[Match thread] Bulldogs 30 def Sharks 18

[maroondog72]

I’m not convinced, but willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and a chance to prove himself, at least until round 4/5 lol. He can have that.

Starting Lewis over wakeham is a perfect example of why ex forwards should not be head coaches ***** a spud and we are in for a long year Imo

 

[Scoooby]

Starting Lewis over wakeham is a perfect example of why ex forwards should not be head coaches ***** a spud and we are in for a long year Imo

Oh agree, wakeham definitely needs to start, and if he doesn’t then pays benefit of the doubt for mine is very slim. If we lose wakeham it will be because of pay not picking the best man for the job..!! Which ain’t Lewis lol.

 

[maroondog72]

Oh agree, wakeham definitely needs to start, and if he doesn’t then pays benefit of the doubt for mine is very slim. If we lose wakeham it will be because of pay not picking the best man for the job..!! Which ain’t Lewis lol.

Too true scoob

 

[TwinTurbo]

I rewatched the trial game again last night, mostly watching off the ball, and it was “just a trial game” and nothing more. I didn’t see anything great or anything terrible. Many of our best players missing and others playing out of position, played one half and/or rotated, with the obvious result, not a lot of cohesion. No one really stood out, either good or bad. In general longer they were on the field the better the majority of them played, which is kinda the objective of trials.

I made the mistake of reading comments on here before the rewatching and as result I expected to see things that I actually didn’t see. For example, from some of the comments I expected to see a lift in the performance driven by Wakeham in the halves, not really. What the noticeable difference was the support players were there, with spacing and positioning so he had someone in a better position to pass to. Of the 3 kicks that I paid attention to one was a ripper, one he was lucky that it was caught otherwise it was going out on the full and the third (unluckily) went DiG and gave them a 7 tackle set. Speaking of halves, I’m not a fan of playing Cogger, in defence in the 20, between Harper and Okunbor, they both know he needs help against larger and highly mobile centres and they compress around him leaving the wing exposed. He needs to play at least one more in and if he can’t defend there then he shouldn’t be selected.

I thought Katoa went OK, much like I have seen him play for Penrith. But I didn’t notice much of a drop off in service when Holland stepped into dummy half. I was surprised at that, I expected worse.

For the second trial I’d hope to see more cohesion, with the majors playing (yes, I understand the injury risks). With better positioning and spacing (especially in defence) from the very kick off. A backline with depth, multiple players in motion, a step up in intensity and more of the “team look” than individuals trying to impress, with their own prowess.

Go Dogs

 

[Tassie Devil]

I rewatched the trial game again last night, mostly watching off the ball, and it was “just a trial game” and nothing more. I didn’t see anything great or anything terrible. Many of our best players missing and others playing out of position, played one half and/or rotated, with the obvious result, not a lot of cohesion. No one really stood out, either good or bad. In general longer they were on the field the better the majority of them played, which is kinda the objective of trials.

I made the mistake of reading comments on here before the rewatching and as result I expected to see things that I actually didn’t see. For example, from some of the comments I expected to see a lift in the performance driven by Wakeham in the halves, not really. What the noticeable difference was the support players were there, with spacing and positioning so he had someone in a better position to pass to. Of the 3 kicks that I paid attention to one was a ripper, one he was lucky that it was caught otherwise it was going out on the full and the third (unluckily) went DiG and gave them a 7 tackle set. Speaking of halves, I’m not a fan of playing Cogger, in defence in the 20, between Harper and Okunbor, they both know he needs help against larger and highly mobile centres and they compress around him leaving the wing exposed. He needs to play at least one more in and if he can’t defend there then he shouldn’t be selected.

I thought Katoa went OK, much like I have seen him play for Penrith. But I didn’t notice much of a drop off in service when Holland stepped into dummy half. I was surprised at that, I expected worse.

For the second trial I’d hope to see more cohesion, with the majors playing (yes, I understand the injury risks). With better positioning and spacing (especially in defence) from the very kick off. A backline with depth, multiple players in motion, a step up in intensity and more of the “team look” than individuals trying to impress, with their own prowess.

Go Dogs

Thank you for your balanced view. Really appreciate it!

 

[dogwhisperer]

Because Lewis has been gifted the halfback position and he's absolutely horrendous. Yes this is only a trial but all it did was highlight all his deficiencies in his game and if Pay still can't see who is better for the team at halfback then that's a major concern moving forward.

100% have to agree with that.

 

[Spoonman84]

For example, from some of the comments I expected to see a lift in the performance driven by Wakeham in the halves, not really. What the noticeable difference was the support players were there, with spacing and positioning so he had someone in a better position to pass to.

You do know as a halfback Wakeham organises the spacing and positioning it's not something that magically happens plus on the last try Wakeham's pass creates the space.

 

[diddly]

I rewatched the trial game again last night, mostly watching off the ball, and it was “just a trial game” and nothing more. I didn’t see anything great or anything terrible. Many of our best players missing and others playing out of position, played one half and/or rotated, with the obvious result, not a lot of cohesion. No one really stood out, either good or bad. In general longer they were on the field the better the majority of them played, which is kinda the objective of trials.

I made the mistake of reading comments on here before the rewatching and as result I expected to see things that I actually didn’t see. For example, from some of the comments I expected to see a lift in the performance driven by Wakeham in the halves, not really. What the noticeable difference was the support players were there, with spacing and positioning so he had someone in a better position to pass to. Of the 3 kicks that I paid attention to one was a ripper, one he was lucky that it was caught otherwise it was going out on the full and the third (unluckily) went DiG and gave them a 7 tackle set. Speaking of halves, I’m not a fan of playing Cogger, in defence in the 20, between Harper and Okunbor, they both know he needs help against larger and highly mobile centres and they compress around him leaving the wing exposed. He needs to play at least one more in and if he can’t defend there then he shouldn’t be selected.

I thought Katoa went OK, much like I have seen him play for Penrith. But I didn’t notice much of a drop off in service when Holland stepped into dummy half. I was surprised at that, I expected worse.

For the second trial I’d hope to see more cohesion, with the majors playing (yes, I understand the injury risks). With better positioning and spacing (especially in defence) from the very kick off. A backline with depth, multiple players in motion, a step up in intensity and more of the “team look” than individuals trying to impress, with their own prowess.


Go Dogs

Watching off the ball play gives a different perspective - same as watching from high up in a grandstand, or ground level or behind the goal posts - defensive reads, positioning and spacing becomes really clear watching from behind the posts. I agree with much of what you have said - second trial will give a better idea. Not based on trial but watching Wakeham since Harold Matts he has been a quality half who makes those around him look better - like all small halfs defence is a key but he has been ok throughout - not a liability.

 

[Dognacious]

Starting Lewis over wakeham is a perfect example of why ex forwards should not be head coaches ***** a spud and we are in for a long year Imo

While i agree Wakeham outplayed Lewis in this match, and if it is repeated this week vs raiders, Wakeham should start round 1, i dont agree with the rest of your post.

 

[Natboy]

Starting Lewis over wakeham is a perfect example of why ex forwards should not be head coaches ***** a spud and we are in for a long year Imo

Like Trent Robinson?

 

[Howard Moon]

You do know as a halfback Wakeham organises the spacing and positioning it's not something that magically happens plus on the last try Wakeham's pass creates the space.

we don't score that try if he is not there... we don't kick to the corners if he is not there (we kick dead)... we probably don't receive that drop out which lead to a try if he is not there... the issue for me with the other two halves is that their decision making always sees us playing most of the game at our end of the field but when Brandon came on, we played it at their end of the field

 

[maroondog72]

While i agree Wakeham outplayed Lewis in this match, and if it is repeated this week vs raiders, Wakeham should start round 1, i dont agree with the rest of your post.

Fair enough we’ll just have to agree to disagree on the other points but I’m tipping that if you played footy it was probably in the forwards lol

 

[Dawgfather]

I rewatched the trial game again last night, mostly watching off the ball, and it was “just a trial game” and nothing more. I didn’t see anything great or anything terrible. Many of our best players missing and others playing out of position, played one half and/or rotated, with the obvious result, not a lot of cohesion. No one really stood out, either good or bad. In general longer they were on the field the better the majority of them played, which is kinda the objective of trials.

I made the mistake of reading comments on here before the rewatching and as result I expected to see things that I actually didn’t see. For example, from some of the comments I expected to see a lift in the performance driven by Wakeham in the halves, not really. What the noticeable difference was the support players were there, with spacing and positioning so he had someone in a better position to pass to. Of the 3 kicks that I paid attention to one was a ripper, one he was lucky that it was caught otherwise it was going out on the full and the third (unluckily) went DiG and gave them a 7 tackle set. Speaking of halves, I’m not a fan of playing Cogger, in defence in the 20, between Harper and Okunbor, they both know he needs help against larger and highly mobile centres and they compress around him leaving the wing exposed. He needs to play at least one more in and if he can’t defend there then he shouldn’t be selected.

I thought Katoa went OK, much like I have seen him play for Penrith. But I didn’t notice much of a drop off in service when Holland stepped into dummy half. I was surprised at that, I expected worse.

For the second trial I’d hope to see more cohesion, with the majors playing (yes, I understand the injury risks). With better positioning and spacing (especially in defence) from the very kick off. A backline with depth, multiple players in motion, a step up in intensity and more of the “team look” than individuals trying to impress, with their own prowess.

Go Dogs

is there a link to watch a replay somewhere?

 

[Howard Moon]

is there a link to watch a replay somewhere?

https://www.bulldogs.com.au/news/2020/02/22/nrl-trials-sharks-v-bulldogs/

 

[Howard Moon]

@Dawgfather

starts around the 30 minute mark

 

[Dawgfather]

thx mate

 

[CrittaMagic69]

100% have to agree with that.

Where you been? Everything going well or did you just need a break from the offseason Kennel? Haha.

 

[CrittaMagic69]

I thought jmk will be right for round 1? Even if he’s not I’d rather give the utility to wakeham before holland

He has missed heaps of preseason and from memory he is still yet to join the main group, surely he will be no where near up to scratch come round 1.

 

[Alan79]

I didn't get a chance to watch the trial. So I'm not commenting on who did or didn't perform.

What I am going to say is that opinions are a lot like shoes. They come in all shapes sizes and colours. Just because you don't like someone else's, it's not right to try to cram yours on someone else and expect them to fit comfortably.

Reading the last 20 pages really gives very little idea of anything except for a general idea about who thinks highly of specific players and who hates them.

Given that this was a trial, it's just a glorified fitness drill. I would hope that we didn't go into trials with the intent of giving astute opposition coaches a rundown on what our playing style will be ahead of time.

As far as struggling against a team filled largely with reserve graders goes, those reserve graders have a bigger interest in standing out than do players that are relatively securely placed to get a run at NRL level. The important thing to me is that we gained some fitness. Didn't cop any injury to key personnel and in the end we did enough to win comfortably while supposedly still looking rusty. I don't think that producing our best football three weeks before the season commences is critically important.

 

[DogsOfWar1704]

He has missed heaps of preseason and from memory he is still yet to join the main group, surely he will be no where near up to scratch come round 1.

Katoa will play 80minutes then or Elliot will fill in for 10-15 minutes