Raiders attitude problem?

[glasper]

In Saturday's post-match interview with ABC radio, Schif seemed extraordinarily lackadaisical about blowing a 26 point lead, saying that there were "a lot of positives" to take from the Sharks match. When it was suggested that there was "a lot of work to do" till the next match, he seemed nonplussed.

Last week the departing players seemed to be acting like their season was already over. And in Friday's Canberra Times, Queensland Reds coach Eddie Jones, discussing the (ridiculous) possibility that Schifcofske might play in Rugby's Australian Provincial Championship, said "when [the Raiders] get knocked out, we'll have a chat."

Well, who's to say they will be?

How can Clinton be satisfied with that performance? Are all the departing players so focussed on greener pastures that they've forgotten that they still have a chance to win <i>this year's grand final</i>?

The way they are talking and playing, are they ready for finals footy? I don't think so. Someone needs to turn their heads around, quick smart.

 

[Leethal]

I'm afraid you're right Glasper. If I was the coach or captain of a team that nearly helped to end another teams nine game losing streak by blowing a 26 - 0 lead, I would be beside myself with fury. It's semi-finals time and if you're serious about challenging for the title, it's time to put lesser teams away.

Hopefully Matt Elliott will deliver a well aimed rocket.

 

[aussies1st]

Don't worry no more lesser teams to worry about for our Elliott coached Raiders.

 

[Lime_Green]

On the one hand I don't think it would do the Raiders too much good to immediately focus on the negatives that came out of that match. You want to build momentum, and self-belief going into the finals.

However I do think that second half is exactly why we don't pose much of a threat in terms of winning the premiership. We are just too damned inconsistent. :crazy:

To my mind there were three people primarily responsible for that half:

(1) Matthew Elliot - What does he say to the players at half time when we're in front? "Don't worry boys, have a beer and relax, the game's all wrapped up" :sarcasm: We've had a consistent problem all year, and perhaps the last 5 years, where the Raiders are unable to put teams away. They drop to the level of their opposition.

(2) Clinton Schifcofske - On the field it's the captain's job to get his players heads right when that sort of thing starts to happen. Choc does at times try to lead by example (see last weeks great tackle to shift the momentum against the Storm) but a bit more talk would do the players good. I always had worries about Choc as captain this year, precisely for this reason.

(3) Todd Carney/Linc Withers - Yes Todd played outstandingly well, even I think in the second half. But the halves have organisational duty and both these fellas really let it fall in a big heap in the second half. It's their role to make sure the combinations and second phase play keeps happening. That agonising one-up play was ridiculous. Even Elliott acknowledged as much.

Ultimately points differences are irrelevant in finals football, and the ability to grind out a win is supreme. That is something we do well. But I'd like to see more consistency, and more leadership.

 

[aussies1st]

Agree on all points. Carney really went missing in the 2nd half, didn't see him touch the ball that often. 5th play options are still very suspect, and with Withers as halfback we are basically stuffed 5th play wise.

 

[Walt Flanigan]

(3) Todd Carney/Linc Withers - Yes Todd played outstandingly well, even I think in the second half. But the halves have organisational duty and both these fellas really let it fall in a big heap in the second half. It's their role to make sure the combinations and second phase play keeps happening. That agonising one-up play was ridiculous. Even Elliott acknowledged as much.

The other 2 points may have some validation but I can't fault the attack last night when it was our defence that cost us. The one out plays came as a result of tackles made in the second half. The players were stuffed.

 

[Raiders Plight]

The sharks scored a few quick tries and we went into our shell. This is when we need to use the skill of players such as carney and graham, not one out passing to low impact players like kayler and hodgson. it's hard to know who is to blame though.

 

[Lime_Green]

The other 2 points may have some validation but I can't fault the attack last night when it was our defence that cost us. The one out plays came as a result of tackles made in the second half. The players were stuffed.

I disagree. Possesion was probably at least even in the second half. At least one of the Sharks tries was from line breaks. And it was us that had the raft of repeat sets that we couldn't score off.

Even Elliott stated that "we lost our combinations". If it was a lack of fitness that caused that then it's a genuine worry as the players hadn't done that much work.

To me it seemed, as Elliott also said, that Carney was trying to put the game away on his own. There was no direction from either he or Withers and the end result was that the other players went back into their shells and played safety first football. It seemed that by 10 minutes in, everyone except Carney was happy to defend the 26 points and not bother to actually score further.

 

[aussies1st]

I'm just lost why we keep losing our gameplan from the early 20 minutes. Throw the ball wide and we look dangerous. One off rubbish and we get dominated putting heaps of pressure on the kicker.

 

[Lime_Green]

I'm just lost why we keep losing our gameplan from the early 20 minutes. Throw the ball wide and we look dangerous. One off rubbish and we get dominated putting heaps of pressure on the kicker.

Yeah I agree it's a bit of a mystery. I think perhaps it has a lot to do with Elliott's coaching style. He doesn't let players play intuitively or naturally, it's all pre-programmed, rote learnt, mechanical stuff.

It often works wonders...Until the players are tired and have to fall back to their intuitive game, which Elliott hasn't nurtured or made cohesive...

I dunno though.

 

[The Horse]

I think a decent halfback(hopefully Dobson) will solve the problem of the innconcistency next year purely with good last play options. Carney has a very good long kicking game but we seem to be missing something when were leading, i cant remember the last time we got a repeat set or scored a try with a well placed grubber. Jason Smith just bombs everytime he gets the ball and todd likes to run to the line on the 5th inside the oppositions 20 and Linc just doesn't know how to kick a ball. From what ive seen of wigan dobson has a brilliant short kicking and if were leading he'll be able to plug the opposition down their end of the field.

 

[Walt Flanigan]

i cant remember the last time we got a repeat set or scored a try with a well placed grubber.

We got about 3 repeat sets in a row with grubbers into the in goal early in the second half.

 

[aussies1st]

Carney has a decnet bomb it seems but doesn't use it when close to the goal line.

 

[Mal Meninga]

Remember we also blew that Broncos game despite being up 18-0 at half time and also that dreaded Souths game. To me it's due to professionalism, look at clubs like the Storm who's coaching staff are prepared to drop players like Slater... Hill.... Webster... And they lost Orford in the off-season, but collectively they rally together because as individuals, they know 1 bad performance could see them in reserves. As opposed to the Raiders, it seems that no matter how badly a player performs, the hard decisions are never made, and from there stems complacency, and an unprofessional approach.

 

[Raider Jack]

Well said MM; the thing sh*ts me is that if we'd won a couple of the games we looked like winning we'd be in 2nd: broncos, eels, bunnies, panthers.

 

[Walt Flanigan]

We've also won a few games that we've looked like losing. It's Rugby League karma.

 

[peter_raiders]

If we had of beaten Souths then we might not have beaten the team the following week.

If we scored a couple more tries against the Eels, Carney and Schif could of got injured going over for a try.

No if's no but's. You lose some close ones you win some close ones. We've had more than our share of close wins. The Broncos game was a 'should of won' game but.