We didn't adapt to Parramatta's linespeed because we lost the forward battle

User avatar
MacDougall
Member
Member
Posts: 7964
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 4:03 am
Location: Brisbane, QLD

We didn't adapt to Parramatta's linespeed because we lost the forward battle

Post by MacDougall » Mon 28 Mar, 2016 6:30 pm

Parramatta were getting off their line fast all game. Slow ruck play and ineffective carries allowed them to pressure the halves. As a result the halves were getting ball with defenders in their faces and forced to make decisions under pressure every time they tried to put on a play. They'd then shuffle the ball on quickly to the easiest out (the plebian backrower Lovett or Halatau) and put the outside man under just as much pressure which led to heaps of errors, or if they tried to force the pass out the back to Tedesco, he'd be under just as much pressure and be forced to jink, come back inside and get belted or get it out to the centres under too much pressure.

They simply needed to get deeper in attack but they didn't adjust to the linespeed. If they got deeper in attack and used the same plays they've been working all season they'd have caught Parramatta out plenty.

This wasn't helped by Farah showing no urgency at the ruck to get the ball and deliver it. When Cherrington came on he was picking the ball up faster, two handed and getting quick ball to the halves and they immediately had time with the ball. So yes, let's leave Cherrington on the bench until the 72nd minute. It also wasn't helped by Grant being concussed early game and having only two forwards on the bench and having Halatau, Lovett and Buchanan, three of the least effective ball runners in the NRL trying to win the advantage line. Tiring, ineffective forwards led to Rankin repeatedly and to his credit coming in off the wing to put in a forwards carry but you might as well have Preston Campbell doing hit ups if you've got Rankin trying to get over the ad line.

The game was lost when Taylor decided to play two forwards on the bench, one of whom was Buchanan. Our best forward was the other benchie, Seumanufagai. When Grant went down, the decision to have no forwards on the bench was made even worse.

We can't afford to carry forwards who don't impact the advantage line in the volumes we did today. We especially can't afford to carry Lovett and Buchanan in games that we're down on forwards. We can't afford to carry two forwards on the bench. Rather than using a pecking order system, Taylor needs to use a horses for courses selection policy. That game needed Chee Kam and Griffin if you're playing Farah. Not Cherrington and Buchanan.


User avatar
MacDougall
Member
Member
Posts: 7964
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 4:03 am
Location: Brisbane, QLD

Post by MacDougall » Mon 28 Mar, 2016 6:32 pm

tl;dr Taylor made ridiculous selections. 2 forwards, plodders. His job is on the line. He needs to not be so dumb. He also showed no vision on the fly by getting Cherrington out there earlier and instructing them to get deeper in attack. This also showed a lack of vision by Farah, Brooks and Moses.

jadtiger
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 3269
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 8:12 am
Location: bayview

Post by jadtiger » Mon 28 Mar, 2016 6:34 pm

I expected us to be worn down with such a poor bench (2 hookers) but i was surprised and happy it didnt become a blowout

User avatar
stryker
Member
Member
Posts: 10825
Joined: Sun 19 Jul, 2009 4:16 pm
Location: Cairns

Post by stryker » Mon 28 Mar, 2016 6:36 pm

We had more than enough opportunities. The forwards worked extremely hard and got us good field position many times. Our halves aren't good enough to take advantage. They just aren't.

User avatar
Demps
Member
Member
Posts: 8119
Joined: Sat 29 Jan, 2011 2:31 pm
Location: Newcastle

Post by Demps » Mon 28 Mar, 2016 6:38 pm

I think Cherrington shoukld have been used towards the last 20 off each half...
Farah should've started and Halatau on the bench or dropped for Griffin or Che-Kam.

We all know this though,
so whats the coach's excuse?
#Unbeatable

"I never lie because I don't fear anyone. You only lie when you're afraid" - John Gotti

Wests Tigers Forum's most brilliant mind.


User avatar
stryker
Member
Member
Posts: 10825
Joined: Sun 19 Jul, 2009 4:16 pm
Location: Cairns

Post by stryker » Mon 28 Mar, 2016 6:38 pm

We had more than enough opportunities. The forwards worked extremely hard and got us good field position many times. Our halves aren't good enough to take advantage. They just aren't.

User avatar
sheer64
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 5555
Joined: Sun 23 Sep, 2012 2:06 pm

Post by sheer64 » Mon 28 Mar, 2016 6:41 pm

stryker wrote:We had more than enough opportunities. The forwards worked extremely hard and got us good field position many times. Our halves aren't good enough to take advantage. They just aren't.
Agree Stryker not our forwards it was poor attack, there was just no options other that what the defense had to read. This is something we can improve on.
Arise Sir Waste Anasta, Tool of the highest order!

criwdfluffer
Member
Member
Posts: 544
Joined: Mon 15 Feb, 2016 9:34 am

Post by criwdfluffer » Mon 28 Mar, 2016 6:43 pm

Lovett and Buchanan are so bad its laughable.

Thank you JT.

PS>...they tackles their arses off.

User avatar
MacDougall
Member
Member
Posts: 7964
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 4:03 am
Location: Brisbane, QLD

Post by MacDougall » Mon 28 Mar, 2016 6:45 pm

Our forwards individually had a good crack, but I expect you didn't read my post. We lost the forwards battle because we had one too few and three of them were bog average barely first grade standard.

And I put as much blame on the halves for not adapting to the deteriorating line. You have to be able to adapt to that and our halves should know by now how to deal with forward pack that are being dominated. Yet they can't.

stevetiger
Member
Member
Posts: 5111
Joined: Mon 25 Feb, 2013 7:59 am

Post by stevetiger » Mon 28 Mar, 2016 6:46 pm

stryker wrote:We had more than enough opportunities. The forwards worked extremely hard and got us good field position many times. Our halves aren't good enough to take advantage. They just aren't.
It's this simple isn't it. I don't get the Farah hate. I thought he was our best player. Our halves were terrible.

User avatar
MacDougall
Member
Member
Posts: 7964
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 4:03 am
Location: Brisbane, QLD

Post by MacDougall » Mon 28 Mar, 2016 6:46 pm

Also I dunno bout the rest of you but I've seen enough of Halatau. He was past it two years ago and had one good running game last year and all of a sudden everyone thinks he's useful. He's worse than Lovett.

User avatar
MacDougall
Member
Member
Posts: 7964
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 4:03 am
Location: Brisbane, QLD

Post by MacDougall » Mon 28 Mar, 2016 6:55 pm

stevetiger wrote:
stryker wrote:We had more than enough opportunities. The forwards worked extremely hard and got us good field position many times. Our halves aren't good enough to take advantage. They just aren't.
It's this simple isn't it. I don't get the Farah hate. I thought he was our best player. Our halves were terrible.
No, you're both blind I'm sorry. Our good field position was almost always caused by Parramatta errors and then when we were deep on the attack our forwards (and Farah) couldn't set up ruck speed that was quick enough for our backs to get time with the ball. They should have got deeper in attack, but they shouldn't have had to have done that. Farah should have been hitting forwards coming over the ad line and the forwards should have been working for quick PTB.

Our halves were good enough to take advantage in the first three rounds to the tune of 17 tries and equal second tries scored in the NRL. They were bad today but they were bad because the Parra defenders were able to get back to their defensive line in time to get off it fast enough to pressure them.

The forwards were getting stopped, held up and put on their backs rather than hitting their bellies for quick play the balls.

This is Woods every carry. Lumbers up, turns his back, fights the tackle, rather than hitting the ground and trying to get quick PTD. Grant is the best player in our side for doing it and he was concussed after 15 minutes. Grant is the most important player in the team this year imo. We need more forwards who put their nose through the lines and get to their feet fast so the backs can run their plays without pressure. Ava is good at it. Sue is reasonable. Grant is beast at it. Woods is a machine and works hard but his carries don't help with the flow of our attack at all.

User avatar
MacDougall
Member
Member
Posts: 7964
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 4:03 am
Location: Brisbane, QLD

Post by MacDougall » Mon 28 Mar, 2016 6:57 pm

The amount of times Woods gets a hit up after one of the other forwards causes a quick PTB and he stands in the tackle for no reason and let's the ref count to the 3 and the rest of the defensive line reset does my damn head in. Why does nobody else see it? He needs to learn to go to ground and get the quick PTB. Especially since the offload doesn't seem part of the gameplan this season.

User avatar
Black'n'White
Member
Member
Posts: 1901
Joined: Sat 02 Mar, 2013 6:52 pm

Post by Black'n'White » Mon 28 Mar, 2016 7:17 pm

Mac, people think I kick Farah and Woods for no reason, and that I am an idiot for knocking rep players.

In supercoach they are great players, but in reality I think their reliance on statistical analysis as a performance indicator is flawed.

For at least a season now I have been of the opinion that oppositions know not to fight him to the ground, but rather wrestle him upright to either slow down the ptb, or as you say turn his back and put him on it, to yet again, slow the ptb down. To break it down, his carries while large metre wise handicap our overall rolling offence.

I dont think it cost us tonight by any way shape or means, though I am glad you notice it also.

goldcoast tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 6129
Joined: Sat 12 Apr, 2014 5:42 pm

Post by goldcoast tiger » Mon 28 Mar, 2016 7:29 pm

MacDougall wrote:
stevetiger wrote:
stryker wrote:We had more than enough opportunities. The forwards worked extremely hard and got us good field position many times. Our halves aren't good enough to take advantage. They just aren't.
It's this simple isn't it. I don't get the Farah hate. I thought he was our best player. Our halves were terrible.
No, you're both blind I'm sorry. Our good field position was almost always caused by Parramatta errors and then when we were deep on the attack our forwards (and Farah) couldn't set up ruck speed that was quick enough for our backs to get time with the ball. They should have got deeper in attack, but they shouldn't have had to have done that. Farah should have been hitting forwards coming over the ad line and the forwards should have been working for quick PTB.

Our halves were good enough to take advantage in the first three rounds to the tune of 17 tries and equal second tries scored in the NRL. They were bad today but they were bad because the Parra defenders were able to get back to their defensive line in time to get off it fast enough to pressure them.

The forwards were getting stopped, held up and put on their backs rather than hitting their bellies for quick play the balls.

This is Woods every carry. Lumbers up, turns his back, fights the tackle, rather than hitting the ground and trying to get quick PTD. Grant is the best player in our side for doing it and he was concussed after 15 minutes. Grant is the most important player in the team this year imo. We need more forwards who put their nose through the lines and get to their feet fast so the backs can run their plays without pressure. Ava is good at it. Sue is reasonable. Grant is beast at it. Woods is a machine and works hard but his carries don't help with the flow of our attack at all.
The main reason that they had more time in the first two or even three games was that not one of those three had a fast committed defence, as Parra did today.
We were fortunate to hit two clubs that were completely disjointed and one that just ran over us when we were gassed halfway through the first half.
There was people saying that we were top 8 or even 4 chances after two games.
The one thing that showed today was that we can defend better, at least we did today, it remains to be seen if that was a one off.
The other thing that was shown was that we have players on the field that should not be in first grade but if last year is an indicator, they will continue to be picked.

stevetiger
Member
Member
Posts: 5111
Joined: Mon 25 Feb, 2013 7:59 am

Post by stevetiger » Mon 28 Mar, 2016 7:30 pm

I tell you something that I find interesting. I don't rate Woods or Farah that highly but they were both in my opinion great out there today.

I reckon you guys need to re-watch the game because I reckon you have it wrong.

User avatar
cktiger
Member
Member
Posts: 3485
Joined: Fri 12 Nov, 2010 10:37 am

Post by cktiger » Mon 28 Mar, 2016 7:31 pm

MacDougall wrote:
stevetiger wrote:
stryker wrote:We had more than enough opportunities. The forwards worked extremely hard and got us good field position many times. Our halves aren't good enough to take advantage. They just aren't.
It's this simple isn't it. I don't get the Farah hate. I thought he was our best player. Our halves were terrible.
No, you're both blind I'm sorry. Our good field position was almost always caused by Parramatta errors and then when we were deep on the attack our forwards (and Farah) couldn't set up ruck speed that was quick enough for our backs to get time with the ball. They should have got deeper in attack, but they shouldn't have had to have done that. Farah should have been hitting forwards coming over the ad line and the forwards should have been working for quick PTB.

Our halves were good enough to take advantage in the first three rounds to the tune of 17 tries and equal second tries scored in the NRL. They were bad today but they were bad because the Parra defenders were able to get back to their defensive line in time to get off it fast enough to pressure them.

The forwards were getting stopped, held up and put on their backs rather than hitting their bellies for quick play the balls.

This is Woods every carry. Lumbers up, turns his back, fights the tackle, rather than hitting the ground and trying to get quick PTD. Grant is the best player in our side for doing it and he was concussed after 15 minutes. Grant is the most important player in the team this year imo. We need more forwards who put their nose through the lines and get to their feet fast so the backs can run their plays without pressure. Ava is good at it. Sue is reasonable. Grant is beast at it. Woods is a machine and works hard but his carries don't help with the flow of our attack at all.
Think you'll find 15 or 16 were scored with Halatau on the field.
The statistics this year say we leak points with Cherrington on the field and don't score many.
If you think his 'fast' service is the answer the stats don't agree.

stevetiger
Member
Member
Posts: 5111
Joined: Mon 25 Feb, 2013 7:59 am

Post by stevetiger » Mon 28 Mar, 2016 7:37 pm

MacDougall - you sound like you have an axe to grind rather than actually talk about what happened out there today.

I can see your point with Woods and Robbie at times but not today. Our halves were terrible and they got plenty of good ball.

Post Reply