Which is why I think stormshark is right, people will be annoyed if he doesn’t make the 17Fitzy has confirmed Nicholas will be back
I just don’t know why he wouldn’t
Which is why I think stormshark is right, people will be annoyed if he doesn’t make the 17Fitzy has confirmed Nicholas will be back
I don't mind him there in this instance as injury cover. Rather have him if needed than 12 minutes for Williams.Oh dear, Trindall on the bench
If at first you dont succeed, try try try again
I feel our bench is too light.I thought Tricky would be 17. Makes sense to put him there until at least the bye.
If he struggles with the role again then he can play Jets 7 after our bye.
But he has shown what he can do so Moylan should be on notice
I don't mind him there in this instance as injury cover. Rather have him if needed than 12 minutes for Williams.
If he botches it and Hynes goes sweet max one more week for Trindall to show he can play that role.
Typically I'd prefer a forward there
Proabably more to cover Nicho just in case he's not 100% or to give him a rest if we're well ahead I'd suspect.Trindall is injury cover for who?
Mmm ok, interesting.Proabably more to cover Nicho just in case he's not 100% or to give him a rest if we're well ahead I'd suspect.
I wouldn't class McInnes as a 'utility' but he is certainly a small forward - he is 177cm 91kg to Radleys 182cm 92kg and nobody calls Radley a utility.I feel our bench is too light.
2 front rowers
A utility
A half
When out pack has been dominated 3 weeks running.
Places have him recorded as ankle injury because he got it taped instead of taking that kick. Played out the game so presumably is sweet.Mmm ok, interesting.
SEN were saying Trindall was injured himself.
We covered or bettered the Raiders in most stats……just not points scored.I wouldn't class McInnes as a 'utility' but he is certainly a small forward - he is 177cm 91kg to Radleys 182cm 92kg and nobody calls Radley a utility.
But I get the gist, definitely not a big bench.
Jack 184cm 98kg adds a bit of size but not really massive, especially not for 12 minutes.
Now Hazelton would be a size upgrade, if that's what we were after (clearly from coaches perspective it isn't).
Against Canberra we had the ball more, completed more, had more runs, made more meters, made more post contact meters, broke more tackles, ran 20% further each set, and had quicker play the balls. The only metric really they beat us was line breaks.
At least statistically speaking their pack didn't dominate us. Personally I think we did dumb things at dumb times and beat ourselves.
Also the make up penalties we got late leveled that out but the damage was done with them getting a lot of early field position.
The numbers almost suggest we dominated them but I don't think I would say that - just not sure I agree we got dominated.
Statistics definitely don't tell a full story, which is a shame as the stats of the Canberra game would mostly tell a story of a Sharks victory.
run meters by forwards - I just glanced at this but I thought it was interesting how well we are represented so I've added it into post
177 tapine
176 Wilton
133 Rudolf
129 BHU
125 Hunt
124 Kaufusi
116 Whitehead
103 Finucane
102 CHN
101 Saulo
98 Young
85 Horse
74 McInnes
74 Guler
27 Williams
2 Mooney
I think we have the personel right but we play certain players too long. Rudolph this week and Finucane last week looked like they were hanging on by a thread. We play with a prop as a lock so in reality we play with three props. I think we match it with anyone with a better and maybe shorter middle rotation of finucane, kaufusi, Rudolph, BHU, Hunt. But we seem to play em for big minutes and they get too tired.I feel our bench is too light.
2 front rowers
A utility
A half
When out pack has been dominated 3 weeks running.
There may be a risk with NichoOh dear, Trindall on the bench
If at first you dont succeed, try try try again