Player stats from tonight

voice of reason
Member
Member
Posts: 263
Joined: Sat 09 Aug, 2014 10:35 pm

Re: Player stats from tonight

Post by voice of reason » Sun 18 Jun, 2017 10:33 am

MacDougall wrote:
Sun 18 Jun, 2017 10:25 am
The thing is, is that even with them having 5 players out vs. our 2 out. We still weren't as good a side on paper. We had a far more inexperienced team. Our roster is just plain woeful. And this is most likely because we have nearly $1,000,000 playing for other teams.

We played better than them, deserved to win. I think every one of our players performed admirably. I cannot really fault anyone in particular for efforts outside of moments. Clearly had them playing well. It just sucks they weren't rewarded for it.

I thought Naiqama was exceptional at fullback. I didn't feel like we missed Tedesco at all out there which was a massive surprise. All the young guys stood up. Given we'll be having our pick of them mixed with some actual talent coming in next year the signs are very positive for 2018.

I was devastated last night but this morning I'm not feeling so bad.

Eisenhuth, Naiqama, Nofoaluma, Watene-Zelezniak, Liddle were our best imo but many could get a mention. Grant should have got more minutes, he has really come good the past few weeks. I think we should re-sign him.
^ This. I agree with pretty much everything here.
Suffering supporter since 1967


User avatar
Harvey
Member
Member
Posts: 3211
Joined: Mon 22 Jun, 2015 10:01 pm
Location: Leumeah

Post by Harvey » Sun 18 Jun, 2017 10:45 am

The stats don't pick up blokes like Sue & Grant where blokes run straight past them because they are too slow or have given up chasing, or where they hold on while being dragged 15 metres by the opposition players.

User avatar
willow
Member
Member
Posts: 32203
Joined: Fri 10 Jul, 2009 9:28 pm
Location: The Village

Post by willow » Sun 18 Jun, 2017 12:57 pm

MacDougall wrote:
Sun 18 Jun, 2017 10:25 am
The thing is, is that even with them having 5 players out vs. our 2 out. We still weren't as good a side on paper. We had a far more inexperienced team. Our roster is just plain woeful. And this is most likely because we have nearly $1,000,000 playing for other teams.

We played better than them, deserved to win. I think every one of our players performed admirably. I cannot really fault anyone in particular for efforts outside of moments. Clearly had them playing well. It just sucks they weren't rewarded for it.

I thought Naiqama was exceptional at fullback. I didn't feel like we missed Tedesco at all out there which was a massive surprise. All the young guys stood up. Given we'll be having our pick of them mixed with some actual talent coming in next year the signs are very positive for 2018.

I was devastated last night but this morning I'm not feeling so bad.

Eisenhuth, Naiqama, Nofoaluma, Watene-Zelezniak, Liddle were our best imo but many could get a mention. Grant should have got more minutes, he has really come good the past few weeks. I think we should re-sign him.
Grant was injured last night Mac, hence why he only played 30 minutes. Had ice on his hammy after the game.

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

Post by cktiger » Sun 18 Jun, 2017 1:08 pm

Harvey wrote:
Sun 18 Jun, 2017 10:45 am
The stats don't pick up blokes like Sue & Grant where blokes run straight past them because they are too slow or have given up chasing, or where they hold on while being dragged 15 metres by the opposition players.
You missed the worst offender... Lovett.
How many times does he miss a tackle and give up or - on the other hand if the ball goes the opposite direction he stands around like a log without following the play?
I keep trying to see any positives in him being in first grade but they just don't present themselves.

User avatar
MacDougall
Member
Member
Posts: 7920
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 4:03 am
Location: Brisbane, QLD

Post by MacDougall » Sun 18 Jun, 2017 1:54 pm

willow wrote:
Sun 18 Jun, 2017 12:57 pm
MacDougall wrote:
Sun 18 Jun, 2017 10:25 am
The thing is, is that even with them having 5 players out vs. our 2 out. We still weren't as good a side on paper. We had a far more inexperienced team. Our roster is just plain woeful. And this is most likely because we have nearly $1,000,000 playing for other teams.

We played better than them, deserved to win. I think every one of our players performed admirably. I cannot really fault anyone in particular for efforts outside of moments. Clearly had them playing well. It just sucks they weren't rewarded for it.

I thought Naiqama was exceptional at fullback. I didn't feel like we missed Tedesco at all out there which was a massive surprise. All the young guys stood up. Given we'll be having our pick of them mixed with some actual talent coming in next year the signs are very positive for 2018.

I was devastated last night but this morning I'm not feeling so bad.

Eisenhuth, Naiqama, Nofoaluma, Watene-Zelezniak, Liddle were our best imo but many could get a mention. Grant should have got more minutes, he has really come good the past few weeks. I think we should re-sign him.
Grant was injured last night Mac, hence why he only played 30 minutes. Had ice on his hammy after the game.
Ah that explains that. Hope he is alright for next week.


ricksen
Member
Member
Posts: 1840
Joined: Fri 17 Jul, 2015 9:10 pm

Post by ricksen » Sun 18 Jun, 2017 2:11 pm

We had more than two out - Woods and Ted at Origin obviously, but both starting back rowers (Lawrence and Aloiai) were out injured, as well as Idris.

tig_prmz
Member
Member
Posts: 7948
Joined: Sat 03 Oct, 2009 10:32 pm

Post by tig_prmz » Sun 18 Jun, 2017 2:55 pm

MacDougall wrote:
Sun 18 Jun, 2017 10:25 am
The thing is, is that even with them having 5 players out vs. our 2 out.

We played better than them, deserved to win.
i dont think it's as simple as 5 vs 2. They had to replace those 5 players and their 5 depth players probably outshone most of ours. Those 5 players are the best in their position. This was a team that had Maloney, Fifita, Bird, Gragam and Holmes out.

It's debatable whether we played better. It was 12-5 line breaks against us. Penalties about 12-5 for us as well. We had all the help but Sharks depth players were just hungrier and better than us and THAT hurts. So idk if we deserved to win, but the Sharks were 10x better than us.
My Round 1 Team 2018

1. lolo 2. noffa 3. suli 4. milne 5. fonua
6. reynolds 7. brooks
8. packer 9. ET 10. Twal
11. McQuen 12. Lawrence 13. Eiso
14. Matulino 15. McIllwrick 16. Sue 17. Aloiai
18. Marsters 19. Benji 20. Grant 21. K Naiqama
Next: Liddle, MCK, Felise, MWZ, Thompson, Rochow, Gamble

User avatar
MacDougall
Member
Member
Posts: 7920
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 4:03 am
Location: Brisbane, QLD

Post by MacDougall » Sun 18 Jun, 2017 9:24 pm

tig_prmz wrote:
Sun 18 Jun, 2017 2:55 pm
MacDougall wrote:
Sun 18 Jun, 2017 10:25 am
The thing is, is that even with them having 5 players out vs. our 2 out.

We played better than them, deserved to win.
i dont think it's as simple as 5 vs 2. They had to replace those 5 players and their 5 depth players probably outshone most of ours. Those 5 players are the best in their position. This was a team that had Maloney, Fifita, Bird, Gragam and Holmes out.

It's debatable whether we played better. It was 12-5 line breaks against us. Penalties about 12-5 for us as well. We had all the help but Sharks depth players were just hungrier and better than us and THAT hurts. So idk if we deserved to win, but the Sharks were 10x better than us.
If you want to split hairs over rosterish type arguments you can argue that we had our highest paid player (Farah), a backrower (Sironen), another backrower (Lawrence), another backrower (Aloiai) and then Tedesco and Woods out.

Then there is the fact they have a better roster than us anyway (they are the premiers).

I don't think they were better than us at all. We played better. Better completions, better discipline, better structure. They beat us in moments as I said. The moments resulted in the line breaks, which you are leaning on to make your case. 10x better than us pleeease. If it makes you feel better to rag on our reggies then whatever.

Their depth players were the likes of Tagataese, Beale, Mortimer, Capewell etc. We had rookies. They had seasoned players as depth.

tig_prmz
Member
Member
Posts: 7948
Joined: Sat 03 Oct, 2009 10:32 pm

Post by tig_prmz » Sun 18 Jun, 2017 11:28 pm

MacDougall wrote:
Sun 18 Jun, 2017 9:24 pm
tig_prmz wrote:
Sun 18 Jun, 2017 2:55 pm
MacDougall wrote:
Sun 18 Jun, 2017 10:25 am
The thing is, is that even with them having 5 players out vs. our 2 out.

We played better than them, deserved to win.
i dont think it's as simple as 5 vs 2. They had to replace those 5 players and their 5 depth players probably outshone most of ours. Those 5 players are the best in their position. This was a team that had Maloney, Fifita, Bird, Gragam and Holmes out.

It's debatable whether we played better. It was 12-5 line breaks against us. Penalties about 12-5 for us as well. We had all the help but Sharks depth players were just hungrier and better than us and THAT hurts. So idk if we deserved to win, but the Sharks were 10x better than us.
If you want to split hairs over rosterish type arguments you can argue that we had our highest paid player (Farah), a backrower (Sironen), another backrower (Lawrence), another backrower (Aloiai) and then Tedesco and Woods out.

Then there is the fact they have a better roster than us anyway (they are the premiers).

I don't think they were better than us at all. We played better. Better completions, better discipline, better structure. They beat us in moments as I said. The moments resulted in the line breaks, which you are leaning on to make your case. 10x better than us pleeease. If it makes you feel better to rag on our reggies then whatever.

Their depth players were the likes of Tagataese, Beale, Mortimer, Capewell etc. We had rookies. They had seasoned players as depth.
apologies, i missed the "moments" bit and agree with you partially about it.

however, point still stands. The sharks were much better than us. We had better discipline, but we had no structure. There was no threat about us at all. All our points came off the back of field position which were on the back of penalties (half luck, half sharks' indiscipline). We didn't deserve to win simply coz we played crap- call it inexperience, bad structure, lack of game plan, whatever; the fact that sharks played their worst game of the season has nothing to do with it.

I'm not ragging on all the players and my arguement isn't based on the roster either.
My Round 1 Team 2018

1. lolo 2. noffa 3. suli 4. milne 5. fonua
6. reynolds 7. brooks
8. packer 9. ET 10. Twal
11. McQuen 12. Lawrence 13. Eiso
14. Matulino 15. McIllwrick 16. Sue 17. Aloiai
18. Marsters 19. Benji 20. Grant 21. K Naiqama
Next: Liddle, MCK, Felise, MWZ, Thompson, Rochow, Gamble

larrycorowa
Member
Member
Posts: 2015
Joined: Fri 19 Feb, 2010 1:47 pm

Post by larrycorowa » Mon 19 Jun, 2017 9:36 am

There are some ridiculous comments on here with regards to woods. If he plays we win, we just lacked some experienced heads in crucial moments. The most pleasing aspect is that some of our younger brigade were out better players. Liddle and the two young back rowers were great.

Byron Bay Fan
Member
Member
Posts: 4187
Joined: Sat 17 Oct, 2015 2:14 pm

Post by Byron Bay Fan » Mon 19 Jun, 2017 9:48 am

larrycorowa wrote:
Mon 19 Jun, 2017 9:36 am
There are some ridiculous comments on here with regards to woods. If he plays we win, we just lacked some experienced heads in crucial moments. The most pleasing aspect is that some of our younger brigade were out better players. Liddle and the two young back rowers were great.
Credit where credit is due - Liddle is coming on. Next he has learn beautiful grubbers and field goals.
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)

Russell
Member
Member
Posts: 4332
Joined: Sat 10 Dec, 2011 6:46 pm

Post by Russell » Mon 19 Jun, 2017 10:17 am

tig_prmz wrote:
Sun 18 Jun, 2017 11:28 pm
MacDougall wrote:
Sun 18 Jun, 2017 9:24 pm
tig_prmz wrote:
Sun 18 Jun, 2017 2:55 pm
MacDougall wrote:
Sun 18 Jun, 2017 10:25 am
The thing is, is that even with them having 5 players out vs. our 2 out.

We played better than them, deserved to win.
i dont think it's as simple as 5 vs 2. They had to replace those 5 players and their 5 depth players probably outshone most of ours. Those 5 players are the best in their position. This was a team that had Maloney, Fifita, Bird, Gragam and Holmes out.

It's debatable whether we played better. It was 12-5 line breaks against us. Penalties about 12-5 for us as well. We had all the help but Sharks depth players were just hungrier and better than us and THAT hurts. So idk if we deserved to win, but the Sharks were 10x better than us.
If you want to split hairs over rosterish type arguments you can argue that we had our highest paid player (Farah), a backrower (Sironen), another backrower (Lawrence), another backrower (Aloiai) and then Tedesco and Woods out.

Then there is the fact they have a better roster than us anyway (they are the premiers).

I don't think they were better than us at all. We played better. Better completions, better discipline, better structure. They beat us in moments as I said. The moments resulted in the line breaks, which you are leaning on to make your case. 10x better than us pleeease. If it makes you feel better to rag on our reggies then whatever.

Their depth players were the likes of Tagataese, Beale, Mortimer, Capewell etc. We had rookies. They had seasoned players as depth.
apologies, i missed the "moments" bit and agree with you partially about it.

however, point still stands. The sharks were much better than us. We had better discipline, but we had no structure. There was no threat about us at all. All our points came off the back of field position which were on the back of penalties (half luck, half sharks' indiscipline). We didn't deserve to win simply coz we played crap- call it inexperience, bad structure, lack of game plan, whatever; the fact that sharks played their worst game of the season has nothing to do with it.

I'm not ragging on all the players and my arguement isn't based on the roster either.
Sounds like you are raggin on players and the team to me.

As stryker mentioned they had 3 players that have played as many games as our whole team. They put in a 100% effort and due to a couple of guys with inexperience they faltered in the last few minutes. What the hell do you expect? A state of origin performance against the reining premiers from a team of nobodys with very little experience. You will never be satisfied by the way you go on.

10 x better than us - I didn't think the score was 220 to 22. You do exaggerate.

Credit where credit is due - and don't come back with the stupid line "You are just accepting mediocrity"

larrycorowa
Member
Member
Posts: 2015
Joined: Fri 19 Feb, 2010 1:47 pm

Post by larrycorowa » Mon 19 Jun, 2017 10:18 am

Everyone was ragging on liddle last week....

jadtiger
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 2760
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 8:12 am
Location: bayview

Post by jadtiger » Mon 19 Jun, 2017 10:22 am

larrycorowa wrote:
Mon 19 Jun, 2017 9:36 am
There are some ridiculous comments on here with regards to woods. If he plays we win, we just lacked some experienced heads in crucial moments. The most pleasing aspect is that some of our younger brigade were out better players. Liddle and the two young back rowers were great.
Agree 100% you have to put things in perspective

Post Reply