****WE ARE AN EMBARRASMENT*****

User avatar
cktiger
Member
Member
Posts: 3341
Joined: Fri 12 Nov, 2010 10:37 am

Re: ****WE ARE AN EMBARRASMENT*****

Post by cktiger » Mon 11 Apr, 2016 3:16 pm

Swordy wrote:Please tell me you dont take Phil Gould seriously.
You don't think he knows anything about football?


maxxy86
Member
Member
Posts: 1582
Joined: Fri 04 Mar, 2011 11:54 am

Post by maxxy86 » Mon 11 Apr, 2016 3:23 pm

Look at the end of the day it wasn't anyone in particular that lost us that game. We aren't playing as a team and playing an entire 80 minutes.
We would be lucky ATM to be playing 8 minutes of good footy.
Well its nearly time to have a 'CRACK'....Go you :sign:

maxxy86
Member
Member
Posts: 1582
Joined: Fri 04 Mar, 2011 11:54 am

Post by maxxy86 » Mon 11 Apr, 2016 3:25 pm

Swordy wrote:Please tell me you dont take Phil Gould seriously.
He did point out maybe 2 seasons ago that we have two halfbacks in our team. Yes he may go on and on but he makes a lot of sense also.
Well its nearly time to have a 'CRACK'....Go you :sign:

User avatar
Swordy
Member
Member
Posts: 1794
Joined: Fri 02 Jul, 2010 9:34 pm

Post by Swordy » Mon 11 Apr, 2016 4:44 pm

cktiger wrote:
Swordy wrote:Please tell me you dont take Phil Gould seriously.
You don't think he knows anything about football?
He knows way more than i do, but i believe there is a fair bit of media myth about him also.. ....and he is happy to feed that myth.

Im just thinking i wouldnt place too much importance on his thinking or reasons.
Sunshine Coast resident.
Tigers fan since birth in 1969.
Fond memories of Leichhardt Oval every home game as a kid with my Dad!

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

Post by stevetiger » Mon 11 Apr, 2016 5:16 pm

Byron Bay Fan wrote:In todays Herald Phil Gould did not put any blame on Farah at all, but on the poor handling and decisions of our youngsters.
Which was obvious if you watched the game. Farah deserves a kick up his backside for the playing for penalties that he did and a couple of the poor options that he took but he deserved our best player if you take that crap out of his game and that crap didn't impact the result.


User avatar
Harvey
Member
Member
Posts: 3214
Joined: Mon 22 Jun, 2015 10:01 pm
Location: Leumeah

Post by Harvey » Mon 11 Apr, 2016 8:46 pm

goldcoast tiger wrote:
TIGER wrote:
Harvey wrote:To put it bluntly the side is soft. They need a major clean-out & get some footballing hard heads in there who want to win. To be honest you could pencil in Tedesco, Grant, Nofa (does half the forwards work for them) & Woods (though he is not a hard head). The rest of the side and the coac hing staff should be shown the exit.
Grant???????? are you kidding me!!!!!!!!!

Do yourself a favour and if you can stomach it, watch this game again and watch him get destroyed every carry he has against arguably (no the worst) pack in the NRL.

Everyone is entitled to an off game but he's more than due for the ESL.
As the season wears on im expecting to see a gradual decline, thats if he doesn't get injured and earn his coin in rehab.
Ordinary personified.
That is because the only forward the Knights needed to muscle up against was him. Woods performed up to his usual high standard, Ava is showing half the fire of last year when he did not have a contract, Sue was gone injured after 20 mins. Most of the rest of the hit ups were done by wingers and teddy. If you want to see someone that would be an ESL star look no further than Curtis. He shows all the potential of Dave Taylor

Grant was back to his Souths form yesterday.
Most of the forward pack are soft as marshmallows.

matchball
Member
Member
Posts: 1427
Joined: Tue 18 Nov, 2014 3:21 pm

Post by matchball » Tue 12 Apr, 2016 12:01 pm

I just watched the replay and Robbie seems to opt for Brooks a majority of the time and its slow service. It may as well be a get back 5 metre rule because he has half the time to play what's in front of him and its all rushed passes. Moses was shackled and only made progress in 2nd phase play.

Robbie is not giving quick service and we cant make any metres.
We only managed 16 points all game when in recent weeks we were 16 up in 30 mins without him.

User avatar
cktiger
Member
Member
Posts: 3341
Joined: Fri 12 Nov, 2010 10:37 am

Post by cktiger » Tue 12 Apr, 2016 1:18 pm

matchball wrote:I just watched the replay and Robbie seems to opt for Brooks a majority of the time and its slow service. It may as well be a get back 5 metre rule because he has half the time to play what's in front of him and its all rushed passes. Moses was shackled and only made progress in 2nd phase play.

Robbie is not giving quick service and we cant make any metres.
We only managed 16 points all game when in recent weeks we were 16 up in 30 mins without him.
I'm tired of this rubbish.
The reason the defence gets up so fast is because our players get dominated (or held up) in tackles giving the defence more time.
In the first game our forwards actually got back and ran onto the ball taking us forward - it's been retrograde ever since.

User avatar
jirskyr
Member
Member
Posts: 5487
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 12:00 pm

Post by jirskyr » Tue 12 Apr, 2016 3:08 pm

cktiger wrote:
matchball wrote:I just watched the replay and Robbie seems to opt for Brooks a majority of the time and its slow service. It may as well be a get back 5 metre rule because he has half the time to play what's in front of him and its all rushed passes. Moses was shackled and only made progress in 2nd phase play.

Robbie is not giving quick service and we cant make any metres.
We only managed 16 points all game when in recent weeks we were 16 up in 30 mins without him.
I'm tired of this rubbish.
The reason the defence gets up so fast is because our players get dominated (or held up) in tackles giving the defence more time.
In the first game our forwards actually got back and ran onto the ball taking us forward - it's been retrograde ever since.
I disagree, I fully believe Farah's service has suffered recently and I'm a big fan of his.

I know he's fresh back, but in his first game I went back through the replay to watch how often the forwards and halves had to jump up or lean forward to catch his passes - not good. Surely he will improve, but I do feel that Farah holds the ball a touch too long and does not sufficiently engage the markers to make this a working strategy (compared to Cam Smith who holds the footy but ensures the markers commit to him and not the runner).

Post Reply