I thought Shore was fortunate to be down 8 nil at halftime playing into the wind. Shore has 2 forwards of note, Edwards who went off injured after 30 min and Suttor. The rest are determined but small. Kings tight 5 led ably by Pietsch were to clinical, despite the wet. And Kyle Brown the Kings half is like an extra forward and was bigger than the Shore no8.
The difference was in the backs. Brown's distribution gave Kings 10 time & space and with Osborne chiming in at 15 Shore were always under pressure. Osborne's booming punt is also useful.
The wet track stifled the opportunities for Rixon (Shore 15). His speed is clear but today was not a day for quicks.
Let me be gracious in defeat. But I can only wear so much crap.
I will give Kings credit. They have the best scrum in GPS. Yes they did have success early and got 1 tight head. But Shore worked out a way to counter them even after Edwards went off.
3,4 and 12 all had strong games.
Peitch and Osborne both quiet games.
Rixon I thought had the better game at Fullback.
In open play Shore forwards were dominant and continually bent Kings defensive line.
It's a game Shore could have won. They had their opportunities and full credit to Kings defence.
Kings should well know they were in a tight game and they knew the momentum was with Shore in the second half. They needed the penalty goal to get clear by 8,
So kings win by 1 try and a penalty. Pretty close game.
I'm sure Kings were expecting to put a big score on and after their defeat last week.
As for the back row comment. Yes Kings were bigger. shore had 2 regular back rows out including the captain. Think these boys really stood up and pound for pound put in twice the effort of Kings.
The great thing about 2 rounds is that Shore can even the score against all sides
