: Sat Mar 28, 2009 7:55 pm  

Big Dave T wrote:

Looking at the defensive work Quins did in the firsy half im seriously concerned about our fitness currently. We looked bigger and stronger the first 5 games but have looked slow and knackered the last 2.

Is this because Moa doesn't play more than 10mins? Our forwards looked gone after 60mins......... again

: Sat Mar 28, 2009 7:56 pm  

Smiggs wrote:

No you wasn't, you've been trying to defend a very poor performance by us.

It could have been a million times better. Just dont think there was a big difference between the teams. It was another game there for the taking, when asked to step up and take the game we couldnt.

[Kosh]

: Sat Mar 28, 2009 7:58 pm  

Hull_Lad2010 wrote:

a lot of half chances tho, thormans 3 kicks to calderwood, briscoe at the end, halls break at the beginin which if he had any support could of done bit better. in the first 5 minutes we had 2 sets of 6 on their try line nd then dicided to go 4 the 2 points wen they got another set of 6.

All in the first half.

In the second half we were just garbage.

: Sat Mar 28, 2009 7:58 pm  

Whoever said we don't need Crocker must be joking,on this showing we need him and a strike centre who can break the line.We certainly need to splash the cash,we started the season well but we seemed to have gone back into our shell.We fell into Harlequins hands by playing their kind of game.

: Sat Mar 28, 2009 8:00 pm  

BALROG wrote:

Is this because Moa doesn't play more than 10mins? Our forwards looked gone after 60mins......... again

Not really. Even before Moa came over Agar liked to us Radford, Tickle and Manu for almost 80 mins each and Dowes and Cusack for 60 mins each.

He needs to sort it out. All of them should only be playing 40 mins, we may as well not even have a bench. Its like he has his favourite 13 and then just some others to cover a middle 10 mins.

: Sat Mar 28, 2009 8:00 pm  

Where was thaks he could have mixed it up a bit, and why not washy?

am a fan of kingy but wonder about his fitnesslevels!

quins where a patched up side! where supposed to be in a ok poisition !

it didnt look like that to me??????

worrying times..........................

: Sat Mar 28, 2009 8:01 pm  

colt-45 wrote:

Where was thaks he could have mixed it up a bit, and why not washy?

am a fan of kingy but wonder about his fitnesslevels!

quins where a patched up side! where supposed to be in a ok poisition !

it didnt look like that to me??????

worrying times..........................

Washy is less fit than King. Thought King did OK TBH. I'd have still had thacks in instead of Moa. Houghton may as well not be there too for the impact he brought tonight, especially against a very tired pack with heavy conditions.

: Sat Mar 28, 2009 8:02 pm  

Big Dave T wrote:

Washy is less fit than King. Thought King did OK TBH. I'd have still had thacks in instead of Moa. Houghton may as well not be there too for the impact he brought tonight, especially against a very tired pack with heavy conditions.

I thought Kingy was strong, solid and steady. Just didn't get why he only got 5 mins in his second spell???

: Sat Mar 28, 2009 8:03 pm  

Gordon Gekko wrote:

I thought Kingy was strong, solid and steady. Just didn't get why he only got 5 mins in his second spell???

Only his 2nd game in months, he played reserves last week and was said to look good but short.

: Sat Mar 28, 2009 8:04 pm  

can anyone remmember the last time we put 40 points past a team - none this season