We Are Not on the Bulldogs Level......Yet....

User avatar
stevied
Member
Member
Posts: 1017
Joined: Sun 10 Jul, 2011 10:45 am

We Are Not on the Bulldogs Level......Yet....

Post by stevied » Sun 10 Jul, 2016 2:12 am

It was another gutsy performance from our boys last night. They scrambled well and kept the score close, despite possession going heavily against them in the second half. But the difference wasn't about effort, it was about the overall level of class. Put simply, we are not on the Bulldogs level at the moment. They are bigger and stronger right across the park, they have a better organized, more physical defense and they have the edge in experience and skill in the forwards and backs. Put that altogether and we did extremely well to be as competitive as we were against a side in red hot form. If we are going to achieve top Top Four, or even, Top Eight status we definitely need to improve our defense, our kicking game and our ball control. You can single out one or two poor performers on the night and point to our missing players, especially Tedesco, but at the moment the Bulldogs are a better team. I'm not sure if people agree, but I also think we played too conservatively for much of the time in the second half. One out stuff through the middle is not going to cut it against the huge Bulldogs pack. When we showed enterprise, we troubled Canterbury. Examples were the quick movement wide for the JAC try and cross field kick by Simona which was botched by Rankin. So, therefore, our strategy was inferior.


User avatar
Winnipeg
Member
Member
Posts: 1152
Joined: Fri 15 Jan, 2010 6:57 pm

Post by Winnipeg » Sun 10 Jul, 2016 4:43 am

I hate to say it but we are pretty far from the Dogs' level...

Not sure about anyone else but for me you could tell we were gone from about the 50th minute... we didn't look like scoring another point, our forwards were pushing sh.. up hill, it was really all she wrote from then on. I think we can really beat most teams on our day, but not yet at this stage can we beat any team on any day.

The Dogs have grinded down plenty of teams this year and we were just another one in that respect

It's going to take some effort for us to make the 8 this year, but it's still a possibility. But we arent quite up there with the top teams yet

maxxy86
Member
Member
Posts: 1644
Joined: Fri 04 Mar, 2011 11:54 am

Post by maxxy86 » Sun 10 Jul, 2016 6:20 am

No we're not but its games like these that we were within range of winning. At 22-16 and we make a break down the dogs right edge on what the 2nd or 3rd. This is where the grind co es into play and field position becomes gold. In hindsight Simona IMO should have taken the tackle.
Now before the Rankin bashers say anything, yes he had every right to score that try. However on a dry Sat/Sun afternoon is where you try that play. We were in Front.... Not behind.
Look I was happy with the effort from our boys but still leave that game disappointed.
Well its nearly time to have a 'CRACK'....Go you :sign:

GoldXR50Leroy
Member
Member
Posts: 1857
Joined: Tue 31 May, 2011 3:36 pm

Post by GoldXR50Leroy » Sun 10 Jul, 2016 8:37 am

We need some big forwards like the Dogs, they've got a special nursery for big units, with no ball in the second half & our players driven back in tackles & rarely bending the line I thought the backs should have thrown it around, crikey you could have covered the team with a blanket they were that bunched.

Russell
Member
Member
Posts: 4966
Joined: Sat 10 Dec, 2011 6:46 pm

Post by Russell » Sun 10 Jul, 2016 9:35 am

maxxy86 wrote:No we're not but its games like these that we were within range of winning. At 22-16 and we make a break down the dogs right edge on what the 2nd or 3rd. This is where the grind co es into play and field position becomes gold. In hindsight Simona IMO should have taken the tackle.
Now before the Rankin bashers say anything, yes he had every right to score that try. However on a dry Sat/Sun afternoon is where you try that play. We were in Front.... Not behind.
Look I was happy with the effort from our boys but still leave that game disappointed.
Agree Maxxy - well said (would have given you a positive rep except it has disappeared again).

Just part of a slow process (said my bit in "Congratulations Tigers" thread) but I was also not disappointed in the effort.


User avatar
notarealtiger
Member
Member
Posts: 137
Joined: Wed 12 Aug, 2015 7:24 pm

Post by notarealtiger » Sun 10 Jul, 2016 9:50 am

If Simona took the tackle he might've gotten pushed over the sideline so kicking was the right option. There was no pressure on Rankin except from another Tiger backing up in support so really no reason to not catch that, it practically bounced into his hands.

Byron Bay Fan
Member
Member
Posts: 4832
Joined: Sat 17 Oct, 2015 2:14 pm

Post by Byron Bay Fan » Sun 10 Jul, 2016 9:56 am

my footie mate said Jankin missed bouncing ball because of the way he grabbed at the ball, there is like a more delicate knack of doing it
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)

Bones
Member
Member
Posts: 539
Joined: Wed 02 Mar, 2011 5:30 pm

Post by Bones » Sun 10 Jul, 2016 10:07 am

I actually thought the ball control was very good. We made out first error about 10 minutes into the second half.

Rankin dropping that ball was huge. He snatched at it, i don't think he realised how much time he had. If we score there i think we win.

Our defence is still a massive issue. The dogs blew a few chances that could have made it worse and we just have a general lack of organisation. I was watching the game with a dogs fan and he commented on how we looked like we were defending 2 men short. We may have been compressing to combat the big forwards but when you play compressed you have to slide and we still tried to play a rush defence.

No knocking the effort though, and losing Sue for the first half hurt the forward rotation.

Tigermama
Member
Member
Posts: 4351
Joined: Sat 14 Jun, 2014 12:33 am

Post by Tigermama » Sun 10 Jul, 2016 10:18 am

GoldXR50Leroy wrote:We need some big forwards like the Dogs, they've got a special nursery for big units, with no ball in the second half & our players driven back in tackles & rarely bending the line I thought the backs should have thrown it around, crikey you could have covered the team with a blanket they were that bunched.
I wonder if trying to go through the middle at that time was the coaches instructions, or just bad decision making from our halves. I lean towards the latter.

User avatar
Wagga Tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 740
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 7:22 pm

Post by Wagga Tiger » Sun 10 Jul, 2016 10:21 am

Bones wrote: I was watching the game with a dogs fan and he commented on how we looked like we were defending 2 men short. We may have been compressing to combat the big forwards but when you play compressed you have to slide and we still tried to play a rush defence.
This for me is our problem, I noticed it against the Panthers last week as well every time teams go to our right we are outnumbered. They need to slide like every other team but they don't and Kev and Noffa have to rush up and try and shut things down which doesn't always work. Everyone is blaming those two but they are outnumbered every time, the problem is closer to the middle not the edge.

User avatar
innsaneink
Member
Member
Posts: 28946
Joined: Fri 10 Jul, 2009 9:49 pm
Location: ...ahead of you....

Post by innsaneink » Sun 10 Jul, 2016 10:25 am

Winnipeg wrote:I hate to say it but we are pretty far from the Dogs' level...

Not sure about anyone else but for me you could tell we were gone from about the 50th minute... we didn't look like scoring another point, our forwards were pushing sh.. up hill, it was really all she wrote from then on
. I think we can really beat most teams on our day, but not yet at this stage can we beat any team on any day.

The Dogs have grinded down plenty of teams this year and we were just another one in that respect

It's going to take some effort for us to make the 8 this year, but it's still a possibility. But we arent quite up there with the top teams yet
Yep
spot on
Fatigue... Mentally an physically
There was a set with about 6 minutes to go we just roles up field one out for 5 takes as if we were in front... Mentally exhausted imo

User avatar
innsaneink
Member
Member
Posts: 28946
Joined: Fri 10 Jul, 2009 9:49 pm
Location: ...ahead of you....

Post by innsaneink » Sun 10 Jul, 2016 10:27 am

Tigermama wrote:
GoldXR50Leroy wrote:We need some big forwards like the Dogs, they've got a special nursery for big units, with no ball in the second half & our players driven back in tackles & rarely bending the line I thought the backs should have thrown it around, crikey you could have covered the team with a blanket they were that bunched.
I wonder if trying to go through the middle at that time was the coaches instructions, or just bad decision making from our halves. I lean towards the latter.
When teams bunch up ...go one out.. that's fatigue.. There's little thought and little talk...

happy tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 40513
Joined: Sun 27 Feb, 2011 4:49 pm

Post by happy tiger » Sun 10 Jul, 2016 10:31 am

Until we size up we will never be on the Bulldogs ,Sharks ,Cowboys or Roosters level

We get manhandled both in attack and defence and will always struggle in the last 20 minutes when fatigue sets in

We need to play a compressed line to try and cope and the get dominated out wide

Not that I mind that , would rather have teams scoring in the corners in those situations than scoring near the post

The missed kick last night from Mbye was valuable for a long time

happy tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 40513
Joined: Sun 27 Feb, 2011 4:49 pm

Post by happy tiger » Sun 10 Jul, 2016 10:34 am

It would be interesting across the board to see how much we are outweighed by the Dogs ,Roosters ,Cowboys and Sharks as a 17 man side

In some cases it could be close to a 100-150 kg , basically an extra prop

That hurts in my opinion

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

Post by stevetiger » Sun 10 Jul, 2016 1:35 pm

I basically agree. We are close to the Bulldogs team though and they are a really good team.

I think last night showed how we might be a little bit better with someone like Taupau still in the team. We bring on Lovett who works hard and is pretty good but the dogs bring on Kasianao and Williams. I think a dominant forward would make a difference. I also think we need to look at our options on JAC's wing. JAC showed what a player like that can do.

happy tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 40513
Joined: Sun 27 Feb, 2011 4:49 pm

Post by happy tiger » Sun 10 Jul, 2016 4:10 pm

stevetiger wrote:I basically agree. We are close to the Bulldogs team though and they are a really good team.

I think last night showed how we might be a little bit better with someone like Taupau still in the team. We bring on Lovett who works hard and is pretty good but the dogs bring on Kasianao and Williams. I think a dominant forward would make a difference. I also think we need to look at our options on JAC's wing. JAC showed what a player like that can do.
JAC got dominated with every hit up , even with an 80-85 metre try he still couldn't make more yards than Nofoaluma

Do you honestly think that JAC will score tries like that every week ??

It was a good try don't get me wrong at all , but you might score two tries like that a season if your lucky

Telltails
Member
Member
Posts: 2656
Joined: Fri 18 Apr, 2014 3:24 pm

Post by Telltails » Mon 11 Jul, 2016 9:34 am

happy tiger wrote:It would be interesting across the board to see how much we are outweighed by the Dogs ,Roosters ,Cowboys and Sharks as a 17 man side

In some cases it could be close to a 100-150 kg , basically an extra prop

That hurts in my opinion
And the Raiders.....the games we have lost badly have been due to being overpowered. The whole game changed when Kasiano and Williams came on. Losing Sue early didn't help and while their is some growth left to come in some of young forwards it is a problem that is hurting us week in week out.

User avatar
pHyR3
Member
Member
Posts: 5048
Joined: Tue 12 Feb, 2013 7:11 pm

Post by pHyR3 » Mon 11 Jul, 2016 9:43 am

agreed, we looked like a 10th or 11th placed playing a top 2 team on saturday. our pack was constantly outmuscled

i think woods, teddy and farah help us more than kelmmer and jackson help them. we still need that one top line prop/2nd rower to bolster our pack. preferably a right edge 2nd rower to tighten up our D. Josh Jackson, manu mau, beau scott a couple years ago, they would all be great and we can afford it once farah leaves
''Everybody talks about their four brothers, we have 17 here so we don't really care about them."

Post Reply