You need to be a member of 1Eyed Eel to add comments!
This reply was deleted.
More stuff to read
"Start Samrani either centre or wing. He smashed the sharks and the chooks. Was fast, tackle-busting and once he set his eyes on the try line it was curtains for the opposition.
I'd start him on the wing as not to disrupt Rusty and the combos set up…"
I'd start him on the wing as not to disrupt Rusty and the combos set up…"
"Will we ever get a full season out of him?? "
"I am starting to think the same. Samrani and Papalii as 18th and 19th man with Tuilagi starting the year in NSW Cup."
Replies
Can you break this down into quarters please
Awesome blog slip!
I've been waiting for some stat king to answer my question re how bad our 2nd halves are? I knew that we were bad in the 2nd half, but didn't realise just how bad.
Is it a fitness problem or just inexperience. You know, come out firing but the enthusiasm drops off?
I'm guessing the latter.
Grunts, I posted on one of the other blogs regarding what I noticed against the storm, that being in the first half (& this is shown only as an example from reports and some clips of the try scored) compared to the second half. Seems when they come out after the break they have a change to their playing style especially when they are in the lead.
First half to me shows they play more of an expansive and adventurous/attacking style of play which gets them in front, with the backs we have I think its very much our strength, against the storm they played the card believing Vonuvalu could get over Semi in the high balls and lost, which he usually wins.
Around the 20 minute mark our interchange comes into play usually for around 15 into the second half, this is usually the danger times and slowing time, especially with the attack and dominance over the opposition.
Second half, the eels switch and try to then take the opposition forwards on thinking they can get on top of them and play a tighter controlled game, if the opposition do not succumb they have to wait until the main run on players return.
I am no expert but there seems to be very much a pattern in the 20 minute second half drop off. I do not know why the backs are not used throughout the game more, many have called for more attacking plays, and that has come, but the 20 minute thing is still a problem but its getting the right players on the interchange bench, which I think is the big issue.
The aspect of our 9 spot be it with King or Pritchard, means a utility is needed and while Smith has done a good job for us there, my thinking is that we need a player that can take over the 9 spot for at least 40 minutes with the replacement capable of the same. That may mean and depending on how well he comes back is Pritchard and King, other options may be still playing NYC at the moment.
I know it's chalk and cheese but would you rather a team like the 2001 team who blow teams off the park and then fall at the last hurdle or one that has spent the year playing finals type footy, winning without winning pretty?
I think it's impossible in the game to play at full pelt for 80 mins. Every team has it's time sets when everyone goes hard for 10-20 mins and then drop their intensity a little to recharge their batteries for the next all out assault. Of course this depends on the score a lot of the time but I do see a pattern Parra going hard for the first 20 mins, laying of for a while, playing safe and trying more to destroy the oppositions game than look to be more creative that takes more effort and energy. In the 2nd half we usually hold a lead which we try to protect and only really raise out intensity in the last 10-20 mins.
I think these time periods will increase at particular times during a game. I still think we are stuck between whose decisions we follow those being either Corey's or Mitch's. The opposition is confused too most the time.
Or BA's HT speech messes with Parra's head!!