Live game thread (contains spoilers)

InBenjiWeTrust
Member
Member
Posts: 2067
Joined: Mon 12 Mar, 2012 2:59 pm

Re: Live game thread (contains spoilers)

Post by InBenjiWeTrust » Sat 02 Apr, 2016 7:48 pm

We need better goal kicker than Moses & Rankin, where is Richards when you need him :)
Our 2nd rowers did not play with the energy from the 1st half.
Farah was again disappointing in attack, player on 900k shall contribute much more :(
Our props were very good, especially Woods, he played 70 min, 171 m from 16 runs, 38 tackles 2 MT.
IMHO, if Halatau is in the team, we need another prop or 2nd rower on the bench, Chee-Kam, Griffin or Edwards.
Again like in the last few games, why Aloiai plays only 23 minutes?
Too many missed tackles, Brooks 7 and Naiqama 6, in total 35 vs opposition's 22 :(
Lovett was solid, but we need a better player in his position.


User avatar
851
Member
Member
Posts: 6343
Joined: Sun 12 Jul, 2009 6:38 pm

Post by 851 » Sat 02 Apr, 2016 7:48 pm

weststigers wrote:Lovett, Cherrington and Rankin need replacing. Rankin didn't do anything wrong, but doesn't do anything great either.

Chee Kam for Lovett
Joel Edwards for Cherrington
Addo Carr or Justin Hunt for Rankin
That would be a great start, Taylor surely can't keep trotting out the same blokes every week and hoping something will change, surely he is not that stupid.
Go hard or go home

gallagher
Member
Member
Posts: 5516
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 1:18 pm

Post by gallagher » Sat 02 Apr, 2016 7:48 pm

jadtiger wrote:2 from 5 is not good and if we lose to the winless knights next week this forum will be in meltdown.On what i saw from the knights and us it has to be a good possibility
It's nicely set up isn't it.
We'll lose, Taylor will get the ass and the merry go round will start again.
We'll also commit to a 50/50 split of games at LO and CSS to ensure our financial future. And balmain will get a 59 year extension to repay the debt.

User avatar
cktiger
Member
Member
Posts: 3496
Joined: Fri 12 Nov, 2010 10:37 am

Post by cktiger » Sat 02 Apr, 2016 7:49 pm

formerguest wrote:
cktiger wrote:What is the go with Cherrington - what a waste of the bench
You're correct, he should be starting. :)
I was referring to wasting a spot for someone to play a few minutes .
And the few minutes he has played has been substandard anyway.
He needs more time in reggies.
Taylor must have rocks in his head to use someone for 10 minutes over 2 games.

hobbo
Member
Member
Posts: 10150
Joined: Mon 10 Mar, 2014 5:03 pm

Post by hobbo » Sat 02 Apr, 2016 7:50 pm

Geo. wrote:
hobbo2803 wrote:Sharks were to fast , to big , to strong .
With our Turnstyle defence , poor discipline ,and the inability to cope with the niggle , we got what we deserved .
This team needs to go back to the basics .
Do you mean 5 hit ups and a bomb... :shock:
You know what I mean ... Don't start ;)

Ball security /tackling / positional play and a decent goal kicker wouldn't go astray !!!!
Without Tedesco this teams a State cup side IMO
We need mongrel ..
No more plodders !


Telltails
Member
Member
Posts: 2683
Joined: Fri 18 Apr, 2014 3:24 pm

Post by Telltails » Sat 02 Apr, 2016 7:51 pm

Boonboon2 wrote:We missed less tackles, we broke more tackles, we made less errors, completed better, scored the same amount of tries and were within striking distance or in front for 75 minutes against a team that will finish top 4 in 2016. Personally I am happy with the result when looking at the quality of the 2 squads. Sharks are a top 4 team and we competed for 80 minutes
Yep agree. Dont know what everyone else was watching. We had no ball in the second half got caned by the refs the penalty against Farah in front was atrocious, and the offside pass in the try to Barba laughable. Our forwards when we had the ball were all over them.One of the biggest problems I see is goalkicking. They are niggling side and they did get the better of us there- hate losing but the bagging of the team for that performance is unwarranted in my opinion.

Nelson
Member
Member
Posts: 3302
Joined: Sat 31 Oct, 2015 11:17 am

Post by Nelson » Sat 02 Apr, 2016 7:55 pm

Bad bench balance again with only one prop. How bloody hard is it to select a balanced bench?

GoldXR50Leroy
Member
Member
Posts: 1857
Joined: Tue 31 May, 2011 3:36 pm

Post by GoldXR50Leroy » Sat 02 Apr, 2016 7:57 pm

All I can ad is that we need to have a better rapport with the ref's, suck right up to them, they love being brown nosed, work out how Ennis can manipulate them while robbing us blind.

Byron Bay Fan
Member
Member
Posts: 4859
Joined: Sat 17 Oct, 2015 2:14 pm

Post by Byron Bay Fan » Sat 02 Apr, 2016 7:59 pm

without going back pages to check if mentioned in that last try by Cronulla Ennis elbowed one of our defenders out of way a bit when chasing Barba towards in goal. Without that try could have been a different game.
Malcolm Knox: What has happened this week is a pity for the Tigers, a pity for Jason Taylor and a pity for Robbie Farah, who had achieved more than the Big Four put together but was somehow turned into collateral damage. (SMH 25-26 March, 2017)

larrycorowa
Member
Member
Posts: 2094
Joined: Fri 19 Feb, 2010 1:47 pm

Post by larrycorowa » Sat 02 Apr, 2016 7:59 pm

Lovett was pathetic, he would not stand out in new cup.

User avatar
cqtiger
Member
Member
Posts: 2573
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 2:34 pm
Location: Rockhampton QLD

Post by cqtiger » Sat 02 Apr, 2016 8:00 pm

gallagher wrote:
jadtiger wrote:2 from 5 is not good and if we lose to the winless knights next week this forum will be in meltdown.On what i saw from the knights and us it has to be a good possibility
It's nicely set up isn't it.
We'll lose, Taylor will get the ass and the merry go round will start again.
We'll also commit to a 50/50 split of games at LO and CSS to ensure our financial future. And balmain will get a 59 year extension to repay the debt.
We may lose against the Knights
Taylor won't get the chop
We should have one home (1 x game each year for both Leichardt and Campbelltown for old times sake only)
Balmain should get an extension

Nuff said
If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said a faster horse
– Henry Ford

stevetiger
Member
Member
Posts: 5111
Joined: Mon 25 Feb, 2013 7:59 am

Post by stevetiger » Sat 02 Apr, 2016 8:02 pm

Nelson wrote:Bad bench balance again with only one prop. How bloody hard is it to select a balanced bench?
I think the bench and the interchange need some work. We seemed to just run out of gas at some point.

User avatar
cktiger
Member
Member
Posts: 3496
Joined: Fri 12 Nov, 2010 10:37 am

Post by cktiger » Sat 02 Apr, 2016 8:05 pm

stevetiger wrote:
Nelson wrote:Bad bench balance again with only one prop. How bloody hard is it to select a balanced bench?
I think the bench and the interchange need some work. We seemed to just run out of gas at some point.
Seems to me Taylor is leaving players on for longer than they can handle to get a good 5 minutes out of Cherrington.

User avatar
sheer64
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 5609
Joined: Sun 23 Sep, 2012 2:06 pm

Post by sheer64 » Sat 02 Apr, 2016 8:14 pm

Telltails wrote:
Boonboon2 wrote:We missed less tackles, we broke more tackles, we made less errors, completed better, scored the same amount of tries and were within striking distance or in front for 75 minutes against a team that will finish top 4 in 2016. Personally I am happy with the result when looking at the quality of the 2 squads. Sharks are a top 4 team and we competed for 80 minutes
Yep agree. Dont know what everyone else was watching. We had no ball in the second half got caned by the refs the penalty against Farah in front was atrocious, and the offside pass in the try to Barba laughable. Our forwards when we had the ball were all over them.One of the biggest problems I see is goalkicking. They are niggling side and they did get the better of us there- hate losing but the bagging of the team for that performance is unwarranted in my opinion.
We are a much better side than last year, but we dont have the back rowers we need to take that next step.
Arise Sir Waste Anasta, Tool of the highest order!

User avatar
stryker
Member
Member
Posts: 10825
Joined: Sun 19 Jul, 2009 4:16 pm
Location: Cairns

Post by stryker » Sat 02 Apr, 2016 8:18 pm

Telltails wrote:
Boonboon2 wrote:We missed less tackles, we broke more tackles, we made less errors, completed better, scored the same amount of tries and were within striking distance or in front for 75 minutes against a team that will finish top 4 in 2016. Personally I am happy with the result when looking at the quality of the 2 squads. Sharks are a top 4 team and we competed for 80 minutes
Yep agree. Dont know what everyone else was watching. We had no ball in the second half got caned by the refs the penalty against Farah in front was atrocious, and the offside pass in the try to Barba laughable. Our forwards when we had the ball were all over them.One of the biggest problems I see is goalkicking. They are niggling side and they did get the better of us there- hate losing but the bagging of the team for that performance is unwarranted in my opinion.
I agree too. I was upset at the Titans and Parra loses because I thought we lost those games more than they won them. Today however we had a red hot go. It was a fast quality match that saw us edged out by a side that will go close to the big dance (I wouldnt mind a sly 50 on them to take it out actually). We lost to a side that played smart attacking footy whilst muscling up in D. Our inexperience showed at the end and we lost all structure and composure.

Having said that,the wrong team is continually selected. We need a speedy winger and another prop on the bench. Our ball control, discipline and goal kicking were all poor which helped them but for the most part, our line held up and we scrambled well. They were just too good for us and piggy back penalties helped them conserve energy for their assaults.

stevetiger
Member
Member
Posts: 5111
Joined: Mon 25 Feb, 2013 7:59 am

Post by stevetiger » Sat 02 Apr, 2016 8:18 pm

sheer64 wrote:
Telltails wrote:
Boonboon2 wrote:We missed less tackles, we broke more tackles, we made less errors, completed better, scored the same amount of tries and were within striking distance or in front for 75 minutes against a team that will finish top 4 in 2016. Personally I am happy with the result when looking at the quality of the 2 squads. Sharks are a top 4 team and we competed for 80 minutes
Yep agree. Dont know what everyone else was watching. We had no ball in the second half got caned by the refs the penalty against Farah in front was atrocious, and the offside pass in the try to Barba laughable. Our forwards when we had the ball were all over them.One of the biggest problems I see is goalkicking. They are niggling side and they did get the better of us there- hate losing but the bagging of the team for that performance is unwarranted in my opinion.
We are a much better side than last year, but we dont have the back rowers we need to take that next step.
Is this true ? Halatau and Lawrence belted it up - they had some great runs out wide with speed and energy. Sue is awesome this year.

stevetiger
Member
Member
Posts: 5111
Joined: Mon 25 Feb, 2013 7:59 am

Post by stevetiger » Sat 02 Apr, 2016 8:21 pm

stryker wrote:
Telltails wrote:
Boonboon2 wrote:We missed less tackles, we broke more tackles, we made less errors, completed better, scored the same amount of tries and were within striking distance or in front for 75 minutes against a team that will finish top 4 in 2016. Personally I am happy with the result when looking at the quality of the 2 squads. Sharks are a top 4 team and we competed for 80 minutes
Yep agree. Dont know what everyone else was watching. We had no ball in the second half got caned by the refs the penalty against Farah in front was atrocious, and the offside pass in the try to Barba laughable. Our forwards when we had the ball were all over them.One of the biggest problems I see is goalkicking. They are niggling side and they did get the better of us there- hate losing but the bagging of the team for that performance is unwarranted in my opinion.
I agree too. I was upset at the Titans and Parra loses because I thought we lost those games more than they won them. Today however we had a red hot go. It was a fast quality match that saw us edged out by a side that will go close to the big dance (I wouldnt mind a sly 50 on them to take it out actually). We lost to a side that played smart attacking footy whilst muscling up in D. Our inexperience showed at the end and we lost all structure and composure.

Having said that,the wrong team is continually selected. We need a speedy winger and another prop on the bench. Our ball control, discipline and goal kicking were all poor which helped them but for the most part, our line held up and we scrambled well. They were just too good for us and piggy back penalties helped them conserve energy for their assaults.
I thought we were good as well. I want to win but that wasn't a bad loss. I think we need to put JAC in there but I don't want to crucify Rankin. I would also think of putting another impact forward on the bench maybe at the expense of Cherrington.

gallagher
Member
Member
Posts: 5516
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 1:18 pm

Post by gallagher » Sat 02 Apr, 2016 8:29 pm

cqtiger wrote:
gallagher wrote:
jadtiger wrote:2 from 5 is not good and if we lose to the winless knights next week this forum will be in meltdown.On what i saw from the knights and us it has to be a good possibility
It's nicely set up isn't it.
We'll lose, Taylor will get the ass and the merry go round will start again.
We'll also commit to a 50/50 split of games at LO and CSS to ensure our financial future. And balmain will get a 59 year extension to repay the debt.
We may lose against the Knights
Taylor won't get the chop
We should have one home (1 x game each year for both Leichardt and Campbelltown for old times sake only)
Balmain should get an extension

Nuff said
Your not far off from what i said. Your version or mine doesn't really differ much. It's loser ville.

Post Reply