: Wed Apr 22, 2009 11:21 am  

Wire_Yed_79 wrote:

5 drives and a kick anyone ??

Which is all Hudds have been doing this season, but its been done very well. They're not the Harlem Globetrotters by any stretch of the imagination, no matter what all seven of their fans think. *

On Friday we played basic rugby as well, but against a very poor Bradford side. My concern coming away from that match was that we still conceded 22 points. Too many considering we shipped in almost 60 past them.

To win on Sunday we have to match them up the middle, suck their defence in then fling it wide. They're still vulnerable in the flanks and their pack is more than beatable. Our defence has to be the tightest its been all season. We cant afford to concede more than 12 points.

Brett Hodgson needs to be silenced early on. He is easily their danger man, and Luke Robinson has the ability to tear us to shreds. In fact he has done it many times before.

* Cheap, out-of-date shot. Do I care?

: Wed Apr 22, 2009 2:36 pm  

Is that you Tony

: Wed Apr 22, 2009 7:11 pm  

The Referees and the Rugby Football League have looked and looked again and all said there is nothing wrong with the way we play.
And as for the poster who says he doesnt look forward to games against us, well i'm the opposite, i always look forward to the Wire games as i think they are always hard fought , exciting games and over the years there has been one or two feisty encounters.
Shame i cant come on Sunday because Wire is the 1 away game i always look for when the fixtures come out!!.
Anyway here's to a good hard game of Rugby League - thats how it should be ! - and may the best team win ![/quote]

Here, Here and well put. Looking forward to the battle of the packs.

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 12:11 am  

Ian [77] wrote:

It'll be a very tough game against a good team. If we're not somewhere near our best, they'll do us and they'll do us with ease.

I expect hudds to bounce, a loss by 8 me thinks.

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 1:03 am  

The Wood wrote:

On Friday we played basic rugby as well, but against a very poor Bradford side. My concern coming away from that match was that we still conceded 22 points. Too many considering we shipped in almost 60 past them.

It was basic in the way Saints play basic rugby, in the 'execution of well coached tactics' sense. Admittedly, Bradford put up little resistance, but the ball movement and off-the-ball options were fantastic to watch. Seeing Briers and Monaghan 'link up' and hitting option runners was stark contrast to seeing the 5 drives/inside balls and a kick of the opening night.

For the main part, the pack went where Briers directed them; often they'd get field position just (our) right of centre-field, allowing for the big switch play to the left, funnily enough King's channel. I don't know if anyone noticed, but I found joy in watching us no longer over-reliant on two players on the right channel. I also found joy in seeing a kick put up for Matt King and his 6ft odd presence. (It's the simple things in life that I take pleasure from, see.)

Phil Clarke noted in commentary that Warrington "at their best are like watching Saints" and he was very correct in that whenever there was opportunity to attack a gap, they exploited it. Suppose some could say somewhat reminiscent of Leeds' style under Smith, we looked very disciplined in the sense that you could tell there were set patterns that he wanted playing and they were excellently executed with few errors.

Defensively, I was worried, too, particularly with Jeffries ghosting past Monas as though he was the proverbial chocolate fireguard, but I think we caused enough errors and made enough good reads up front to provide some positivity. Whenever there was a chance for a 'tip-on', or even an unders line, most of the time, our defensive structure made the right read and sniffed it out - we did force a fair amount of errors, too, and even Briers had a solid defensive game.

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:57 am  

'Hitman' Norvern Soul wrote:

Defensively, I was worried, too, particularly with Jeffries ghosting past Monas as though he was the proverbial chocolate fireguard, but I think we caused enough errors and made enough good reads up front to provide some positivity. Whenever there was a chance for a 'tip-on', or even an unders line, most of the time, our defensive structure made the right read and sniffed it out - we did force a fair amount of errors, too, and even Briers had a solid defensive game.

to be fair to Wire we were well in front with about 5 to play when that happened. They already knew they'd won and maybe the concentration and intensity levels had gone from the game

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:15 am  

'Hitman' Norvern Soul wrote:

Defensively, I was worried, too, particularly with Jeffries ghosting past Monas as though he was the proverbial chocolate fireguard, but I think we caused enough errors and made enough good reads up front to provide some positivity. Whenever there was a chance for a 'tip-on', or even an unders line, most of the time, our defensive structure made the right read and sniffed it out - we did force a fair amount of errors, too, and even Briers had a solid defensive game.

if this had been stopped we would never have got to hear Rick Astley "Never Gonna Give You Up" so i commend Monas in his poor tackle

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 9:30 am  

'Hitman' Norvern Soul wrote:

Defensively, I was worried, too, particularly with Jeffries ghosting past Monas as though he was the proverbial chocolate fireguard, but .

I watched that again and whilst yes, Monas should have made an attempt, it was actually more Vinnie's fault. Monas was watching the next man, Vinnie should have been sliding across but was a little slow and that was how the gap opened up. Monas glared at Vinnie immediately.

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 9:54 am  

SEB wrote:

I watched that again and whilst yes, Monas should have made an attempt, it was actually more Vinnie's fault. Monas was watching the next man, Vinnie should have been sliding across but was a little slow and that was how the gap opened up. Monas glared at Vinnie immediately.

I thought Monas could/would/should've flattened him tbh, he was running at his right shoulder, which is generally most players' good shoulder. The inside push also could/would/should've been better, but it hardly made an impression on the scoreline, just suppose I'm looking for the 'next level', which will come under Smith I'm sure; that pride in the defensive line of even when the game has gone, you want to keep the opposition to an absoloute minimum scoreline.

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 9:56 am  

'Hitman' Norvern Soul wrote:

I thought Monas could/would/should've flattened him tbh, he was running at his right shoulder, which is generally most players' good shoulder. The inside push also could/would/should've been better, but it hardly made an impression on the scoreline, just suppose I'm looking for the 'next level', which will come under Smith I'm sure; that pride in the defensive line of even when the game has gone, you want to keep the opposition to an absoloute minimum scoreline.

Agreed, did you see Potter interviewed after they had put 68 on Cas? He said he wasn't happy they had conceded 22 points, they have alot of work to do.