LIVE GAME Wests Tigers v Melbourne Storm..

Live Game Discussion
I hope Gildart can get his defence right because he can really move in attack. Was always going to be an adjustment moving from England plus he's in the worst defensive team in the league

I wish Hastings would be allowed to do a little more kicking, it's one of his best skills. Did well linking up with his outside men and defended strongly, isn't the fastest but did his job

Peach at lock was solid, don't like him at dummy half but not much of a choice at the moment
 
GNR4LIFE said:
I rewatched the game this morning to see if I missed all his talk and energy that was much lauded about him. Didn’t see it. Besides one neat grubber that got us a repeat set, he didn’t offer much.
Click to expand...

I think he has the ability but he has to go out there and dominate. He wasn't terrible and that was a good kick but we need a half who takes the game on and wins it.

Brooks was actually pretty good as well. He set-up all Maulers tries as well as the one he didn't ground which could have gone either way.

We have to aim to be like Melbourne and a couple of their top players killed us out there. I think we needed a lot more from Hastings and/or Laurie.
 
Earl said:
I think he has the ability but he has to go out there and dominate. He wasn't terrible and that was a good kick but we need a half who takes the game on and wins it.

Brooks was actually pretty good as well. He set-up all Maulers tries as well as the one he didn't ground which could have gone either way.

We have to aim to be like Melbourne and a couple of their top players killed us out there. I think we needed a lot more from Hastings and/or Laurie.
Click to expand...
Brooks had a solid game, his kicking was quite good. Wish he would mix his passing up, he went short all night long.

Big miss on Hughes that lead to Melbourne getting the lead was a killer
 
cktiger said:
No we wouldn't have.
Brooks was getting all the ball.
Click to expand...

It's a good point. We were going to Brooks a fair bit but he played well. Does Madge have to get Hastings more involved ?

Hastings though doesn't have the running game of Hughes. He looked slow. I get what you are stating and I sort of agree but at the same time Hastings didn't just take the ball and make a bust himself. That is what Hughes did.
 
JC99 said:
Big miss on Hughes that lead to Melbourne getting the lead was a killer
Click to expand...

Agreed but at the same time no one in our team took the game on like this. I watched Papz interviewed after the game and he said they'd worked on their belief to make an impact on the game.
 
Defence is coaching. Storm are well drilled in defence had 5 players making their debut. They all know how to defend. Defence is on Madge. He was hired because of his defence aspect. Last nite proved to me Madge will be gone soon.
 
stryker 69 said:
We got some against and some for. The Noffa knock on late in the game that was let go an example.
Click to expand...
They felt bad at that point… look at chumps on here actually trying to give the decisions a pass, it's the same notion… I watched with two Storm supporters and another Tiger and we all thought for the first 20 second half was totally the rough end of the stick.

My question is, do we get the rub of the green?
 
Last edited:
TigerNeddyK said:
Surely you Dan see that Brooks is the problem ? He has failed to ever collaborate with anyone, Hastings should not just be another sacrificial lamb, the guy can ress as lay play.. he’s at least as good as Todd Carney!
Click to expand...
Preaching to the choir man.
Club loves Brooks.
 
twentyforty said:
I’m going to answer my own question here..
We’ve only ever had one or two good, clever forwards in our pack for half the club’s history. Fix that and it comes together.
Click to expand...
Furthermore, there’s been so much focus on recruiting halves. If we could develop a strong, skilful, no nonsense forward pack with good depth, then I dare say halves won’t be our problem.
 
Demps said:
Smart posting...

We've watched Brooks for years and despite him, being our best half... is a bottom tier half within the NRL.

I believe he has an extremely low football IQ shown with his poor kicking, poor game management and his poor choices on the field.

He'd be a outstanding 6 next to Cleary, Cherry Evans or Adam Reynolds.
Click to expand...
Disagree about the IQ being extremely low . I believe it’s a lack of trust in his own abilities and that of the team , combined with a footy IQ , that can go missing .
Also as Benji and Cronk said last night , and I’ve banged on about it on here in the past , The lack of a legitimate weapon out the back , really means that the edges can compress , as they don’t have to worry about Lattrell / turbo , in a 2 on 1 , 3 on 2 , with the edge defence .
This obviously really cramps the space in and around first receiver .
AD being there , definitely means there’s more spaces either side of the ruck , but he needs to learn how to hit his fullback with space , not try and hit the winger with a bullet pass himself .
That’s my take . With AD back I think we can let Brooks go and give madden a go . I think a kick first half , rather than a run first , allows AD to get at the edge defence one on one. .
But that’s not me saying brooks is shit . I still rate him . Next to Reynolds , even Chad Townsend , would spell trouble for oppositions , as his intangibles, are there for all to see .
We just don’t need that player . We need a no frills kick to corner type .
 
There is a reason most have us favourite for the spoon. We had enough field position and possession to control the game but really didn't take advantage of it, and in doing so kept Melbourne in the game. When they had opportunity they had players to take advantage of it - cant say the same about us. Players/ coach fault - take your pick it doesn't change the fact that the squad lacks quality in the key positions.
 
pawsandclaws1 said:
Stop blaming the referees, they weren't the reason for the continued poor goal line defence. Good teams defend referees mistakes. We don't and haven't over the last three and now start of the fourth year.
Click to expand...
So you're happy to let 3metre forward passes get let go for tries? You're easily pleased then.
 
The main issue as I see it: Tigers made key mistakes, including unforced errors like a few bad offloads, and Storm made us pay for those mistakes. We were unable to defend our errors.

In reverse, Storm were losing the physical battle and were themselves starting to make mistakes, but Tigers couldn't quite make them pay for it, and Storm were able to hang on for 80 minutes. Storm key players stepped up in key moments.

Tigers need to keep doing everything they did in the 2nd half, for 80 mins. And I really don't care if it's use of the bench or whatever, the players on there need to be able to do it, or we'll never be able to compete with the top teams.

E.g. Kaufusi was asked to play centre for half the match, did so and did a solid job. The young forwards for Storm played reasonably large minutes, all rookies, and did their jobs (not outstandingly, just did what was needed).

Also goal kicking abysmal from both sides.

Storm were depleted going into the match, but that's like saying Roosters are depleted or Penrith are depleted - they are still very good sides and they still have excellent players in key positions.

If we jag one more try and/or Brooks kicks 4/5 instead of 2/5 I think the Tigers get away with the win.
 
Demps said:
That was probably what he was thinking but it was a dud move.

Shoulda capitalised on their weakened bench.

Peachy should've came on sooner.
Seyf and Garner shoulda played in the first half also.

They've been pushing LL to be a 80 minute player since day 1 which I believe he is not... Kelma definitely isn't either.

Bench mismanagement cripped us tonight.
I ain't a coach though..... 😂
Click to expand...
When you consider the goal line defence was so poor, we needed both these players on early to get some energy into the defence close to the line.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 542 (members: 37, guests: 505)
Back
Top