Brooks.... what is he good for??

[voice_of_reason]

When we had the ball we looked dangerous. I thought both Brooks and Reynolds were solid. Reynolds misses a lot of tackles but many are on kick chases where he is 'first man in' applying pressure. He may miss the initial tackle but creates the pressure for the tackle to be made by his support chasers.

Putting aside some very, very ordinary decisions, we simply didn't have enough ball to win. The 'new game' is very much momentum based and you need the ball to maintain that momentum. Being on the wrong end of possession will see you lose more than you win - regardless of your halfback.

 

[weststigerman]

We need to have a play for Kieran foran, at the right price...as showed last night We are a competitive unit but we will never quite match the top teams...especially when things are tight, Brooks will never get us home in those types of games....time for him to go

Brooks is early into a 5 year contract. He’s not going anywhere.

If he was off contract, the Storm, Broncos, Canterbury and any other club looking for a good 7 would be making large offers.

Exactly right. It seems there are a few dinosaurs on here that still think the game revolves around the halfback winning it on their own.

Reality is it's now more of a team thing. The top 4 favourites to win the comp do not have a number 7 any better than Brooks (arguably Moses, but he's got a much better team around him). I don't see the Roosters expecting Kyle Flanagan to control everything and when they lose it's his fault.

 

[Tim Sheens]

Geez, here we go again. Tackled as much and as good as a decent second rower, got a repeat set and would have had another and the team well on top if Eiso is onside or stays out of it, makes a handful of linebreaks without support and a try assist if Mbye hadn't had his knee bent backwards earlier.

We lost that match due to other reasons, with a very dubious knock on decision against Garner to start the match, then the wife basher leading with his head (Nate Myles like) taking out McIntyre contributing, plus a red hot Lucy getting laid out. He was replaced by MCK, who's poor effort from marker late in the game cost us dearly as did the upset brother Joey's stupidity for the remaining quarter or so of the match. For mine, keeping either of those two forwards on the field gives us the match.

As for Reynolds, enjoyed his enthusiasm and chase, providing value that should not be underestimated and have no issue with missing those tackles when applying such great pressure. Still, we were lucky to get away with some misses at our end through great scramble.

 

[momo_amp_medo]

Well mark this game down as another one this fella can’t take a game by the scruff. His runs weren’t dangerous, his kicks were ineffective and last tackle play before BJ lost his head was poor.
For mine he isn’t our 7 going forward and Benji should have that role next week against the rabbits.

Just saw this thread.
I have one thing to say ....”give it the rest” ...... !

 

[happy_tiger]

Geez, here we go again. Tackled as much and as good as a decent second rower, got a repeat set and would have had another and the team well on top if Eiso is onside or stays out of it, makes a handful of linebreaks without support and a try assist if Mbye hadn't had his knee bent backwards earlier.

We lost that match due to other reasons, with a very dubious knock on decision against Garner to start the match, then the wife basher leading with his head (Nate Myles like) taking out McIntyre contributing, plus a red hot Lucy getting laid out. He was replaced by MCK, who's poor effort from marker late in the game cost us dearly as did the upset brother Joey's stupidity for the remaining quarter or so of the match. For mine, keeping either of those two forwards on the field gives us the match.

As for Reynolds, enjoyed his enthusiasm and chase, providing value that should not be underestimated and have no issue with missing those tackles when applying such great pressure. Still, we were lucky to get away with some misses at our end through great scramble.

No one will argue with you FG , but he has lost considerable pace or is unwilling to use it or something is preventing him using it ...it is very noticeable

 

[Tim Sheens]

Geez, here we go again. Tackled as much and as good as a decent second rower, got a repeat set and would have had another and the team well on top if Eiso is onside or stays out of it, makes a handful of linebreaks without support and a try assist if Mbye hadn't had his knee bent backwards earlier.

We lost that match due to other reasons, with a very dubious knock on decision against Garner to start the match, then the wife basher leading with his head (Nate Myles like) taking out McIntyre contributing, plus a red hot Lucy getting laid out. He was replaced by MCK, who's poor effort from marker late in the game cost us dearly as did the upset brother Joey's stupidity for the remaining quarter or so of the match. For mine, keeping either of those two forwards on the field gives us the match.

As for Reynolds, enjoyed his enthusiasm and chase, providing value that should not be underestimated and have no issue with missing those tackles when applying such great pressure. Still, we were lucky to get away with some misses at our end through great scramble.

No one will argue with you FG , but he has lost considerable pace or is unwilling to use it or something is preventing him using it ...it is very noticeable

Yeah, he obviously has hamstring concerns at some level. Someone wrote on here a while back about his early season problem being a bigger issue than was made public. Might have been @tigerballs, does anyone have any more insight on that?

Edit; Hammys are a severe impediments to any player that has problematic ones, being like an anchor in them reaching potential that others enjoy. Even seemingly innocuous runs such as those by Jennings to score a few weeks back can pull them up.

 

[Needaname]

I’m not sure Brooks has lost pace, he outran the young cowboys fullback in the cowboys game to the line.
He hasn’t had much of a long kicking game in the recent years. Something he had to begin with so maybe the hamstring issues contribute to that, however he seems to be slowly reeling that back. Thought he was more varied with his kicks in the last few games.
He had a super solid game however there are a couple of times where he starts to play wide and he darts back inside. It’s hard to tell whether In those moments he is running because he wants too or running because his other options are cut down, he does it on the 4th or 5th tackle too which leaves Reynolds to do the kicking.
There was one particular moment where the panthers winger was injured out of play and Brooks was screaming for the ball to get it left but Harry played right two more tackles by the time Brooks got it the panthers already were set again.
A completely lost opportunity, also what about Mbye not getting on his hip for that try opportunity when he throws it left and Edwards intercepts.
I just disagree that he was the reason we lost that.
The one factor that kept us in that match was our defence and Brooks was a big contributor to that.
In attack we made less meters per set in our forward runs, only Nof and Lucy got over the advantage line. We would of easily had less tackles in the panthers 20 to the panthers. It was just a display of one team matching another in defence but in attack it was a step up in class between the two sides.

Side note: Nathan Cleary is on the Footy Show this afternoon.

 

[TrueTiger]

I said earlier in this thread that Brooks didn't play poorly "he was outclassed"by the origin 1/2 back and a very good football team....

Nathan is only better than Luke because of one thing....GAME MANAGEMENT....Luke hasn't had the opportunity to manage the games properly because we always end up with many changes through injury or players not performing...once he forms his structure with the guys he has in the team with him week to week,then they get rhythem and ball flowing movement and end up on the same page..
BJ having brain snaps or players not defending or supporting play make it difficult for Luke to make his next move with confidence..
AND therein lies a significant part of the problem...not having players sticking to their job or the gameplan at times...when Brooks runs the ball .he is very good,no good running and trying to get good field position if you have no backup players in support...

Just my take on things and Madge has some work to do with some of these players,namely BJ and his attitude...

 

[Tigrrs]

Brooks with his skill set should be playing as a five eight. Get Blake Green for half back and problems are solved

 

[TYGA]

A lot on here must have never played rugby league or understand what happened tonight. Brooks was targeted on every run, targeted either very kick. Grant was niggled hit and taken out of the game. It was an ice rink on that new turf I was out there. This was not a. Game for the backs or Brooks/Reynolds.

The only difference was Kikau he monstered us out wide and created space for Crichton who is a freak. We were held own and intentional 6 agains and the. In the next play they are 5 metres offside and not called stifling every set.

Yes - Brooks made 27 tackles at 96% against the pack touted as the best in the comp. Its way too many tackles for a number 7 to be making and still be effective in attack. And for those saying Cleary is a good defender - he made 16 tackles at 72% effective. He missed 3 and 3 ineffective. We ran more at Luai when we should have been running at Cleary all night just as Penrith did to Brooks.

The issue with Brooks is his lack of vision and quick accurate passing game. He needs to sit down and watch Keary. He reads numbers engages the line but passes bullets to players. Brooks is a runner and has a good shirt ball but there were times he could have put the winger over but just doesn’t throw the long ball. Defences know this and shut his short runner down and crowd his running game.

 

[Needaname]

A lot on here must have never played rugby league or understand what happened tonight. Brooks was targeted on every run, targeted either very kick. Grant was niggled hit and taken out of the game. It was an ice rink on that new turf I was out there. This was not a. Game for the backs or Brooks/Reynolds.

The only difference was Kikau he monstered us out wide and created space for Crichton who is a freak. We were held own and intentional 6 agains and the. In the next play they are 5 metres offside and not called stifling every set.

Yes - Brooks made 27 tackles at 96% against the pack touted as the best in the comp. Its way too many tackles for a number 7 to be making and still be effective in attack. And for those saying Cleary is a good defender - he made 16 tackles at 72% effective. He missed 3 and 3 ineffective. We ran more at Luai when we should have been running at Cleary all night just as Penrith did to Brooks.

The issue with Brooks is his lack of vision and quick accurate passing game. He needs to sit down and watch Keary. He reads numbers engages the line but passes bullets to players. Brooks is a runner and has a good shirt ball but there were times he could have put the winger over but just doesn’t throw the long ball. Defences know this and shut his short runner down and crowd his running game.

To me it just looks like he always chooses the highest percentage play. Whether that’s a mental decision of his own doing or whether he is getting coached to play that way remains to be seen.
He plays the game with completely no risk, the plays he attempts always seem to have the lowest error rate.
For example, a short ball to a forward, may be dropped but has a lower percentage of that occurring and a moderate percentage of the forward breaking the line but the highest percentage of the forward continuing the forward momentum.
Kicking bombs are the same. Most time available for our forwards to get set and ready to defend the team, lowest chance of kick going dead, Moderate chance of an error.
Kicking grubbers in traffic and back against the grain, give our chases the most time in goal, keeps the ball from going dead and also has a chance of a repeat set if the opposition trap and fumble or the ricochet occurs. Running himself under pressure is a high percentage play then passing on to someone else who would be under pressure. Brooks seems to have thrown all the trick shots out of the window.

It’s interesting you say that the defence of teams have been adjusted to cater for this.
We have high completions playing this way but we don’t threaten teams with our attack this way either because it becomes very predicable.

 

[Lauren]

I think it just frustrates people Nathan is better than him.

Yep. They are miles apart.
And Cleary isn’t even that good.

I don’t think much of Cleary’s game tbh
All he does is put up bombs ..

He’s a good defender and has a decent kicking game. Has nothing in attack at all.

Agree @avocadoontoast. Other than his kicking game he offers absolutely nothing in attack and is a rather one-dimensional player. The only aspect of his game that he excels in (over Brooks) is his composure.

 

[Mighty_Tiger]

I said earlier in this thread that Brooks didn't play poorly "he was outclassed"by the origin 1/2 back and a very good football team....

Nathan is only better than Luke because of one thing....GAME MANAGEMENT....Luke hasn't had the opportunity to manage the games properly because we always end up with many changes through injury or players not performing...once he forms his structure with the guys he has in the team with him week to week,then they get rhythem and ball flowing movement and end up on the same page..
BJ having brain snaps or players not defending or supporting play make it difficult for Luke to make his next move with confidence..
AND therein lies a significant part of the problem...not having players sticking to their job or the gameplan at times...when Brooks runs the ball .he is very good,no good running and trying to get good field position if you have no backup players in support...

Just my take on things and Madge has some work to do with some of these players,namely BJ and his attitude...

By that Logic Nathan wouldn’t have out played him... Panthers have had massive changes to their roster the last 12-18mths to key positions.

BJ brain snaps have been limited with us.

We need to stop making excuses & also think Brooks has another level.

He is as good as he can be, he isn’t a leader of a team & isn’t a game manager. He is a good dynamic runner of the ball and needs flat running forwards off his hip to be effective. He has a good short game (ball, run, kick, pass). Any length and he struggles. His defense is brilliant.

His combo with Garner was awesome last year, this year we haven’t seen them team up at all. He is playing one side only. That’s not what a game manager does. He is clearly following orders from Madge.

 

[Muffstar]

Watching the game last night, whilst Cleary didn't run too much, his control of the team was superior to Brooks. Cleary's kicking and passing game was very good. It is probably easier said than done, but this imo differentiates the good half's to the average half's. Also being consistent doing it week to week as well.

 

[turkeytiger03]

I was there, right on the half-way line and few rows from the front, and I had a very close look at Brooksy, as I am far from convinced about him, but, I thought Brooks was better than ok last night. I don't think he deserves the criticism this week. He was solid.

It's not his job to be solid. It's his job to get us home.

His fans just don't get this

His job is to win us those games.

Spot on !!

Rubbish!!

Rubbish = 9th spot

And, that's completely the fault of Brooks because he "doesn't get us home". Yeh?

That's the premise I'm objecting to, that it is HIS job (alone ....just his?? ) to get us those wins.

Yup Good halfbacks have been doing it for years

So, you would have Cleary as MoM last night, no doubt. And, every time they win.

No but every time he touches the ball ya think something gonna happen.... not with Luke though

 

[Telltails]

Cant be going too bad with Brooks at 7 third highest points scored only behind Roosters and Eels and equal second in tries scored behind the Roosters. Established he is a good defender we are managing to score points - somehow - so if he can just do it all on his own then I guess everyone will be happy

 

[Lauren]

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but the way the modern game is played...and the moments I've noticed which have secured wins, doesn't appear exclusive to the halfback leading the team around, but more to do with **everyone** simply fulfilling their own role.
The "clutch" plays I've seen win most (of the) recent games are from smart or safe decisions only and off the back of collective effort - be it the forward pack getting a roll on or the spine working together. I don't have the footy knowledge as all of you but I feel the halfback's role is evolving and the hooker is the cog or key to the whole team's performance.

I don't get the whole doing the comparisons between Nathan and Luke because both are working with completely different types of teams and qualities/attributes. Plus I just don't think their management is vital to a team' winning games.

Edit: I mean while it's good to see a halfback take the reins, I don't think their management of the overall team is what wins games anymore and it's more to do with other leadership skills.

 

[weststigers]

Watching the game last night, whilst Cleary didn't run too much, his control of the team was superior to Brooks. Cleary's kicking and passing game was very good. It is probably easier said than done, but this imo differentiates the good half's to the average half's. Also being consistent doing it week to week as well.

Jerome Luai gave them a second option. I'm sorry, but until we have that, Brooks can't do it all himself.

Brooks went well.

We showed tonight that we can take it to the best teams. GC game still hurts.