Fitness

ImageImageImage
Post Reply
User avatar
the third
Member
Member
Posts: 668
Joined: Wed 01 Sep, 2010 10:55 pm
Location: here and there

Fitness

Post by the third » Fri 08 Jun, 2012 10:26 pm

Tonight against the storm we were good, played well and to a good plan only problem for me was that in the last 15 we looked like we had very little in the tank. Seems to be a bit of work to do on fitness. A few weeks to
Fix that still.


Posted using RoarFEED 2012


paulo

Post by paulo » Fri 08 Jun, 2012 10:32 pm

Chris Lawrence seems very tentative ,not unfit but scared to stretch out with his dodgy hammy.

boonboon
Member
Member
Posts: 864
Joined: Sun 12 Jul, 2009 7:14 pm

Post by boonboon » Fri 08 Jun, 2012 10:35 pm

From a fitness point of view though need to take into account playing 2 games in a row away from home and in the pooring rain which anyone who has played knows takes a lot more out of you then dry weather footy. Lawrence is a different story what ever is wrong with him I d ont know but he has lost his speed massively he would have scored at least once tonight but he just had no pace compared to other years

Knuckles
Member
Member
Posts: 2773
Joined: Wed 15 Jul, 2009 10:11 am

Post by Knuckles » Fri 08 Jun, 2012 10:37 pm

There is nothing wrong with the Storm forward pack. Credit to them but it must be mentioned the conditions were more favorable to them than us.

User avatar
Flippedy
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 7913
Joined: Mon 19 Oct, 2009 10:58 pm
Location: Central Coast NSW

Post by Flippedy » Fri 08 Jun, 2012 10:44 pm

There maybe some players carrying a few injuries, but I actually think we are very fit, endurance wise. We had barely any decent ball for most of the second half and they threw everything at us. In the end they could only manage one try which was very dodgy to say the least. This after a whole game, also in the rain, holding the opposition to zero.
Sooner or later, next year has to be this year - Ricksen


Snake
Member
Member
Posts: 4347
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 5:37 pm

Post by Snake » Fri 08 Jun, 2012 10:47 pm

2 x heavy tracks don't help but this will be a blessing in a few weeks as this aslo works up the fitness level when you get a dry track.

claws
Member
Member
Posts: 231
Joined: Wed 28 Oct, 2009 11:42 am

Post by claws » Fri 08 Jun, 2012 10:48 pm

Personally, I don't think Lawrence has a too many problems with speed or stretching out. He is still powering onto the ball! I believe, the defense from most teams these days is outstanding and their reads are getting better as well. He didn't seem to have too many problems last week against the raiders. His defense tonight was also effective. Go Weststigers!

tigerlogic
Member
Member
Posts: 954
Joined: Sun 26 Jun, 2011 1:23 pm

Post by tigerlogic » Fri 08 Jun, 2012 10:49 pm

boonboon wrote:From a fitness point of view though need to take into account playing 2 games in a row away from home and in the pooring rain which anyone who has played knows takes a lot more out of you then dry weather footy. Lawrence is a different story what ever is wrong with him I d ont know but he has lost his speed massively he would have scored at least once tonight but he just had no pace compared to other years
Don't think it's that he has lost pace just think he is too willing to pass the ball because he hasn't got the confidence in his hammy yet


Posted using RoarFEED 2012

Alf Duguid
Member
Member
Posts: 1009
Joined: Fri 14 May, 2010 10:07 am

Post by Alf Duguid » Fri 08 Jun, 2012 10:49 pm

Playing in the rain is a great leveller. Any one would struggle in those conditions (apart from Trevor Cogger)


Posted using RoarFEED 2012

InBenjiWeTrust
Member
Member
Posts: 1741
Joined: Mon 12 Mar, 2012 2:59 pm

Post by InBenjiWeTrust » Fri 08 Jun, 2012 10:50 pm

Flippedy wrote:There maybe some players carrying a few injuries, but I actually think we are very fit, endurance wise. We had barely any decent ball for most of the second half and they threw everything at us. In the end they could only manage one try which was very dodgy to say the least. This after a whole game, also in the rain, holding the opposition to zero.
x2

Except one bad miss by Fulton, and few missed tackles by Benji, Tigers defence was very good. That try really was not. Blair was superb in defence.

User avatar
willow
Member
Member
Posts: 30096
Joined: Fri 10 Jul, 2009 9:28 pm
Location: Perth

Post by willow » Fri 08 Jun, 2012 10:51 pm

Physically it was a difficult game, plus the Storm had the majority of possession for the entire game, particularly in the second half. Overall the Tigers had 47% possession, but had an excellent completion rate.

And here's another interesting stat, this was the first time Melbourne have been beaten on a Friday night in Melbourne in 11 years.

User avatar
Flippedy
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 7913
Joined: Mon 19 Oct, 2009 10:58 pm
Location: Central Coast NSW

Post by Flippedy » Fri 08 Jun, 2012 10:53 pm

willow wrote:Physically it was a difficult game, plus the Storm had the majority of possession for the entire game, particularly in the second half. Overall the Tigers had 47% possession, but had an excellent completion rate.

And here's another interesting stat, this was the first time Melbourne have been beaten on a Friday night in Melbourne in 11 years.
History makers! :D
Sooner or later, next year has to be this year - Ricksen

BALMAINIAC
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun 15 Apr, 2012 9:34 pm

Post by BALMAINIAC » Fri 08 Jun, 2012 10:53 pm

I think we also played with only 16 - I never saw Reddy. Also Bell didn't seem to be on for long and we used 3 interchanges on hookers. Add to that the conditions and I think they went ok


Posted using RoarFEED 2012

cochise
Member
Member
Posts: 484
Joined: Sun 12 Feb, 2012 10:42 pm

Post by cochise » Fri 08 Jun, 2012 10:53 pm

I think our fitness has improved noticeably during the season. At the start of the year, while we were losing, we seemed to be playing in slow motion and visably exhuasted at the end of matches. There has been a large improvement.

User avatar
innsaneink
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 25578
Joined: Fri 10 Jul, 2009 9:49 pm
Location: ...ahead of you....

Post by innsaneink » Fri 08 Jun, 2012 10:57 pm

16 v 17

User avatar
underdog
Member
Member
Posts: 4773
Joined: Tue 27 Apr, 2010 5:25 pm
Location: Gold Coast

Post by underdog » Fri 08 Jun, 2012 11:05 pm

innsaneink wrote:16 v 17

*16 v 20

You forgot the refs.
Image

slacko
Member
Member
Posts: 328
Joined: Thu 16 Jun, 2011 7:44 pm
Location: Leumeah

Post by slacko » Sat 09 Jun, 2012 8:37 am

I hate wasting interchanges on hookers. Hookers need to be 80 minutes players.


Posted using RoarFEED 2012
eternal optimist.

Post Reply
cron