LIVE GAME Round 20 vs. Knights

Live Game Discussion
It was zero effort . The worst performance by a winger I can remember
He rushes up sticks an arm out then just stands there watching
Was he Tanking ?
I think that's the ceiling for him.
Lacks ability.

Did an OK job in the backrow but the same mistakes.

If he wants to go, he can go.
 
Really makes you start to question the universe when youd gladly put 3 of the most average first graders in 100+ years to ever lace on a boot, Nofo on a wing, Brooks in the halves and re-sign Kyle Lovett in the centres over the tripe last night.

This club is beyond BBQ'd. Send it to the crematorium and drop its ashes in the Mariana trench.
 
Last edited:
Even if that happened, Gadget and co. will go behind their backs and make their own moves without consulting Sheens and team.
That's exactly why we are where we are. Unless this is rectified we will continue to have a team with shit halves and no belief in the joint. Fix the halves and fix the attitude and we go a long way to getting off the bottom. Fix the halves and keep the untrustng relationship at the top and it will affect the team's belief and morale in 24 and beyond (if it lasts that long).
 
It seems pointless to be critical of players for poor performance. Particularly if said players have been told by the new recruitment guy their services are no longer needed?
Why does it always appear that elements within the club are continually slowing progress?
 
Wow what a comment that was a joke right 29 tackles 0 missed
Same with the Wakeham critics and the Brooks critics when he was half. These blokes are making 20 -30 tackles on players far bigger than themselves in the middle of the field and then expected to automatically set the place alight when we have the ball. The other clubs' wingers or centres make a couple of tackles early in the set then drift out to their position, our wingers and centres make sure they're as far away from the play as possible.
 
Same with the Wakeham critics and the Brooks critics when he was half. These blokes are making 20 -30 tackles on players far bigger than themselves in the middle of the field and then expected to automatically set the place alight when we have the ball. The other clubs' wingers or centres make a couple of tackles early in the set then drift out to their position, our wingers and centres make sure they're as far away from the play as possible.
What a load of shit
 
What have the board done? This Sheens hire has been awful and all of the fallout (the team's results, the media attention, the coaching plan, our recruitment issues) is on the back of it.
Bingo,

Heck the Recruitment has been WAY better then expected. Api, Bateman, Klemmer and Paps.

I view Sheens as having the side that we wanted Madge to have. Ofcourse we forgot a little about the backs, but seriously we did have some signings there with Stains and Naden....

We have not performed under Madge or Sheens, I feel Sheens had the squad but hasn't delivered the goods. I hated the new coaching idea because it seemed like a huge risk:
if it worked we get a mediocre coach.

If it failed, we burn 3 club legends in one go.


I almost left the club in despair over that decision. I saw our recruitment and came back... Now I see the Ladder
 
Same with the Wakeham critics and the Brooks critics when he was half. These blokes are making 20 -30 tackles on players far bigger than themselves in the middle of the field and then expected to automatically set the place alight when we have the ball. The other clubs' wingers or centres make a couple of tackles early in the set then drift out to their position, our wingers and centres make sure they're as far away from the play as possible.
Half's are always targets defensively but doesn't stop the good one's creating in attack our forwards have done a reasonable job going forward with half's not being able to create or have any direction in attacking position's
 
Graham Annesley saying our first try which was overturned by the bunker was 'subjective' view of the bunker 50/50, camera angles.... in his view it was a knock back but his view doesnt matter it was the bunker.... makes me sick. What about the qn of was their sufficient evidence to overturn the ruling if it was a 50/50 call.... does my head in
 
Graham Annesley saying our first try which was overturned by the bunker was 'subjective' view of the bunker 50/50, camera angles.... in his view it was a knock back but his view doesnt matter it was the bunker.... makes me sick. What about the qn of was their sufficient evidence to overturn the ruling if it was a 50/50 call.... does my head in
Annesley is a token mouthpiece.
100% Protector of the bunker and referees.

The point you raised is what the question was all about - what evidence did the bunker have to overturn the referee sending it up as a try only to then take it away?
50-50 does not cut it.
 
Back
Top