality contenders this season IMO. If we have only won 2 or 3 we are in real strife, and Brian can start packing his bags. If we have 4 wins, then we're still hanging in there and with improvement we might still be in good form and position by the end of the year.
Cheer 'Em On!
The Dogs match was a disappointing start to the season, especially for me as it's my last live NRL match for quite some time, as I leave Sydney for NZ, Japan and then England in a few days. After having a season tciket in the same seat since 1986, I'm going to miss my live Eels fix! So everyone that is left and goes to the games, please cheer 'em on double for me over the next seven weeks, so we can be still be a contender this year!! I look forward to seeing any league coverage I can get overseas, and to reading (a little less often) people's views of our games in all grades on these forums.
The Coach
Trials are the time to try experiments not comp games, especially when we missed the top 8 the previous year by 2 points. I didn't see evidence of any game plan. Either it didn't work, or the bulldogs were THAT good. They were good, but even the most basic gameplan should include factors like "tackle" and "run with some heart" and "attacking options" all of which were missing. The players should take some blame, but I now have big doubts about the gameplan approach used in this week's coaching, and that's not good at the start of the season.
The Players
LUKE BURT at fullback doesn't work. He is/was a very good winger. Select him there. VAEALIKI did fine at the back when he was brought on - he is currently our best fullback option, ahead of either Ash Graham's recovery or Wade McKinnon or Ronnie Prince's elevation.
ERIC GROTHE ran hard all night, better than any of our forwards. He should keep a wing spot. WISE KATIVERATA isn't up to standard yet for mine, let him practice in PL.
JAMIE LYON missed some vital tackles, very unusual. And of course he was never given the ball in attack. MATT PETERSEN was OK for mine and kept trying, and deserves another start there next week. I think the problems in our backline defence relate more to the fact the Dogs actually have a playmaking five eighth that gets the ball to the backs, and we've forgotten how to play (and defend against) that type of football?
Five eighth was a joke. DANIEL WAGON is a good defensive player with few creative attacking skills. Yet he still couldn't contain the Dogs halves or Anasta from where he was playing. Wags is a solid lock, and should just be used for hit-ups in attack.
ADAM DYKES went OK, and kept trying things all match. Showed some spark, and I nearly keeled over when I saw... a backline move... leading to the Vaealiki try! There is potential there, and if he was five eighth I'd have more hope for our chances of mounting some attack. Which means we need a halfback (who is also a playmaker, and has a kicking game). During the year it has to be either MICHAEL WITT or Chris Thorman. Unless you move JOHN MORRIS to the halves, then we need another hooker/dummy half (James Webster).
I don't even want to talk about our forward pack at the moment. HOPKINS tried hard in defence, tried a few things in attack which didn't work. CAYLESS was just average, HINDY was just average, VELLA did great work once to chase down three players, but was crap from then on. PEARSON was just average. CANNINGS showed promise, and the potential to be damaging in attack. ARMIT tackled hard and reliably when on, but doesn't add much to the attack. STAPLETON did OK, but again nothing too special.
You don't win games with average packs, and for all the talk about our bulked up pack, the Dogs steam rolled us. Did anyone notice what a huge game Andrew Ryan had? I'm not a Willie Mason fan, but he really warmed up when the Dogs got on top, and made us pay. That Hutch bloke in 17 was also damaging when he was on. Anasta is a playmaker with finesse, and with Sherwin and Thurston they had attacking options that weren't predictable and allowed their backs to get involved to good effect.
Next Week
Smith needs to pick the best team. he needs to make changes. The Broncos are no slouch, and with Lockyer at five-eighth and more involved in their playmaker mix we can expect to come up against a similar approach. I would name the side as follows, and maybe practice some attack, and of course defensive work...
1 Vaealiki, 2 Burt, 3 Lyon, 4 Petersen, 5 Grothe, 6 Morris, 7 Dykes
8 Cayless, 9 Webster, 10 Cannings, 11 Hindmarsh, 12 Hopkins, 13 Wagon
14 Witt/Thorman, 15 Armit/Stapleton, 16 Vella/Pearson 17 Pai/Widders
It looks a bit like something we might have tried last year, and you're right. We need some attacking options, and that means playmakers with kicking games and speedy passes at 6, 7, 9. We need a reserve playmaker with spark from the bench, as well as two solid forwards, and one forward with some finesse. I didn't see this week's PL game, but I would be looking at blooding guys like Pai, Witt, Thorman, Langi, O'Dwyer, and MacKinnon if they are showing promise, and awaiting the return of guys like Graham, Tsoulos, Muckert and Muspratt from injury into the first grade mix.
The Future
Our next three games can all be considered hard - Broncos away, Newcastle home, and Raiders away - all with good wins already under their belts. If we are to be contenders this year, you would expect us to win two out of these first four rounds, even in the early stages of the year. If we don't, then the next four games (Bunnies, Manly, Sharks, Cowboys) become a lot more vital.
If we have improved and win two of our next three games, then we can look at winning three/four of those next four with good form and some confidence. So, when we come to the bye in Round 9, we should have won 5 or 6 of the eight games if we are to be quality contenders this season IMO. If we have only won 2 or 3 we are in real strife, and Brian can start packing his bags. If we have 4 wins, then we're still hanging in there and with improvement we might still be in good form and position by the end of the year.
Cheer 'Em On!
The Dogs match was a disappointing start to the season, especially for me as it's my last live NRL match for quite some time, as I leave Sydney for NZ, Japan and then England in a few days. After having a season tciket in the same seat since 1986, I'm going to miss my live Eels fix! So everyone that is left and goes to the games, please cheer 'em on double for me over the next seven weeks, so we can be still be a contender this year!! I look forward to seeing any league coverage I can get overseas, and to reading (a little less often) people's views of our games in all grades on these forums.
