Archived Articles - www.league matters.com

Game One, 2010 - Tahu

Game Two, 2010 - Scott

Beau Scott came into to replace Tahu, in a decision that could be described as defensive at best. Obsessed with tackling Inglis instead of scoring themselves, NSW picked a second rower in the centres. It could be argued that Bennett did it for his club side so it should be good enough for NSW but did the Blues really want to play like the Dragons?

Game Two & Three, 2009 - Williams

A surprisingly handsome face hidden under a shaggy beard shouldn't be a reason for getting picked for NSW, but in this case it seems like it might have been. Picked to replace the injured McManus (who almost made the list), he was enthusiastic but wasn't experienced enough for the Origin cauldron. The harder he run the faster the ball came shooting out of his arms.

Game Two, 2008 - Turner

A good solid first grader but probably the craziest selection on this list. This should have been the tipping point to stop allowing club coaches to helm NSW, but for some reason it took another two series losses. 

Top 5 players you would pick to punch you in the face (if you were forced to choose one)

Posted 7/3/2011

The Benji Marshall drama is dominating the headlines, but there are plenty of other places that you can find details and comments on that, so there is no need to get into it here, but it did get us thinking.......If you had to be punched in the face by a player, who would you choose?

He wouldn't actually hit you, he'd just be trying to stop you hitting yourself and if you happen to be injured in the process that can't be helped - it's your own fault.

Cameron Smith

He does a such a good impression of most of the guys that walk around the office and appears more likely to hit you with a meeting request than a fist, so if somebody has to hit you in the face I'd choose Cameron Smith over Adam Blair or every day of the week.

Benji Marshall

He has to make the list because the timing of his punches are so bad. He cost the Tigers a try, and possibly a win, in the 2010 semis when he hit Mitchell Pearce and now the "Face of the NRL" has waited until a week before the season kicks off to get himself charged with assault. So if he was to hit you in the face, your cut lip would pale into insignificance when compared to whatever other calamity his outbursts of violence seem to bring

Brett White:

This is for the Queenslanders out there who would have you believe that it was just a lucky punch that knocked out Steve Price in Origin 3 2009 (which may have ended his career – did he ever play properly after that?). If we follow that logic, they'd have White in this Top 5 and would happily receive a right cross to the face.......yeah right! Alright, bugger it. We’ll change this one to Ben Creagh.

Robert Lui

Difficult form line to judge here, but if fighters are judged based on their most recent opponents, what do we make of his? Insert your own jokes here.....


____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Why Oscar night should be compulsory viewing

Posted 1/3/2011

What lessons from the Oscars can be applied to the 2011 premiership race?

The Academy awards are really just a sporting contest in disguise. Each team, or film in this case, goes out and does the best job that they can and hopes to win against the best of the best on the big stage.

As League fans what we can learn something from the Best Picture Winner, The Kings Speech? Let's break it down and see what elements we can use on the field.

It's a simple story that was executed very well. The conservative nature of the subject matter made it very attractive to the voters therefore it was successful in its "game". Sounds alot like the Dragons of 2010 doesn't it? They played very conservative football but executed it very well and it saw them pick up the ultimates accolade, not a gold statue in this case, but the NRL premiership.

The director is like the coach. At the start of the shoot he looks at the elements he has: the script, the actors, the locations and he figures out the best way to film it and tell the story. In the same way the coach starts the season with his actors or players, his knowledge and his facilities and does his best to come up with a game plan that has the best chance of being successful given the competitive environment they play in.

At that point you may be asking yourself if this article is just an excuse for an Oscar rant? Well maybe, so while we are here we might as well mention another couple of things.......What was doing with the hosts of last nights telecast? Anne Hathaway was just plain annoying and James Franco looked a little embarrassed to be there. Most of the time he had an expression on his face like he just farted but nobody could smell it yet. And why was Hugh Jackman in the front row? I know he's hosted before but the chances of him ever winning a statue of his own are as remote as Kirk Douglas being invited back to present an award (if he survives that long).

What about the standard of the awards themselves; the nature of the voting process, reflecting the age of a large group of voters, mean that the winners are now both conservative and predictable. What greater accusation can you place on an award that is supposed to recognise the greatest achievement in film, an art form founded on risk and daring? We’re not saying that the Kings Speech is not a good film, it's really good, but Best Picture, Best Director and Best Actor may be overstating its worth a little bit because it really was the safe and slightly bland choice.

In the same way we are hoping the winner of the 2011 NRL Premiership won't be due to a risk adverse, conservative game plan that is focussed on reducing errors. We want to the comp won by a team that has flair and energy and is willing to gamble in the big moments. Here’s hoping!

(Post Script - Oct 2011. We kinda got that result really, the conservatism of the Dragons and Melbourne style was overcome by the flair and chaos of Manly & Warriors and Tigers - nice.)

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

Talking Yourself Up

Posted 28/12/2011

Bryce Gibbs from the Wests Tigers was quoted in the Daily Telegraph today as saying his team he would win the comp. Surely his team mates would be rolling their eyes at that, but perhaps they shouldn’t.

It would be easy to dismiss Gibbs as a big talking prop who doesn’t know any better, but the article went onto describe how last year Gibbs wrote the he would retire if the Tigers didn’t make the top eight. He signed the piece of paper and placed it on the team white board. This was countersigned by other players including Tigers captain Robbie Farrah. Whether accidentally or on purpose, Bryce Gibbs may have hit upon the perfect motivational technique. He established a common goal that was serious enough to give a shit about.

In that moment Gibbs galvanised his team-mates and hard coded a common goal. One of the key elements of this common goal theory is that the needs of the individual give way to the needs of the team. Gibbs was basically saying if the team is not successful he did not care if he, the individual, had to pay the price, and he got the others to do the same.

It was clear by the way the Tigers ended the season that they were working together to achieve a common goal. Since winning the premiership in 2005 they could be a team accused of coasting. They had a title in the bag, they were all on good money and they were a group of young guys enjoying the trappings of success. But that changed last year when they came together as a team to decide that something had to change and they named a real tangible goal.

History is full of examples where individuals or even groups of individuals find success by coming together with a single shared goal. Even Sparta and Athens, historical enemies, whose existence was virtually defined by fighting each other, came together for the common goal of beating the Persians. Maverick and Ice Man hated each other, but once they had a couple of enemy MIG’s in front of them, they were able to put their personal issues behind them and win the battle – even though we personally blame Iceman for Goose dying.

We can see another example of this at the Roosters right now. Braith Anasta used to be young hotshot prodigy, the next big thing. After leaving the Bunnies and settling at the Dogs he was eventually lured to the Roosters as the heir apparent to Brad Fitler. During the 2009 season though his star began to fade and he was no longer treated like the star recruit. Younger five eighth options started to appear and the change in the way he was viewed was shocking to him and he didn’t take it well. When Fitler chose him at fullback one week and he tanked the game badly. Almost immediately the rumours started about him going to North Queensland.

That talked continued last season until something seemed to change in the last few weeks. It seems that Anasta has come around to accepting his new role in the team, which is now in the forwards, and the team will be better for it. If the other individuals can put the team before themselves (Todd Carney if you are listening??) as Anasta has, the Roosters may be able to take the next step this year.

So talking big is fine if it has a purpose, but if that purpose is not to galvanise the team towards a common goal then perhaps it is better to keep it behind closed doors. Bryce Gibbs has struck motivational gold once, but it may have been a lucky strike.