• We had an issue with background services between march 10th and 15th or there about. This meant the payment services were not linking to automatic upgrades. If you paid for premium membership and are still seeing ads please let me know and the email you used against PayPal and I cam manually verify and upgrade your account.
  • We have been getting regular requests for users who have been locked out of their accounts because they have changed email adresses over the lifetime of their accounts. Please make sure the email address under your account is your current and correct email address in order to avoid this in the future. You can set your email address at https://silvertails.net/account/account-details
  • Wwe are currently experience some server issues which I am working through and hoping to resolve soon, Please bare with me whilst I work through making some changes and possible intermittent outages.
  • Apologies all our server was runing rogue. I managed to get us back to a point from 2:45 today though there is an attachment issue i will fix shortly. Things should be smooth now though

HK_Eagle

First Grader
Premium Member
I’m in Portugal so won’t see the game. How, much difference would the croke have been?
I’m not sure. Yes, he probably would have stiffened up the middle somewhat, but… I don’t think it’s as simple as just individuals. Our strategy just seems so passive in defence. We look like we are waiting for them to run to us, then only able to put two in the tackle, and allowing the opposition to poke through, get to their stomachs, and then get quick plat the balls to continue the momentum. I’m somewhat baffled by our defence , TBH
 

Dion Johnson

Bencher
Premium Member
Tipping Member
When dissecting games, it's easy to blame individuals and/or moments but unless a game is two sides competing hard against each other and a pivotal mistake happens at the death, it is rarely ever down to a moment.

Personally, when I watch Manly, I see a side consistently beaten at the ruck most weeks. It's a big reason why the edge defence is exposed. At no point today did we look on top of Penrith. Even when we scored those tries down the edge and were winning 12-4, it still felt like Penrith were running harder and tackling harder. I was not surprised when they went to halftime in front.

A game is 17 on 17; that's 34 variables. Nine times out of ten, a game will be won by the team that 'on average' wins contact, either in defence or with the ball. Our side do not win the little contests enough across the 17 players. Most of the contact today was won by Penrith and we lost the game. It's not Garrick or Ben T. It's the team.

Every year, the two teams that make the GF are usually the two teams who 'on average' win the contact more than their opposition. Now, that might seem obvious and pointless, but I don't blame individuals for our position in the middle of the table. We do not have the pack and power outside backs to challenge quality opposition when they decide to turn up, like Penrith did today. Wins against the likes of Melbourne at Brooky, happen because we turn up and give 100% and the opposition are slightly off the boil.
The basics for winning and slowing the ruck go missing at times.

For me the simple aspects of body positioning, leg drive and getting your hands on the ball or the attacking players arms are parts of the game where a few players can improve.

As you have alluded to a strong ruck presence provides a solid platform for attacking plays and ultimately determines the outcome of the game.
 

LeonardCohen

Bencher
I also think a big reason we struggle to bend the opposition line is a lack of guile out of dummy half. I’ve noticed there are occasions when we get a good ball set inside the opposition half, say around half way, and we shift back and forth and end up kicking from 30m out?! That’s a 20m gain in five tackles…it’s not just yardage sets, it’s pretty much every set.
 

Dion Johnson

Bencher
Premium Member
Tipping Member
I also think a big reason we struggle to bend the opposition line is a lack of guile out of dummy half. I’ve noticed there are occasions when we get a good ball set inside the opposition half, say around half way, and we shift back and forth and end up kicking from 30m out?! That’s a 20m gain in five tackles…it’s not just yardage sets, it’s pretty much every set.
This area of the game this season Tent bends the line he has 6th most post contact meters this season with Guaca in 17Th spot, than daylight to the next player.

A few of the big bodies lack leg speed, Alioia, Jake, Lodge and Sipley at the moment, the decision not to play Bully over Sipley was a mistake in my opinion.
 

Carl

Reserve Grader
This area of the game this season Tent bends the line he has 6th most post contact meters this season with Guaca in 17Th spot, than daylight to the next player.

A few of the big bodies lack leg speed, Alioia, Jake, Lodge and Sipley at the moment, the decision not to play Bully over Sipley was a mistake in my opinion.
Yeah, I think it's about playing the best team instead of the best players.

I'd pick bully on the bench with this week's starting pack; if aloiai gets suspended, I'd pick toff to replace him in the starting pack.
 

Dion Johnson

Bencher
Premium Member
Tipping Member
Yeah, I think it's about playing the best team instead of the best players.

I'd pick bully on the bench with this week's starting pack; if aloiai gets suspended, I'd pick toff to replace him in the starting pack.
At the start of the season I thought Sipley wouldn’t make the best 17, than he was very good when he got his chance, post his knee injury he has been ordinary with his efforts in defence.

Sipley is a good ball runner, though he needs to be where he was with his defensive efforts earlier this season, I think he came back from injury to early and he looks sluggish at the moment.
 

LeonardCohen

Bencher
At the start of the season I thought Sipley wouldn’t make the best 17, than he was very good when he got his chance, post his knee injury he has been ordinary with his efforts in defence.

Sipley is a good ball runner, though he needs to be where he was with his defensive efforts earlier this season, I think he came back from injury to early and he looks sluggish at the moment.
Couldn’t agree more.
 

davohan123

First Grader
Premium Member
Tipping Member
Yeah, it was the first thing i noticed in the game. They were making 50 metres and we were making 30m.

I'm not sure we lose the ruck most games but this time we were way off the pace. But they aren't the 3 time champions for a reason.

Solutions? I actually thought Paseka and Aloiai were pretty good. But yeah need to find one or two Spencer Leniu or Rueben Cotters..but they don't grow on trees.
 

davohan123

First Grader
Premium Member
Tipping Member
When dissecting games, it's easy to blame individuals and/or moments but unless a game is two sides competing hard against each other and a pivotal mistake happens at the death, it is rarely ever down to a moment.

Personally, when I watch Manly, I see a side consistently beaten at the ruck most weeks. It's a big reason why the edge defence is exposed. At no point today did we look on top of Penrith. Even when we scored those tries down the edge and were winning 12-4, it still felt like Penrith were running harder and tackling harder. I was not surprised when they went to halftime in front.

A game is 17 on 17; that's 34 variables. Nine times out of ten, a game will be won by the team that 'on average' wins contact, either in defence or with the ball. Our side do not win the little contests enough across the 17 players. Most of the contact today was won by Penrith and we lost the game. It's not Garrick or Ben T. It's the team.

Every year, the two teams that make the GF are usually the two teams who 'on average' win the contact more than their opposition. Now, that might seem obvious and pointless, but I don't blame individuals for our position in the middle of the table. We do not have the pack and power outside backs to challenge quality opposition when they decide to turn up, like Penrith did today. Wins against the likes of Melbourne at Brooky, happen because we turn up and give 100% and the opposition are slightly off the boil.
Great post well said
 

Stewbojevic

Reserve Grader
When dissecting games, it's easy to blame individuals and/or moments but unless a game is two sides competing hard against each other and a pivotal mistake happens at the death, it is rarely ever down to a moment.

Personally, when I watch Manly, I see a side consistently beaten at the ruck most weeks. It's a big reason why the edge defence is exposed. At no point today did we look on top of Penrith. Even when we scored those tries down the edge and were winning 12-4, it still felt like Penrith were running harder and tackling harder. I was not surprised when they went to halftime in front.

A game is 17 on 17; that's 34 variables. Nine times out of ten, a game will be won by the team that 'on average' wins contact, either in defence or with the ball. Our side do not win the little contests enough across the 17 players. Most of the contact today was won by Penrith and we lost the game. It's not Garrick or Ben T. It's the team.

Every year, the two teams that make the GF are usually the two teams who 'on average' win the contact more than their opposition. Now, that might seem obvious and pointless, but I don't blame individuals for our position in the middle of the table. We do not have the pack and power outside backs to challenge quality opposition when they decide to turn up, like Penrith did today. Wins against the likes of Melbourne at Brooky, happen because we turn up and give 100% and the opposition are slightly off the boil.
I’m interested to hear what you think could turn it around?

I notice myself agreeing with almost everything you say when you analyse our team, but you don’t tend to pose that many solutions.

Is it a roster thing? Coaching? Tactics?
 

LeonardCohen

Bencher
I’m interested to hear what you think could turn it around?

I notice myself agreeing with almost everything you say when you analyse our team, but you don’t tend to pose that many solutions.

Is it a roster thing? Coaching? Tactics?
I think it’s primarily down to the roster and Seibs knows it, hence the tactics…so it’s all three.

I reckon our coach’s tactics are to play to our edges (our weapons as he calls it) because of our roster. We’ve got speed in the backs and we’ve got creative halves, so an attacking mindset kinda makes sense. Our hooker is no real threat and our middles are sluggish so why would we play through the middle third?

Part of the solution is a 9 that can at least get the middles over the ad line with some variation. The problem? There are none on the market. So we gotta hope Simpkin can reach potential.

The other solution is some forwards with power and leg speed. The problem? There are none on the market. Hopefully a guy like Stefano from the Tigers might wanna look at us, but we’ll have to pay overs.

I’m a huge Jake fan but he is offering nothing with the ball…we need his defence regardless. Then you’ve got Aloiai who did have leg speed but his knees have slowed him down somewhat, ditto Brown. We’ve got Lodge injured and he’s a plodder anyway. Bullemor can get over the ad line quickly but lacks raw power so unless a good 9 gets him wedging between defenders, he’s a sitting duck that get dominated. Sipley is playing injured but last year was probably the only guy that charged over the ad line with speed and purpose; OK Paseka helped as well. He’s probably our best but I also think he can plod a little at times.

So basically, I see our middle (including lock) as lacking the punch to compete with the top sides and the solution is to acquire a better middle rotation, but knowing it’s a problem and being able to fix it are two different things. Who are we going to sign, will they want to sign with us and do we have the cap space?! It’s like the Raiders with their halves and fullback. They know it’s a deficit but that doesn’t mean you can click your fingers and solve it. They’ve finally landed Strange, who looks a good prospect but there’s not much around him and it’ll take time.
 
Last edited:

HK_Eagle

First Grader
Premium Member
I’m interested to hear what you think could turn it around?

I notice myself agreeing with almost everything you say when you analyse our team, but you don’t tend to pose that many solutions.

Is it a roster thing? Coaching? Tactics?
I think it’s a reflection of the limits we face under Penn ownership, along with politics and economics of this salary cap post-super league era.

Penn seems unable to attract money so that we can build a strong financial supporting structures around the club (IE; third party deals ala Politis Rorters style). He may be working on this and that may be part of the US focus, but he doesn’t strike me as a top shelf successful businessman with the ambition and connections to grow us. This is just an observation from a sausage roll eating numpty with zero inside knowledge.
 

Pepi

Bencher
Our middles look tired and weren't up to the fight. Brown was probably the exception and did his best to get us some momentum. Hope we are selective about our forward spots for next year. Lodge started off well last year but looked a slug in his return, wouldn't re-sign him.

Caleb Navale is fast for a middle forward and has a good motor on him. Signed up for 3 years. Possibly a starter in 2025.
 

LeonardCohen

Bencher
Our middles look tired and weren't up to the fight. Brown was probably the exception and did his best to get us some momentum. Hope we are selective about our forward spots for next year. Lodge started off well last year but looked a slug in his return, wouldn't re-sign him.

Caleb Navale is fast for a middle forward and has a good motor on him. Signed up for 3 years. Possibly a starter in 2025.
Coming off the bye too so no reason to be tired. It’s how they look most weeks when the opposition pack turns up. The first set of six, we made 25m and they made 50. We kicked from inside our half and they put an attacking bomb in. Some good middles and a decent 9 help the yardage and field position battle, which determines which side fatigues the quickest. Most weeks it’s Manly that ends up fatigued, hanging on bravely but hanging on nonetheless. The effort was there, we just weren’t good enough.
 

Go manly

Bencher
Premium Member
Tipping Member
I've mentioned it before, we are terrible for getting 3 or more in a tackle and always grass cut tackles that are not rewarded but let teams get quick play the balls against us.
And our okay the balls are slowest in comp
We are getting done both ways
 

Fibro Eagle

Bencher
Premium Member
Tipping Member
I reckon our coach’s tactics are to play to our edges (our weapons as he calls it) because of our roster. We’ve got speed in the backs and we’ve got creative halves, so an attacking mindset kinda makes sense. Our hooker is no real threat and our middles are sluggish so why would we play through the middle third?

Part of the solution is a 9 that can at least get the middles over the ad line with some variation. The problem? There are none on the market. So we gotta hope Simpkin can reach potential.
That’s Manly in a nutshell right there
Hooker for Manly is the key position that has lacked any go forward
If you look at the top teams all front foot play and pushing up through the middle come from there hookers ours take a step back and pass , Once your on the front foot and pushing through the middle is what the panthers do well and they showed the difference on Sunday arvo with how slow Manly look .
 

StuBoot

Bencher
That’s Manly in a nutshell right there
Hooker for Manly is the key position that has lacked any go forward
If you look at the top teams all front foot play and pushing up through the middle come from there hookers ours take a step back and pass , Once your on the front foot and pushing through the middle is what the panthers do well and they showed the difference on Sunday arvo with how slow Manly look .
Yep, we need a hooker that can step out and offload forward, sorry l mean "flat" passes to middles that look like they want it.
 

Pete W

Bencher
I think it’s primarily down to the roster and Seibs knows it, hence the tactics…so it’s all three.

I reckon our coach’s tactics are to play to our edges (our weapons as he calls it) because of our roster. We’ve got speed in the backs and we’ve got creative halves, so an attacking mindset kinda makes sense. Our hooker is no real threat and our middles are sluggish so why would we play through the middle third?

Part of the solution is a 9 that can at least get the middles over the ad line with some variation. The problem? There are none on the market. So we gotta hope Simpkin can reach potential.

The other solution is some forwards with power and leg speed. The problem? There are none on the market. Hopefully a guy like Stefano from the Tigers might wanna look at us, but we’ll have to pay overs.

I’m a huge Jake fan but he is offering nothing with the ball…we need his defence regardless. Then you’ve got Aloiai who did have leg speed but his knees have slowed him down somewhat, ditto Brown. We’ve got Lodge injured and he’s a plodder anyway. Bullemor can get over the ad line quickly but lacks raw power so unless a good 9 gets him wedging between defenders, he’s a sitting duck that get dominated. Sipley is playing injured but last year was probably the only guy that charged over the ad line with speed and purpose; OK Paseka helped as well. He’s probably our best but I also think he can plod a little at times.

So basically, I see our middle (including lock) as lacking the punch to compete with the top sides and the solution is to acquire a better middle rotation, but knowing it’s a problem and being able to fix it are two different things. Who are we going to sign, will they want to sign with us and do we have the cap space?! It’s like the Raiders with their halves and fullback. They know it’s a deficit but that doesn’t mean you can click your fingers and solve it. They’ve finally landed Strange, who looks a good prospect but there’s not much around him and it’ll take time.
In 2019, it was the opposite - we had very weak outside backs but the Api-Nase combo with a beastly Marty-AFB pairing, saw us knock down the front door of some of the league's best defences that season. It was a thing of beauty, and when you go through the middle, you immediately become a serious footy team.

The current inverse of this is just touch footy. It's T20 cricket. No substance, no backbone. Having said that, if Seibold used his brain and at the least backed up this silliness by focusing on our defence, maybe we could actually pull this off. But no, not only do we have superficial attack, we have paper thin defence...the Manly Way
 

Forster eagle

Reserve Grader
I’m not sure. Yes, he probably would have stiffened up the middle somewhat, but… I don’t think it’s as simple as just individuals. Our strategy just seems so passive in defence. We look like we are waiting for them to run to us, then only able to put two in the tackle, and allowing the opposition to poke through, get to their stomachs, and then get quick plat the balls to continue the momentum. I’m somewhat baffled by our defence , TBH
It looked to me that we'd gone back to the Barrett days of defence. Let em come and hold them upright without any forceful first contact. Who wouldn't run flat out at that defence. Oh yes Trent was a genius......not.
 

Latest posts

Team P W L PD Pts
16 13 3 125 32
16 11 5 116 28
17 11 6 225 26
17 11 6 125 26
16 9 7 65 24
16 9 7 48 24
17 9 8 1 22
17 9 8 -56 22
16 8 7 29 21
16 8 8 -43 20
16 7 9 -93 20
17 7 9 -32 19
17 7 10 9 18
16 6 10 -59 18
16 6 10 -104 18
17 4 13 -153 12
17 4 13 -203 12
Back
Top Bottom