LIVE GAME Round 11 vs. Rabbitohs

Live Game Discussion
Our halves didn’t do anything yesterday attack wise. Brooks did do a couple hits in defence, but attack we saw nothing from him and Wakeham. Api I thought struggled as well he only made 3 runs and less then 30 metres to, but our halves struggling when we get into the opposition 20 has what’s been killing us this year. Majority of our 5th tackle options yesterday was poor, there was only maybe 2 good ones.
 
Glenji95 said:
Our halves didn’t do anything yesterday attack wise. Brooks did do a couple hits in defence, but attack we saw nothing from him and Wakeham. Api I thought struggled as well he only made 3 runs and less then 30 metres to, but our halves struggling when we get into the opposition 20 has what’s been killing us this year. Majority of our 5th tackle options yesterday was poor, there was only maybe 2 good ones.
Click to expand...
Souths kept our halves quiet and we kept their’s quiet. It was a great defensive game for both sides.
 
Just my opinion - Watching KOE Cup, Blore is to good a player for that standard, needs to be on the bench,
Wakeham offers nothing really and having Laurie in the the 6 would be an improvement. Brook tried really hard, but had no real support from Wakeham, his defensive effort was great. Simpkin is a bench waste, you need mobile big forwards coming on when the opposition is starting to tire. Another one, watch other Teams how they move the ball around early in the sets, at least they are testing the opposition, our attack is so one out.
 
I just rewatched the game and read the comments here. I think we played conservatively in order to minimise mistakes and get into the grind. We did that well; however, our lack of creativity means we don't have points in us to get over the top. There were a couple of half chances that could have swung the game on its ear; but just not to be.

The question really is where do we find improvement given the roster that we have?

Picking and sticking with Brooks and Wakeham is a problem. Brooks and Wakeham are too similar and don't offer much as a combination except consistency on the left and right side of the field. I just don't think we can afford to have them playing as a combination for the rest of the season. When used as a combination they don't dig into the line. Wakeham in particular passes too early.

I think it is time to experiment with a replacement in Cup. Daino is on the outer and from all reports is probably done at the club; however, I feel that despite his flaws off the field he may be the player we have that has the ability to produce some spark in the opposition's 20. The other option is Pellow, one we need to keep an eye on in cup - but clearly we need to develop and option or two if we are going to get off the bottom of the ladder.

On the game plan. I think we could change two things in the oppositions 20 and to improve our ability to put points on the board. Changes we could make even if we do stick with a Brroks/Wakeham combination.
  • End of set play. We need the halves to play what they see instead of low % bombs that result in us handing the ball over 1-5m out. Mix up the options, a bomb, a grubber, a stacked shift to a corner with an IP, Bateman or Twal as the targeted runner. We simply ask more questions of the defence.
  • Second phase play. Instead of running a perpetual set of drop off plays around the ruck and first receiver. change the dimension of it. Drop off to, or run, a simple X/Y play off Klemmer/Stefano one or two passes wide. This will provide second phase options for an ICE/Bateman running lines or a "fill in" backline shift. Subtle change, low risk but higher probability of success.
Nothing drastic here but certainly enough to improve our diabolical attacking stats and it doesn't take a brilliant set of halves to execute. Certainly within the capabilities of Brooks and Wakeham as they aren't doing any thinking just executing. Surely Api has the capacity to call a "3 for" play from hooker.
 
Last edited:
Blocker1963 said:
Just my opinion - Watching KOE Cup, Blore is to good a player for that standard, needs to be on the bench,
Wakeham offers nothing really and having Laurie in the the 6 would be an improvement. Brook tried really hard, but had no real support from Wakeham, his defensive effort was great. Simpkin is a bench waste, you need mobile big forwards coming on when the opposition is starting to tire. Another one, watch other Teams how they move the ball around early in the sets, at least they are testing the opposition, our attack is so one out.
Click to expand...

We’re stuck in wet weather format, but it was worth a try.
 
Jolls said:
I just rewatched the game and read the comments here. I think we played conservatively in order to minimise mistakes and get into the grind. We did that well; however, our lack of creativity means we don't have points in us to get over the top. There were a couple of half chances that could have swung the game on its ear; but just not to be.

The question really is where do we find improvement given the roster that we have?

Picking and sticking with Brooks and Wakeham is a problem. Brooks and Wakeham are too similar and don't offer much as a combination except consistency on the left and right side of the field. I just don't think we can afford to have them playing as a combination for the rest of the season. When used as a combination they don't dig into the line. Wakeham in particular passes too early.

I think it is time to experiment with a replacement in Cup. Daino is on the outer and from all reports is probably done at the club; however, I feel that despite his flaws off the field he may be the player we have that has the ability to produce some spark in the opposition's 20. The other option is Pellow, one we need to keep an eye on in cup - but clearly we need to develop and option or two if we are going to get off the bottom of the ladder.

On the game plan. I think we could change two things in the oppositions 20 and to improve our ability to put points on the board. Changes we could make even if we do stick with a Brroks/Wakeham combination.
  • End of set play. We need the halves to play what they see instead of low % bombs that result in us handing the ball over 1-5m out. Mix up the options, a bomb, a grubber, a stacked shift to a corner with an IP, Bateman or Twal as the targeted runner. We simply ask more questions of the defence.
  • Second phase play. Instead of running a perpetual set of drop off plays around the ruck and first receiver. change the dimension of it. Drop off to, or run, a simple X/Y play off Klemmer/Stefano one or two passes wide. This will provide second phase options for an ICE/Bateman running lines or a "fill in" backline shift. Subtle change, low risk but higher probability of success.
Nothing drastic here but certainly enough to improve our diabolical attacking stats and it doesn't take a brilliant set of halves to execute. Certainly within the capabilities of Brooks and Wakeham as they aren't doing any thinking just executing. Surely Api has the capacity to call a "3 for" play from hooker.
Click to expand...
Whatever happened to the old inside pass to Chris Lawrence on the angle play, with either Bateman or Ice or even AJ?
 
Glenji95 said:
Our halves didn’t do anything yesterday attack wise. Brooks did do a couple hits in defence, but attack we saw nothing from him and Wakeham. Api I thought struggled as well he only made 3 runs and less then 30 metres to, but our halves struggling when we get into the opposition 20 has what’s been killing us this year. Majority of our 5th tackle options yesterday was poor, there was only maybe 2 good ones.
Click to expand...

Rewatching they did throw a bit at them. silly errors like the Bateman error, bad defence, giving away a penalties cost the game.

Not much attack at 9, front row and centre either
 
I gotta feeling souths were told not to go hard against us & just get the 2 points
Latrell & Co were quiet for 70 minutes & only went hard in the last 10 minutes to secure the points when they got worried that 6 - 0 wasn't a handy enough lead
It was like a training run for them & they made us look good for 70 minutes but they were in full control the whole game & they knew that we weren't gonna score 🤣
 
Wiz said:
Our right side has more metres than our left because Souths almost exclusively kicked to our right side. You cannot conclude the right side is stronger based on those statistics. I believe Souths kicked to our right side to avoid Junior Tupou on our left, who has been absolute dynamite on kick returns in recent weeks.
Click to expand...
Well maybe souths did bomb the hell out of our rightside but don't remember any spilt bombs on our right
 
Tiger Woods said:
I gotta feeling souths were told not to go hard against us & just get the 2 points
Latrell & Co were quiet for 70 minutes & only went hard in the last 10 minutes to secure the points when they got worried that 6 - 0 wasn't a handy enough lead
It was like a training run for them & they made us look good for 70 minutes but they were in full control the whole game & they knew that we weren't gonna score 🤣
Click to expand...
It was 8-0, I had the same thought. Mitchell mic’d up and playing against his heroes nephew could have been a distraction?
Has anyone heard/seen the mic’d Mitchell replay?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

... and 10 more.
Total: 481 (members: 60, guests: 421)
Back
Top