
Jay M
Contributor
We get it. Ads aren't what you are here for. NZWarriors.com has been up for almost 20 years and relies on ad revenue to help keep the server running.
Please add us to your ad blocker's whitelist or disable to run on our website. Alternatively, click here to upgrade your account to remove all ads.
|
minute |
|
01 Jan 1970 12:00 PM |
Tries | ||
/ | Conversions | / |
/ | Field Goals | / |
/ | Two Point Field Goals | / |
% | Posession | % |
/ | Set Completion | / |
Completion Rate | ||
Time in Opposition Half | ||
Metres Gained | ||
Dropouts | ||
Dummy Half Runs | ||
Kicks | ||
Kick Metres | ||
40/20 | ||
20/40 | ||
One on One Strip | ||
Line Breaks | ||
Offloads |
Penalties (Conceded) | ||
Set Restarts | ||
Errors | ||
Handling Errors | ||
Missed Tackles | ||
Sin Bin | ||
Sent Off |
# | Player | T | Pts | TA | LB | TB | OFF | Ta | MT | IT | Pos | DR | K | KM | M | E | P |
---|
# | Player | T | Pts | TA | LB | TB | OFF | Ta | MT | IT | Pos | DR | K | KM | M | E | P |
---|
Thought the bench usage was alright, having Roache chucked in straight away, meant he could cycle the young props on and off, which got good performances out of them, maybe Lisone could have gone longer.Secondly - wtf was up with McFadden's use of the bench? Vete - 34 mins, Gubb - 23 mins, Lisone - 25 mins, Sipley 21 mins. Basically one of those guys subbed Matulino, and the other three split 80 minutes between them. If he tries that shit against the Sharks - their pack will destroy ours.
Thought the bench usage was alright, having Roache chucked in straight away, meant he could cycle the young props on and off, which got good performances out of them, maybe Lisone could have gone longer.
But those guys’s defence gets real sloppy when left out there too long, i.e. Vete running a block on his own backline as he was retreating on the big SKD bust.
Cappy gets in most trouble with his 17th man, hooker cover, wing cover, Hurrell cover, it always seems random. He might be better with 3 props, 1 injury utility. Its an Orgin bench! Mentor Lozza knows what works.
Maumalo was sinbinned because he got burned
Sure he beat Ken to the ball but it's easy to overlook a turn and chase, even the quickest aren't going to turn and get there compared to a straight runner.
Wells wouldn't give us 190m like mamalo, that is absolute madness, the team won so why change, Fusitua is special on wing, mamalo and beast other wing depending who is fit
Maumalo had a fair game but he is not a winger now thats the problem hes If he gets his defence right he will be better suited in the forward packWells wouldn't give us 190m like mamalo, that is absolute madness, the team won so why change, Fusitua is special on wing, mamalo and beast other wing depending who is fit
Yet the obvious is the most frequently ignored or more so 'downed played.Yep, you sell it best "Dave". Obviously our defence was good enough to take home the 2 points.
To the people that gave Maumalo either "passable" or "below average" tell me what game you watched, because I don't want to miss a Warriors game. Young buck, who made the most meters in the game, up and down the middle, he wasn't getting garbage meters out wide, against a big Roosters pack that were looking to intimidate for 80 minutes. The play when he got smashed on tackle 1 then stuck his hand straight back up and took tackle 3 and earned us a penalty was massive.
He did, but had Liu run away from him pretty easily to set up a try as well, won’t bag him for the turn and chase on the sin binning, he tried to get back.To the people that gave Maumalo either "passable" or "below average" tell me what game you watched, because I don't want to miss a Warriors game. Young buck, who made the most meters in the game, up and down the middle, he wasn't getting garbage meters out wide, against a big Roosters pack that were looking to intimidate for 80 minutes. The play when he got smashed on tackle 1 then stuck his hand straight back up and took tackle 3 and earned us a penalty was massive.
To the people that gave Maumalo either "passable" or "below average" tell me what game you watched, because I don't want to miss a Warriors game. Young buck, who made the most meters in the game, up and down the middle, he wasn't getting garbage meters out wide, against a big Roosters pack that were looking to intimidate for 80 minutes. The play when he got smashed on tackle 1 then stuck his hand straight back up and took tackle 3 and earned us a penalty was massive.
How much energy does it sap out of the opposition when we are offloading and getting second phase play? While it might not lead directly to a line break or points the effect of continually having to be on guard against us is just as big. More effort in defence also means less energy in attack. Perhaps this also contributed to a number of Roosters players not being able to get back onside and us gaining penalties and also possession/position from it.Yet the obvious is the most frequently ignored or more so 'downed played.
Actually in in the false economony of attacking flair that is the Warriors, ...the truism that is the last four years is points coneeded....the for and against....forget the for....its the against.
Cappy gets it in the neck, so its timely after a crude game like that to ask the question, was it our recent shift in adjusting to the players preferred second phase game that got the result ? Or was it simple buy in to basic Aussie coaching style tennents (like kick penalties, make your tackles, do the boring stuff well).
I wager the difference between this game and the last two blow outs, is that when the Warriors have a defensive line in their faces (whether illegally like last night, or quassi Legally by the line speed of the better sides or the shallow ten meters granted to home teams) ....in such pressured conditions.....having 'out score the opposition mentality....is limiting this club.
The line in the sand, the foundation stone, has to be a bed Rock of defence.
No matter how many exciting players we throw into this team, no matter how rejigged the coaches plans are adapted to suit our so called Warrior ball, even seriously weakened teams can cynically disrupt a team that is so heavily reliant on second phase and running.
We won because the Roosters could only scrape together ten points.
Really looking forward to seeing what they do against the Sharks.
The play when he got smashed on tackle 1 then stuck his hand straight back up and took tackle 3 and earned us a penalty was massive.
There's more to being a winger other than scoring tries. Sure, Fusitua is well ahead of him, but Ken is a young kid who wasn't overawed. Often you see these young kids come in and sit back a bit, in fact I thought Ken did that a lot last year. Here when the going got tough he got amongst it.
To the people that gave Maumalo either "passable" or "below average" tell me what game you watched, because I don't want to miss a Warriors game. Young buck, who made the most meters in the game, up and down the middle, he wasn't getting garbage meters out wide, against a big Roosters pack that were looking to intimidate for 80 minutes. The play when he got smashed on tackle 1 then stuck his hand straight back up and took tackle 3 and earned us a penalty was massive.
Yet the obvious is the most frequently ignored or more so 'downed played.
Actually in in the false economony of attacking flair that is the Warriors, ...the truism that is the last four years is points coneeded....the for and against....forget the for....its the against.
Cappy gets it in the neck, so its timely after a crude game like that to ask the question, was it our recent shift in adjusting to the players preferred second phase game that got the result ? Or was it simple buy in to basic Aussie coaching style tennents (like kick penalties, make your tackles, do the boring stuff well).
I wager the difference between this game and the last two blow outs, is that when the Warriors have a defensive line in their faces (whether illegally like last night, or quassi Legally by the line speed of the better sides or the shallow ten meters granted to home teams) ....in such pressured conditions.....having 'out score the opposition mentality....is limiting this club.
The line in the sand, the foundation stone, has to be a bed Rock of defence.
No matter how many exciting players we throw into this team, no matter how rejigged the coaches plans are adapted to suit our so called Warrior ball, even seriously weakened teams can cynically disrupt a team that is so heavily reliant on second phase and running.
We won because the Roosters could only scrape together ten points.
Really looking forward to seeing what they do against the Sharks.
18 Mar
Compiled from 20 ratings