I get it and see exactly where you are coming from; in fact I acknowledged the quality of the defence on both edges. In addition, Seyfarth, in my opinion, is only partially responsible for the poor execution of the attacking side of the equation. Galvin is equally responsible for not straightening the attack or digging into the line deep enough before releasing the ball. As a result Seyfarth is easily to shut down. Sure if he was a Fafita he could brobably break a couple of tackles with his strength and get a better result; bit that isn't the issue on that edge in attack.
Given Seyfarth's size and strength limitations he isn't going to skittle players to make his own hole; but, we know what is capable of if he is put into a gap. This simply means that his combination with Galvin needs to improve. They need to work out how they can hit holes, at good angles, at the ad line or they need to target a specific player and have Galvin shift them create the hole for Seyfarth. If they follow him he drops it off his hip and if they don't a simple show and go or hit Star with no inside pressure. That is about as difficult as it needs to be for that edge.
We are scoring points on that edge because Starford is standing up the opposition and Taruva is a great finisher outside of him. It is their combination, and Galvin's willingness to serve them the ball that is leading to points, not anything magic Galvin is doing.
On the other side of the paddock AD is in slow motion with the ball - no urgency, no effort to get to his feet, not providing opportunities for his winger. If his groin is holding him back we would be better served with Naden in that postion; he is making the effort. However, when Galvin swings to that side Luai strightens the attack and brings him to the line before releasing the ball. If you look at what Luai did for Galvin on the sweep this is exactly what Galvin needs to do for Seyfarth on the other edge. Address that and our right edge will start to fly.
