Match stats v Manly

Post Reply
happy tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 41498
Joined: Sun 27 Feb, 2011 4:49 pm
Location: Watching Waiting Lurking

Match stats v Manly

Post by happy tiger » Mon 14 Jul, 2014 11:56 pm

If you look at most of these stats its hard to believe we got beaten 40-8

% Possession Manly 51 % Tigers 49%

Time in Opps half Manly 49 minutes Tigers 31 minutes (big one obviously )

Sets Tigers and Manly equal 37 sets

Completions Manly 31 Tigers 27

Metres Manly 1396 Tigers 1295

Kick metres 672 Manly Tigers 425

Line breaks Manly 6 Tigers 5

Offloads Manly 7 Tigers 9

Tackles Both teams 297

Missed tackles 29 Manly Tigers 33

Penalties Manly 10- Tigers 6

Errors 5 Manly Tigers 9

It is scary to see we were competitive in most areas and got beaten by 32


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

Post by pHyR3 » Tue 15 Jul, 2014 12:17 am

Every time we go into their 20 we'd knock the ball on. Add in a few calls against us, and losing the penalty count and it's not inconceivable.
''Everybody talks about their four brothers, we have 17 here so we don't really care about them."

happy tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 41498
Joined: Sun 27 Feb, 2011 4:49 pm
Location: Watching Waiting Lurking

Post by happy tiger » Tue 15 Jul, 2014 12:32 am

The point I was trying to make is how many other clubs in the NRL would of got beaten so badly with those stats ??

formerguest
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 4134
Joined: Fri 07 Jun, 2013 7:33 pm

Post by formerguest » Tue 15 Jul, 2014 6:01 am

For decent periods of the game, the figures were a fair indication of the contest. The most important numbers from the match and the difference between the teams were the one, six and seven.

Hayne, and the timing of his errors and penalties, obviously did not help things.

Gary Bakerloo
Member
Member
Posts: 2463
Joined: Tue 14 Jul, 2009 7:22 pm

Post by Gary Bakerloo » Tue 15 Jul, 2014 7:49 am

We were ripping them apart up the middle for about 20 minutes in the second half, but we just kept dropping the ball.


tig_prmz
Member
Member
Posts: 8024
Joined: Sat 03 Oct, 2009 10:32 pm

Post by tig_prmz » Tue 15 Jul, 2014 11:23 am

Wasn't it something like 22-8 with 10 to go?

Posted using RoarFEED V.4
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

TigerSJ
Member
Member
Posts: 490
Joined: Tue 22 Apr, 2014 9:44 pm

Post by TigerSJ » Tue 15 Jul, 2014 6:29 pm

I thought we were in the game for large chunks and were playing hard with plenty of heart but a combination of things got the better of us. Obviously when virtually every ruling goes against you it doesn't help. I think a couple of their tries could easily have been disallowed on another day.
However, our outside backs reading of the opposition attack especially in our own 20m is horrible (one decoy runner or a cut-out pass and any team scores against us). Every winger we have gets sucked infield and our centres are rubbish in D. We have no respect for possession and made school boy errors continuously - this let them off the hook countless times. We had plenty of chances but never completed whereas a better team would have, so I don't think they were that great.
The couple of times we actually held the ball and ran it in their 20m we scored fairly easily (and once we scored but Hayne must have had a bet on the margin).
Until we can complete sets, hold the ball and mount pressure, improve our 5th tackle options and defend for our lives - we are not finals material.

Nors05
Member
Member
Posts: 325
Joined: Thu 13 Mar, 2014 9:21 pm

Post by Nors05 » Wed 16 Jul, 2014 8:59 pm

Every time Manly came to our 20 they did this thing called quick passing and catching.

I don't think Tigers have really practiced this new and exciting technique called catching, but hopefully they will work on it at training this week.

Post Reply