Trauma snowballing syndrome and the urge to blow things up isn’t just something buried in human DNA. It's now rebranded as “high standards". Forty Years can do that. Sometimes, all it takes is a few minutes.
But let’s park the emotion for a minute. What actually happened yesterday?
The good news? We fought. Fought hard. That’s two weeks back-to-back. Despite being undermanned, we’ve already used 28 players - the most in the comp - and have the worst injury toll in the game.
The bad news? We didn't stick to what works.
Foxlab shows we made 15-9 errors. That’s the game.
If you’re handing over that much ball, you’re not winning too many.
Fair dinkum. You could have a $17 million roster and a recruitment team featuring Jesus, Mary, Mohammed and Buddha. You’re still getting beat.
Even the Panthers lost 32-16 to the Dogs with 15-8 errors two weeks ago. The Storm made 13-9 errors and lost 48-6 to Souths this week.
Given the injury crisis and rebuilding roster and the fact we’ve been losing the yardage battle every week (see table above) and possession except for once (Broncos game), the adjustment isn't complicated. It's obvious. We have to kick longer, at least over 600 metres, chase hard, hold the ball, make no more errors than the opponents, and complete above 80%.
When we do that, we compete or win.
When we don’t, we lose, usually badly.
Yes, it's boring. It’s not revolutionary. It's not sexy. It just works.
In the first half, despite errors, we kept largely to that blueprint. The kicking game and chase was doing its job - close to 500 metres - was keeping things within possibility of an upset. We were still in the fight at 7-6. Hanging in by our finger nails.
But in the second half, we fell away from that. Kick metres dropped to around 240m. Errors kept piling up at critical moments in the wrong places. We invited Manly to "please enjoy almost unlimited possession and field position." Game over.
Emotions will point to the highlight reel.
Saab and Hopoate, right and left wingers, combining to slice through the middle.
Garrick making a break on our left edge.
Sean Russell missing a tackle and getting steamrolled.
Oka bashing Walker out of the game and running over blokes like he’s late for a Sunday roast.
But cold-hard stats tell a deeper story.
The game didn’t slip away gradually.
Thirteen Minutes of Choas
It snapped. Between the 50th and 63rd.
The score went from 7-6 to 27-6.
4 tries in 13-minutes.
Lights out.
But that thirteen minutes of chaos didn’t happen in isolation.
It sat in within a mammoth 20-minute momentum swing. Almost one long fatigue-feast of a death zone.
Between the 46th and 66th.
Possession was almost 80% against us.
13 /15 vs 2 / 4 sets
87% v 50% completions
It all kicked off with a single error.
Then the avalanche.
5 errors
2 restarts
1 penalty
1 sin bin
4 tries
22–0
We didn't lose the game over 80 minutes.
For 67 minutes, we led 18-11.
Uncomfortable Truths
When momentum shifts nowadays, it doesn’t just shift, it accelerates. One error becomes two. Two becomes a set restart. Then a penalty. Then fatigue. Then someone’s in the bin. Then you’re watching wingers carve up the middle with your head spinning.
Naturally, the You're Fired Posts were inevitable. Sack R&R. Sack the Team. Sack Ryles. Sack the board. Sack the Club. Rebuild the club by Tuesday morning. Get Shane Richardson in, he'll bring us Galvin. Get Matt Cameron. He'll bring Ice and Talagi back along with Alamoti and Jenkins. Job Done. Who said running a $200m organization was hard and needed 5-year plans?
Right now, until we get troops back and new signings like Su'a, this team doesn’t have the punch or luxury of intricate playing loose or expressive footy for long periods. Or to look hot. We’ve got to stick to a simple blueprint, and it’s about as exciting as a trip to the dentist. Hard yakka.
We know exactly what works. We just don’t always stick to it. And when we don’t, we get thirteen minutes like that or worse.
Replies
What Adam said above. The desperation in the cherry picking is brutally obvious
Right and is that MON's fault that they weren't ready? Still made a GF, better than what was here 10 years before.
Look i do not think MON is perfect, nor is he really good at his job. But if you cannot admit the job he did from 2019-2022 was good to great then you either are ignorant or have an agenda.
Same with BA, i wanted him gone in 2024 but can admit the good things he did too. You can demand a person to be sacked and say they are bad at their job but give credit for some areas too.
Look at the 2022 GF team
1. Gutho - already here
2. Sivo - signed
3. Penisini- progressed through juniors
4. Simonsson - signed
5. Blake - signed
6. Brown - progressed through juniors
7. Moses - already here
8. RCG - signed
9. Mahoney - already here
10. Paulo - signed before MON arrived
11. Lane - signed
12. Papali'i signed
13. Matterson - signed
14. Brown - already here
15. Arthur - progressed through juniors
16. Niukore - already here
17. Kaufusi - already here
6 of the 17 were already there at the club by the time MON arrived. The rest was assembled post his hire. The downfall was how the R&R handled the 2021 off-season.
I never said he hasn't done anything worthwhile. Of course he has. And I have openly thrown my support behind him in the past. But it's patently clear that he is a spent force and needs to be replaced. He's the GM of Football so the buck stops with him even if he's not entirely responsible for all the R&R decisions. It's clear, to me at least that our Football dept is not making any progress and if we stay the current course we won't be playing Finals anytime soon let alone winning a GF. MON has had more than enough opportunity to prove his worth. It's time for change. Just as you wanted BA gone because it was obvious that he was done. That time has come for MON.
Ok now that is a fair claim. Simply we need a new voice is a fair reason to want him gone and i don't mind that.
But you are cherry picking examples to make him look worse than what he actually is. You say his inability to assemble a premiership roster but yet 2022 so showed he got so close to doing so.
If you said he has done some alright things but this team need a new voice and someone different to lead us forward as he has been here long enough, i would support that as fair. But some examples are just being used when unjusitified.
Just so I'm clear, we do need a new voice. 8 years is long enough, the club is underperforming and has been for some time. However we do need someone better than MON.
We should only hire someone who has been the GM of Football and his club won Premiership(s) with him in that position. We can't take a punt on someone in that role who's never won a comp as a GM of Football.
Wanting a new voice at GM is a fair claim. But it still seems the standard is wrong. Cherry picking players and decisions sets up a standard where on-field success is directly not indirectly related to the GM. I think it is only ever indirect.
Arguments for why a new voice at GM are needed, which do not rely on cherry picking player R&R and contracts, are fair arguments.
It's a major component of the job and worth mentioning. It's not cherry picking to point out bad decisions. The cumulative effect of a high performing GM of Football is continual roster improvement (or maintenance of a quality roster) over time. Yes everyone makes mistakes but overall the club should be strong or getting stronger on the field if the GM of Football is performing well.
Where does Gus Gould sit? Premierships as player and coach (NRL and SOO). GM at Panthers 2011-2019, made finals four times but 50% win rate overall. Panthers post-Gould is where all the magic happened. Gould not successful?
How about Gould at Dogs 2021 to present? Barrett had a sorry record 2021-23. Ciraldo starts 2023, they finish 15th, then finals 2024-2025. It's half-half so is Gould successful at Dogs or not?
What about the Storm. Is Frank Ponisi up for getting sacked after 6 losses in a row despite success 2007 to present?
The cherry picking is not strictly speaking the picking out of this or that decision as good or bad. The cherry picking is isolating particular decisions as the claimed "mark" of bad club mgmt. Sometimes that is going to be easy, like salary cap rorting. But as the Gould case shows, sometimes it is highly contingent. Pushed to its limit, a club is not well managed unless the club sits higher on the ladder than last season? Until of course you are minor premiers then you can only go down, maybe like Ponisi at the Storm?
There are another 13 teams without a premeriship winning roster. Does that mean those CEO 's are also bad operators?
The Dragons just sacked their GM of Football. The Tigers brought Shane Richardson in to revitalise their roster. They're currently in 3rd place. It's an important role and which greatly effects the performance of the NRL side.
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
of 5 Next