1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

our 2nd half

Discussion in 'Rugby League Forum' started by sharx, Mar 19, 2006.

  1. sharx

    sharx Active Member

    +1 /0
    9 miss tackles(21 in the first half)
    only 39% possession
    70% in our half
    6-0 penalty count against us
    1 sin bin
    they lose the ball,its a penalty
    we lose it,its a knock on
    we out score them 12-4
  2. Matabele

    Matabele Well-Known Member

    +516 /14
    yeah, there were some hopeful signs, especially in defense.
  3. Ryan

    Ryan Well-Known Member

    +9,393 /402
    The problem was though, is that we HAD to pull together, or another flogging was on the board. I just can't get around that that's a GOOD thing. We are second last lads, and our performance warrants it.
  4. Nutzcraw

    Nutzcraw Active Member

    +4 /0
    Too hard on them again mate!!

    The end scenario is we played crappy in attack and had to make a ****load of tackles.. we rarely had the ball in their half... rarely had the ball fullstop and if stewarts kick stays in we got to 20 all .. with a chance at snatching a victory!!

    Not a bad effort considering we are playing the favourites for the competition in their first home game of the year.. we had to make arguably the hardest trek in the game and we just about got over the top of them with no ball!!
  5. Ryan

    Ryan Well-Known Member

    +9,393 /402
    Game = 80 minutes. That 1st 40 minutes, and espects of the second 40 was plain 2004, and appaulling. At least Peter Sharp has some balance to his sides !!! He introduced new players (albeit hacks) at times to attempt to improve change things.
  6. Jatz Crackers

    Jatz Crackers Moderator Staff Member

    +1,476 /8
    I think referring to Sharp & Dessie in that way Ryan is out of line.

    I think Hasler has done more than Sharp and done it better than Sharp & the results achieved under Hasler are better than Sharp.

    Hasler may still be doing some things wrong, like King & Ballin etc, but placing a favourable comparison on Sharp is to my mind plain wrong.

Share This Page