So I was looking for a few things out of this game:
1. Assess the Latu/Galvin combination. The combination didn't work; not sure if it was overcalling by Galvin or a lack of voice from Latu; but it wasn't pretty no matter how you look at it. Latu spending time developing his game in Ressies won't hurt us at all and I think it is probably best for his development at the moment.
2. Does the off season Matamua hype have any substance. We really didn't use him as a ball playing lock; which is what I was expecting to see. Again was this Galvin overplaying his hand or was it a lack of cohesion. His defence was OK. So overall maybe a bare pass.
3. The potential of the Johannssen brothers. The potential is there; they were both willing but made errors on both sides of the ball. They are worth developing but need more time in the lower grades to get their skills and consistence up.
4. Sione F on the edge. Not sure how early he did his toe but the hole running I wanted to see wasn't there; although Galvin really didn't play for it either. This definitely needs development.
5. Where TDS is at. TDS played OK, his service at times was good at times was average. He is learning from Api though, a couple of the look long pass short options were out of the Api play book. I saw enough to think that he should probably start and let Api cut them up when they tire a little.
6. Skelton as a winger. He was average to good for mine - defintely better at getting the ball back than Staines. He is a keeper and will play plenty of FG.
7. The development of Sukkar, Rahme, Broederlow and Hope. Sukkar wasn't impresive but did his job; I don't think he had FG in him, The other three, although more erratic, demonstrated that they have the potential to become FG quality.
8. Assess our simplified attack. It wasn't there to see in the first half as out halves combination didn't get it together. There edges weren't running lines waiting to be hit, whcih is what I would have expected to see with Galvin all over the shop. The second half was better although we lacked enterprise. IF we had the go forward provied by Kit L in the first half potentially Galvin doesn't overplay. Having bagged Galvin a few times; he did link well with his outside backs and the early kicks demonstrated an intent to attack with our defence so there were positives as well.
9. Assess our Defensive plan. There were a few very poor defensive reads that led to meat pies - but for the most part it was a fairly solid performance. From what I saw I expect that we are going to jam and use the sideline/scramble in our own 40. For the most part this was effective; although Lobb is simply not tup to it. He panics and gets on the backwards bicycle too often. He thinks so slow in defence that you can almost ssee the cogs ticking over behind his panicked eyes. Other than that we dealt with most of what was thrown at us. We didn't shut the gate on the try up the middle - but that one is easily addressed. I also think if you replace Lobb a key aspect of the problem is resolved.
My overall assessment 4/10. Our game plan was workable, but had limitations. Those limitations were, in most cases, individual deficiencies as opposed to deficiencies in the plan. I expect Galvin to play a more controlled game with Luai on the paddock, and we should have more momentum with Hunt/May than what was provided by the Johannssen brothers. This should enable the attack and bring Bird/Matamua to play more of a role. If we are playing Lobb in FG we are in a dire situation!
