Match Report: Western Force vs Sharks

[slomo]

first 15 mins ball retention means aboslutely nothing in the context of 1 game then a bye, you'd expect that..

if the sharks score an easy try from it, it means slightly more than nothing....

[jombi]

Not really, you're assuming the shorks are a normal Afrikaan outfit that suck on the road. They were 2 from 2 and they always play good in Australasia.

[BeeJay]

Part of the handling problems is down to team familiarity. Fairbanks is new, Smith is new, and there are a handful of others too. It also hurts the support play a bit. That'll get better. What put a lot of pressure on us, in my opinion, was not having a go to player for slow/bad ball. Mitch Inman is a big unit and is a good option when you are running off a retreating scrum or slow ball. He puts 20kgs on Gene Fairbanks and wouldn't have been rag-dolled like Fairbanks was in that monster Willem Alberts tackle. No wonder JO'C and Fairbanks were pissed at each other. O'Connor didn't have that option and Fairbanks was on the receiving end of that.

I saw Bartholomeusz and Hockings sitting in their suits a few rows in front. Does anyone know if Barty is fit? I'd like to see him run out at 10, JOC to 12, Cummins to 13 and Mafi to start. I think an experienced player like Bart would settle down our attack a little.

Agree with getting Barts involved if he is fit, and Hockings will need to be on the bench with Pocock injured and Wykes in the starting 15.

But as to combinations, we are now into the fourth week of the competition. Combinations should be well and truly worked out by now. By the time we get it right, the season will well and truly be over, if it isn't already.

[BeeJay]

Had we attacked we might have forced some repeat penalties, maybe cost them a player of their own for a bit, and at least tested them. Instead, we took penalties. It probably wouldn't have mattered either way, but there was absolutely no way we were going to beat a team like the Sharks three points at a time. It was a very, very poor strategy.


There is little skill and no fluency in the passing, with altogether too many passes going to no-one, or hitting people in the chest, face, hip, shoulder...pretty much anywhere but out in front of the runner. Binned players, poor decisions, luck - it is all irrelevant when we can't execute a cohesive attack anyway. I can only hope that there is something can be done about it quickly, otherwise it is going to be a very long season in defense.

We got into those positions to kick penalties BECAUSE we attacked. To talk about going for tries with the Shorks defense as organised as it was is pie in the sky. The points kept us in touch. With just over 10 min to go we were behind by 10. We have NOT looked like scoring meat pies this year, and just like the Reds game, hot on attack in the 22 we turn over ball. Handling and execution, and novelty in attack are missing.

Agree totally with your second para above, Andy. That's the important issue to be fixed. We can't control the opposition, or referees, but we can look at our execution in attack.

[Jambooi]

Can someone give a good description - unbiased if possible - of what was going on those last few minutes. It seemed every time Force touched the ball they were called back - until the ref awarded a try.

I reckon match fixing by the ref. Who has access to his bank account!!!

[GIGS20]

Nah,looked it over jombooi, everything he called on the force side was justified, it is unfortunate, but we have nothing to complain about there.......he was even pretty consistent in not calling offside, the sharks ended up being off about a meter in the end and we suffered badly for it......missing a couple of knock ons, and at least two dangerous head high tactics (one on bam and one on rabbit) are more concerning to me, also his complete refusal to bench a shark after his general warning compared to the softness of the card on cullet.


That is IMHO the real difference (has anybody figured out what cullet walked for yet)

[jazza93]

The last 5 minutes was very lazy. Everyone was just waiting for full time and many players didn't even bother recovering behind the advantage line. Our scrum was falling apart and guys were coming out of the defensive line with no purpose which resulted in Lambie walking straight through for a try.

ETA:

That is IMHO the real difference (has anybody figured out what cullet walked for yet)

I think he landed a late hit on one of the centres (the centre was running at him so contact was unnavoidable, but at the same time he used no arms and hit high). It was pretty careless and the ref seemed to be getting tired of those needless infringements. It was an awesome hit though.

[Sheikh]

Good to see Wykes having a good game. He was doing well last year when we had the injuries and was playing 6 (Hodgeo at 7), but then McCalman stepped up and we got Pocock and Brownie back and Wykes went back to warming the bench.

[jono]

I didn't think cullet's tackle was anything sus. He hit him
Cos he couldnt avoid it. He used arms. The sharks player just bounced off him and flung his arms back open. But ya know, it's over and done with now. Can't change it so we gotta get over it
Posted via Mobile Device

[zimeric]

at about the 60 minute mark there was a knock on called by the ref on Hodgo when it wasnt one, he lost the ball forward but recollected and batted it backwards, it was well on the way to being a breakaway try, half the back line was involved in that play and the look on cullets face when was called back said it all..... that was game changing right there..

[Bigbear-53]

If we didn't make a 180 degree forceful tackle a send off, no one would insure the players. (Well they would, it would just be a rip off).



While i always like to see Eky's review (if he has the time). We should also be asking those who are blindly asserting the ref did a crap job to give us an unbiased critique. (If they can...)


*not a shot at you. But i've seen a number of fairly dumb comments so far. Not from any forum regulars though.

Jazza, your quote." not from any forum regulars" is not warranted, just because you see fit to have your say about anything does not mean that a person who decides to comment on a subject shouldnt be able to do so without you being snide.
For your information I make a comment when I believe it warranted, not just because I can. For the record I have played rugby all over the world and whilst I agree the tackle was suspect it was obviously not done with intent and was not technically a spear tackle. A yellow card yes but a red at that stage of the game?????

By all means have your opinion but allow others to have theirs even if they only post once.

[jazza93]

Jazza, your quote." not from any forum regulars" is not warranted, just because you see fit to have your say about anything does not mean that a person who decides to comment on a subject shouldnt be able to do so without you being snide.

I think the fact i didn't mention any names is good enough. I went out of my way not to shut down anyone in-particular. But even so, i don't see how pointing out blind assertions would equal/me being snide. I haven't directly confronted anyone in question in this thread yet.

For your information I make a comment when I believe it warranted, not just because I can.

Go for it.

For the record I have played rugby all over the world and whilst I agree the tackle was suspect it was obviously not done with intent and was not technically a spear tackle. A yellow card yes but a red at that stage of the game?????

I've said above, this debate could go on for ever there is no definite answer. All i say is that under the rules a tackle of this sort can warrant a red card.

By all means have your opinion but allow others to have theirs even if they only post once.

I don't think i'm stopping anyone from posting their opinion. The only way they could take offence to my comment is if they made a blind assertion in the first place.

[slomo]

Jazza, your quote." not from any forum regulars" is not warranted, just because you see fit to have your say about anything does not mean that a person who decides to comment on a subject shouldnt be able to do so without you being snide.
For your information I make a comment when I believe it warranted, not just because I can. For the record I have played rugby all over the world and whilst I agree the tackle was suspect it was obviously not done with intent and was not technically a spear tackle. A yellow card yes but a red at that stage of the game?????

By all means have your opinion but allow others to have theirs even if they only post once.

bigbear you go for it mate....post once, or a couple of thousand times your input is just as important as the next poster......

[AndyS]

We got into those positions to kick penalties BECAUSE we attacked. To talk about going for tries with the Shorks defense as organised as it was is pie in the sky. The points kept us in touch. With just over 10 min to go we were behind by 10....

We got those penalties going forward, but attack is what the Sharks did chasing that fourth try. We may have trailed by 10 with ten to go, but we lost by 27 - always the likely outcome as players tired. "Staying in touch" is a waste of time unless you are playing a fast starting/slow finishing team, and it is a nonsense to think that 14 Force men missing two front line players might have been able to bide their time, toying with 15 Sharks players and looking to pinch the game at the death as the tourists weaken. To be honest, I doubt anyone in this competition could have pulled off that trick. The only way we might have won it would have been to get in front, force them to play and hope that our weakened defense might somehow have held up. Of course it was pie-in-the-sky, but I would have preferred they at least have a lash rather than just concede a pretty big loss.

[slomo]

AndyS is the voice of reason around these parts!.....