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
Nothing in the post suggests arbitrating opinions. It's a bloody opinions-blog style site FFS. I made a somewhat sarcastic request to those going off at "the club" to at least own not deny their inconsistencies. "Pay overs for Russell, yeah! + "Never said that" etc etc.
Another way to view my critique of the critics is that I share the critics' disappointment and frustration with the Eels being perennial also-rans. If there are going to be critiques, then, I just want them to be productive. Isolating individual decisions, outside of salary cap rorting of course, as markers of poor management ultimately obscures more than it illuminates. It looks like griping not productive suggestion.
For example, if critics think club management is on the hook for the on-field stuff, I assume they mean post reform? Or after the 2016 debacle of salary cap rorting stuff and being forced to the bottom of the ladder and the reforms that followed. Assuming that is the case, some extra care in critiquing the club should probably be made about a key feature of those reforms? The independence of football operations and leagues club mgmt? Hence loose talk of "the club" may obscure more than illuminate.
I take it productive suggestion is the aim. I am saying it does not look like that when the critique gets bogged down in stuff like paying Russell overs (we normally complain about paying overs), or blaming mgmt entirely for Brown leaving (which excuses Brown for bailing on a 2031 contract), or calling for speedy outside back recruitment (despite JAC and Lomax arriving). That's all cherry picking. I'm not the first one here to say such critiques start to lose credibility. What's happening with pathways? What is the impact of the centre of excellence? Are the contracts on more solid ground, no get out clauses? etc etc etc. I am sure there are lots of things to discuss related to under-performance, without sacrificing credibility via cherry picking.
Again, (yet again) it is not cherry-picking to point to instances of poor performance by our football department. As to your inference that such criticism is somehow agenda based that's just fucking ridiculous. I gain nothing whatsoever in MON staying or going. Perhaps you have an agenda in him staying put? (See how easy that is?)
MON is the GM, the buck stops with him. However if you want to set aside any specific instances of R&R train wrecks and focus on a higher level view that's fine. The club's roster has declined rapidly under MON's watch and he must be held accountable for that. Questions should be raised as to whether he is the man to take us into the future.
The goal of any NRL club is to build a premiership type roster. After almost 8 years of MON at the wheel we are getting further from that goal.
I supported BA for years but when his time came, almost everyone here, including me were openly calling for him to be replaced. It was obvious that he was spent and needed to go.
It's simply my view that MON's time has also come. There are better credentialed, more experienced operators out there.
Or we could do nothing, which seems to be the club's preferred option and we'll be having this conversation for the next however many years. And eventually Ryles will get shouldered with the blame and he'll get punted whilst those above him remain untouchable.
Nice blog HOE (as always). One thing I do know is that we need to send Pezet off now...Get the youngsters ie Lorenzo in now and get them used to first grade.
Pezet has shown he is at best on par with a rookie and why should we help the premiers by getting NRL miles into him.
Thanks HOE, thats a great write up and while watching the game new the stats were heavily against us.
When we had the ball fuck we looked good, rolling up the middle making 70 meters every set. When we had equal possession we defended brilliantly but ultimately the errors got us and it was the fatigue that led us to soft tries. At least three errors were simple errors in our red zone which shouldnt have happened.
Also did i see two short drop outs and both occassions they scored.
Some of the strongest and most intelligent posters have commented on this blog.
I dont deny any of the opinions and to reinforce one aspect is that Hoe's "dead zone" is just about proven and cannot be denied.
Of course our judgements always come after whatever event has just happened and this applies specifically to the Russell anecdote, we have seen many turnarounds this year, JDB, Junior, Moretti, Guymer, Smith, TDS,Kelly, the list goes on and Moses probably has application in different views......Daz talks about scapegoats, we will always have them.
No one could put their handup for consistency.
This where JR has to screw this down to understand all the reasons.
Is he smart enough.....lets wait and see. The judgements against him come from some of the lessor intellects , now that is not surprising.
I have just had a reverse shoulder replacement and am in agony typing this......good news is Poppa has no corner for a few weeks, you should all be grateful for that small mercy......LOL
Rest up and let the shoulder repair Pops! Sending lots of good vibes your way.
Thanks Cappy
I think it's even more simple do you trust MoN or anyone else in our front office to deliver a premiership if so we'll stick if not we'll still stick until there times are up.
If one of the heavy hitters became available do you honestly think our club would 1 go for a guy like this or 2 have the nouse to get him across the line on the evidence been presented I'd suggest not.In [Wayne Bennett] approach.
I'll say it because no one else has we aren't winning a premiership with MoN as our director of football but don't worry he is safe we won't move him on we aren't actively looking to recruit anyone better and it's same same on the board which is fine as none and I mean none of them have sat on or built a team that's won a premiership again if mediocre and good intentions is what we are about id suggest we continue to stick with what we have.For me this discussion feels pointless discuss opinions that'll change nothing.
Anyway back to project mediocre we are good at that so onwards.
Ha I've said it mate. Too many times apparently.
Poppa, whjat the hell is a "reverse should replacement"? Is it like you're RoboCop and they accidentally put a rocket launcher on the wrong way? "Dead or alive, this arm is going on backwards"
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
6
of 6 Next