Tedesco NSW SOO III fullback

@Nelson said:
@stryker said:
Yes Mike I agree. However he didn't play that way tonight. He drew defenders and didn't pass the ball. He tried to run around guys who had his measure. In the end he had no tries or assists and no line breaks nor assists. This is despite having all the ball and many many touches. I don't think he has locked down that no.1 just yet.

He didn't draw outside defenders so why would he have passed the ball? They targeted him hard from the inside and committed to him. Short of brushing 2 or 3 rushing defenders he wasn't going to break the line himself, he needed an option back on the inside to stop the rushing slide. It was inept coaching where they just planned the most obvious ploy and then didn't tweak it to adjust for Queensland predicting it, which they were always going to do.

Yes he did. Anyway I'm not arguing over this. He didn't impress me.
 
@stryker said:
@Nelson said:
@stryker said:
Yes Mike I agree. However he didn't play that way tonight. He drew defenders and didn't pass the ball. He tried to run around guys who had his measure. In the end he had no tries or assists and no line breaks nor assists. This is despite having all the ball and many many touches. I don't think he has locked down that no.1 just yet.

He didn't draw outside defenders so why would he have passed the ball? They targeted him hard from the inside and committed to him. Short of brushing 2 or 3 rushing defenders he wasn't going to break the line himself, he needed an option back on the inside to stop the rushing slide. It was inept coaching where they just planned the most obvious ploy and then didn't tweak it to adjust for Queensland predicting it, which they were always going to do.

Yes he did. Anyway I'm not arguing over this. He didn't impress me.

Because your a butthurt qlder?
My god your a soft lot. 10 series out of 11 and still can't cop a loss. Lol
 
Tedesco just showed why he will be the NSW fullback for the next few seasons while Latrell Mitchell waits.

He impressed me and I'm a Qlder.
 
It's not about the loss you nerd. We have the series and to be honest I'm happy to see NSW get up so there's interest next year.

Its about the Tiges…when your players leave the club scene to play rep you hope that they take their game to another level and return to the club a better player and lead the team to higher honors.
I would argue Woods has become a worse player since making rep and I hoped not to see that happen again. I'm sure it won't and will put it down to pressure and a useless coach but Teddy looked easily contained tonight and his X factor was nullified. I wasn't concerned about him ripping the game open and that's not the way I was thinking going into the game. With all that ball he should have done better.
 
All the backs were easily contained as nsw moved the ball side to side rather than doing the hard yards up the middle first.
 
@stryker said:
Rep footy is a team sport. Ted didn't play as a member of the team at times out there….Had QLD won he would have copped some criticism for shutting down backline plays.

He'll learn that try assists mean just as much as tries scored at this level and when he does he'll kill it. The lesson must be learnt... NSW had all the ball and field position and had to come from behind to win as they butchered so many try scoring opportunities. Ted was one of the reasons why.

Can't agree with that at all.

Firstly Tedesco has as many try assists as tries at club level.

Secondly I hardly saw an opportunity where he should have thrown a pass where he did not. He distributed a fair number of times, or tucked the ball under when under pressure.

The halves essentially threw the ball out the back to him and hoped for the best, right out of the Tigers playbook. Especially with NSW struggling to straighten the play, he should not be distributing out the the centres will-nilly if the team is going more sideways than forwards.

As others have said, QLD focused so heavily on Tedesco that it gave the others more breathing space. Sometimes it's his involvement off the ball that causes the most trouble for oppositions.

Of all the players out there, in his first game, I thought he was close to the most dangerous and did not make any errors at the back. Probably Tedesco and Inglis looked most likely to break the line and Inglis has played 30+ Origins, getting quality ball from Cronk, Lockyer and Thurston in his recent times.

I actually don't know how you can be labelled a hog - not your words but it is what you meant - when playing fullback. Fullback is not a distribution role, it is a "chime in" role, and if they give you the ball you make the call to run or pass, and you make that call in a near instant because the defence are on you and you are almost always part of a planned move. It's not like the halves where you get a bit of time to pick and choose your option.

So if the halves give him the ball and he runs it half or more of the times, which is his greatest strength, I say go for it… dare I say that was even the game plan for the first 30 odd minutes.

No hospital passes from him unlike Wade Graham, Mansour or a few others.
 
As happy already stated QLDsupporters wish Teddy was a Queenslander..

Ran for 254m in an Origin game with 3 tackle breaks and a line break when it mattered most…
 
I think the amount of criticism for a debut game is totally unwarranted and reeks of sour grapes

Yes, he may not have been as dominant last night as he is for us, that's not easy with qld offside all nite and his first game with his team mates… Yet he played a major role in the lead up to the blues match winning try

Butthurt sounds about right... tough guy try hard true colours showing
Lol
 
Great debut. Very involved. One line break, 2 breaks due to supporting and just missing 2 tries. That 3 line breaks he was involved in. Looked dangerous many times.
Got the ball running sideways near the sideline too much.
 
Teddy was excellent except for one bit easy Qld try out to the left of the field early in the game - Teddy just went to have a look it seemed like but stayed well back and not get involved at all.
 
@innsaneink said:
I think the amount of criticism for a debut game is totally unwarranted and reeks of sour grapes

Yes, he may not have been as dominant last night as he is for us, that's not easy with qld offside all nite and his first game with his team mates… Yet he played a major role in the lead up to the blues match winning try

Butthurt sounds about right... tough guy try hard true colours showing
Lol

Such a boring little twerp you are ink.j
 
From NRLcom

1\. James Tedesco

Showed enough in 80 minutes to suggest the No.1 jersey will be his for many years to come. It was his supporting break that paved the way for Michael Jennings' match winning-try. Tedesco made more metres than any other player with 258 and looked lethal whenever he got the ball in space. Supported his forwards through the middle and created several half-chances on the fringes with his speed. 8.5/10
 
C'mon Stryker are you making it up that you even watched the game.

Tedesco was in the top 3 for NSW and cemented his FB spot for years to come

Was he has dominant as he is in the NRL - No of course he wasnt it is Origin and his first game

If you think he played badly then you are an absolute idiot
 
He was pretty damn good given it was he debut. Heaps better than Moylan.

Shame the Blues just played boring, one out footy for the majority of the night…..hard to shine with that happening.
 
Look I think Stryker is right in a way…however the cross field stuff from the first half didn't help Teddy's game. Along with the predictability of the out the back plays.
I seriously believe that the blues need a dominant half in Hodkinson and must blood Peats for game 1\. Be even better if Laurie's not coach, a Geoff Toovey type would do me or even Geoff himself.
 
I can see where Stryker is coming from. Teddy didn't blow the game apart. It was though a very solid debut.

I think he took the right option on basically every occasion though which was a good thing. I think he should work on his pace a little bit because he should have scored that runaway try.
 
I thought QLD did a great job in nullifying Tedesco. Usually he got hit as soon as he caught the ball. With the little variation in attack for the entire game, he was an easy target. If the halves had varied it up more, Tedesco could have had more space, becoming so much more dangerous.

I was disappointed with NSW's second half. Given all the defensive work QLD did in the first half, I was expecting our backs to run rampant in the second half. But that obviously wasn't in the game plan…
 
@jirskyr said:
@stryker said:
Rep footy is a team sport. Ted didn't play as a member of the team at times out there….Had QLD won he would have copped some criticism for shutting down backline plays.

He'll learn that try assists mean just as much as tries scored at this level and when he does he'll kill it. The lesson must be learnt... NSW had all the ball and field position and had to come from behind to win as they butchered so many try scoring opportunities. Ted was one of the reasons why.

Can't agree with that at all.

Firstly Tedesco has as many try assists as tries at club level.

Secondly I hardly saw an opportunity where he should have thrown a pass where he did not. He distributed a fair number of times, or tucked the ball under when under pressure.

The halves essentially threw the ball out the back to him and hoped for the best, right out of the Tigers playbook. Especially with NSW struggling to straighten the play, he should not be distributing out the the centres will-nilly if the team is going more sideways than forwards.

As others have said, QLD focused so heavily on Tedesco that it gave the others more breathing space. Sometimes it's his involvement off the ball that causes the most trouble for oppositions.

Of all the players out there, in his first game, I thought he was close to the most dangerous and did not make any errors at the back. Probably Tedesco and Inglis looked most likely to break the line and Inglis has played 30+ Origins, getting quality ball from Cronk, Lockyer and Thurston in his recent times.

I actually don't know how you can be labelled a hog - not your words but it is what you meant - when playing fullback. Fullback is not a distribution role, it is a "chime in" role, and if they give you the ball you make the call to run or pass, and you make that call in a near instant because the defence are on you and you are almost always part of a planned move. It's not like the halves where you get a bit of time to pick and choose your option.

So if the halves give him the ball and he runs it half or more of the times, which is his greatest strength, I say go for it… dare I say that was even the game plan for the first 30 odd minutes.

No hospital passes from him unlike Wade Graham, Mansour or a few others.

100% spot on. You were obviously watching the same game I was.
 
@Juro said:
I thought QLD did a great job in nullifying Tedesco. Usually he got hit as soon as he caught the ball. With the little variation in attack for the entire game, he was an easy target. If the halves had varied it up more, Tedesco could have had more space, becoming so much more dangerous.

I was disappointed with NSW's second half. Given all the defensive work QLD did in the first half, I was expecting our backs to run rampant in the second half. But that obviously wasn't in the game plan…

NSW fell into the Tigers trap of not playing direct enough before doing the backline sweep. You have to drag the defence into the middle time and time again, before the odd backline wide sweep.

On Teddy made a couple of massive tackles on his own line early, was safe under the high ball in crappy conditions and eventually backed up and made the long run to win the game and was smart enough to not try and throw a hail Mary pass and take the tackle with seconds left on the clock. All and All a very good first up game, not super great but very good
 
Back
Top