2 things from Origin already

[Andrew Walker]

Carney was invisible for all but 10 mins of the game. In that 10 mins he did two really good things which got NSW over the line. He still looks nervous to me, you can see it in his goal kicking and general play kicking.

Two try assists 1 line break Would have scored a try had it not been for Cronk taking him out Even when not at his top He has played a major hand in a NSW victory

[Andrew Walker]

I agree with this.

You heard Archer say to Gallen "we had to be certain Carney would have scored".

This has always been the rule regarding penalty tries and is flawed. If enforced to the letter, nobody can ever be awarded a penalty try, as you can't be 100% certain about anything. What if the player about to score when he is fouled has a stroke or cardiac arrest? What if he is struck by a meteor? What if an eagle swoops down onto the field and steals the football?

See what I mean? If a player deliberately commits a foul with the direct result (not on one or two tackles before) that an attacking player is unfairly denied the chance to score a try that, ON THE BALANCE OF PROBABILITY, he would otherwise have scored, then a penalty try should be awarded. Not this "certainty" bullshit, or even "beyond a reasonable doubt" (nobody is being sentenced to execution by lethal injection). Cronk manipulated this rule last night and 10 in the bin was not sufficient punishment.

This rule should be changed immediately.

All you needced to do to explain your self about there never bein a penalty try awarded Was say what if they did a Dave Taylor I know it wouldnt have been a try as Stewart had grounded the ball But he was absolutely certain to score wehn all he had to do was fall on it Yet he still ****ed it up

[Guest]

Why weren't we awarded a penalty try when Cronk was binned for being a grub?

In hindsight doesn't matter but we we potentially would have been up by an extra try if the refs didn't screw us. If QLD had scored in the final minutes I think more would be dirty about this call.

Apparently the refs have to be 100% sure the attacking player would have scored, funny how when it comes to awarding a conventional try, the attacking team gets something like 80% or more of the benefit of the doubt!! Why such a stark contrast in ruling? Personally I think there is far too much advantage given to the attacking team with the BoD rule, give me downward pressure & a degree of control over the ball any day please, but as it stands these two rulings for a penalty try & BoD are worlds apart, when they are actually much closer in association than it is ever talked about!

[Chook Norris]

Farah still tries to do too much out of dummy half with his decision making and kicking, he cut Pearce out a few times when there was space out wide. And Pearce's kicking was part of the game plan imo. He turned QLD around and made their pack work it out from deep in their half time and time again.

Chook.

Strongly disagree with this assessment.

His long kicking game was nothing short of abysmal last night. Not once did he find the turf with his kicks, finding Slater on the fly every single time. They started most of their sets on their 40metre line.

Compare that to QLD's kicking efforts. They found the grass plenty of times leaving Stewart trapped in his own in-goal. (case in point, Cronk enforcing the dropout 60metres out)

QLD NINE DROP OUTS to NSW's ZERO - all series, speaks volumes about NSW's kicking game.

I'm not sure what game you watched but the only time Pearce attempted to "turn QLD around and make their pack work it out" was kicking on tackle 3, 20 metres out........... and that was a shocking kick straight down the throat of slater who started the set on the 50metre line.

Another criticism i'd make is the lack of grubbers. Pearce made a very important grubber kick to Carney in the 2nd half (the no-try) and after not once attempted to try such a kick again. Once again, QLD's ability under pressure to find the right kicks is a stark contrast to Carney and Pearce's impatient kicking under pressure

[Guest]

Strongly disagree with this assessment.

His long kicking game was nothing short of abysmal last night. Not once did he find the turf with his kicks, finding Slater on the fly every single time. They started most of their sets on their 40metre line.

Compare that to QLD's kicking efforts. They found the grass plenty of times leaving Stewart trapped in his own in-goal. (case in point, Cronk enforcing the dropout 60metres out)

QLD NINE DROP OUTS to NSW's ZERO - all series, speaks volumes about NSW's kicking game.

I'm not sure what game you watched but the only time Pearce attempted to "turn QLD around and make their pack work it out" was kicking on tackle 3, 20 metres out........... and that was a shocking kick straight down the throat of slater who started the set on the 50metre line.

Another criticism i'd make is the lack of grubbers. Pearce made a very important grubber kick to Carney in the 2nd half (the no-try) and after not once attempted to try such a kick again. Once again, QLD's ability under pressure to find the right kicks is a stark contrast to Carney and Pearce's impatient kicking under pressure

When you're kicking to the best fullback in the game it's going to be difficult to find the turf. Pearce kicked for over 560 meters - http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/spo...-1226394937910 - If that wasn't part of the game plan I'm not here.

Chook.

[Guest]

^^^^^^^^ Hahahaha, seriously if your happy with pearce's kicking game in game 2 then your easily pleased. We were lucky to get away with the win.

[Guest]

^^^^^^^^ Hahahaha, seriously if your happy with pearce's kicking game in game 2 then your easily pleased. We were lucky to get away with the win.

Hello paranosiaxintaxmrrhksomodmitewhateveryoucallyousel fnext, where you been? If you want to continue to be the little dog that follows me around you have to keep up.

Chook.

[Guest]

You should take another look Pearcey. Uate is coming in and onto the ball, Stewart is running a cover. If thats not the wingers ball nothing is.

It was a midfield bomb, should always be the fullbacks ball, it is like a wicket keeper letting the slips fielder taking a skied catch over the top of middle stump.

[Andrew Walker]

When you're kicking to the best fullback in the game it's going to be difficult to find the turf. Pearce kicked for over 560 meters - http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/spo...-1226394937910 - If that wasn't part of the game plan I'm not here.

Chook.

What would be an interesting stat to see and one which probaly doesnt exist Is how many metres from Pearce kicking 560 metres. Were returned back from these kicks. As oppsed to Qlds kicks and haw many metres weer returned from those This shows the true merit of a kicking game more than saying Perace kicked for 560 metres

[Guest]

Hello paranosiaxintaxmrrhksomodmitewhateveryoucallyousel fnext, where you been? If you want to continue to be the little dog that follows me around you have to keep up.

Chook.

??? Follow u around? Must have me confused with someone else mate.

[Chook Norris]

When you're kicking to the best fullback in the game it's going to be difficult to find the turf.

You are right.. but your earlier suggestion that Pearce's kicking game "turned their forwards around", when quite clearly it did not as proven by your above admission, is thus simply incorrect.

Pearce kicked for over 560 meters - http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/spo...-1226394937910 - If that wasn't part of the game plan I'm not here.

Chook.

You seem very easily pleased with his kicking performance. Just about everyone is bagging the blues kicking game and i also find it very hard to extract a positive out of that

Kicking for that many metres means nothing Chook. That just means Pearce was the designated kicker of the ball for the team.

Since when has quantity equaled quality? Just because i kick the most kicks for the most metres does not mean each kick was strategically and intelligently well placed

[Guest]

You are right.. but your earlier suggestion that Pearce's kicking game "turned their forwards around", when quite clearly it did not as proven by your above admission, is thus simply incorrect.



You seem very easily pleased with his kicking performance. Just about everyone is bagging the blues kicking game and i also find it very hard to extract a positive out of that

Kicking for that many metres means nothing Chook. That just means Pearce was the designated kicker of the ball for the team.
Since when has quantity equaled quality? Just because i kick the most kicks for the most metres does not mean each kick was strategically and intelligently well placed

It turned them around because of the depth of his kicks. Watch the game again, apart from one, Slater was catching Pearce's kicks inside his own ten metres and then getting bashed when he ran it back. Ever stop to think that was the plan? You've said he was the designated kicker so he must have been doing somethinng right to keep the job all game?

What Pearce should have done more of is take the line on with the ball in both hands. He did it once and had all the QLD defenders flat footed, all he lacked was a hole runner.

Chook.

[Guest]

What would be an interesting stat to see and one which probaly doesnt exist Is how many metres from Pearce kicking 560 metres. Were returned back from these kicks. As oppsed to Qlds kicks and haw many metres weer returned from those This shows the true merit of a kicking game more than saying Perace kicked for 560 metres

Maybe, but I reackon Brett Stewart was miniesque in his speed to get to the ball off kicks. Geesus he was slow.

Chook.

[bondi paul]

Hannant, Pillow, Nate, Harrison, FatHodgo, Tamou, Carntey and Pearce.

All played for us.

And we wonder why we can't win games.

Blame whoever youse want, the last few days read has been hilarious, but look at that, we could have 8 SOO players. We have 1.

well said. 16 state of origin games for harrison and we swapped him for big willy.
shillington was terrific running the ball up from weak pearce kicks.

[Chook Norris]

It turned them around because of the depth of his kicks. Watch the game again, apart from one, Slater was catching Pearce's kicks inside his own ten metres and then getting bashed when he ran it back. Ever stop to think that was the plan? You've said he was the designated kicker so he must have been doing somethinng right to keep the job all game?

What Pearce should have done more of is take the line on with the ball in both hands. He did it once and had all the QLD defenders flat footed, all he lacked was a hole runner.

Chook.

game plan or not Pearce struggled to take ownership of the game. In a few situations he could've placed a few grubber kicks into the in-goal that would've earnt us repeat sets. The "game plan" excuse isn't valid because at club level, Pearce earning us a repeat set is also a very rare play that he is yet to value. Just because a game plan exists and the circumstances of the match change, doesn't mean it has to be followed word for word.
Yes, i agree that smashing Slater and also compounding his injury probably was mentioned, but when QLD earnt so many repeat sets the blues could've got some of their own.
Check his kick at the 46th minute of play. 35 metres out and a very nothing kick that lead to very little territorial gain. It was neither a bomb nor a grubber. A terribly weighted kick which was easily swallowed. Gould immediately commented on how it was a very conservative and indecisive kick. Compare that to Carney's long kick which forced a Slater mistake under pressure close to the side line. That was a clever kick appropriate to the situation.

It's often said that Origin sorts out the boys from men. Who do you want to give the ball to in the crucial moments of the game. Right now we're seeing that Pearce and Carney are still boys who don't want to take ownership and lead with the ball in hand. And that's why Thurston still shits over both of them.

Whether Pearce will eventually develop into a true leader on the big stage remains to be seen.

Peter Sterling's analysis of his contribution is quite accurate:

7. M. PEARCE – 7/10 Something of a mixed performance which again was full of effort. Still struggling to really take control of proceedings when the opportunity exists but there are signs that he is gradually coming to grips with such situations. When the forwards were getting tired late in the contest and were under pressure that's the time that Mitchell needs to step up and physically and verbally guide the team home.

But supposedly he's an organisational player?