Re: Sinfield : Tue May 12, 2015 7:59 pm  

It was the wrong play, even if he runs from dummy half and Catalan force a drop out, with a minute on the clock it eats the time up.

I was stood in absolute disbelief that he'd even attempted the flat pass there at that point, there's so many more risks with that play that running it.

Bad plays do not however, take away from what I said we were missing, onfield management and organisation. Players are going to make the wrong decisions, but one error 99/100 does not lose you a match, where as poor discipline, a lack of organisation and a poor work ethic for 50 minutes of a game will!

Re: Sinfield : Tue May 12, 2015 8:07 pm  

Claypitrhino wrote:

It was the wrong play, even if he runs from dummy half and Catalan force a drop out, with a minute on the clock it eats the time up.

I was stood in absolute disbelief that he'd even attempted the flat pass there at that point, there's so many more risks with that play that running it.

Bad plays do not however, take away from what I said we were missing, onfield management and organisation. Players are going to make the wrong decisions, but one error 99/100 does not lose you a match, where as poor discipline, a lack of organisation and a poor work ethic for 50 minutes of a game will!

Their was just over a minute and 40 secs on the clock, even with a slow walk to take the drop out they'd have gotten over a minute and a full set of six at us. If Briscoe takes the pass which he should've done and we get through our set and put a kick in that would've left Catalans a lot less time and further to travel.

Re: Sinfield : Tue May 12, 2015 8:17 pm  

Yes but way up the risks, you make a flat pass, Briscoe knocks on and Catalan score/ briscoe takes the pass and gets dragged over for a dropout anyway. You eliminate the knock on if you run from dummy half, which is already one less risk.

You take the knock on out of the equation and you have the same possible outcomes, so why take the risk with the knock on involved? Even if it's a drop out, it's what another 30/40 seconds maybe if we're lucky? At least we could have set up well to defend, we'd have had a much greater chance at that over what happened.

Were you honestly thinking to yourself at that play of the ball 'pass it' because I know I certainly wasn't and I'd expect anyone watching the game with a bit of awareness to have been expecting him to run, obviously in the game with all the adrenaline and what not, your decision can be effected so I'm not slating him for it, but as a spectator and if I'm brutally honest it was definitely the wrong play.

Please don't forget I am all for sinfield coming back into the side, I disagree with the people (sal) that don't think we could use him right now or that it wouldn't be better for us, but my opinion on that play is that it was definitely wrong aha

Re: Sinfield : Tue May 12, 2015 8:26 pm  

Claypitrhino wrote:

Yes but way up the risks, you make a flat pass, Briscoe knocks on and Catalan score/ briscoe takes the pass and gets dragged over for a dropout anyway. You eliminate the knock on if you run from dummy half, which is already one less risk.

You take the knock on out of the equation and you have the same possible outcomes, so why take the risk with the knock on involved? Even if it's a drop out, it's what another 30/40 seconds maybe if we're lucky? At least we could have set up well to defend, we'd have had a much greater chance at that over what happened.

Were you honestly thinking to yourself at that play of the ball 'pass it' because I know I certainly wasn't and I'd expect anyone watching the game with a bit of awareness to have been expecting him to run, obviously in the game with all the adrenaline and what not, your decision can be effected so I'm not slating him for it, but as a spectator and if I'm brutally honest it was definitely the wrong play.

Please don't forget I am all for sinfield coming back into the side, I disagree with the people (sal) that don't think we could use him right now or that it wouldn't be better for us, but my opinion on that play is that it was definitely wrong aha

Briscoe running onto the ball had more chance of getting us away from the line than Sinfield running from dummy half (which isn't exactly a strong point for him) with the markers and other defenders rushing in to help push him back knowing he could only go left. How far do you honestly Sinfield would've gone? Tackled same spot if lucky but unlikely. Had the tackle been several yards further infield with the possibility that he could run either side of the PTB then yes he should do that. If the pass was too far then again bad idea. But it was simple as you like, Briscoe just messed up.

Re: Sinfield : Tue May 12, 2015 8:30 pm  

ThePrinter wrote:

Briscoe running onto the ball had more chance of getting us away from the line than Sinfield running from dummy half (which isn't exactly a strong point for him) with the markers and other defenders rushing in to help push him back knowing he could only go left. How far do you honestly Sinfield would've gone? Tackled same spot if lucky but unlikely. Had the tackle been several yards further infield with the possibility that he could run either side of the PTB then yes he should do that. If the pass was too far then again bad idea. But it was simple as you like, Briscoe just messed up.

I'm still going to argue......... He makes 2 yards maximum but the next pass is easier to take because it's not flat

Re: Sinfield : Tue May 12, 2015 8:38 pm  

ThePrinter wrote:

Their was just over a minute and 40 secs on the clock, even with a slow walk to take the drop out they'd have gotten over a minute and a full set of six at us. If Briscoe takes the pass which he should've done and we get through our set and put a kick in that would've left Catalans a lot less time and further to travel.

You continue to (inadvertently?) use the wrong 'their' by the way.

It is a puzzle why McDermott selects Sinfield in the 19 only to not appear in the final 17. It must mean he doesn't even figure in the training field moves integral to any match day tactics?!?
Maybe Sinfield is being saved for the CC to give him the best chance of a more fancied second winner's medal

Re: Sinfield : Wed May 13, 2015 6:24 am  

ThePrinter wrote:

McGuire and quite a few others would never have tried to run it from dummy half there. On the goalline, right on the sideline so both markers knew he could only go one way, the most likely result would've been forced back for a drop out. It was only a bad play because Briscoe turned it into one, the pass was as straightforward as you could hope for and one you'd catch 99 times out of 100.

You shouldn't let the end result of a play determine whether is was the right or wrong choice. Had Sinfield gone himself and conceded a drop out from which Catalans scored I'm sure you'd have been saying he was dumb not passing to Briscoe who is a strong carrier of the ball.

We don't like players throwing passes across the line in our 20 throwing a pass on your own line in any circumstances is crazy. It is not the % play especially if you are leading with <two minutes to go. He should have had enough experience to take the ball and get to ground. Briscoe is a strong runner from dummy half with some space - how much space is he going to have after Sinfield had passed him the ball? - it was a seriously dumb play and a poor example of game management.

Re: Sinfield : Wed May 13, 2015 9:25 am  

The reason Peacock hasn't been given a reduced role in the team and Sinfield has is despite his age Peacock continues to make 150m an 30 tackles a game, and is still one of the best props in the competition. Sinfield's non-selection is as much about his performance levels prior to his injury as it is about his up coming departure. His body doesn't seem to be able to keep up with his brain anymore, and I think it's something he recognises as much as anyone at the club. However, he should still be in the 17 somewhere IMO, but his days of being the lynchpin of the side seem to be all but done.

Re: Sinfield : Wed May 13, 2015 1:50 pm  

Charlie Sheen wrote:

The reason Peacock hasn't been given a reduced role in the team and Sinfield has is despite his age Peacock continues to make 150m an 30 tackles a game, and is still one of the best props in the competition. Sinfield's non-selection is as much about his performance levels prior to his injury as it is about his up coming departure. His body doesn't seem to be able to keep up with his brain anymore, and I think it's something he recognises as much as anyone at the club. However, he should still be in the 17 somewhere IMO, but his days of being the lynchpin of the side seem to be all but done.

Bingo Bongo

Re: Sinfield : Wed May 13, 2015 1:51 pm  

Charlie Sheen wrote:

The reason Peacock hasn't been given a reduced role in the team and Sinfield has is despite his age Peacock continues to make 150m an 30 tackles a game, and is still one of the best props in the competition. Sinfield's non-selection is as much about his performance levels prior to his injury as it is about his up coming departure. His body doesn't seem to be able to keep up with his brain anymore, and I think it's something he recognises as much as anyone at the club. However, he should still be in the 17 somewhere IMO, but his days of being the lynchpin of the side seem to be all but done.

Spot on Charlie.