please explain

[sue ridgepipe]

this is not a bagging of the respective players as the boys had a real dig but from a coaching perspective

1.why was robertson fullback and hicks on the wing.their grubber tries were ridiculously easy.hicks has so much experience at fullback.

2.why was glen stewart involved in (and slowing down) almost every backline move.

to my dying days i will never know the answers.and that is the most important match for us in a long time.

 

[Kiwi Eagle]

my only answer to question 1 is that Hicks was shown up recently under the high ball, and Robertson has been safe under it

 

[Matabele]

But Robertson looked like he was audtitioning for Dancing on Ice last week - and was no better this week.

 

[Kiwi Eagle]

True, but i am guessing that was just put down to ground conditions on the day

 

[Ryan]

Des Hasler is the answer to all the above. I am going to be bluntly honest, and say a few things here:-

I am starting to think Brett Stewart is injury prone (and as he heals twice as slow as anyone else), hurts the team consistency wise.

Our defensive line. Can it move forward?

Glenn Stewart had his worst game ever for us, and his size issues showed tonight. Dominated in attack by the opposition, dominated in defence by the opposition. Poor bloke.

Regardless of how many metres Jason King made, he needs to have the ability to not be pushed back 3-4 metres every time he gets tackled.

Chris Hicks is a better centre than winger.

Steve Bell was very timid tonight. VERY timid. Probably not the game to bring him back. I would have maybe swappped him and Hicks around (put Bell on wing in come back game). That said, it's understandable why he was nervous.

We haven't won 4 games in a row since 1998. That should tell everyone that we aren't a top 4 team. I sincerely hope we still make the 8. Bulldogs and Melbourne away is a hell of a worry.

George Rose is a great prop. I really rate hime.

I also rate Dunley / Burns / Matai - but their penalties are really starting to piss me off.

We were one man up for 40 minutes, against a team without their normal starting 1,7 & 10. Not good enough, and I feel Parra looked like a better coached team.

 

[Downie]

I thought Stewart played very well tonight. Made heaps of tackles and looked quite dangerous whilst running the ball off Orford.

 

[Canteen Worker]

I was at the ground but thought Glen Stewart played well. To answer Sue's question I think that part of the game plan was to get Matai one on one with O'Dwyer who is a bit sus defensively. However he also showed up Matai's poor decision making to score the try that hurt us most.

I thought the Eagles had a real dig tonight and but for lack of conversions we would have been on level terms with 20 to go. You can't play catch-up consistently and win.

As for Robbo I thought he did well. It was very slippery and we were giving them hours to make their grubbers. They got a lot of 50/50 calls at vital times.

As for Bell being quiet, trying having your jaw smashed and then see how hard you are when you come back about 5 weeks later?

 

[Fluffy]

cant understand why robbo is fullback over hicks, was dissapointed when i saw them warm up that way.

agree that stewy was getting out of position

also seemed BK tried to play a lot of half back in the dying 20 rather than leaving it to orford which also slowed the spread

 

[Cletus]

Hicks was just as bad against Brisbane. Neither of them can do a one on one tackle and their positioning is ****ing awful. I thought Stewart could have stopped a couple of they're tries and it shows how little depth we have at fullback.

Not sure about G Stewart. I don't mind him but he's not in the same class as Menzies or Watmough.

 

[sue ridgepipe]

didnt mean that g stewart played that badly.cimply that he should not be getting the ball 3 wide of the ruck as we spread the ball.it looked ridiculous on tv and happened far too often for it not to be a plan.

we may be in a bit of strife from here as 7th or 8th is an absolute waste of time and we play knights away and the top two sides.at least we have the bye to regroup.

 

[Canteen Worker]

Not many players are in the class of Beaver of Watmough. Put those three on the paddock and we win that game.

Must cut out the stupid penalties. I was very upset though at the strip penalty that was given to them in front of us - no Manly hand went anywhere near the ball.

 

[Cletus]

Not many players are in the class of Beaver of Watmough. Put those three on the paddock and we win that game.

We seem to be missing them in defence. I don't think Williamson and Stewart work well together because they both lack impact. Williamson is very reliable but I think we need someone bigger with him.

 

[sue ridgepipe]

I agree canteen about watmough and menzies.but what people do forget is that they were without tahu,mckinnon,smith and had 12 men for half a game..having said that we competed well in a high quality tough game of footy and not much went our way.with 13 they would certianly have beaten us by more.they are finals bound i would say and unfortunately 7th or 8th looks the most likely for us.i really wish the bulldogs and knights games were daytime affairs-our chances plummet at night.storm away is a match all sides should simply forfeit and rest up.

raiders getting rolled helps.

 

[Matabele]

Quite likely that by Round 26 the Storm will have the minor premiership stitched up and will rest a few players.....

 

[sue ridgepipe]

dont agree mata.if you win the MP and rest players last round and win first week (as is a certianty at home for them )you go into a preliminary final with some players having played once in a month.bellamy wont fall for that IMO.

Having said that they may be down on intensity a bit but having to win that one is not a great option.

 

[Fluffy]

i wouldnt count it as a win but as mata said if they have it stitched up there is less to play for so i would definatly prefer round 26 in that situation than any other round down there

i wouldnt right off 5th or 6th just yet as we are still right at the pointy end of the log jam.

I think 30 will get you 6th at worst which means with all players back on deck we only need to win one of the 3 hard ones and beat souths, something that is achievable.

 

[DSM5]

I was there last night and it was a worry. Positional plays aside, and I agree with most of the posts, why didn't Burns take the goal kicks? As well Robbo is not a fullback as displayed last week, so why didn't Hicks play there? His catches under the high ball have improved so that's really not the reason. Stephenson was ordinary and Haynes made him look so, why give the guy a run when he's leaving. Matai needs to stay in the line and tackle effectively (give the arm slaps away). The slow start is disgusting. Parra looked on their toes and interested in winning, we didn't. So is this a coaching problem? Rose is starting to bloom as King wilts. So much more to say.

 

[Nutzcraw]

I was hoping that Brett Stewart went into the sheds at half time and told Robertson where the hell to position himself!

He was caught out of position a thousand times... i think we missed Brett Stewart the most last night!!

The boys will appreciate the bye and we'll be back after it.. fully fit!!

 

[DSM5]

We need to be.

 

[Matabele]

I am starting to think Brett Stewart is injury prone (and as he heals twice as slow as anyone else), hurts the team consistency wise.

Since Jamie Lyon smashed up his shoulder in 2003 he has not had an extended stint on the sideline.

His medical condition is adverstiy and adversity breeds character. The main reason I would not trade Stewart for any other fullback in the competition is because he has kept his feet on the ground despite his meteoric rise.

I put it to you that his strength of character means he is doing EVERYTHING possible to get back on the field without taking shortcuts. I reckon he's above that kind of sniping Ryan.