terrible bench selection + moltzen at fullback

ImageImageImage
Kickoff:
Venue: Skilled Park, Robina
Telecast:
fergiefurr
Member
Member
Posts: 2900
Joined: Tue 14 Jul, 2009 1:18 pm

terrible bench selection + moltzen at fullback

Post by fergiefurr » Fri 15 Apr, 2011 11:41 pm

cost us the game.

yes we played disgusting and dumb which sheens cant control. but he can control what he sends out there and where he plays people.

moltzen at fullback was what it always is, a complete disaster, the people on here that even mildly suggest him there should hopefully never EVER suggest it again. he is scared of the ball and his positoning is terrible. then in attack he is non existent.

to make matters worse we have TWO FULLBACKS IN THE SEVENTEEN!!!!! brown was great guns for us all last year and sean meaney is a million times better fullback then moltzen.

then our bench, what a joke. one prop, one second rower, the smallest second rower in the world and a fullback.

did anybody notice what both grand final sides has on their bench last years? FOUR PROPS/SECONDROWERS!!!!!!! a coincidence?? i think not

after 30 minutes i turned to my mates and told him 'we'll get run over in the forwards late' and low and behold we did. to make matters worse the second rower turned prop we used gets injured early in the second half. unavoidable but usually easy enough to deal with...if you have a NORMAL BENCH

i know half of the forum on here has undying love for sheens and he can do no wrong in their eyes. yes i am critical of him however i didnt blame him for the dogs lose and i didnt blame him for the roosters loss.

however in this instance he has to take a HUGE amount of the blame. his selections were an absolute joke and cost us dearly.


User avatar
hybrid_tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 4564
Joined: Sat 11 Jul, 2009 10:49 am
Location: Latchem Robinson Stand

Post by hybrid_tiger » Sat 16 Apr, 2011 12:40 am

Spot on as usual.

southerntiger
Member
Member
Posts: 4392
Joined: Sun 12 Jul, 2009 6:24 pm
Location: Sydney

Post by southerntiger » Sat 16 Apr, 2011 12:46 am

Fergie apart from the penultimate paragraph, one if your few posts i wholeheartedly agree with.


Posted using RoarFEED

happy tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 40470
Joined: Sun 27 Feb, 2011 4:49 pm

Post by happy tiger » Sat 16 Apr, 2011 12:47 am

hybrid_tiger wrote:Spot on as usual.
Totally agree x3 What has Woods done wrong Honestly

User avatar
NJLM78
Member
Member
Posts: 2708
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 1:51 pm

Post by NJLM78 » Sat 16 Apr, 2011 1:05 am

happy tiger wrote:
hybrid_tiger wrote:Spot on as usual.
Totally agree x3 What has Woods done wrong Honestly

He would be one of the first blokes I'd pick for the first grade side.


User avatar
TuiTui
Member
Member
Posts: 307
Joined: Thu 03 Mar, 2011 7:19 pm

Post by TuiTui » Sat 16 Apr, 2011 1:09 am

yeah why was Woods not in the 17???
Quit work, be a Robot.

southerntiger
Member
Member
Posts: 4392
Joined: Sun 12 Jul, 2009 6:24 pm
Location: Sydney

Post by southerntiger » Sat 16 Apr, 2011 1:12 am

I would assume it has something to do with Tim bringing him along slowly. Tonight was not the right night to look a the bigger picture. We needed some boppers.


Posted using RoarFEED

matty119
Member
Member
Posts: 168
Joined: Sat 11 Jul, 2009 10:47 am

Post by matty119 » Sat 16 Apr, 2011 11:42 am

From what I heard Woods wasn't fit, hence why he didn't play 20s either. To be honest, we didn't have many other experienced and/or match fit players of that size. Moors is really the only one that fits the bill, but seeing him last week for BRET, he isn't fit enough yet


Posted using RoarFEED

angeman
Member
Member
Posts: 477
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 7:14 am

Post by angeman » Sat 16 Apr, 2011 12:38 pm

matty 119 is right. woods had a virus and moors isn't deemed match fit.

moltzen at fullback was always the wrong call though...

tiger tigers
Member
Member
Posts: 981
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 6:49 am

Post by tiger tigers » Sat 16 Apr, 2011 1:28 pm

moors is a would be if he could be .....if he is the answer to all our prayers then the season is over .....for 5 or more years he was going to be the next big thing .....whats with all the silence on adam blair .. did the done deal fall through ?

User avatar
smeghead
Site Moderator
Site Moderator
Posts: 9451
Joined: Fri 10 Jul, 2009 11:56 pm

Post by smeghead » Sat 16 Apr, 2011 1:39 pm

Take out the positional play and timidness with the ball bouncing the biggest pain of Moltzen is his lack of ruck running.

McKinnon and Meaney when he was on last night constantly trail the ruck and create doubt and not allow defenders to gang tackle. Moltzen tried it once and went to scratching his bollocks wanting to play half. His terrible grubber took the foot off the Titans throat as well early.

I like Miller but he should be in the 20's or on the bench because we need fluidity of structure.

The entire point of the new State Cup structure was to bring in like for liek and the minute he strayed from that we play like a busted through fatigue and poor selection
Image

18thman
Member
Member
Posts: 101
Joined: Fri 18 Feb, 2011 8:01 pm

Post by 18thman » Sat 16 Apr, 2011 1:54 pm

Agree Fergie.

When clubs start bragging about the depth in the squad it usually bites them on the bum very quickly. This has been the case with us having to use the likes of Latu Meaney Daniella and Flanagan none of which are up to NRL standard. The exceptions are Miller- a great prospect, but I suspect Sheens would have preferred to bring him on a bit slower- Brown of course, and Al Schirnack-despite his lack of size I believe has been one of our most consistent performers. Utai has performed beyond my expectations but conversely Moltzen has been well below and I must agree fullback is not his go.
May be time to give the likes of Mullaney and Clarke a crack at the big time....couldn't be any worse than the guys used so far!

magpie mania
Member
Member
Posts: 1106
Joined: Fri 16 Oct, 2009 7:40 pm

Post by magpie mania » Sat 16 Apr, 2011 2:05 pm

fergiefurr wrote:cost us the game.

yes we played disgusting and dumb which sheens cant control. but he can control what he sends out there and where he plays people.

moltzen at fullback was what it always is, a complete disaster, the people on here that even mildly suggest him there should hopefully never EVER suggest it again. he is scared of the ball and his positoning is terrible. then in attack he is non existent.

to make matters worse we have TWO FULLBACKS IN THE SEVENTEEN!!!!! brown was great guns for us all last year and sean meaney is a million times better fullback then moltzen.

then our bench, what a joke. one prop, one second rower, the smallest second rower in the world and a fullback.

did anybody notice what both grand final sides has on their bench last years? FOUR PROPS/SECONDROWERS!!!!!!! a coincidence?? i think not

after 30 minutes i turned to my mates and told him 'we'll get run over in the forwards late' and low and behold we did. to make matters worse the second rower turned prop we used gets injured early in the second half. unavoidable but usually easy enough to deal with...if you have a NORMAL BENCH

i know half of the forum on here has undying love for sheens and he can do no wrong in their eyes. yes i am critical of him however i didnt blame him for the dogs lose and i didnt blame him for the roosters loss.

however in this instance he has to take a HUGE amount of the blame. his selections were an absolute joke and cost us dearly.
hybrid_tiger wrote:Spot on as usual.

balmain bugs been saying the same thing for 3 weeks and everyone shouts him down and calls him an idiot someone else says it and there a genius.Unbelievable.

User avatar
Cultured Bogan
Member
Member
Posts: 17824
Joined: Tue 15 Sep, 2009 11:20 pm
Location: Blue Mountains

Post by Cultured Bogan » Sat 16 Apr, 2011 3:24 pm

magpie mania wrote:
fergiefurr wrote:cost us the game.

yes we played disgusting and dumb which sheens cant control. but he can control what he sends out there and where he plays people.

moltzen at fullback was what it always is, a complete disaster, the people on here that even mildly suggest him there should hopefully never EVER suggest it again. he is scared of the ball and his positoning is terrible. then in attack he is non existent.

to make matters worse we have TWO FULLBACKS IN THE SEVENTEEN!!!!! brown was great guns for us all last year and sean meaney is a million times better fullback then moltzen.

then our bench, what a joke. one prop, one second rower, the smallest second rower in the world and a fullback.

did anybody notice what both grand final sides has on their bench last years? FOUR PROPS/SECONDROWERS!!!!!!! a coincidence?? i think not

after 30 minutes i turned to my mates and told him 'we'll get run over in the forwards late' and low and behold we did. to make matters worse the second rower turned prop we used gets injured early in the second half. unavoidable but usually easy enough to deal with...if you have a NORMAL BENCH

i know half of the forum on here has undying love for sheens and he can do no wrong in their eyes. yes i am critical of him however i didnt blame him for the dogs lose and i didnt blame him for the roosters loss.

however in this instance he has to take a HUGE amount of the blame. his selections were an absolute joke and cost us dearly.
hybrid_tiger wrote:Spot on as usual.

balmain bugs been saying the same thing for 3 weeks and everyone shouts him down and calls him an idiot someone else says it and there a genius.Unbelievable.
That's because Bug has an agenda against Sheens. Most people can look at what he does objectively. As far as the Bug is concerned, when things go wrong, it's Sheens fault, when things go right, it's in spite of Sheens. How many of you were cursing Sheens or the team when we were up 14 zip at the 11th minute? They went to pieces in a matter of minutes and it became a war of attrition until we gave in.

Sheens picked a light bench, that had an impact on the outcome of the game however it was only a small piece of the puzzle. The whole team underperformed with the exception of Heighington and Utai. Moltzen was also another problem but not the sole problem that led to the loss.

Poor discipline first and foremost lost us that game. Stupid errors at critical parts of the game cost us dearly. Light benches, poor refereeing and a poor fullback absolve the most serious concern which was poor ball security and cheap penalties.
It's not cruelty to animals if you inject enough amphetamines.

Cuando llegue el día, y estoy parado a las puertas del cielo, será Dios pidiendo mi perdón...

User avatar
Geo.
Member
Member
Posts: 29173
Joined: Fri 10 Jul, 2009 10:55 pm
Location: Perugia Italy..

Post by Geo. » Sat 16 Apr, 2011 3:26 pm

Cultured Bogan wrote:That's because Bug has an agenda against Sheens. Most people can look at what he does objectively. When things go wrong, it's Sheens fault, when things go right, it's in spite of Sheens.

Sheens picked a light bench, that had an impact on the outcome of the game however it was only a small piece of the puzzle. The whole team underperformed with the exception of Heighington and Utai. Moltzen was also another problem but not the sole problem that led to the loss.

Poor discipline first and foremost lost us that game. Stupid errors at critical parts of the game cost us dearly. Light benches, poor refereeing and a poor fullback absolve the most serious concern which was poor ball security and cheap penalties.
Well said CB....we loose Sheens..... We win In spite of Sheens...been that way for years
Ivan's Laws

1. You are either on the Bus or you are off..
2. The Star of the Team is the Team
3. Be the player your teammates want to play with..

happy tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 40470
Joined: Sun 27 Feb, 2011 4:49 pm

Post by happy tiger » Sat 16 Apr, 2011 3:35 pm

Geo. wrote:
Cultured Bogan wrote:That's because Bug has an agenda against Sheens. Most people can look at what he does objectively. When things go wrong, it's Sheens fault, when things go right, it's in spite of Sheens.

Sheens picked a light bench, that had an impact on the outcome of the game however it was only a small piece of the puzzle. The whole team underperformed with the exception of Heighington and Utai. Moltzen was also another problem but not the sole problem that led to the loss.

Poor discipline first and foremost lost us that game. Stupid errors at critical parts of the game cost us dearly. Light benches, poor refereeing and a poor fullback absolve the most serious concern which was poor ball security and cheap penalties.
Well said CB....we loose Sheens..... We win In spite of Sheens...been that way for years
One question Geo if Moltzen catches that bomb he let bounce do you think we win . My answer is yes we win and probably comfortably

User avatar
innsaneink
Member
Member
Posts: 28890
Joined: Fri 10 Jul, 2009 9:49 pm
Location: ...ahead of you....

Post by innsaneink » Sat 16 Apr, 2011 6:34 pm

happy tiger wrote: One question Geo if Moltzen catches that bomb he let bounce do you think we win . My answer is yes we win and probably comfortably
Why?

User avatar
Geo.
Member
Member
Posts: 29173
Joined: Fri 10 Jul, 2009 10:55 pm
Location: Perugia Italy..

Post by Geo. » Sat 16 Apr, 2011 7:23 pm

happy tiger wrote: One question Geo if Moltzen catches that bomb he let bounce do you think we win . My answer is yes we win and probably comfortably
I dont know if it would have made a Difference....I thought Zilmans second try was worse....very poor defense unorganised but that's what happens when your playing with a patched up team.....

I'm sure they will learn a lot from the loss and be a better team for it
Ivan's Laws

1. You are either on the Bus or you are off..
2. The Star of the Team is the Team
3. Be the player your teammates want to play with..

Post Reply