Effort Analysis

[barra]

Player I’m most disappointed with is Tamou. He should be up there leading our line speed and saying come with me. With 1 more big bopper on the bench this week hopefully Madge has all our forwards thinking effort and energy first and sustainability and longevity second. Keep the middle working hard but staying fresh at the same time.

I thought in his first stint for us against Canberra he was very good, he did lead the line speed and we were right in the game. He got that head knock and had to go for HIA, he just wasn't as effective when he came back on. Maybe that game was already getting away from us.

And you're correct, last week he was very disappointing, and his lateral defence has been poor as well.

 

[Deleted member 3518]

Pic 2 really annoys me. I’m pretty sure Tedesco not only tackled Talau but kept him upright for about 10secs where it was clear that a scoring option from anyone of our players was available on the short side. Afterwards, Liddle goes left to Leuia on the last.

Agree.. We should of had a few 6 again calls or penalties for them laying on us after a break.. Not even going to start on them be offside on there line and thats how they shut us down.. We need to improve big time but refs also need to ref both ways.

Agree, but also disagree. You would think they are offside, as was the believe with the raiders. But in truth and you can see it in the vision. They just work that much harder to run up and down the 10 quicker than the opposition. Those teams aren’t offside. Or at the least the players rushing up in that position aren’t. The fringes might or the players out of frame could be to lessen the chance of a spread but those plays are timed perfectly every time. That is an example of a professional footy side.
Player I’m most disappointed with is Tamou. He should be up there leading our line speed and saying come with me. With 1 more big bopper on the bench this week hopefully Madge has all our forwards thinking effort and energy first and sustainability and longevity second. Keep the middle working hard but staying fresh at the same time.

Nah , the Raiders were offside , at no point on Sunday did I think , “what the actual ?!!!“ , which was the case against the Raiders . They’re just smarter in what they do . Like when we did get some momentum in the first half , they kept giving away 6 again penalties knowing that , the act of slowing it down was enough , as most tries are scored 3-4 tackles earlier , by the play the ball speed.
But that’s not why we lost . That was ? our edge defence , and the lack of speed , when someone gets on the outside of us , or lack of speed between the ears .

 

[Russell]

Pic 2 really annoys me. I’m pretty sure Tedesco not only tackled Talau but kept him upright for about 10secs where it was clear that a scoring option from anyone of our players was available on the short side. Afterwards, Liddle goes left to Leuia on the last.

Agree.. We should of had a few 6 again calls or penalties for them laying on us after a break.. Not even going to start on them be offside on there line and thats how they shut us down.. We need to improve big time but refs also need to ref both ways.

The only Ref. that is even close to Ref'ing both ways is Cecchin - that's only sometimes and he is out of favour anyway, probably as much as us.

 

[Russell]

I thought of this stuff after the game but haven't had time to verify my thoughts.

Brooks kicking and end of set options were atrocious, there is no denying that. And there are a lot of people that have cut Brooks, and thats their opinion and thats fine. We are a forum sharing ideas.

But I havent written of Brooks yet, on the basis that he hasn't exactly had the support required. There is a presumption from some that every WT player on those last tackles is in position, ready with several options, and Brooks always takes the worst one. I think this is incorrect.

The times I recall, Brooks got the feed from Dummy half on the last or second last, and there was no one there. There were no forwards coming through giving options, the outside backs werent even in position and ready, and generally most were standing on the short side or close to the ruck, lazy or out of breath.

Brooks gets the ball, looks at his options (of which there are none because most are standing there like tools) and so what is he to do.

I saw one stage when Brooks decided to try and get quick ball out, so he passed to Doeuhi, who was not moving, literally didnt move his feet, and on passed it to some other knucklehead standing 3 foot away from him. It looked like an under 7s game at the local park where they have to pass 3 times before you can run.

Its alright to say Brooks isnt taking the right options but the Roosters game highlighted the fact that very often, he doesnt have any.

Now some will respond by saying "well Brooks runs the team, he should get them into position". To that I say - if it only worked like that. Cooper Cronk never had these issues because his teams were well drilled to be where they were supposed to be. He proved it in the GF where he did nothing and the team went without him.

Brooks cant make players get off their a$$ and start being lazy and make some second efforts. So I think he will make a sufficient NRL halfback in the right team. Changing him for Adam Reynolds (which has been the joke of the week suggested by some) doesnt make the forwards get into position and offer options, or get the backline in order ready to capitalise on an option taken by the playmaker.

Well said Swordy - the only thing I would add.... they (Rorters) were offside quite a few times + the times they were on side with incredible line speed - gave Brooks no time to set for the kick on the majority of the sets. The opposition knew that he had no other option but to kick because none of our our players gave him an option. It is almost like the rest of the team are thinking ...ok we've put in for the first five tackles and made 35 metres, now it is your turn on the sixth ... we are going to have a rest. Need a bomb under all of them, only AJ maybe has an injury excuse, no one has an unfit excuse - they need to work as a team, they have not done this in the first games. I think this is the main problem...Not Brooks. With no options Reynolds wouldn't be any better, even Cronk would struggle.

 

[happy_tiger]

I thought of this stuff after the game but haven't had time to verify my thoughts.

Brooks kicking and end of set options were atrocious, there is no denying that. And there are a lot of people that have cut Brooks, and thats their opinion and thats fine. We are a forum sharing ideas.

But I havent written of Brooks yet, on the basis that he hasn't exactly had the support required. There is a presumption from some that every WT player on those last tackles is in position, ready with several options, and Brooks always takes the worst one. I think this is incorrect.

The times I recall, Brooks got the feed from Dummy half on the last or second last, and there was no one there. There were no forwards coming through giving options, the outside backs werent even in position and ready, and generally most were standing on the short side or close to the ruck, lazy or out of breath.

Brooks gets the ball, looks at his options (of which there are none because most are standing there like tools) and so what is he to do.

I saw one stage when Brooks decided to try and get quick ball out, so he passed to Doeuhi, who was not moving, literally didnt move his feet, and on passed it to some other knucklehead standing 3 foot away from him. It looked like an under 7s game at the local park where they have to pass 3 times before you can run.

Its alright to say Brooks isnt taking the right options but the Roosters game highlighted the fact that very often, he doesnt have any.

Now some will respond by saying "well Brooks runs the team, he should get them into position". To that I say - if it only worked like that. Cooper Cronk never had these issues because his teams were well drilled to be where they were supposed to be. He proved it in the GF where he did nothing and the team went without him.

Brooks cant make players get off their a$$ and start being lazy and make some second efforts. So I think he will make a sufficient NRL halfback in the right team. Changing him for Adam Reynolds (which has been the joke of the week suggested by some) doesnt make the forwards get into position and offer options, or get the backline in order ready to capitalise on an option taken by the playmaker.

Well said Swordy - the only thing I would add.... they (Rorters) were offside quite a few times + the times they were on side with incredible line speed - gave Brooks no time to set for the kick on the majority of the sets. The opposition knew that he had no other option but to kick because none of our our players gave him an option. It is almost like the rest of the team are thinking ...ok we've put in for the first five tackles and made 35 metres, now it is your turn on the sixth ... we are going to have a rest. Need a bomb under all of them, only AJ maybe has an injury excuse, no one has an unfit excuse - they need to work as a team, they have not done this in the first games. I think this is the main problem...Not Brooks. With no options Reynolds wouldn't be any better, even Cronk would struggle.

But its Brooks job to organize his set of six ......organize the runners ...the line he wants them to run ...where he wants to be by tackle 5

Brooks is the problem obviously and the excuses need to stop

 

[Needaname]

I thought of this stuff after the game but haven't had time to verify my thoughts.

Brooks kicking and end of set options were atrocious, there is no denying that. And there are a lot of people that have cut Brooks, and thats their opinion and thats fine. We are a forum sharing ideas.

But I havent written of Brooks yet, on the basis that he hasn't exactly had the support required. There is a presumption from some that every WT player on those last tackles is in position, ready with several options, and Brooks always takes the worst one. I think this is incorrect.

The times I recall, Brooks got the feed from Dummy half on the last or second last, and there was no one there. There were no forwards coming through giving options, the outside backs werent even in position and ready, and generally most were standing on the short side or close to the ruck, lazy or out of breath.

Brooks gets the ball, looks at his options (of which there are none because most are standing there like tools) and so what is he to do.

I saw one stage when Brooks decided to try and get quick ball out, so he passed to Doeuhi, who was not moving, literally didnt move his feet, and on passed it to some other knucklehead standing 3 foot away from him. It looked like an under 7s game at the local park where they have to pass 3 times before you can run.

Its alright to say Brooks isnt taking the right options but the Roosters game highlighted the fact that very often, he doesnt have any.

Now some will respond by saying "well Brooks runs the team, he should get them into position". To that I say - if it only worked like that. Cooper Cronk never had these issues because his teams were well drilled to be where they were supposed to be. He proved it in the GF where he did nothing and the team went without him.

Brooks cant make players get off their a$$ and start being lazy and make some second efforts. So I think he will make a sufficient NRL halfback in the right team. Changing him for Adam Reynolds (which has been the joke of the week suggested by some) doesnt make the forwards get into position and offer options, or get the backline in order ready to capitalise on an option taken by the playmaker.

Precisely what I’ve noticed based on the vision I’ve displayed and exactly the point I was trying to make.
Thanks.

 

[Speed2burn]

I thought of this stuff after the game but haven't had time to verify my thoughts.

Brooks kicking and end of set options were atrocious, there is no denying that. And there are a lot of people that have cut Brooks, and thats their opinion and thats fine. We are a forum sharing ideas.

But I havent written of Brooks yet, on the basis that he hasn't exactly had the support required. There is a presumption from some that every WT player on those last tackles is in position, ready with several options, and Brooks always takes the worst one. I think this is incorrect.

The times I recall, Brooks got the feed from Dummy half on the last or second last, and there was no one there. There were no forwards coming through giving options, the outside backs werent even in position and ready, and generally most were standing on the short side or close to the ruck, lazy or out of breath.

Brooks gets the ball, looks at his options (of which there are none because most are standing there like tools) and so what is he to do.

I saw one stage when Brooks decided to try and get quick ball out, so he passed to Doeuhi, who was not moving, literally didnt move his feet, and on passed it to some other knucklehead standing 3 foot away from him. It looked like an under 7s game at the local park where they have to pass 3 times before you can run.

Its alright to say Brooks isnt taking the right options but the Roosters game highlighted the fact that very often, he doesnt have any.

Now some will respond by saying "well Brooks runs the team, he should get them into position". To that I say - if it only worked like that. Cooper Cronk never had these issues because his teams were well drilled to be where they were supposed to be. He proved it in the GF where he did nothing and the team went without him.

Brooks cant make players get off their a$$ and start being lazy and make some second efforts. So I think he will make a sufficient NRL halfback in the right team. Changing him for Adam Reynolds (which has been the joke of the week suggested by some) doesnt make the forwards get into position and offer options, or get the backline in order ready to capitalise on an option taken by the playmaker.

Well said Swordy - the only thing I would add.... they (Rorters) were offside quite a few times + the times they were on side with incredible line speed - gave Brooks no time to set for the kick on the majority of the sets. The opposition knew that he had no other option but to kick because none of our our players gave him an option. It is almost like the rest of the team are thinking ...ok we've put in for the first five tackles and made 35 metres, now it is your turn on the sixth ... we are going to have a rest. Need a bomb under all of them, only AJ maybe has an injury excuse, no one has an unfit excuse - they need to work as a team, they have not done this in the first games. I think this is the main problem...Not Brooks. With no options Reynolds wouldn't be any better, even Cronk would struggle.

But its Brooks job to organize his set of six ......organize the runners ...the line he wants them to run ...where he wants to be by tackle 5

Brooks is the problem obviously and the excuses need to stop

Don’t forget to add it’s Brooks fault if BJ is a lazy so and so

And it’s Brooks fault Teddy and Keary are a class above anything we have

He probably even started the NSW floods.

 

[BZN]

In all 4 frames, Tedesco is covering a different person. He made Brooks pass, try-saver on Talau, got off quickly and was there for the kick on the other side of the field. What a blood freak.

I hate how good he is

Has he been drug tested yet ?

:flushed: :joy_cat: :joy_cat:

 

[Needaname]

I thought of this stuff after the game but haven't had time to verify my thoughts.

Brooks kicking and end of set options were atrocious, there is no denying that. And there are a lot of people that have cut Brooks, and thats their opinion and thats fine. We are a forum sharing ideas.

But I havent written of Brooks yet, on the basis that he hasn't exactly had the support required. There is a presumption from some that every WT player on those last tackles is in position, ready with several options, and Brooks always takes the worst one. I think this is incorrect.

The times I recall, Brooks got the feed from Dummy half on the last or second last, and there was no one there. There were no forwards coming through giving options, the outside backs werent even in position and ready, and generally most were standing on the short side or close to the ruck, lazy or out of breath.

Brooks gets the ball, looks at his options (of which there are none because most are standing there like tools) and so what is he to do.

I saw one stage when Brooks decided to try and get quick ball out, so he passed to Doeuhi, who was not moving, literally didnt move his feet, and on passed it to some other knucklehead standing 3 foot away from him. It looked like an under 7s game at the local park where they have to pass 3 times before you can run.

Its alright to say Brooks isnt taking the right options but the Roosters game highlighted the fact that very often, he doesnt have any.

Now some will respond by saying "well Brooks runs the team, he should get them into position". To that I say - if it only worked like that. Cooper Cronk never had these issues because his teams were well drilled to be where they were supposed to be. He proved it in the GF where he did nothing and the team went without him.

Brooks cant make players get off their a$$ and start being lazy and make some second efforts. So I think he will make a sufficient NRL halfback in the right team. Changing him for Adam Reynolds (which has been the joke of the week suggested by some) doesnt make the forwards get into position and offer options, or get the backline in order ready to capitalise on an option taken by the playmaker.

Well said Swordy - the only thing I would add.... they (Rorters) were offside quite a few times + the times they were on side with incredible line speed - gave Brooks no time to set for the kick on the majority of the sets. The opposition knew that he had no other option but to kick because none of our our players gave him an option. It is almost like the rest of the team are thinking ...ok we've put in for the first five tackles and made 35 metres, now it is your turn on the sixth ... we are going to have a rest. Need a bomb under all of them, only AJ maybe has an injury excuse, no one has an unfit excuse - they need to work as a team, they have not done this in the first games. I think this is the main problem...Not Brooks. With no options Reynolds wouldn't be any better, even Cronk would struggle.

But its Brooks job to organize his set of six ......organize the runners ...the line he wants them to run ...where he wants to be by tackle 5

Brooks is the problem obviously and the excuses need to stop

Sure fair enough. If your playing Taylor ball that’s acheiveable. But what happens if the set ends up going in a direction other than the way it was intended a break in the line or someone runs 50m across the field and not 10 forwards.
Is it really ALL Brook’s job?

 

[happy_tiger]

I thought of this stuff after the game but haven't had time to verify my thoughts.

Brooks kicking and end of set options were atrocious, there is no denying that. And there are a lot of people that have cut Brooks, and thats their opinion and thats fine. We are a forum sharing ideas.

But I havent written of Brooks yet, on the basis that he hasn't exactly had the support required. There is a presumption from some that every WT player on those last tackles is in position, ready with several options, and Brooks always takes the worst one. I think this is incorrect.

The times I recall, Brooks got the feed from Dummy half on the last or second last, and there was no one there. There were no forwards coming through giving options, the outside backs werent even in position and ready, and generally most were standing on the short side or close to the ruck, lazy or out of breath.

Brooks gets the ball, looks at his options (of which there are none because most are standing there like tools) and so what is he to do.

I saw one stage when Brooks decided to try and get quick ball out, so he passed to Doeuhi, who was not moving, literally didnt move his feet, and on passed it to some other knucklehead standing 3 foot away from him. It looked like an under 7s game at the local park where they have to pass 3 times before you can run.

Its alright to say Brooks isnt taking the right options but the Roosters game highlighted the fact that very often, he doesnt have any.

Now some will respond by saying "well Brooks runs the team, he should get them into position". To that I say - if it only worked like that. Cooper Cronk never had these issues because his teams were well drilled to be where they were supposed to be. He proved it in the GF where he did nothing and the team went without him.

Brooks cant make players get off their a$$ and start being lazy and make some second efforts. So I think he will make a sufficient NRL halfback in the right team. Changing him for Adam Reynolds (which has been the joke of the week suggested by some) doesnt make the forwards get into position and offer options, or get the backline in order ready to capitalise on an option taken by the playmaker.

Well said Swordy - the only thing I would add.... they (Rorters) were offside quite a few times + the times they were on side with incredible line speed - gave Brooks no time to set for the kick on the majority of the sets. The opposition knew that he had no other option but to kick because none of our our players gave him an option. It is almost like the rest of the team are thinking ...ok we've put in for the first five tackles and made 35 metres, now it is your turn on the sixth ... we are going to have a rest. Need a bomb under all of them, only AJ maybe has an injury excuse, no one has an unfit excuse - they need to work as a team, they have not done this in the first games. I think this is the main problem...Not Brooks. With no options Reynolds wouldn't be any better, even Cronk would struggle.

But its Brooks job to organize his set of six ......organize the runners ...the line he wants them to run ...where he wants to be by tackle 5

Brooks is the problem obviously and the excuses need to stop

Don’t forget to add it’s Brooks fault if BJ is a lazy so and so

And it’s Brooks fault Teddy and Keary are a class above anything we have

He probably even started the NSW floods.

What has BJ got to do with how we complete our sets ....he is useless as well ...and we are paying him about 600 k

I guess a few Brooks started the floods , as wel as the creeks and rivers and rain ...and the fact you Govt didn't increase the dam wall height

 

[Speed2burn]

I thought of this stuff after the game but haven't had time to verify my thoughts.

Brooks kicking and end of set options were atrocious, there is no denying that. And there are a lot of people that have cut Brooks, and thats their opinion and thats fine. We are a forum sharing ideas.

But I havent written of Brooks yet, on the basis that he hasn't exactly had the support required. There is a presumption from some that every WT player on those last tackles is in position, ready with several options, and Brooks always takes the worst one. I think this is incorrect.

The times I recall, Brooks got the feed from Dummy half on the last or second last, and there was no one there. There were no forwards coming through giving options, the outside backs werent even in position and ready, and generally most were standing on the short side or close to the ruck, lazy or out of breath.

Brooks gets the ball, looks at his options (of which there are none because most are standing there like tools) and so what is he to do.

I saw one stage when Brooks decided to try and get quick ball out, so he passed to Doeuhi, who was not moving, literally didnt move his feet, and on passed it to some other knucklehead standing 3 foot away from him. It looked like an under 7s game at the local park where they have to pass 3 times before you can run.

Its alright to say Brooks isnt taking the right options but the Roosters game highlighted the fact that very often, he doesnt have any.

Now some will respond by saying "well Brooks runs the team, he should get them into position". To that I say - if it only worked like that. Cooper Cronk never had these issues because his teams were well drilled to be where they were supposed to be. He proved it in the GF where he did nothing and the team went without him.

Brooks cant make players get off their a$$ and start being lazy and make some second efforts. So I think he will make a sufficient NRL halfback in the right team. Changing him for Adam Reynolds (which has been the joke of the week suggested by some) doesnt make the forwards get into position and offer options, or get the backline in order ready to capitalise on an option taken by the playmaker.

Well said Swordy - the only thing I would add.... they (Rorters) were offside quite a few times + the times they were on side with incredible line speed - gave Brooks no time to set for the kick on the majority of the sets. The opposition knew that he had no other option but to kick because none of our our players gave him an option. It is almost like the rest of the team are thinking ...ok we've put in for the first five tackles and made 35 metres, now it is your turn on the sixth ... we are going to have a rest. Need a bomb under all of them, only AJ maybe has an injury excuse, no one has an unfit excuse - they need to work as a team, they have not done this in the first games. I think this is the main problem...Not Brooks. With no options Reynolds wouldn't be any better, even Cronk would struggle.

But its Brooks job to organize his set of six ......organize the runners ...the line he wants them to run ...where he wants to be by tackle 5

Brooks is the problem obviously and the excuses need to stop

Don’t forget to add it’s Brooks fault if BJ is a lazy so and so

And it’s Brooks fault Teddy and Keary are a class above anything we have

He probably even started the NSW floods.

What has BJ got to do with how we complete our sets ....he is useless as well ...and we are paying him about 600 k

I guess a few Brooks started the floods , as wel as the creeks and rivers and rain ...and the fact you Govt didn't increase the dam wall height

Well the scoreline blew out to 40 because our left edge was a disaster in the 2nd half (that’s mainly on BJ and Kepoa)

Say if the score was 20-6, it would have been fairly indicative of where both teams are at, as the 2nd half was a complete contrast to the 1st half where I think we competed well.

We were on the back foot constantly in the 2nd half because roosters were punching holes through BJ at will, that’s not on Brooks

 

[happy_tiger]

I thought of this stuff after the game but haven't had time to verify my thoughts.

Brooks kicking and end of set options were atrocious, there is no denying that. And there are a lot of people that have cut Brooks, and thats their opinion and thats fine. We are a forum sharing ideas.

But I havent written of Brooks yet, on the basis that he hasn't exactly had the support required. There is a presumption from some that every WT player on those last tackles is in position, ready with several options, and Brooks always takes the worst one. I think this is incorrect.

The times I recall, Brooks got the feed from Dummy half on the last or second last, and there was no one there. There were no forwards coming through giving options, the outside backs werent even in position and ready, and generally most were standing on the short side or close to the ruck, lazy or out of breath.

Brooks gets the ball, looks at his options (of which there are none because most are standing there like tools) and so what is he to do.

I saw one stage when Brooks decided to try and get quick ball out, so he passed to Doeuhi, who was not moving, literally didnt move his feet, and on passed it to some other knucklehead standing 3 foot away from him. It looked like an under 7s game at the local park where they have to pass 3 times before you can run.

Its alright to say Brooks isnt taking the right options but the Roosters game highlighted the fact that very often, he doesnt have any.

Now some will respond by saying "well Brooks runs the team, he should get them into position". To that I say - if it only worked like that. Cooper Cronk never had these issues because his teams were well drilled to be where they were supposed to be. He proved it in the GF where he did nothing and the team went without him.

Brooks cant make players get off their a$$ and start being lazy and make some second efforts. So I think he will make a sufficient NRL halfback in the right team. Changing him for Adam Reynolds (which has been the joke of the week suggested by some) doesnt make the forwards get into position and offer options, or get the backline in order ready to capitalise on an option taken by the playmaker.

Well said Swordy - the only thing I would add.... they (Rorters) were offside quite a few times + the times they were on side with incredible line speed - gave Brooks no time to set for the kick on the majority of the sets. The opposition knew that he had no other option but to kick because none of our our players gave him an option. It is almost like the rest of the team are thinking ...ok we've put in for the first five tackles and made 35 metres, now it is your turn on the sixth ... we are going to have a rest. Need a bomb under all of them, only AJ maybe has an injury excuse, no one has an unfit excuse - they need to work as a team, they have not done this in the first games. I think this is the main problem...Not Brooks. With no options Reynolds wouldn't be any better, even Cronk would struggle.

But its Brooks job to organize his set of six ......organize the runners ...the line he wants them to run ...where he wants to be by tackle 5

Brooks is the problem obviously and the excuses need to stop

Don’t forget to add it’s Brooks fault if BJ is a lazy so and so

And it’s Brooks fault Teddy and Keary are a class above anything we have

He probably even started the NSW floods.

What has BJ got to do with how we complete our sets ....he is useless as well ...and we are paying him about 600 k

I guess a few Brooks started the floods , as wel as the creeks and rivers and rain ...and the fact you Govt didn't increase the dam wall height

Well the scoreline blew out to 40 because our left edge was a disaster in the 2nd half (that’s mainly on BJ and Kepoa)

Say if the score was 20-6, it would have been fairly indicative of where both teams are at, as the 2nd half was complete contrast to the 1st half where I think we competed well.

Oh so losing by only 14 makes it ok .....

If we complete our sets of six and get better results at the end of sets , we will end up in better field position and not hand possession over in areas that the Roosters can easily attack from ..which results in bigger risks taken by the Roosters

Brooks controls this ......

 

[Deleted member 3518]

I thought of this stuff after the game but haven't had time to verify my thoughts.

Brooks kicking and end of set options were atrocious, there is no denying that. And there are a lot of people that have cut Brooks, and thats their opinion and thats fine. We are a forum sharing ideas.

But I havent written of Brooks yet, on the basis that he hasn't exactly had the support required. There is a presumption from some that every WT player on those last tackles is in position, ready with several options, and Brooks always takes the worst one. I think this is incorrect.

The times I recall, Brooks got the feed from Dummy half on the last or second last, and there was no one there. There were no forwards coming through giving options, the outside backs werent even in position and ready, and generally most were standing on the short side or close to the ruck, lazy or out of breath.

Brooks gets the ball, looks at his options (of which there are none because most are standing there like tools) and so what is he to do.

I saw one stage when Brooks decided to try and get quick ball out, so he passed to Doeuhi, who was not moving, literally didnt move his feet, and on passed it to some other knucklehead standing 3 foot away from him. It looked like an under 7s game at the local park where they have to pass 3 times before you can run.

Its alright to say Brooks isnt taking the right options but the Roosters game highlighted the fact that very often, he doesnt have any.

Now some will respond by saying "well Brooks runs the team, he should get them into position". To that I say - if it only worked like that. Cooper Cronk never had these issues because his teams were well drilled to be where they were supposed to be. He proved it in the GF where he did nothing and the team went without him.

Brooks cant make players get off their a$$ and start being lazy and make some second efforts. So I think he will make a sufficient NRL halfback in the right team. Changing him for Adam Reynolds (which has been the joke of the week suggested by some) doesnt make the forwards get into position and offer options, or get the backline in order ready to capitalise on an option taken by the playmaker.

Well said Swordy - the only thing I would add.... they (Rorters) were offside quite a few times + the times they were on side with incredible line speed - gave Brooks no time to set for the kick on the majority of the sets. The opposition knew that he had no other option but to kick because none of our our players gave him an option. It is almost like the rest of the team are thinking ...ok we've put in for the first five tackles and made 35 metres, now it is your turn on the sixth ... we are going to have a rest. Need a bomb under all of them, only AJ maybe has an injury excuse, no one has an unfit excuse - they need to work as a team, they have not done this in the first games. I think this is the main problem...Not Brooks. With no options Reynolds wouldn't be any better, even Cronk would struggle.

But its Brooks job to organize his set of six ......organize the runners ...the line he wants them to run ...where he wants to be by tackle 5

Brooks is the problem obviously and the excuses need to stop.

I disagree Happy . It’s not spontaneous football they play . They work to a position on the field , to setup whatever play they called to run , which would have been a lot of the time 2-3 plays earlier . If your saying there’s an inability to play eyes up footy , well I agree with you. But people standing in the centre of the field when a block play down thier edge is called , is ? their fault.

Brooks needs to call these guys out , with some serious on field abuse , and that’s brooks problem .
I saw Munster do it a couple weeks back , Moses does it every single set of 6 , etc. he’s too good of a bloke . I guess that’s his issue . But that’s an easy fix , to me .

 

[Speed2burn]

I thought of this stuff after the game but haven't had time to verify my thoughts.

Brooks kicking and end of set options were atrocious, there is no denying that. And there are a lot of people that have cut Brooks, and thats their opinion and thats fine. We are a forum sharing ideas.

But I havent written of Brooks yet, on the basis that he hasn't exactly had the support required. There is a presumption from some that every WT player on those last tackles is in position, ready with several options, and Brooks always takes the worst one. I think this is incorrect.

The times I recall, Brooks got the feed from Dummy half on the last or second last, and there was no one there. There were no forwards coming through giving options, the outside backs werent even in position and ready, and generally most were standing on the short side or close to the ruck, lazy or out of breath.

Brooks gets the ball, looks at his options (of which there are none because most are standing there like tools) and so what is he to do.

I saw one stage when Brooks decided to try and get quick ball out, so he passed to Doeuhi, who was not moving, literally didnt move his feet, and on passed it to some other knucklehead standing 3 foot away from him. It looked like an under 7s game at the local park where they have to pass 3 times before you can run.

Its alright to say Brooks isnt taking the right options but the Roosters game highlighted the fact that very often, he doesnt have any.

Now some will respond by saying "well Brooks runs the team, he should get them into position". To that I say - if it only worked like that. Cooper Cronk never had these issues because his teams were well drilled to be where they were supposed to be. He proved it in the GF where he did nothing and the team went without him.

Brooks cant make players get off their a$$ and start being lazy and make some second efforts. So I think he will make a sufficient NRL halfback in the right team. Changing him for Adam Reynolds (which has been the joke of the week suggested by some) doesnt make the forwards get into position and offer options, or get the backline in order ready to capitalise on an option taken by the playmaker.

Well said Swordy - the only thing I would add.... they (Rorters) were offside quite a few times + the times they were on side with incredible line speed - gave Brooks no time to set for the kick on the majority of the sets. The opposition knew that he had no other option but to kick because none of our our players gave him an option. It is almost like the rest of the team are thinking ...ok we've put in for the first five tackles and made 35 metres, now it is your turn on the sixth ... we are going to have a rest. Need a bomb under all of them, only AJ maybe has an injury excuse, no one has an unfit excuse - they need to work as a team, they have not done this in the first games. I think this is the main problem...Not Brooks. With no options Reynolds wouldn't be any better, even Cronk would struggle.

But its Brooks job to organize his set of six ......organize the runners ...the line he wants them to run ...where he wants to be by tackle 5

Brooks is the problem obviously and the excuses need to stop

Don’t forget to add it’s Brooks fault if BJ is a lazy so and so

And it’s Brooks fault Teddy and Keary are a class above anything we have

He probably even started the NSW floods.

What has BJ got to do with how we complete our sets ....he is useless as well ...and we are paying him about 600 k

I guess a few Brooks started the floods , as wel as the creeks and rivers and rain ...and the fact you Govt didn't increase the dam wall height

Well the scoreline blew out to 40 because our left edge was a disaster in the 2nd half (that’s mainly on BJ and Kepoa)

Say if the score was 20-6, it would have been fairly indicative of where both teams are at, as the 2nd half was complete contrast to the 1st half where I think we competed well.

Oh so losing by only 14 makes it ok .....

If we complete our sets of six and get better results at the end of sets , we will end up in better field position and not hand possession over in areas that the Roosters can easily attack from ..which results in bigger risks taken by the Roosters

Brooks controls this ......

I would have been happy if we put the same effort in the 1st half for the full 80. That’s all I’m trying to say. But we didn’t

 

[weststigerman]

Part of the issue is not just general lack of support, but at that stage Roosters had already cut the outside defence up several times, for two tries, and I think the Tigers were already battling fitness-wise.

We have to be competitive and stay competitive early, because good teams, as soon as they get that small advantage, they will punish you. And then you find yourself defending several sets, down by 12 or 18 points and somehow trying to mount a comeback with no energy.

That's why I said I saw effort last week, and Madge said so too, but effort isn't enough. Other folks dismissed it, saying there was lack of unity or lack of effort, but I saw players trying and struggling, once the first mistakes were made, Roosters barely let off and Tigers don't seem to have the talent/confidence at the moment to turn things around mid-game.

Yep, that's why I was so critical of Brooks. If he was able to get some repeat sets or even kick early to corners like the good halfbacks do, the defence would not be as gassed. We probably would have still lost but we would have stayed in the contest.

 

[PJ_]

In all 4 frames, Tedesco is covering a different person. He made Brooks pass, try-saver on Talau, got off quickly and was there for the kick on the other side of the field. What a blood freak.

I hate how good he is

Has he been drug tested yet ?

I'd test him for horse roids judging by his teeth

 

[AdelaideTiger]

Effort was abysmal this week, they are really down on confidence. Tigers won the first defensive set and should have a scored after Laurie's break, instead they took the wrong option with tackles left Roosters dive on a loose ball and all of a sudden were 6-0. Heads went down, next set BJ seemingly disappears from the defensive line, it's 12-0 and the game is basically over.
Everything was going to have to go our way to get past the chooks and almost nothing did, what's most disappointing is that the opportunity was there for a strong second half showing but the effort wasn't there.
It really just seems like they are mentally in a hole, and everything is that much harder when your losing, they just need a win and soon. The Knights aren't that special, we just need some luck to go our way.

 

[happy_tiger]

I thought of this stuff after the game but haven't had time to verify my thoughts.

Brooks kicking and end of set options were atrocious, there is no denying that. And there are a lot of people that have cut Brooks, and thats their opinion and thats fine. We are a forum sharing ideas.

But I havent written of Brooks yet, on the basis that he hasn't exactly had the support required. There is a presumption from some that every WT player on those last tackles is in position, ready with several options, and Brooks always takes the worst one. I think this is incorrect.

The times I recall, Brooks got the feed from Dummy half on the last or second last, and there was no one there. There were no forwards coming through giving options, the outside backs werent even in position and ready, and generally most were standing on the short side or close to the ruck, lazy or out of breath.

Brooks gets the ball, looks at his options (of which there are none because most are standing there like tools) and so what is he to do.

I saw one stage when Brooks decided to try and get quick ball out, so he passed to Doeuhi, who was not moving, literally didnt move his feet, and on passed it to some other knucklehead standing 3 foot away from him. It looked like an under 7s game at the local park where they have to pass 3 times before you can run.

Its alright to say Brooks isnt taking the right options but the Roosters game highlighted the fact that very often, he doesnt have any.

Now some will respond by saying "well Brooks runs the team, he should get them into position". To that I say - if it only worked like that. Cooper Cronk never had these issues because his teams were well drilled to be where they were supposed to be. He proved it in the GF where he did nothing and the team went without him.

Brooks cant make players get off their a$$ and start being lazy and make some second efforts. So I think he will make a sufficient NRL halfback in the right team. Changing him for Adam Reynolds (which has been the joke of the week suggested by some) doesnt make the forwards get into position and offer options, or get the backline in order ready to capitalise on an option taken by the playmaker.

Well said Swordy - the only thing I would add.... they (Rorters) were offside quite a few times + the times they were on side with incredible line speed - gave Brooks no time to set for the kick on the majority of the sets. The opposition knew that he had no other option but to kick because none of our our players gave him an option. It is almost like the rest of the team are thinking ...ok we've put in for the first five tackles and made 35 metres, now it is your turn on the sixth ... we are going to have a rest. Need a bomb under all of them, only AJ maybe has an injury excuse, no one has an unfit excuse - they need to work as a team, they have not done this in the first games. I think this is the main problem...Not Brooks. With no options Reynolds wouldn't be any better, even Cronk would struggle.

But its Brooks job to organize his set of six ......organize the runners ...the line he wants them to run ...where he wants to be by tackle 5

Brooks is the problem obviously and the excuses need to stop.

I disagree Happy . It’s not spontaneous football they play . They work to a position on the field , to setup whatever play they called to run , which would have been a lot of the time 2-3 plays earlier . If your saying there’s an inability to play eyes up footy , well I agree with you. But people standing in the centre of the field when a block play down thier edge is called , is ? their fault.

Brooks needs to call these guys out , with some serious on field abuse , and that’s brooks problem .
I saw Munster do it a couple weeks back , Moses does it every single set of 6 , etc. he’s too good of a bloke . I guess that’s his issue . But that’s an easy fix , to me .

Every situation is different of course , but they probably have a Plan A,B and C depending if they are coming from a 22 tap ,scrum ,penalty set restart etc ...yes they play eyes up footy , but they practice how they run a set 1000 times .....

The idea that is even if you hit the 85 minute mark and are mentally and physically exhausted ...these Plans and sets come second nature

 

[happy_tiger]

I thought of this stuff after the game but haven't had time to verify my thoughts.

Brooks kicking and end of set options were atrocious, there is no denying that. And there are a lot of people that have cut Brooks, and thats their opinion and thats fine. We are a forum sharing ideas.

But I havent written of Brooks yet, on the basis that he hasn't exactly had the support required. There is a presumption from some that every WT player on those last tackles is in position, ready with several options, and Brooks always takes the worst one. I think this is incorrect.

The times I recall, Brooks got the feed from Dummy half on the last or second last, and there was no one there. There were no forwards coming through giving options, the outside backs werent even in position and ready, and generally most were standing on the short side or close to the ruck, lazy or out of breath.

Brooks gets the ball, looks at his options (of which there are none because most are standing there like tools) and so what is he to do.

I saw one stage when Brooks decided to try and get quick ball out, so he passed to Doeuhi, who was not moving, literally didnt move his feet, and on passed it to some other knucklehead standing 3 foot away from him. It looked like an under 7s game at the local park where they have to pass 3 times before you can run.

Its alright to say Brooks isnt taking the right options but the Roosters game highlighted the fact that very often, he doesnt have any.

Now some will respond by saying "well Brooks runs the team, he should get them into position". To that I say - if it only worked like that. Cooper Cronk never had these issues because his teams were well drilled to be where they were supposed to be. He proved it in the GF where he did nothing and the team went without him.

Brooks cant make players get off their a$$ and start being lazy and make some second efforts. So I think he will make a sufficient NRL halfback in the right team. Changing him for Adam Reynolds (which has been the joke of the week suggested by some) doesnt make the forwards get into position and offer options, or get the backline in order ready to capitalise on an option taken by the playmaker.

Well said Swordy - the only thing I would add.... they (Rorters) were offside quite a few times + the times they were on side with incredible line speed - gave Brooks no time to set for the kick on the majority of the sets. The opposition knew that he had no other option but to kick because none of our our players gave him an option. It is almost like the rest of the team are thinking ...ok we've put in for the first five tackles and made 35 metres, now it is your turn on the sixth ... we are going to have a rest. Need a bomb under all of them, only AJ maybe has an injury excuse, no one has an unfit excuse - they need to work as a team, they have not done this in the first games. I think this is the main problem...Not Brooks. With no options Reynolds wouldn't be any better, even Cronk would struggle.

But its Brooks job to organize his set of six ......organize the runners ...the line he wants them to run ...where he wants to be by tackle 5

Brooks is the problem obviously and the excuses need to stop

Don’t forget to add it’s Brooks fault if BJ is a lazy so and so

And it’s Brooks fault Teddy and Keary are a class above anything we have

He probably even started the NSW floods.

What has BJ got to do with how we complete our sets ....he is useless as well ...and we are paying him about 600 k

I guess a few Brooks started the floods , as wel as the creeks and rivers and rain ...and the fact you Govt didn't increase the dam wall height

Well the scoreline blew out to 40 because our left edge was a disaster in the 2nd half (that’s mainly on BJ and Kepoa)

Say if the score was 20-6, it would have been fairly indicative of where both teams are at, as the 2nd half was complete contrast to the 1st half where I think we competed well.

Oh so losing by only 14 makes it ok .....

If we complete our sets of six and get better results at the end of sets , we will end up in better field position and not hand possession over in areas that the Roosters can easily attack from ..which results in bigger risks taken by the Roosters

Brooks controls this ......

I would have been happy if we put the same effort in the 1st half for the full 80. That’s all I’m trying to say. But we didn’t

That's what happens to undermanned sides ...they can't keep up the effort for the 80 because they can't cope mentally or physically in the end

 

[Deleted member 3518]

I thought of this stuff after the game but haven't had time to verify my thoughts.

Brooks kicking and end of set options were atrocious, there is no denying that. And there are a lot of people that have cut Brooks, and thats their opinion and thats fine. We are a forum sharing ideas.

But I havent written of Brooks yet, on the basis that he hasn't exactly had the support required. There is a presumption from some that every WT player on those last tackles is in position, ready with several options, and Brooks always takes the worst one. I think this is incorrect.

The times I recall, Brooks got the feed from Dummy half on the last or second last, and there was no one there. There were no forwards coming through giving options, the outside backs werent even in position and ready, and generally most were standing on the short side or close to the ruck, lazy or out of breath.

Brooks gets the ball, looks at his options (of which there are none because most are standing there like tools) and so what is he to do.

I saw one stage when Brooks decided to try and get quick ball out, so he passed to Doeuhi, who was not moving, literally didnt move his feet, and on passed it to some other knucklehead standing 3 foot away from him. It looked like an under 7s game at the local park where they have to pass 3 times before you can run.

Its alright to say Brooks isnt taking the right options but the Roosters game highlighted the fact that very often, he doesnt have any.

Now some will respond by saying "well Brooks runs the team, he should get them into position". To that I say - if it only worked like that. Cooper Cronk never had these issues because his teams were well drilled to be where they were supposed to be. He proved it in the GF where he did nothing and the team went without him.

Brooks cant make players get off their a$$ and start being lazy and make some second efforts. So I think he will make a sufficient NRL halfback in the right team. Changing him for Adam Reynolds (which has been the joke of the week suggested by some) doesnt make the forwards get into position and offer options, or get the backline in order ready to capitalise on an option taken by the playmaker.

Well said Swordy - the only thing I would add.... they (Rorters) were offside quite a few times + the times they were on side with incredible line speed - gave Brooks no time to set for the kick on the majority of the sets. The opposition knew that he had no other option but to kick because none of our our players gave him an option. It is almost like the rest of the team are thinking ...ok we've put in for the first five tackles and made 35 metres, now it is your turn on the sixth ... we are going to have a rest. Need a bomb under all of them, only AJ maybe has an injury excuse, no one has an unfit excuse - they need to work as a team, they have not done this in the first games. I think this is the main problem...Not Brooks. With no options Reynolds wouldn't be any better, even Cronk would struggle.

But its Brooks job to organize his set of six ......organize the runners ...the line he wants them to run ...where he wants to be by tackle 5

Brooks is the problem obviously and the excuses need to stop.

I disagree Happy . It’s not spontaneous football they play . They work to a position on the field , to setup whatever play they called to run , which would have been a lot of the time 2-3 plays earlier . If your saying there’s an inability to play eyes up footy , well I agree with you. But people standing in the centre of the field when a block play down thier edge is called , is ? their fault.

Brooks needs to call these guys out , with some serious on field abuse , and that’s brooks problem .
I saw Munster do it a couple weeks back , Moses does it every single set of 6 , etc. he’s too good of a bloke . I guess that’s his issue . But that’s an easy fix , to me .

Every situation is different of course , but they probably have a Plan A,B and C depending if they are coming from a 22 tap ,scrum ,penalty set restart etc ...yes they play eyes up footy , but they practice how they run a set 1000 times .....

The idea that is even if you hit the 85 minute mark and are mentally and physically exhausted ...these Plans and sets come second nature

Yea that’s my point , does anyone really need another bloke drilling them to get in position when they train and drill the situations all day every day . I get the kicking hate , the lack of working to a position on the field hate , I’ll pay all that , but you can put hate on brooks for other guys just not getting to where they need to get to . It’s on those guys . And , BJ unfortunately leads the cultural bludge brigade . Hopefully , he fixes himself , and he has a late career renaissance, but it’s not looking good , and we can’t afford to carry him whilst he works that out . It sux because he probably is the best centre in the world when he’s in form . But when was the last time that happened ?