Having the numbers covered doesn't stop one-on-ones. That's the whole point of attackers committing multiple defenders. Centres always have to stay close to their half because there is a much bigger edge forward coming at him.
Every centre misses at least a couple of tackles a game. Whether they lead to tries or not doesn't make the missed tackle any worse - defenders don't choose what happens after they miss a tackle. It is out of their hands.
Reed missed three tackles in that game (and went off injured before the 70th minute). But Milford on his inside missed five tackles, showing how much help he needed in that game. So judging a bloke on one game is as stupid as deeming a missed tackle any worse just because it resulted in a try. In fact, if there's no try scored then nobody ever notices who missed the tackle. How many people noticed that Blake Ferguson missed more tackles than Jack Reed in that game? f**k all, that's how many.
Hmm. How many broncos games did you watch? Or are you making assumptions
1) Reed missed two tackles on his line and no one else could do anything. He is 100% at fault, also he was in position and should have made them. While Ferguson is a good attack players, they were very lame attempts. I already mentioned he may have been severely limited by injury.
2) all year my mate wanted Copley in for Reed, i personally also always saw him as a better all round NRL centre and possibly his injuries have played against him.
3) most all miss tackles are equal, sometimes you technically miss tackles but they stop the play or force errors. If you rush in you will always miss more tackles but you will break down more plays as well. Miss tackles are only equal when you don't watch games and just read stats