Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Thelmus, post: 3237920, member: 8988"] I think the problem isn't with Turpin per say (or for that macca before him) but the quality of the players around him that demand he work as hard as he does, in both defence and attack. The kind of mistakes we're making with the ball in hand puts a terrible pressure on our defence which is made largely of young fragile first graders still learning the game (and a terribly out of form 5/8 expected to ignite an otherwise might mundane and tired attack). A second hooker is a must if we continue to run Turpin into the ground. What would be preferable though is an attack that works with or without Milford. That comes from simplifying a few roles of our younger players and working at the things we are actually good at. I pushed for early kicks at the beginning of games and the reason for it is takes a lot of pressure off our younger players. Combine that with a compacted defence and only stretch out the tackle count later in the halves, when we lack the energy to keep it up. That way you can play a second hooker/utility type player and not expose him. None of that makes a difference if we keep making the mistakes with the ball in hand of course, and teams like the storm can be good enough to go around us. There's little to be done about that. It must be remembered we started with early kicks against the storm and for 20 minutes held the lead despite barely being able to complete a set. I won't say we played well but we did have an opportunity for a different outcome with a little better application (probably not a win but not the thrashing we had). [/QUOTE]

Verification

Active Now

No members online now.

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)

Reply to thread

Log in

Active Now