Some set plays would be good but I think more ad-lib footy is the go in Origin with short prep and combinations etc. I'd have B.Stewart sniffing around Tamou, Bird and Gallen etc more for offloads in the middle of the park.
Thurston and co. don't really rely on set moves as much as playing what is in front of them. The Blues support play in game 1 wasn't that great and if they improve there I think they will be in with a good chance.
Well isn't that a form of a set play? It's a strategy to expose QLD big boppers with B. Stewart's speed, not unlike what QLDers did using Inglis a decoy twice to reel in the inside men and score their two first half tries.
Sure, you obviously play what's in front of you, but the QLDers are set up, organised and ready to run a play once they were in the red zone. there's the call for the type of play to be run and then it develops based on how the the defence ends up responding. going back to the QLD tries from smith at acting half, to boyd at the end of the chain, it was known what was going to happen whether it was going to be a kick or going through the hands. slater wasn't lurking around the halves for a kicking play.
in contrast, NSW seemed to have no clue when it came time to capitilise on the territory of the forwards or line breaks out wide. it resorted to just putting the ball onto the boot. yes, a try is a try whether is comes from a kick or taking on the defensive line, but redzone plays from NSW were 90% kicks. once the ball is in the air or on the ground, it is a contest and the outcome can go either way. rugby league isn't simply crash and barge. It's not rocket science either but there are strategies and tactics, particularly at this level when abilities are very similar. It's not unlike American Football where the defence is kept on it's toes determining whether the play is going to be a run or a pass. NSW need to do similar. Get organised, mix it up and keep the QLD defence guessing because in the end, Tate et al knew what the next red zone play was going to be.
Years of the same combinations helps, but this is something NSW have to develop if they are ever going to get a series over this QLD team. I read that Stuart had a meeting with Pearce, Carney & Farah to analyse the Game 1 match because their lack of organisation was clearly the difference between the two teams in that match. Several times, it appeared Pearce or Carney didn't know what Farah was going to do, whether it be pass, take on the line himself, go for bit of a dart before offloading. All good at the Tigers as he has developed a rapport with Benji over many years, but Pearce and Carney just aren't used to that sort of acting half. Sure, Farah should mix it up a bit and take on the line himself, but he also needs to get the ball out the the halves quickly at other time too, and they have to talk it up and get the play organised.
all this talk of NSW forwards being better than QLD forwards means jack if it can't be converted into points.
