Not Taking the 2 Points

Byron Bay Fan
Member
Member
Posts: 3620
Joined: Sat 17 Oct, 2015 2:14 pm
Has liked: 26 times
Been liked: 30 times

Re: Not Taking the 2 Points

Unread post by Byron Bay Fan » Sun 06 Mar, 2016 8:43 am

LCA wrote:
innsaneink wrote:Was woods on field at the time?
Captains call.... It was a no brained really. Not respecting the opposition
Woods was on the field but seemed to be unsure what to do. Moses seemed to make the decision for him. And it was the wrong one.
Love the guy but hope he is only a short term fill in captain (it must go back to Farah).
Malcolm Knox: What has happened this week is a pity for the Tigers, a pity for Jason Taylor and a pity for Robbie Farah, who had achieved more than the Big Four put together but was somehow turned into collateral damage. (SMH 25-26 March, 2017)


User avatar
bigsiro
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 1175
Joined: Tue 11 Jan, 2011 10:50 pm
Has liked: 4 times
Been liked: 13 times

Unread post by bigsiro » Sun 06 Mar, 2016 9:12 am

Byron Bay Fan wrote:You can't blame Moses for that. It could have gone either way. We could not really predict how the second half would pan out and it looked for awhile in the second half that two extra points would not have saved us from Warriors onslaught (and our faults). The way WT were playing they were scoring tries all over the paddock and it sort of looked a certain try. If we had taken those two points and still lost the game some of us would still be complaining that we took those two points. Can't win either way.
Rubbish. You ALWAYS take the points in that situation. If we go on to surrender a 4 try buffer then we deserve to lose.
This was a bad mistake by Woods and his captaincy must be called into question.
Make Wests Tigers Great Again

stevetiger
Member
Member
Posts: 5117
Joined: Mon 25 Feb, 2013 7:59 am

Unread post by stevetiger » Sun 06 Mar, 2016 9:26 am

I don't have a problem with not taking the 2. We were looking to attack and over the course of the season that might help us out. In a more critical situation yes take the 2.

Byron Bay Fan
Member
Member
Posts: 3620
Joined: Sat 17 Oct, 2015 2:14 pm
Has liked: 26 times
Been liked: 30 times

Unread post by Byron Bay Fan » Sun 06 Mar, 2016 9:43 am

bigsiro wrote:
Byron Bay Fan wrote:You can't blame Moses for that. It could have gone either way. We could not really predict how the second half would pan out and it looked for awhile in the second half that two extra points would not have saved us from Warriors onslaught (and our faults). The way WT were playing they were scoring tries all over the paddock and it sort of looked a certain try. If we had taken those two points and still lost the game some of us would still be complaining that we took those two points. Can't win either way.
Rubbish. You ALWAYS take the points in that situation. If we go on to surrender a 4 try buffer then we deserve to lose.
This was a bad mistake by Woods and his captaincy must be called into question.
I can understand both strategies here so not real strong against taking the two. But we do agree on the captaincy as my post at 8.43am already states. Just a shame if Woodsie loses the captaincy when it meant a lot to him and he is a terrific guy. A mistake from upstairs to win the PR war I think.
Malcolm Knox: What has happened this week is a pity for the Tigers, a pity for Jason Taylor and a pity for Robbie Farah, who had achieved more than the Big Four put together but was somehow turned into collateral damage. (SMH 25-26 March, 2017)

User avatar
stryker
Member
Member
Posts: 10791
Joined: Sun 19 Jul, 2009 4:16 pm
Location: Cairns
Has liked: 24 times
Been liked: 142 times

Unread post by stryker » Sun 06 Mar, 2016 10:00 am

I said right from the beginning that Woods is an experienced warrior who adds expert opinions but is not a general.
I think not taking the 2 was a small insight into this. It was not strategic thinking. I also noticed in the huddle that Moses was doing just as much talking as Woods was.


User avatar
Magpie Ryan
Member
Member
Posts: 147
Joined: Wed 04 Jun, 2014 8:13 pm

Unread post by Magpie Ryan » Sun 06 Mar, 2016 10:03 am

Yes its ok to back yourself,but you take those 2 points,though I must admit that I wasnt that worried at the time..
As ive said in the live game thread,this is where Farah was missed,though Woodsy has been around long enough.
But hey we got the 2 competition points,which is the main thing,and im more than happy with what i saw yesterday.

User avatar
foreveratiger
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 11538
Joined: Mon 27 Jun, 2011 8:03 pm

Unread post by foreveratiger » Sun 06 Mar, 2016 10:10 am

As per my " live game " comment, a rush of blood really by Moses as he seemed to make the call, the 2 points that was on offer would of taken us out to a 20 point lead.
Farah would of slowed down the situation and taken the 2.
But we can't go back to Farah being the Captain, if anything Lawrence should take the reins if Woods isn't able to handle it.
On a side note what about the ball from Lawrence to Lovett that led to his Try.
It depends who you talk to on this Forum, if you are Optimistic? it's because your delusional and need a reality check. If you are Pessimistic? Your accused of being a negative Nancy and to go and follow another Club.

Snake
Member
Member
Posts: 4323
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 5:37 pm
Has liked: 16 times
Been liked: 43 times

Unread post by Snake » Mon 07 Mar, 2016 8:00 pm

Watching Storm game tonight they have just taken 2 kicks right in front ...when they could of tapped . This shows the difference in maturity on the field with a couple of thinkers .Yes I know they are old heads but this is what Taylor has to instill into the young playmakers THINK!

happy tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 35889
Joined: Sun 27 Feb, 2011 4:49 pm

Unread post by happy tiger » Mon 07 Mar, 2016 8:06 pm

foreveratiger wrote:As per my " live game " comment, a rush of blood really by Moses as he seemed to make the call, the 2 points that was on offer would of taken us out to a 20 point lead.
Farah would of slowed down the situation and taken the 2.
But we can't go back to Farah being the Captain, if anything Lawrence should take the reins if Woods isn't able to handle it.
On a side note what about the ball from Lawrence to Lovett that led to his Try.
I still think JT had sent the runner out for the 2nd penalty to tell them to take the 2

Watch it again , the runner is flying out towards Woods and Moses

User avatar
foreveratiger
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 11538
Joined: Mon 27 Jun, 2011 8:03 pm

Unread post by foreveratiger » Mon 07 Mar, 2016 8:31 pm

happy tiger wrote:
foreveratiger wrote:As per my " live game " comment, a rush of blood really by Moses as he seemed to make the call, the 2 points that was on offer would of taken us out to a 20 point lead.
Farah would of slowed down the situation and taken the 2.
But we can't go back to Farah being the Captain, if anything Lawrence should take the reins if Woods isn't able to handle it.
On a side note what about the ball from Lawrence to Lovett that led to his Try.
I still think JT had sent the runner out for the 2nd penalty to tell them to take the 2

Watch it again , the runner is flying out towards Woods and Moses
I need to see a Replay of this . They were just caught in the moment i suppose and got a little excited with the line so close.
I'm sure it will be talked about when they have there video session.
It depends who you talk to on this Forum, if you are Optimistic? it's because your delusional and need a reality check. If you are Pessimistic? Your accused of being a negative Nancy and to go and follow another Club.

happy tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 35889
Joined: Sun 27 Feb, 2011 4:49 pm

Unread post by happy tiger » Mon 07 Mar, 2016 8:33 pm

foreveratiger wrote:
happy tiger wrote:
foreveratiger wrote:As per my " live game " comment, a rush of blood really by Moses as he seemed to make the call, the 2 points that was on offer would of taken us out to a 20 point lead.
Farah would of slowed down the situation and taken the 2.
But we can't go back to Farah being the Captain, if anything Lawrence should take the reins if Woods isn't able to handle it.
On a side note what about the ball from Lawrence to Lovett that led to his Try.
I still think JT had sent the runner out for the 2nd penalty to tell them to take the 2

Watch it again , the runner is flying out towards Woods and Moses
I need to see a Replay of this . They were just caught in the moment i suppose and got a little excited with the line so close.
I'm sure it will be talked about when they have there video session.
As I said earlier I prefer them to take a tap quickly and keep the pressure on

Gone are the days Benji and Robbie talk about it for over a minute and then kick the ball ten metres backwards

Tigermama
Member
Member
Posts: 4343
Joined: Sat 14 Jun, 2014 12:33 am

Unread post by Tigermama » Mon 07 Mar, 2016 11:59 pm

Precious two points. They should've but didn't... Hope they will next time.

User avatar
CocaCola
Member
Member
Posts: 456
Joined: Wed 23 Feb, 2011 3:06 pm
Been liked: 1 time

Unread post by CocaCola » Tue 08 Mar, 2016 12:14 am

Milky wrote:Why would you take the two points when you are leading by three converted tries?
Exactly. If you can't defend a 18 point lead, you don't deserve to win. It is round 1, not a grand final.
They made the right call, a winners mentality call.

It's easy for them to say "should've taken the 2" in hindsight. But how many would have questioned that decision if they went on to win by 30? None!.

Tigermama
Member
Member
Posts: 4343
Joined: Sat 14 Jun, 2014 12:33 am

Unread post by Tigermama » Tue 08 Mar, 2016 12:22 am

CocaCola wrote:
Milky wrote:Why would you take the two points when you are leading by three converted tries?
Exactly. If you can't defend a 18 point lead, you don't deserve to win. It is round 1, not a grand final.
They made the right call, a winners mentality call.

It's easy for them to say "should've taken the 2" in hindsight. But how many would have questioned that decision if they went on to win by 30? None!.
Two points, can make a difference to our For and Against CC.

gallagher
Member
Member
Posts: 3976
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 1:18 pm
Has liked: 68 times
Been liked: 37 times

Unread post by gallagher » Tue 08 Mar, 2016 12:24 am

happy tiger wrote:
foreveratiger wrote:
happy tiger wrote:
foreveratiger wrote:As per my " live game " comment, a rush of blood really by Moses as he seemed to make the call, the 2 points that was on offer would of taken us out to a 20 point lead.
Farah would of slowed down the situation and taken the 2.
But we can't go back to Farah being the Captain, if anything Lawrence should take the reins if Woods isn't able to handle it.
On a side note what about the ball from Lawrence to Lovett that led to his Try.
I still think JT had sent the runner out for the 2nd penalty to tell them to take the 2

Watch it again , the runner is flying out towards Woods and Moses
I need to see a Replay of this . They were just caught in the moment i suppose and got a little excited with the line so close.
I'm sure it will be talked about when they have there video session.
As I said earlier I prefer them to take a tap quickly and keep the pressure on

Gone are the days Benji and Robbie talk about it for over a minute and then kick the ball ten metres backwards
Then four hit ups with the forth play the ball on the mark where the penalty was given.Gee that used to infuriate me.

User avatar
innsaneink
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 25001
Joined: Fri 10 Jul, 2009 9:49 pm
Location: ...ahead of you....
Has liked: 169 times
Been liked: 134 times

Unread post by innsaneink » Tue 08 Mar, 2016 9:18 am

CocaCola wrote:
Milky wrote:Why would you take the two points when you are leading by three converted tries?
Exactly. If you can't defend a 18 point lead, you don't deserve to win. It is round 1, not a grand final.
They made the right call, a winners mentality call.

It's easy for them to say "should've taken the 2" in hindsight. But how many would have questioned that decision if they went on to win by 30? None!.
Ensuring the opposition know they must score 4 times to win instead of three can go a long way to ensuring victory, it's no guarantee but an extra buffer... You mustn't watch much footy if you don't see this happen before, the cool experience heads always take the 2

happy tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 35889
Joined: Sun 27 Feb, 2011 4:49 pm

Unread post by happy tiger » Tue 08 Mar, 2016 9:26 am

innsaneink wrote:
CocaCola wrote:
Milky wrote:Why would you take the two points when you are leading by three converted tries?
Exactly. If you can't defend a 18 point lead, you don't deserve to win. It is round 1, not a grand final.
They made the right call, a winners mentality call.

It's easy for them to say "should've taken the 2" in hindsight. But how many would have questioned that decision if they went on to win by 30? None!.
Ensuring the opposition know they must score 4 times to win instead of three can go a long way to ensuring victory, it's no guarantee but an extra buffer... You mustn't watch much footy if you don't see this happen before, the cool experience heads always take the 2
I think if Moses or Woods looked at the bench they would have taken the two

Probably just thought "Well if JT didn't want us to take the 2 from thirty out just off centre , lets go again "

They will cover it in the video sessions and they won't make that mistake again , all good

Life is about learning from your mistakes and never doing it again

User avatar
bigsiro
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 1175
Joined: Tue 11 Jan, 2011 10:50 pm
Has liked: 4 times
Been liked: 13 times

Unread post by bigsiro » Tue 08 Mar, 2016 10:58 am

CocaCola wrote:
Milky wrote:Why would you take the two points when you are leading by three converted tries?
Exactly. If you can't defend a 18 point lead, you don't deserve to win. It is round 1, not a grand final.
They made the right call, a winners mentality call.
Disagree. It's an immature losers call. We had the option of securing the win rather than gambling against the most erratic attacking team in the league. It's not even a question.
CocaCola wrote: It's easy for them to say "should've taken the 2" in hindsight. But how many would have questioned that decision if they went on to win by 30? None!.
Heaps would have. And rightly so. Not taking the points was simply asking for a Warriors comeback. I couldn't care less if they went on to win by 1000, they should still have taken the 2 in that situation.
innsaneink wrote: Ensuring the opposition know they must score 4 times to win instead of three can go a long way to ensuring victory, it's no guarantee but an extra buffer... You mustn't watch much footy if you don't see this happen before, the cool experience heads always take the 2
Exactly.

If the game was out of reach for the Warriors then by all means go for tries but the comeback was well within their grasp (and I think we all half expected it). We got swept up in the moment, had rushes of blood and forgot that the most important thing is getting the win.
Make Wests Tigers Great Again

Post Reply

Return to “Round 1: Wests Tigers vs New Zealand Warriors”