Shorts and Sweets July 6

There was some goody footy played in Cronulla’s win over the Tigers. I liked:

• Andrew Fifita’s try! He tore the heart out of the middle of the Tigers ruck with speed!  Did you see Storm prop Jesse Bromwich do the same thing over the Broncs! Was it a full moon or something? (For those who haven’t seen him yet this is what Roosters rookie front rower Kane Evans can do – break the line and score tries from 40 metres!)
• Andrew Fifita leading the team in so many ways. His confidence stands out. Did anyone notice the Sharks did not have Gallen on board in this victory? Always the sign of a developing team.
• What about AF’s Matt Gidley type pass in a wide ball movement shift to a running support player! WOW!
• Sharks looked sharper in almost all areas of attack particularly in support play
• Todd Carney hammering a 40/20 and making it look easy
• TC kicking with some luck and some accuracy and smart tactics at the tryline for tries! A really positive approach by the team – not the usual mundane and ineffective repeat set syndrome every time they got to the good ball end
• Tigers try after Robbie Farah trademark dummy half show to angled runners before long all to Chris Lawrence. Those quick hands skills were top of the range to provide winger Simona a walk in. I remember when Farah sent shivers down every defence’s spine with creative plays like that and the option to dummy and go himself often
• Tigers try off a perfectly placed chip kick by Farah, again from near half way. Again great tactics. They had belatedly worked out that Sharks stand in full back Stewart Mills had no idea or the physical ability to deal with bouncing balls. Tigers rookie fullback James Tedesco was also positionally at fault for a long distance try to Sharks.  It came from great reactions to a failed kick for a repeat set. He could do with picking the immense footy brain of his Coach Potter who is probably the best positional full back I have seen

*********************************************************************************************************

It’s ironic, to me at least, that the Tigers were more at ease last Saturday night in the pouring rain versus the Storm than they were on a perfect night for footy at Shark Park.

Not so long ago I would have thought the Tiges would struggle against a physical crew like those Storm teams always present particularly in teeming rain. Instead they dealt with almost everything in what I described as “Tigers best defensive performance for a decade”. On reflection the difference may have been that the weather conditions simplified the defensive decision-making required. That and Cam Smith in sick bay and Ryan Hinchcliffe trying to do his best impression of an NRL dummy half.

It was made evident by the Sharks strong attack and varied too at times, that the Tigers have a lot more to do to become a defensively competent and consistent team.  The questions were way too big for them from a team that played well but not really noted in that attacking and point scoring department.

*********************************************************************************************************

I find it amazing that Channel Niners Andrew Johns and Phil Gould, two great minds on footy, can’t come to grips with the now-simplified OBSTRUCTION rule. Their comments around the disallowed try of the Tigers with the score at 30-22 were quite bewildering.  The referee and the video referee both got it right first time with their NO TRY decision on what was one the simplest incidents you could ever wish to see.

The rule, clarified and re-clarified, simplified and explained ad nauseum, says that the onus is on any lead runner not to come in contact with a defender. It his responsibility totally because he is in front of the ball. This is called an OFFSIDE POSITION. If, when you are in an offside position you cause any obstruction to a defender you should be penalised.

The only time that would not apply would be if the obstruction was so far away that it had no effect on the try scoring aspect of the play. This obstruction took place just a few metres away! The obstructed player Bukuya would almost definitely have come over the top in the tackle well before the ball carrier had made the tryline, in my opinion – and the referee’s and the video ref’s also. (To double triple quadruple check I just went back to IQ and replayed the incident over and over. A telling point I hadn’t previously raised is the position of full back Mills at the point of the obstruction. He is further infield towards the posts than Bukuya and still makes the point of collision before Lawrence scores. This illustrates conclusively that Bukuya was denied the opportunity to assist the tackler Carney in stopping the try).

You have to wonder. Is there something else going on to cloud their thinking?

Phil G says “he has the solution to the obstruction issue but no-one will listen”.  I think we might  know why now.