Lame - Orford doesn't do the press conference

[Jatz Crackers]

Ive only lived in Qld for a few years but DSM seems to become more of a Qld politician with each passing minute.

 

[Utility Player]

Sorry to come in late DSM but my work computer blocks the forums for me now and I can only look at home on crappy old dial up & what with fighting the kids for net time I dont look at every thread.

 

[Rex]

Watmough rightfully got rave reviews for almost winning the game virtually singlehandedly.  He clearly deserves most credit for that.  But ask Watmough which teammate contributed most to him shining - by a long, long distance - and we all know the answer.  Even DSM does, although he'd never admit it because then he'd look wrong. In reality, these whingeing rants have nothing to do with Orford, he's only DSM's current target for his incessant cheap shots. If a 26 year old Cliffy replaced Ox, it's a fair bet he'd be the next cheap-shot target.

 

[DSM5]

Rex, where do you get off?  My posts have never been 'cheap shots'.  They are my considered opinions.  I go to most games and call it how I see it.  Disagree with me, sure, and argue your opinion, all good..  You don't have to label people sho disagree with you 'cheap shot merchants', it's just not becoming.    And I could possibly agree with you, Cliffy was a 5/8th not a half, my opinion re that proposition would have to wait until I saw how he performed.  You'll have to wait until after Saturday's game to see what I have to say about Matty's game.  Cheers.

 

[Chip and Chase]

Orford's achilles heel was on show for all to see on Monday night in that last minute of play. A premeditated shot for field goal which wasn't going to be aborted under any circumstances despite a wall of Tigers players bearing down on him. We get the luck of the bounce from that and are still in with a red hot chance with 6 to go. He than embarks on a panicked run across field isolating everyone bar the winger and then tries a miracle ball that ends up in the front row of seats. Game over !

Lack of composure and inability to react quickly on his feet are what lets Orford down. He doesn't have the "vision" that great halfbacks have. The fact that he has never played representative football speaks volumes about what better RL judges than us think.   

 

[Rex]

Rex, where do you get off?  My posts have never been 'cheap shots'.  They are my considered opinions.  I go to most games and call it how I see it.  Disagree with me, sure, and argue your opinion, all good..  You don't have to label people sho disagree with you 'cheap shot merchants', it's just not becoming.    And I could possibly agree with you, Cliffy was a 5/8th not a half, my opinion re that proposition would have to wait until I saw how he performed.  You'll have to wait until after Saturday's game to see what I have to say about Matty's game.  Cheers.

That's the point DSM.  None of us have to wait until after Saturday's game to know what you will say about Matty's game.  It's a rerun every post. Doesn't actually matter how he plays any more. Don't dispute you call it how you see it, just noticing that you don't ever look at Matty's game with fresh or unbiased eyes anymore.

And I do get your point about labelling you a cheap shot merchant.  And its a fair point.  I just can't help noticing the wide disparity between the standards you demand of me when reviewing your performance, and the standards you demand of yourself when reviewing player performances. We see it in others way before we see it in ourselves. Yes?

Where do I get off?  I get off playing with you DSM. And I demand you take me seriously. 🙂

 

[Rex]

Orford's achilles heel was on show for all to see on Monday night in that last minute of play. A premeditated shot for field goal which wasn't going to be aborted under any circumstances despite a wall of Tigers players bearing down on him. We get the luck of the bounce from that and are still in with a red hot chance with 6 to go. He than embarks on a panicked run across field isolating everyone bar the winger and then tries a miracle ball that ends up in the front row of seats. Game over !

Lack of composure and inability to react quickly on his feet are what lets Orford down. He doesn't have the \"vision\" that great halfbacks have. The fact that he has never played representative football speaks volumes about what better RL judges than us think.    

That's one view C&C.  Is it the only view? What other factors in the ending, not attributable to Ox, contributed to the loss? Like Hall having a massive overlap and sacrificing that to go himself.  Like there still being a massive overlap on the right from the play-the-ball - with the game right there for the taking - and Ballin inexplicably sending the ball out left towards Ox to expect him to somehow save the game when he was outnumbered about 9 defenders to 4 attackers?  Like there being 16 other players in the side and the players looking to one player to save the game for them.  With one set left, does anyone seriously think we were likely to threaten the line if Ox didn't pull a rabbit out of his hat? Who's fault is that?

Ox has chinks as you say, and it is not the absence of chinks in individual player's armour that wins games, it's what players can bring to the TEAM performance.  The players and coach know what players bring to the team performance much better than reporters and spectators, and they are supporting Ox.  This TEAM has won 8 of their last 11 without playing its prime trump card.  And it's panic stations in parts of this nest with a simplistic belief that if we dump one player that will somehow solve the problem.  Without any knowledge that the unidentified replacement player is currently up to NRL standards.

Ultimately Hasler recruits and selects and decides how much he pays them.  He has plenty of runs on the board to warrant some level of trust.

 

[DSM5]

I look forward to discussing the Souths game with you Rex.  I will bring you my most dispassionate opinion of the players.  Just remember to bring yours.  And it's an interesting thing that you see inside everyone's head and can interprete their opinions and views.  An admirable skill.   

 

[ManlyBacker]

This thread is way better than tennis. Actually, almost anything is better than tennis 🙂

 

[Rex]

I look forward to discussing the Souths game with you Rex.  I will bring you my most dispassionate opinion of the players.  Just remember to bring yours.  And it's an interesting thing that you see inside everyone's head and can interprete their opinions and views.  An admirable skill.    

An admirable skill ... then you and I and the rest of us must be pretty admirable with all that erroneous mind-reading speculation that continually goes on in our daytime dreaming (also known as "calling it as we see it"). The stuff that inner and outer wars are fundamentally built on.

Fact is we have little ability to wisely watch or interpret our own thoughts, let alone someone else's.

Look forward to our banter as always DSM. 🙂

 

[Chip and Chase]

Rex my friend, in answer to your questions

That's one view C&C.  Is it the only view? - Of course it isn't the only view, it's just my opinion after all. However it seems that my view may be shared by NSW and Australian selectors. How else can you explain a premiership winning, World Cup Challenge winning, and Dally M medallist, not to mention highly experienced, halfback been constantly overlooked for representative duties in favour of less credentialled, younger halves ? Could it be that Orford just doesn't have what it takes in the crunch ?

What other factors in the ending, not attributable to Ox, contributed to the loss? Like Hall having a massive overlap and sacrificing that to go himself. - In hindsight he probably should have passed it, but if you are going to crucify Glen Hall for taking a slightly safer option given that we had 6 to go and a minute on the clock, then may be backtrack a moment. Why was Orford taking a shot at field goal from about 5m behind the ruck so obviously positioned that about 4 Tigers guys formed an impenetrable wall that he was still somehow determined to kick the ball through, only good fortune enabled us to regain possession ? That 5 on 3 overlap that you are blaming Hall for blowing was still there 2 plays earlier when Orford had set his mind to the drop goal. Guys like Lockyer, Thurston and Prince pick up that sort of thing and can conjure plays on the run. Orford struggles with that aspect of his game.

Like there still being a massive overlap on the right from the play-the-ball - with the game right there for the taking - and Ballin inexplicably sending the ball out left towards Ox to expect him to somehow save the game when he was outnumbered about 9 defenders to 4 attackers? - Massive overlap was gone by that stage so nothing much doing on the right. I assume that Ballin passed to Orford because Orford as Captain and chief playmaker called for it, after all isn't that what Orford gets paid for ? Even if Orford was outnumbered 100 to 1 does it justify running sideways for 30 metres and throwing the ball over the sideline ? What is wrong with a bit of composure and taking the hit near the posts and setting for the next play ? Still had time for 2 more tackles and working it to the middle for a field goal to tie it up if necessary  

Like there being 16 other players in the side and the players looking to one player to save the game for them.  With one set left, does anyone seriously think we were likely to threaten the line if Ox didn't pull a rabbit out of his hat? Who's fault is that? - Agree that there are 16 other players in the side, however not all of them are paid $450K a year to run, organise and execute our attacking plays. That's Orford's job, that's why he has the number 7 on his back and the little c in brackets next to his name in the programme. I can't see why we don't score in that set if we have 2 or 3 more tackles. We were absolutely carving them up at that point and they were just hanging on for grim death. Orford just needs to show composure and not panic. I'd forgive him if he tries to put someone in a hole and they drop the ball, or we work to the edge and the Tigers scramble a last ditch tackle into touch. But really Rex you can't seriously be happy with a 30m sprint across field and a wild pass into touch as an acceptable play in that situation. He is paid to pull rabbits out of hats, that's his job.

Ox has chinks as you say, and it is not the absence of chinks in individual player's armour that wins games, it's what players can bring to the TEAM performance.  The players and coach know what players bring to the team performance much better than reporters and spectators, and they are supporting Ox. - I'd fully expect them to support him, be disappointed if they didn't, but that doesn't mean he shouldn't be held accountable for his actions

This TEAM has won 8 of their last 11 without playing its prime trump card.  And it's panic stations in parts of this nest with a simplistic belief that if we dump one player that will somehow solve the problem.  Without any knowledge that the unidentified replacement player is currently up to NRL standards. - I'm not calling for Orford to be dumped, and it's hardly panic stations, God knows we're used to his inconsistency. Agree that getting Brett back will be a huge boost and this season is far from gone. I'm just saying that we should seriously consider whether our future lays with him over the next couple of years. Quality players always look like they have "time", it's like they live in a world where everything happens half a second slower than the rest of us mortals. Orford doesn't inhabit that world unfortunately.

Ultimately Hasler recruits and selects and decides how much he pays them.  He has plenty of runs on the board to warrant some level of trust. - I trust Des, just hope that he is prepared to take a bit of a chance with some youth

 

[DSM5]

Let's all just sit back and observe the 'little master' at work on Saturday. 

 

[Rex]

DSM, your jibe shows you will watch Orford with exactly the same prejudging eyes on Saturday. Why bother, except to whinge and "prove" yourself right?

C&C, mate.  There's a lot of thought in your posting.  The dominant thought I'm hearing is that you think Orford is paid $450k a year to run, organise and executive our plays, and other players aren't.  If that is taken as true and important then I understand your logic. But is it true?  Why do we bother paying the other 16 players at all? To defend? Unlike DSM, I'm reading that you might possibly still be open to looking at the plays with fresh eyes.  Maybe.  Maybe not.  Maybe you have a recording to watch them with this different analysis to consider.

As the end of the game is what has gotten under your skin, here's a reading of the end plays which doesn't start with that dominant thought:

1.  Two minutes to go Wests kick from near halfway.  At this stage Manly realistically only has one set to go and little hope of a win.  Robbo drops an easy chest mark and so Manly start their final set 5 metres out from the line instead of 30 metres out.  Now we are very long shots indeed.

2.  80 seconds to go, 2 attacking plays to win the game, Manly are thirty metres out from own line.  Essentially no hope.  Spinning the ball wide Manly making it to thirty metres out from Wests line.  Orford handles twice in a team effort to set up that play but is not given the final pass and the play breaks down with an overlap to the right.

3.  Last attacking chance play the ball 30 metres out in centre field. Orford stands on left attracting all Wests defenders' attention.  As a result there is a huge 5 on 2 overlap with canyons of space on the right.  With Wolfman madly waving arms to attract Ballin's attention to the overlap, and Bailey calling for the ball from Ballin to go right, Ballin ignores those calls and sends the pass left to Orford. Despite the assertion that Orford is standing too shallow for this last play, only three Manly players are behind him, with Robbo behind 5 metres to his right but stationary on his heels, hunched over apparently disinterested with hands on knees, and Matai and T-Rex are behind 30 metres away to the left. Orford receives a bad pass from Ballin high and to his left.  Robbo doesn't give Orford an option to pass right when he stays stationary with hands on knees, on his heels until Orford kicks.  Three Wests players look for the chargedown, only Todd Payton from marker can reach it.  At least one of the other chasers was two metres offside at the play-the-ball, but the referee puts his whistle in his pocket for the final plays.  Payton did well to avoid the screen and makes the charge-down. Robbo gets the rebound, 6 to go, Manly are still alive. Some say bad play by Orford, others that he effectively forced a 6-to-go versus tied game choice for the defenders.

4.  Robbo takes rebound.  If he passes, Manly have an eight on three overlap with half a field of space on the right with all other defenders not within cooee. Robbo sees a narrow gap and instead of passing goes himself and is tackled.  

5.  From the play-the-ball Ballin chooses well to send the ball right, Hall has a 3 on 1 overlap with twenty metres to the sideline.  He only needs to pass the ball early to Bailey for a simple try.  But Bailey ignores the overlap and cuts inside where the cover defence can reach him (very poor choice).   Perhaps this confuses Hall who ignores the remaining overlap and tucks the ball under his arm and is easily tackled.  

6.   In all these plays, our chief attacking playmaker outside Orford - i.e Lyon - is sitting on the right one player inside Wolfman.  Unmarked.  Ignored.  Why have him on the field?

7.  One metre out from the line Ballin fires the ball left to Orford.  Poor choice.  If he had looked left to Orford and then passed right a try was highly likely on that play with a significant overlap.  And if not, then the Manly players would have been in a position to make a better left-side play.  When Orford receives the ball he had 9 defenders in front of him and three players in support.  It would have been four except Robbo was ten metres behind Orford, hands on knees again, once again planted stationary on his heels, not moving an inch throughout the play. Orford crabbed across field, dummying and cut between two defenders before passing for T-Rex.  A good pass and T-Rex was one-on-one, ten metres out from the line and well outside the defender who had also come infield to cover Orford.  Other defenders didn't have a hope of reaching him if he went for it.  You'd back him in from there.  The pass under the pressure of a good tackle was poor. With 30 seconds on the clock, the pass was a shocker and Orford lay on the ground destroyed, knowing the game was lost and his final poor pass had ended their chances.

The half-back on the commentary team, Brandy Alexander, then made this summary of the final moments:

"Before the 6 to go call the hands from Matt Orford, on 3 or 4 occasions, how he handled the ball.  The balls were coming back at speed.  Orford did a great job, but they just couldn't get it done there."

All I'm saying is that this is a TEAM game, and if you put all your eggs in one basket to make the winning play, then shutting that play down is just too easy. Treating Orford as the sole person responsible to create winning plays and tries is lunacy... as proven by last year's final series.

 

[DSM5]

As I've stated many times Rex, last years GF win was a team effort.  Good of you to recognize that.  And I promise you I will look at orford's game this Saturday dispassionately, along with the other playmakers.  I hope you do too.  Eagles by thirty.

 

[The Wheel]

I wish I was as confident as you DSM - Eagles victory is all that I am asking for Saturday

 

[Chip and Chase]

OK Rex, you're obviously happy with Orford whereas I think that he doesn't perform consistently enough when it matters. He doesn't show me that he is a player that can regularly control the play and exhibit composure and vision when it's needed.

There is no point in listing all the other players and their perceived roles, we all know why they are there and what they are supposed to do. I detect some facetiousness in your post with the "why do we bother playing the other 16 players" comment. My take on it is that Orford is the "go to" man and the playmaker and hence should be judged to a different benchmark then say Glen Hall or Michael Robertson. If that isn't the case then why is he being paid as our marquee player ?

No doubt he was gutted about the last pass, and so he should be, but will he learn and grow from the experience ? History suggests not, he is getting on in years and in my book isn't maturing as a player significantly enough. Look he'll probably come out and have a blinder against the Rabbits, and I hope he does, in which case all will be forgiven by the majority of the fans. My beef is that he isn't consistent and he doesn't inspire me with confidence when things are tight and we need leadership and a level head from our "go to" man.

Let's move on and hope that he hits a purple patch over the next 10 weeks and makes me eat some humble pie.

 

[Fluffy]

If the entire team was even with Orford as you suggest Rex then we would have our first wooden spoon for breaking the salary cap by about $7 million give or take a few hundred thousand.

At least then George Rose could step in as a second field goal option for you.

 

[TokyoEagle]

If the entire team was even with Orford as you suggest Rex then we would have our first wooden spoon for breaking the salary cap by about $7 million give or take a few hundred thousand.

At least then George Rose could step in as a second field goal option for you.

Big George got 4 out of 5 in the prop challenge didn't he ?

 

[DSM5]

Correct Tokyo Eagle, and he kicked a monster field goal.  It was amusing to see the concern for Clinton's groin last Wednesday in that challenge.  I would have thought they'd have shown more concern over his ankle which is keeping him out of this weekends game. 

 

[Rex]

No facetiousness intended C&C.  I was replying to your dominant thought that Orford was paid $450k a year to run, organise and executive our plays.  My point was that other players are also paid to run, organise and executive our plays.  In particular the marquee player named Jamie Lyon, also on HUGE money, who was unsighted at the end, and for most of the game, unlike in the semis last year.  But in reality every player has that role, and Hall got some caning for not performing that role at the end of the game when he hogged the ball and duffed the try.  

The oft-repeated fantasy that DSM and some others here have that you buy one marquee player and he lays on all the plays is a fantasy. Pure fantasy. And if you play that way you lose.  Simple as that.  When the Titans Cecchined us, it wasn't Prince, but Campbell, that made the decisive play and that surprise element keeps the pressure off Prince.  Similarly Thurston was very ordinary indeed when Bowen was out. And we all see how weak Lockyer looks now without other playmakers posing a threat. Ox has done what he's done this year without his prime go to target - Snake.

In reality the $450k (actually not this figure but that's beside the point) is a ludicrous issue to raise right now. Get with the times.  That decision was made many many years ago, and EVERYONE, including Ox knows that he was paid overs at the time to come to the club to rebuild the club into a competitive force - when no-one else would.  And with Ox on board, other players were drawn in.  And unless you haven't noticed Manly improved every year from perpetual cellar-dwellers into record-breaking grand final winners and World Champions.  So, with the benefit of hindsight, that "$450k" was EXTREMELY well spent money.

You say I'm obviously happy with Orford.  If you reread what I've written you'll see I'm not actually making any such assertion.  I'm saying Orford is on the books, he is our best halfback option, and like all Manly players apart from Watmough is not yet near the top of his game. Hopefully that's reached in September. And I'm saying that this repeated demand that he make all the winning plays whilst others take a breather and watch the show is naivity at best.

And if Orford is always the go to man as you say, how easy would that be to defend?  Eh?  And what role Lyon?  Gift?  Ballin? etc in setting up crucial plays. Does the opposition only need to defend Ox's side of the field as they did at the death on Monday?