Lost to a better coach

[Vasco]

exactly.
friend ended up playing 80min, offered little in attack cause the little bloke made 60 odd tackles. i'd much rather he make 30 tackles and have a try assist next to his name.
i dont want to be over critical of brian but i just think it was a bad move. you only get one shot at it (brians had 4) and it wasnt the best plan of attack IMO.

The reason Friend played 80 minutes is because James Aubusson is not good enough.

Hence the signing of Watts.

Simple.

[Guest]

We needed Koups for creativity around the ruck!

Watts will give us another dimension next year.

[Guest]

Friend didnt even play 80 minutes!!! http://live.nrlstats.com/matches/nrl/match3951.html..... Get your facts right!

This thread is ridiculous. So should we now sack Smith?

[Guest]

Friend didnt even play 80 minutes!!! http://live.nrlstats.com/matches/nrl/match3951.html..... Get your facts right!

This thread is ridiculous. So should we now sack Smith?

when did i say sack smith you goose? i said his tactic of having a bench full of props was a bad one considering he didnt do it all year, and i couldnt see why he would choose to change tactics for the GF. he took a gamble and it didnt pay off

[Headless Chook]

when did i say sack smith you goose? i said his tactic of having a bench full of props was a bad one considering he didnt do it all year, and i couldnt see why he would choose to change tactics for the GF. he took a gamble and it didnt pay off

When we played Saints at the SCG we got bashed up in centrefield by the Dragons forwards. The move to play four forwards on the bench was designed to try and ensure that we would go forward all night and give our halves the space to create opportunities. As it was, we still got owned in the forwards and didn't make enough metres to create space for our smaller men to weave their magic. We could have had Cameron Smith coming off the bench and he still wouldn't have been able to do too much because we failed to lay the platform in midfield.

[Guest]

When we played Saints at the SCG we got bashed up in centrefield by the Dragons forwards. The move to play four forwards on the bench was designed to try and ensure that we would go forward all night and give our halves the space to create opportunities. As it was, we still got owned in the forwards and didn't make enough metres to create space for our smaller men to weave their magic. We could have had Cameron Smith coming off the bench and he still wouldn't have been able to do too much because we failed to lay the platform in midfield.

exactly right

we got away with not doing the work in the middle against the other sides, but you'll never get away with it against them

[Guest]

I think we got beaten by a much more experienced side full of current or former rep players who have been coached by one of the greats in conditions that suit. It's nothing to be ashamed of.

[Guest]

We were murdered by referee incompetence.

Five of their tries should not have happened.

The coach had nothing to do with that.

Hej JT

can you show me your thoughts on each of those tries you mentioned...

thanks

[Johnny Tobin]

Hej JT

can you show me your thoughts on each of those tries you mentioned...

thanks

1. Morris was out.
2. Young fell over when he played the ball – and it happened in the play the ball before then as well.
3. Sammy P was pushed and the last pass was forward.
4. Young clearly knocked on.
5. Hornby was standing next to the play the ball (and he went there on purpose - not like he was stuck there) and they pushed our marker out of the way.

Of the above, there is no way they should have had 1, 3 and 4. The others are questionable - especially 5.

[Guest]

1. Morris was out.
2. Young fell over when he played the ball – and it happened in the play the ball before then as well.
3. Sammy P was pushed and the last pass was forward.
4. Young clearly knocked on.
5. Hornby was standing next to the play the ball (and he went there on purpose - not like he was stuck there) and they pushed our marker out of the way.

Of the above, there is no way they should have had 1, 3 and 4. The others are questionable - especially 5.

Add to those:

1 - Todd Carney's pass to BJ's try being ruled forward when it wasn't.
2 - Mini being tackled without the ball in front of their sticks.
3 - St Merge never being offside or laying on the player or slowing the play the ball for 78 mins.
4 - Daniel Conn's penalty and on report for a happy slap to fatso Weyman which was dropped by the review panel.

We were butt farked by officialdom.

Chook.

[Johnny Tobin]

It is a total and utter disgrace and I have no time for anyone, especially so-called roosters on here, saying the better team won our our boys lost.

[TheLoneRooster]

It is a total and utter disgrace and I have no time for anyone, especially so-called roosters on here, saying the better team won our our boys lost.

As another poster so eloquently put it, the Roosters "were butt farked by officialdom" and I hope that the merge scum enjoy this tainted, Clayton's, asterisk, disclaimer-marked "premiership" that the merge scum were gifted by scum archer, scum harrigan and that scum linesman.

[melon....]

It is a total and utter disgrace and I have no time for anyone, especially so-called roosters on here, saying the better team won our our boys lost.

It was their turn JT. The take Turns NRL rolls on. Dread the day its Souffs turn.

[Pass the Ball]

Was it our turn in 2002?

Were we not a great team, it was just our turn..??

[melon....]

Was it our turn in 2002?

Were we not a great team, it was just our turn..??

We were a great team. We also won a GF fair and square. Not much controversy on our part. The video ref did not screw up as many times a decade ago as they do now. In actual fact i challenge anyone to justify the existence of the video ref and the benefits of having one today. There are none. Weve gone backwards. Im more comfortable with the ref making the call live, at normal speed. At least then you can allow a degree of doubt and human error. But not when you have frame by frame technology which effectively should remove 99.9% of all ambiguity. And not when a player is a meter into touch.

I dont care what you think about me. Never have. What i can say is that Im a real believer that the NRL plays massive favourites with some teams. I also believe the Salary Cap is a farce and restraint of trade. I dont believe in equalisation of teams. I say if you cant run a business, then **** off. Im not going to sacrifice half my resources to ensure someone like Souffs survives.

The cap is about restraint of success, and ensuring everyone gets to taste it. and now it seems the interpretation of rules can also fall in the same category. I can find no other reason for the levels of incompetence given the improvements in technology to afford a better judgment system.

Its a sham. This once great game is a complete sham.

Now that ive vented, I must say no matter how ****ed the establishment is and how sick the administration has made this game, the shining light is our club. Its supporters - I mean the big ticket ones, its organisation, the passion of its owners and saviours, and the effort from everyone including our very young team.

Saints can have their day in the sun, it was their turn. Like it was Brisbane's in 2006. Like it was Melbourne's and Manly's more recently. And the lowest common denominator between these victories was the rub of the green they got from the officials all year during their success. We didn't get that in 2002. We had to give up ground to make it. Luckily we revolutionised defense and could cushion the tide against us with that. Do you think the NRL was happy we won in 2002?

But there's one thing we havent done since 2002. Revolutionise something. Or more to the point do what the others have been smart enough to do. Work on exploiting loopholes in the frequent rule changes like strips and grapples.

We just arent enterprising enough. Melbourne were. The Dragons are.