• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

Reds v Waratahs, rd2 SR2013

Status
Not open for further replies.
Richo

Richo

John Thornett (49)
Volavola showed pretty much the same thing at the Cru trial: explosive with ball in hand, unpredictable, immature defensively and a pass that's all over the bloody place. Lots and lots of potential too. His development should be a priority. The Tahs have to be thinking ahead, not just to this season.
 
Inside Shoulder

Inside Shoulder

Nathan Sharpe (72)
Richo said:
Volavola showed pretty much the same thing at the Cru trial: explosive with ball in hand, unpredictable, immature defensively and a pass that's all over the bloody place. Lots and lots of potential too. His development should be a priority. The Tahs have to be thinking ahead, not just to this season.
Click to expand...
I agree he has potential.
Developing, IMO, means not putting him on too early or expecting too much of him. He is already trying to win games with every touch.
He needs to grow into it: in the short term they should go with the less gifted or promising but more established player in order to reap the benefits long term.
Cheika has tenure he can afford to take a medium term view this season at least.
 
Braveheart81

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
I definitely think TPN has tempered his game a bit in the last 6 months to be less impact and play a more traditional (and less injury prone) hooker game where he makes more tackles but less of them are reverse spear tackles (where he's the spear and tries to bury his head in their hip/knee/other hard bits) and more ruck/maul involvement.

His lineout throwing has also improved a lot in recent years. I think the problems weren't really his on Saturday night. As soon as Chapman came on our lineout was solid.
 
Braveheart81

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
Inside Shoulder said:
I agree he has potential.
Developing, IMO, means not putting him on too early or expecting too much of him. He is already trying to win games with every touch.
He needs to grow into it: in the short term they should go with the less gifted or promising but more established player in order to reap the benefits long term.
Cheika has tenure he can afford to take a medium term view this season at least.
Click to expand...

Yes. Who knows what a calm/experienced head like Lachie Turner would have done in similar situations. He might have scored the try that Volavola scored and produced an accurate pass to Chapman to put him over for a try.

Volavola is probably needed on the bench as the backup 10 until Barnes is back in the side. After that I think we only need to be playing one of Folau and Volavola in each matchday 22.
 
Scotty

Scotty

David Codey (61)
Hawko said:
When the game got to 17-17 I thought that the above prediction was going the way of my tipping (so far absolutely attrocious) but it turned out to be pretty accurate. The key issues were defense (missed tackles) and dropped ball. They will be 100% better next week for the hitout. On what we've seen so far that should account for the Rebels at home. I think the Brumbies in Canberra will be just a bit too strong after their bye week, but we've then got a run of four very winnable home games, leading into our next bye. So by then we could be 5:2 on our win/loss ratio and well placed to make a big run in the second half. All is not lost yet and the gloating in this thread is just red cheer-mongering.

The team that does have some issues IMO is the Reds. They had two quick tries put on them and then an open and shut run to the line ruined by a dropped ball. At 65 minutes, at home, with 40,000 rabid cheerleaders the Reds looked down and out against a team that was not defending and handling well. How come? If Volavola kept his nerve the Reds could easily have lost to a bunch of rusty gates. I don't think the loss of Horwill and Genia accounts for all of that. Link will be just as worried as Cheika right now.
Click to expand...

The Reds are definitely rusty as well, a long way to improve, but they did show signs of improvement from the week before vs the Brumbies. The breakdown work for the most was the impressive part and they generally held their own in the scrums. That is a big plus from the week before.

And by the way it isn't just Genia and Horwill. We are missing our strongest running forward (Samo), our backline defensive leader (Fa'aingaa) and a bloke that rucks and picks and drives as good as anyone in the side (Daley).
 
Braveheart81

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
BPC said:
You haven't been inducted into the secret yet? Like most internet forums there really only about four or five participants with various nom de plume.
Click to expand...

Correct.

When I've had too many Bundys, I post under the name biggsy.

It's kind of like when you get a gremlin wet and feed them after midnight.
 
cyclopath

cyclopath

George Smith (75)
Staff member
fatprop said:
Stats are up

http://www.rugbystats.com.au/matches/rugby/match21047.html


TPN got through a goodly load of work, as did Timani
Tom Carter did a shed load of ruck work ie extras
Mitchell missed 4 tackles
Douglas & Hooper missed 3 while doing plenty (same as Quirk who missed 4 while while completing 18)
Click to expand...
Quirk and Gill were immense, Hooper did a lot of work; interesting to look at the lineout stats and not a struck match between the 2 sides as opposed to the the "TPN throws shit" mantra that was still aired by a few. Same too the "Cooper missed tackles" line, which was clearly false. Harris was not what the Reds probably wanted in that game - not his best.
Quirk lapped the field in the MOM stakes though!!
 
Richo

Richo

John Thornett (49)
Interesting how close the missed tackles are in number. It felt like the Tahs were dropping off them all night. Perhaps they occurred in bunches around the Reds' tries.
 
Scott Allen

Scott Allen

Trevor Allan (34)
cyclopath said:
Quirk and Gill were immense, Hooper did a lot of work; interesting to look at the lineout stats and not a struck match between the 2 sides as opposed to the the "TPN throws shit" mantra that was still aired by a few. Same too the "Cooper missed tackles" line, which was clearly false. Harris was not what the Reds probably wanted in that game - not his best.
Quirk lapped the field in the MOM stakes though!!
Click to expand...

The stats on the lineouts from Rugby Stats are bullshit - TPN was terrible with his throws (worst of all Aussie throwers again this week) - will put together a video to show you that the claims about TPN are totally accurate (he is dreadful) - will publish on Friday.
 
cyclopath

cyclopath

George Smith (75)
Staff member
Well, that's me getting a major bitch-slap!!
To be honest, don't usually spend much time on stats sites, so assumed they might be tabulated from, I don't know, watching the game?? Clearly that was outrageous on my part! :D
 
Scott Allen

Scott Allen

Trevor Allan (34)
cyclopath said:
Well, that's me getting a major bitch-slap!!
To be honest, don't usually spend much time on stats sites, so assumed they might be tabulated from, I don't know, watching the game?? Clearly that was outrageous on my part! :D
Click to expand...

Trap for young players mate ;)
 
Wheatman

Wheatman

Chris McKivat (8)
Just a quick question for those who have seen Scott Allen's latest armchair review. When the Tahs eventually kick out of their 22, why isn't the lineout taken back where the kicker kicked it? It looks to me on the first two kicks, the play started outside the 22 before the Reds defence pushed the Tahs deep within the 22. At no stage do the Reds touch the ball. When does the rule end regarding bringing the ball back into 22 to be safely kicked out on the full? Very likely I don't know the complete rule.
 
Braveheart81

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
Wheatman said:
Just a quick question for those who have seen Scott Allen's latest armchair review. When the Tahs eventually kick out of their 22, why isn't the lineout taken back where the kicker kicked it? It looks to me on the first two kicks, the play started outside the 22 before the Reds defence pushed the Tahs deep within the 22. At no stage do the Reds touch the ball. When does the rule end regarding bringing the ball back into 22 to be safely kicked out on the full? Very likely I don't know the complete rule.
Click to expand...

As soon as a phase is completed (i.e. a ruck or maul) inside the 22, the ball is considered to be played from that position even if on the previous phase, that team held the ball outside the 22.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top