Jump to content

The Things We Knew Before the Tournement


OMEGA

Recommended Posts

 

Out of respect for the sheer effort and desire of the players this morning, I’m starting a seperate thread to discuss this

No natural attacking full back after losing Hardaker and Tomkins, Shaul should have been named in the squad if not as starting a Full Back. His inclusion would have added genuine speed to the backline and would have negated the need for Widdop to switch from Stand Off. That would have allowed for a more settled and efficient  Half Back pairing which was needed today.

Bateman at Centre was a very poor selection. No ones doubting his commitment but a centre he’s not, it’s been said he was there for his defence but that’s a poor approach to a Tournement and didn’t work anyway. Hall, who’s averaged a try a Test over 40+ Tests couldn’t buy a try outside Bateman and Australia could afford to concentrate on our more effective  right side, safe in the knowledge that our left was impotent.

Kevin Brown should never have got near consideration let alone selection, McGuire, Patton, Myler even Sneyd would have been far better.

Gale deserved his shot but we’d seen already in the 4Ns that he wasn’t international standard.

Watts would have offered us more than Heighington, with attacking options and flair being all but absent from the halves a prop with a gifted offload game would have been valuable against a tired Aussie team.

Hill came into the Tournement in poor form, I wouldn’t have taken him, he at least played himself into some form during the group games

Hodgeson stifled the attacking game, we saw it in the 4 Ns and we looked far better with Roby playing. How great would it have been to have had Darryl Clarke to throw on in that last 20 minutes.

None of this is hindsight I said it long before we got on the plane and I’ve been proved correct!

The trouble was that Wayne Bennett does not have the depth of knowledge about Super League players and therefore doesn’t have the confidence to pick them over NRL players.

An attacking Full Back with genuine speed and the ability to score from nothing, a genuine left sided centre who could service Hall and play with real instinct, a more composed Half Back pairing and a little bit of X-Factor off the bench (Watts & Clarke) would have made us better balanced and a bigger threat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Wow!  That's some opinion right there.  I suspect most won't agree with any of it but I'll comment on Bateman. 

He did the job he was given fantastically well all tounament. I think he missed one tackle somewhere that led to a try otherwise that channel was dead to the opposition. Will Chambers is a Premiership winning centre playing week in week out for the Storm. How good a player do you think you need to be to get that gig?  Johnny boy had him in his pocket. And in stopping Chambers he also stopped the threat from the wing. 

Forever in our shadow, forever on your mind.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, OMEGA said:

 

Out of respect for the sheer effort and desire of the players this morning, I’m starting a seperate thread to discuss this

No natural attacking full back after losing Hardaker and Tomkins, Shaul should have been named in the squad if not as starting a Full Back. His inclusion would have added genuine speed to the backline and would have negated the need for Widdop to switch from Stand Off. That would have allowed for a more settled and efficient  Half Back pairing which was needed today.

Bateman at Centre was a very poor selection. No ones doubting his commitment but a centre he’s not, it’s been said he was there for his defence but that’s a poor approach to a Tournement and didn’t work anyway. Hall, who’s averaged a try a Test over 40+ Tests couldn’t buy a try outside Bateman and Australia could afford to concentrate on our more effective  right side, safe in the knowledge that our left was impotent.

Kevin Brown should never have got near consideration let alone selection, McGuire, Patton, Myler even Sneyd would have been far better.

Gale deserved his shot but we’d seen already in the 4Ns that he wasn’t international standard.

Watts would have offered us more than Heighington, with attacking options and flair being all but absent from the halves a prop with a gifted offload game would have been valuable against a tired Aussie team.

Hill came into the Tournement in poor form, I wouldn’t have taken him, he at least played himself into some form during the group games

Hodgeson stifled the attacking game, we saw it in the 4 Ns and we looked far better with Roby playing. How great would it have been to have had Darryl Clarke to throw on in that last 20 minutes.

None of this is hindsight I said it long before we got on the plane and I’ve been proved correct!

The trouble was that Wayne Bennett does not have the depth of knowledge about Super League players and therefore doesn’t have the confidence to pick them over NRL players.

An attacking Full Back with genuine speed and the ability to score from nothing, a genuine left sided centre who could service Hall and play with real instinct, a more composed Half Back pairing and a little bit of X-Factor off the bench (Watts & Clarke) would have made us better balanced and a bigger threat.

I agree with all of the last paragraph 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, OMEGA said:

 

Out of respect for the sheer effort and desire of the players this morning, I’m starting a seperate thread to discuss this

No natural attacking full back after losing Hardaker and Tomkins, Shaul should have been named in the squad if not as starting a Full Back. His inclusion would have added genuine speed to the backline and would have negated the need for Widdop to switch from Stand Off. That would have allowed for a more settled and efficient  Half Back pairing which was needed today.

Bateman at Centre was a very poor selection. No ones doubting his commitment but a centre he’s not, it’s been said he was there for his defence but that’s a poor approach to a Tournement and didn’t work anyway. Hall, who’s averaged a try a Test over 40+ Tests couldn’t buy a try outside Bateman and Australia could afford to concentrate on our more effective  right side, safe in the knowledge that our left was impotent.

Kevin Brown should never have got near consideration let alone selection, McGuire, Patton, Myler even Sneyd would have been far better.

Gale deserved his shot but we’d seen already in the 4Ns that he wasn’t international standard.

Watts would have offered us more than Heighington, with attacking options and flair being all but absent from the halves a prop with a gifted offload game would have been valuable against a tired Aussie team.

Hill came into the Tournement in poor form, I wouldn’t have taken him, he at least played himself into some form during the group games

Hodgeson stifled the attacking game, we saw it in the 4 Ns and we looked far better with Roby playing. How great would it have been to have had Darryl Clarke to throw on in that last 20 minutes.

None of this is hindsight I said it long before we got on the plane and I’ve been proved correct!

The trouble was that Wayne Bennett does not have the depth of knowledge about Super League players and therefore doesn’t have the confidence to pick them over NRL players.

An attacking Full Back with genuine speed and the ability to score from nothing, a genuine left sided centre who could service Hall and play with real instinct, a more composed Half Back pairing and a little bit of X-Factor off the bench (Watts & Clarke) would have made us better balanced and a bigger threat.

Amazing!! All those negatives and we could still have pinched it. 

And talking of negativity can I assume we’re back to normal now? 

"Freedom without socialism is privilege and injustice, socialism without freedom is slavery and brutality" - Mikhail Bakunin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, OMEGA said:

 

Out of respect for the sheer effort and desire of the players this morning, I’m starting a seperate thread to discuss this

No natural attacking full back after losing Hardaker and Tomkins, Shaul should have been named in the squad if not as starting a Full Back. His inclusion would have added genuine speed to the backline and would have negated the need for Widdop to switch from Stand Off. That would have allowed for a more settled and efficient  Half Back pairing which was needed today.

Bateman at Centre was a very poor selection. No ones doubting his commitment but a centre he’s not, it’s been said he was there for his defence but that’s a poor approach to a Tournement and didn’t work anyway. Hall, who’s averaged a try a Test over 40+ Tests couldn’t buy a try outside Bateman and Australia could afford to concentrate on our more effective  right side, safe in the knowledge that our left was impotent.

Kevin Brown should never have got near consideration let alone selection, McGuire, Patton, Myler even Sneyd would have been far better.

Gale deserved his shot but we’d seen already in the 4Ns that he wasn’t international standard.

Watts would have offered us more than Heighington, with attacking options and flair being all but absent from the halves a prop with a gifted offload game would have been valuable against a tired Aussie team.

Hill came into the Tournement in poor form, I wouldn’t have taken him, he at least played himself into some form during the group games

Hodgeson stifled the attacking game, we saw it in the 4 Ns and we looked far better with Roby playing. How great would it have been to have had Darryl Clarke to throw on in that last 20 minutes.

None of this is hindsight I said it long before we got on the plane and I’ve been proved correct!

The trouble was that Wayne Bennett does not have the depth of knowledge about Super League players and therefore doesn’t have the confidence to pick them over NRL players.

An attacking Full Back with genuine speed and the ability to score from nothing, a genuine left sided centre who could service Hall and play with real instinct, a more composed Half Back pairing and a little bit of X-Factor off the bench (Watts & Clarke) would have made us better balanced and a bigger threat.

Watts, I agree on.  All the rest your wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Phil said:

Amazing!! All those negatives and we could still have pinched it. 

And talking of negativity can I assume we’re back to normal now? 

Not normally negative and I’m stating opinion which was expressed long before we even played a game. The tragedy is that however close we came had we selected better and bravely we might have won.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Konkrete said:

Wow!  That's some opinion right there.  I suspect most won't agree with any of it but I'll comment on Bateman. 

He did the job he was given fantastically well all tounament. I think he missed one tackle somewhere that led to a try otherwise that channel was dead to the opposition. Will Chambers is a Premiership winning centre playing week in week out for the Storm. How good a player do you think you need to be to get that gig?  Johnny boy had him in his pocket. And in stopping Chambers he also stopped the threat from the wing. 

Great, we went there to contain them and not win then. Reminds me of when we picked Keith Mumby in the centres for GB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, OMEGA said:

Great, we went there to contain them and not win then. Reminds me of when we picked Keith Mumby in the centres for GB

Defence wins games. If you don't get that then you don't understand the game at the top level. 

Forever in our shadow, forever on your mind.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Konkrete said:

Defence wins games. If you don't get that then you don't understand the game at the top level. 

As I said to this point many weeks ago you still need an attack and you still need to score more points than the opposition.

Today the defence was as good as it was ever going to be and we may never restrict Australia to just 6 points again. However it was still not enough. The defence did not win the game today because we had no real attack and couldn't even score a point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The things we know after the tournement...

Despite been written off we matched the Aussies today in the biggest and but for a few dodgy decisions, losing a few important players and a tiny slice of luck (the finger tips of Douglas for example) we would be world champions.

With that in mind the OP seems ridiculously over critical. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Konkrete said:

Defence wins games. If you don't get that then you don't understand the game at the top level. 

And a natural left centre would defend better as a left centre than a right sided second rower will. Shenton is a far better defender in that position than Bateman could ever hope to be, the big difference is that Shenton would also provide for his winger.

If you don’t understand that blah blah blah . . . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Konkrete said:

Defence wins games. If you don't get that then you don't understand the game at the top level. 

I must have turned the TV off too soon. Did we win then?

Defence keeps you in the game but we just didnt have it in offense and, perhaps, other selections would have added that little to take advantage of the great defence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, OMEGA said:

And a natural left centre would defend better as a left centre than a right sided second rower will. Shenton is a far better defender in that position than Bateman could ever hope to be, the big difference is that Shenton would also provide for his winger.

If you don’t understand that blah blah blah . . . 

 

1 hour ago, Goughy said:

I must have turned the TV off too soon. Did we win then?

Defence keeps you in the game but we just didnt have it in offense and, perhaps, other selections would have added that little to take advantage of the great defence.

FFS!  We were within an ace of winning because we had a defence orientated approach. The reason we've not come so close since 1972 is because of your interpretation of the game has been used. 

I guess you need to see your club at the top of the sport to really appreciate how it's done.  If you think you're going to beat Australia 38-36 or something then you probably need to watch the game a for bit longer with someone alongside you. 

Forever in our shadow, forever on your mind.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...