Use of bench

L

larrycorowa

New member
Had no idea what Sheens was doing with his use of the bench in the 2nd half. Mackinnon to fullback, Moltzen to centre, Ashyford to 2nd row. Thought we had enough disruptions with Utai playing out of position and Brown in for Ryan. Could understand if we were 30 in front…..

Have learned not to criticise Sheens because he gets it right 90% of the time. If anyone has a logical explanation would be good to hear it.
 
The commentators were saying something along the lines of 'going for the knock-out punch', but I'd definitely rather our original set up for that, I don't really think McKinnon adds much in attack outside of his support play.
I'm with you on this one, had me shot for ideas.
 
Its to replace a prop with a fullback….

Mackinnon on for Moltzen to take Ayshfords spot in the centre, who moves into the 2nd row to take ellis' spot who moves into the front row to take I think it was Groats spot

...perfectly logical
 
yeah hard to figure that one out!….I personally didn't like it...Sheens put that move away for the rest of the year!
 
It's funny how things never change, I was watching an old Canberra v Balmain game recently and Sheens was playing one of the Walters boys at fullback (cant remember which one) and a prop in the centres!

It didn't work that day!

Seriously though aside from McKinnon's experience surely we would be better off just replacing a prop with a prop?

I know Begavich is still raw but giving him 10-15 minutes would be alright wouldn't it?
 
Sheens may have seen the game as an opportunity toi expose some players to different positions in case it is needed in the semis?? Don't really know just trying to put a take on it. Maybe is saw it as a why of keeping Cronulla guessing or a way of making the wests Tigers work harder one thing is for sure his approach is varied and not boring…
 
We had Murdoch and Woods on the interchange and they can both play prop.
 
@cunno said:
Sheens may have seen the game as an opportunity toi expose some players to different positions in case it is needed in the semis?? Don't really know just trying to put a take on it. Maybe is saw it as a why of keeping Cronulla guessing or a way of making the wests Tigers work harder one thing is for sure his approach is varied and not boring…
Click to expand...

I agree, just testing out some combos in case of injury. It didn't last the whole game, he subbed Ayshford for Gibbs at the end.

Same as when he pulled Benji against Titans and we played 15 with Moltzen/Lui halves.
 
jirskyr, I think there's a bit of a difference between re-shuffling half the team to accomodate McKinnon in a pretty tight game and giving Marshall an early night when we're up by a fair bit against the team running last.
 
@jirskyr said:
@cunno said:
Sheens may have seen the game as an opportunity toi expose some players to different positions in case it is needed in the semis?? Don't really know just trying to put a take on it. Maybe is saw it as a why of keeping Cronulla guessing or a way of making the wests Tigers work harder one thing is for sure his approach is varied and not boring…

I agree, just testing out some combos in case of injury. It didn't last the whole game, **he subbed Ayshford for Gibbs at the end.**
Same as when he pulled Benji against Titans and we played 15 with Moltzen/Lui halves.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Through necessity rather than choice there
 
To quote sherbet from after the titans game regarding ellis to front row, it could be a "sign of things to come"

and many people have been speculating on here that Ayshford might move to second row next year.

If we swap Reddy for Moltz, and Grant for Wade, we actually have a feasible new-look backline for next year… Maybe it was a 10 min trial?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 1,244 (members: 36, guests: 1,208)
Back
Top