Pick Your Team Pick Your Team 2017 Rnd 13 - Eels vs Warriors

Status
Not open for further replies.
So you would offer a FG bench spot to somebody who showed a bit of aggression? He missed two tackles in 29 minutes. Luke missed no tackles at all and was on the field for over twice as long. I hope SK isn't as understanding as you.;)
Lukes had a dig twice this year ,roosters been the other .. that fat little unfit fuck can piss off to stewart island for all i care .. allthough he did set up ashfords try. He is not the future of this club
 
f341f6c4cacb4401f8c0b62a13e66b28.jpg


The Sipley bros have been laying bricks all season.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: letsgonewarriors
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Woofa
1.RTS
2.Maumalo
3.Ayshford
4.Fusitua
5.CNK
6.Foran
7.Johnson
8.Gavet
9.luke
10. P Sipley
11. Lisone
12.Hoffman
13.Mannering

15. T Sipley
16. Vatuvai
17. Afoa
18. Matulino

Manu to play super sub impact player with 20 mins at the death subbing Hoffman, and cover back line injuries. CNK to cover the spine for injury.

Sipleys to play 30 mins each. Afoa and Lisone to play 40 mins on the right edge each. Leaving 1 interchange unused.

I'd go with that side but I'd sub manu at half time with Ken on the wing an keep
them first hit up coming all day
 

matiunz

This year yet?
Contributor
Pretty much the same team with a couple of tweaks
Brodene needs a spell in reserve grade
Maumalo actually for once deserves another shot based off last nights performance
Didn't get excited by roache tbh need a spark off the bench-maybe give Higano a shot to spell Luke?
 

bruce

Contributor
Lukes had a dig twice this year ,roosters been the other .. that fat little unfit fuck can piss off to stewart island for all i care .. allthough he did set up ashfords try. He is not the future of this club
I have been Lukes biggest critic on this forum, but he is starting to approach the form we could expect from him.

He went MIA only once early in the game yesterday, I didn't see why but I assume it wasn't his fault. He didn't miss one tackle either.

Maybe having Roache on the bench is helping him get motivated.

I don't think he is the future either but in his current form he deserves to be in the side this week.
 
A little left of field but I say we use this purple patch (origin period) to give our reserve forwards some first grade experience. Have one of Pat, Tof or Chris in the FG side each week in that unused 17 spot. Start them off light with a 10min stint and then steadily increase their minutes over the next few months so they get up to speed.

Realistically we're gonna need these guys at the back end of the season, whether it be for injury cover or forward impact. No way will our small forward pack get us down the stretch when the origin hardened players get back to their clubs and the race for the finals heats up. We're gonna have to use these guys eventually and I say it's better to ease them in now rather than throw them in the deep end later down the track.

-same backline-

8. Gavet
9. Luke
10. Matulino - Lillyman cough*rested*cough ;)
11. Bunty - Thompson to extended bench
12. Hoffman
13. Mannering

14. Roache
15. Lisone
16. Vete
17. Tof - if he plays well, keep him in. Otherwise switch out with Pat or Chris
 
Every missed tackle is a bad one and he didn't make many either.
Not every missed tackle is a bad one. If a faster player palms out and touches a defender and then skips to the outside, the slower defender may be best to let the attacker be tackled by the player on the outside rather than chase them and leave a hole in the middle. It is technically a missed tackle but is a good defensive read.

What if one prop smashes another one and they bounce off each other, the guy with the balls falls on the ground and someone else falls on him for a dominant tackle. The tackling prop gets a missed tackle because he didn't finish it, but he has done his job. .

As we see more of Vete over the next few weeks we will learn whether he has fixed his defensive issues or not, but the mere fact that he was credited with two misses doesn't mean he had a defensive shocker
 

bruce

Contributor
As we see more of Vete over the next few weeks we will learn whether he has fixed his defensive issues or not, but the mere fact that he was credited with two misses doesn't mean he had a defensive shocker
Not every missed tackle is a bad one. If a faster player palms out and touches a defender and then skips to the outside, the slower defender may be best to let the attacker be tackled by the player on the outside rather than chase them and leave a hole in the middle. It is technically a missed tackle but is a good defensive read.

What if one prop smashes another one and they bounce off each other, the guy with the balls falls on the ground and someone else falls on him for a dominant tackle. The tackling prop gets a missed tackle because he didn't finish it, but he has done his job. .

As we see more of Vete over the next few weeks we will learn whether he has fixed his defensive issues or not, but the mere fact that he was credited with two misses doesn't mean he had a defensive shocker
No Aussie coach would take that attitude. Vete is a fearsome unit, I would not enjoy tackling him with all that muscle but the game is all about defence. The number of tackles he made might be excused by where he was on the field, Hoffman seems to find those places as well. I can't see the Storm in a hurry to sign Vete, put it that way.
 
No Aussie coach would take that attitude.
you are missing the point. No coach would ever accept blatant one on one missed tackle (well Kearney does with Thompson).One missed tackle in a one on one has far more effect than a player who may miss four but each time it is in a big collision and the tackle is completed by someone else.

Trent Robinson ,a premiership winning coach, is on record as saying Maloney misses a lot of tackles but makes the key ones (when he was the roosters)

Missed tackles alone is a crude stat to use to gauge defensive ability. It can point to a problem but it only really makes sense once you' analyse the tackles to see what happened
 

bruce

Contributor
you are missing the point. No coach would ever accept blatant one on one missed tackle (well Kearney does with Thompson).One missed tackle in a one on one has far more effect than a player who may miss four but each time it is in a big collision and the tackle is completed by someone else.

Trent Robinson ,a premiership winning coach, is on record as saying Maloney misses a lot of tackles but makes the key ones (when he was the roosters)

Missed tackles alone is a crude stat to use to gauge defensive ability. It can point to a problem but it only really makes sense once you' analyse the tackles to see what happened
I like your example of Maloney. He was let go by he Storm because of his defence, and he missed plenty at the Warriors too. As for Trent Robinson's comments why did he let Maloney go then?

Call me old fashioned but every tackle you make is one the others do not have to, just ask Mannering, he does enough. So every one you miss, no matter what, is one somebody else has to make.

Just ask Warren Ryan what he thinks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rugged
I like your example of Maloney. He was let go by he Storm because of his defence, and he missed plenty at the Warriors too. As for Trent Robinson's comments why did he let Maloney go then?

Call me old fashioned but every tackle you make is one the others do not have to, just ask Mannering, he does enough. So every one you miss, no matter what, is one somebody else has to make.

Just ask Warren Ryan what he thinks.
On Maloney he has won two premierships with different clubs and was in a grand final with us. He has been picked for NSW despite his missed tackles, so clearly not every Aussie coach only looks at missed tackles when deciding on a players merits and clearly some teams can be successful (even win the comp) with players who have bad missed tackle stats.

Will agree to disagree, and am sure we can both agree that Vetes defence needs to be under scrutiny for his ongoing selection
 

bruce

Contributor
On Maloney he has won two premierships with different clubs and was in a grand final with us. He has been picked for NSW despite his missed tackles, so clearly not every Aussie coach only looks at missed tackles when deciding on a players merits and clearly some teams can be successful (even win the comp) with players who have bad missed tackle stats.
Fair comment, but this is the Warriors we are talking about.

Seriously we have one decent tackler in the side week in week out (Mannering), he is injured for two games and we get smashed so I don't think we have the option of having any defenders who can slack. NSW and the Sharks can carry Maloney because he is so good at other things such as supporting ball runners and the teams have all round better defenders, especially the Sharks.

Vete missed two tackles in 29 minutes of game time. The whole team only missed 25 in the whole game.

That is a high percentage for the number of tackles he actually made (14) although to be fair his overall season average is about the same as Jason Taumalolo and Jesse Bromwich but three times as much as James Graham. So he is not a great defender and his performance should not be glossed over considering the overall Warriors defence.

On the other hand his hitups were seriously impressive, over 12 metres a carry which by NRL standards is right out in front ahead of even Jason Taumalolo, but given that some Australian coaches can bollock a player for breathing I think he would hear about his defence.

Seeing Vete up close he would be a fearsome sight to any tackler. The amount of muscle he carries would really crunch any defender. I question why SK doesn't having him running more directly like Joe Vagana used to. Polynesians are balanced runners so his hitups would be more effective if he could use his balance instead of turning his back. Maybe SK is teaching him to offload though.

I will admit that his carries were so productive another club like the Sharks might be interested in him for that alone.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.