People on here really need to re watch the game and realise those tries had very little to do with Nightingale. First try looked a lot like a forward pass from Slater to Carr ( as likely was Hunts pass to Aitken for our first try), the last try in the dying minutes was due to some brilliant work by Melbourne including a magic flick pass by the centre. Frizzell missed the tackle that led to the other try. Yes it resulted in making Nightingale look like he was out of position (but only due to other circumstances) but hey Melbourne do that to plenty of good back lines. He did mange to help bundle Carr into touch late in the game too after a forward pass from Slater, something I haven't seen happen to Carr very often.
Very true everything you wrote Lovemedragons.
I watched the match again last night, in the first 15 mins nighty helped tackle and close down several threatening players, he missed zero tackles in that first crucial 20 mins.
He also ran the ball back taking pressure off the forwards.
In each of the Ado Carr tries Nighty was following the teams PLAN for a compressed defence.
He was standing infield because THAT WAS the teams game plan, nothing to do with his personal choice!
I am sure if he stood out wider and storm scored on the inside, people would blame him too.
He could stand opposite Ado Carr and tackle him one on one every day of the week, but storm would then run extra players at Aitken and they would score on the inside, without Ado Carr even seeing the ball
Our game plan dictated where Nighty defended from, and carrs tries were from throwing great passes around the compressed defence.
Nighty missed zero tackles.
If we want to prevent it next time we play them, we have to shut the ball down before it gets too far from the ruck area.
So our line speed has to improve, not nighty.
The compressed D worked, keeping storm to 3 tries is a great feat. #34/14
