London Vs Brisbane

London Vs Brisbane

Post by Antonioni P » Sat, 07 Jun 1997 04:00:00


London 22 Brisbane 42

Well I saw the first half, and I thought London did very well, forcing
mistakes and taking their opportunities, and holding out just when
desperate defence was needed. But a BAAD penalty count (It was something
like 8-0 to Brisbane a t one point) and a creeping Missed tackle count did
not augur well.

I left the game after 60 minutes With Edwards off and Brisbane in control,
and I felt that once old Shaun had trundled, London were drifting out of
it. Mind you, scoring 22 against Brisbane should give hope to any side
English side with a better attack than the Broncos, whose game is really
about mean defence rather than cavalier attack. Certainly, Wigan look a
good bet to repeat their World Challenge victory.

I think that the m***of the Story is that a mighty pack is not enough to
guarantee victory. Langer can be shut out of the game, and the Brisbane
players are as fallible as anyone else. (Certainly, London's 2nd and 3rd
tries were the result of Schoolboy play by Brisbane, admittedly under
heavy pressure.) If Wigan etc can hold their Forwards, and don't leave
gaps in midfield, then Brisbane are there for the taking. There will be
much more gnashing and wailing in Brisbane over conceding 22 points to
London than scoring 42.

PJ.

p.s. The ref seemed to allow much higher tackles than in the UK. English
referees might not be so lenient. And (food for thought) a similar London
performance would have destroyed most UK sides. We haven't closed the gap
yet.

 
 
 

London Vs Brisbane

Post by Steve Morri » Sat, 07 Jun 1997 04:00:00



Quote:

>London 22 Brisbane 42

>Well I saw the first half, and I thought London did very well, forcing
>mistakes and taking their opportunities, and holding out just when
>desperate defence was needed. But a BAAD penalty count (It was something
>like 8-0 to Brisbane a t one point) and a creeping Missed tackle count did
>not augur well.

>I left the game after 60 minutes With Edwards off and Brisbane in control,
>and I felt that once old Shaun had trundled, London were drifting out of
>it. Mind you, scoring 22 against Brisbane should give hope to any side
>English side with a better attack than the Broncos, whose game is really
>about mean defence rather than cavalier attack. Certainly, Wigan look a
>good bet to repeat their World Challenge victory.

>I think that the m***of the Story is that a mighty pack is not enough to
>guarantee victory. Langer can be shut out of the game, and the Brisbane
>players are as fallible as anyone else. (Certainly, London's 2nd and 3rd
>tries were the result of Schoolboy play by Brisbane, admittedly under
>heavy pressure.) If Wigan etc can hold their Forwards, and don't leave
>gaps in midfield, then Brisbane are there for the taking. There will be
>much more gnashing and wailing in Brisbane over conceding 22 points to
>London than scoring 42.

>PJ.

>p.s. The ref seemed to allow much higher tackles than in the UK. English
>referees might not be so lenient. And (food for thought) a similar London
>performance would have destroyed most UK sides. We haven't closed the gap
>yet.

Good points but... we turned the ball over several times unnecessarily,
the knock on from the Brisbane kick off was a killer.

About ten points difference between the two teams in my opinion. London
didn't play really well, we can do better.

--
Steve Morris

 
 
 

London Vs Brisbane

Post by Paul McNal » Sat, 07 Jun 1997 04:00:00

On Fri, 6 Jun 1997 16:48:16 +0100, Steve Morris

Quote:

>Good points but... we turned the ball over several times unnecessarily,
>the knock on from the Brisbane kick off was a killer.

>About ten points difference between the two teams in my opinion. London
>didn't play really well, we can do better.

>--
>Steve Morris

I think so too. I believe I've seen London play much better this
season. v Saints twice for starters. Was rather disappointed with
Brisbane to be honest.

Reckon London made it easy for them in the end and they really missed
Edwards.

Paul

 
 
 

London Vs Brisbane

Post by PAUL J. GUBECK » Sun, 08 Jun 1997 04:00:00

Hi

Well I only saw the second half of the game on TV here in Brisbane, but
from what I saw both teams had lack luster defense creaping in as the
game went on. Could this be due to only allowing six interchanges for the
WCC games?

I believe it to be the case. It provided for a more exciting game to
watch on both sides. London played well and I was concerned that Brisbane
could lose(as a Brisbane supporter), but as London tired, the Brisbane
backs exposed the tiredness in London, which was exemplified by Carrol's
try close to the end of the game(approx 80m try).

The rule currently in Aust SL is that there are 2 unlimited interchange and
two perminant interchanges(if I'm wrong please tell me, I think that's how
it is!), which allows teams to rest Forwards etc so that the game is pretty
much at the same level all the way through, but shouldn't Fatigue play a part
in the game where the backs can exploit these weaknesses. From what I saw
last night, it was an entertaining game with the six interchange rule!!

What do you think??

Paul.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul John Gubecka                  If you have a problem with these teams,

Residence: Brisbane                psychologically wrong with you:
Real Home: Melbourne               Liverpool, Juventus, Chicago Bulls,
Home State: Victoria               Essendon(The Dons), Brisbane Broncos,
Home Country: Australia            The Maroons or The Reds!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 
 
 

London Vs Brisbane

Post by Gavin Nicholso » Sun, 08 Jun 1997 04:00:00



Quote:
> Hi

<snip> shouldn't Fatigue play a part

Quote:
> in the game where the backs can exploit these weaknesses. From what I saw
> last night, it was an entertaining game with the six interchange rule!!

> What do you think??

> Paul.

The more I think about it, the more I agree with your statements.  The
reason the game isn't as free flowing has no small part to do with the
resting of players through the unlimited interchange rule. Whilst not
arguing with the cleaning up of the play the ball area, a more important
change to the game could be made by not allowing unlimited interchange.  I
think that this was shown in both the London v Brisbane game, and the Aust
SL v NZ SL earlier in the year when Stacey Jones took Australia apart in
the second half.

BTW, is it just me or does anyone else think that London were REALLY lucky
to only lose by the margin they did?  They really should have been flogged
but for a couple of almost unforgivable errors by Brisbane.

 
 
 

London Vs Brisbane

Post by Jim Whur » Sun, 08 Jun 1997 04:00:00

Thats the rule here in the UK all the time (I think) and yes, fatigue
should play a part!

 
 
 

London Vs Brisbane

Post by Paul McNal » Sun, 08 Jun 1997 04:00:00

On 7 Jun 1997 07:24:53 GMT, "Gavin Nicholson"

Quote:

>The more I think about it, the more I agree with your statements.  The
>reason the game isn't as free flowing has no small part to do with the
>resting of players through the unlimited interchange rule. Whilst not
>arguing with the cleaning up of the play the ball area, a more important
>change to the game could be made by not allowing unlimited interchange.  I
>think that this was shown in both the London v Brisbane game, and the Aust
>SL v NZ SL earlier in the year when Stacey Jones took Australia apart in
>the second half.

We don't have unlimited interchange in Britain anyway...even though I
thought the laws were supposed to be identical...

No I don't think London were really lucky either. If Edwards had
stayed on they might have been in trouble.

Remember for all Brisbane's horrible mistakes, London made em
too...and we had the problem of Aussie interpretation of the rules.
Don't knock for knockings sake..

Paul

 
 
 

London Vs Brisbane

Post by Paul Bennewort » Sun, 08 Jun 1997 04:00:00

What a disappointment!

At the end of the match I wasn't certain whether to think what a load of
gutless tossers, or whether the injuries had given them a bad case of
nerves.  On balance, the determination they sporadically showed through
to the end gets them as a bad case of the nerves.

The Kiwis showed in this 80 that the Southern Hemisphere game is still
way ahead of the European game.  They were hard with their tackling and
never played one-up rugby.  Saints started off one one-up rugby, and
then four*** down decided to start spinning it.

The highlight of the match for me was a break Joynt made, then as he was
cauhgt up by the Auckland defence, pooped it to Sullivan, who _sprinted_
for the try, exactly the same move as at Halifax last weekend.  The
worst bit was all the commiseration from other miserable fans after the
match, and that was in Newcastle (UK.)

I wonder what the odds on the first UK team to actually win a match are
- it looks like the footyTAB tipsters may have it right after all.  Just
this once, I'll be cheering for the Pie-eaters.

Paul.

 
 
 

London Vs Brisbane

Post by Paul McNal » Sun, 08 Jun 1997 04:00:00

On Sat, 07 Jun 1997 13:01:47 -0700, Paul Benneworth

Quote:

>I wonder what the odds on the first UK team to actually win a match are
>- it looks like the footyTAB tipsters may have it right after all.  Just
>this once, I'll be cheering for the Pie-eaters.

>Paul.

Reds tomorrow morning matey! :)

Paul

 
 
 

London Vs Brisbane

Post by Steve Morri » Sun, 08 Jun 1997 04:00:00



Quote:
>On Sat, 07 Jun 1997 13:01:47 -0700, Paul Benneworth

>>I wonder what the odds on the first UK team to actually win a match are
>>- it looks like the footyTAB tipsters may have it right after all.  Just
>>this once, I'll be cheering for the Pie-eaters.

>>Paul.

>Reds tomorrow morning matey! :)

>Paul

How will they go Paul?

--
Steve Morris

 
 
 

London Vs Brisbane

Post by Paul McNal » Sun, 08 Jun 1997 04:00:00

On Sat, 7 Jun 1997 18:38:31 +0100, Steve Morris

Quote:

>>Reds tomorrow morning matey! :)

>>Paul

>How will they go Paul?

>--
>Steve Morris

It's soooo difficult to tell...

If they play to their game I reckon they'll have it....

Like Greg says if we play like we did against Saints and Wigan we'll
win, if we play like we did against Oldham and Cas it's another 42
points on the board for our illegal friends.:)

Paul

 
 
 

London Vs Brisbane

Post by Vibrating Bum-Faced Goa » Tue, 10 Jun 1997 04:00:00

: What a disappointment!

: At the end of the match I wasn't certain whether to think what a load of
: gutless tossers, or whether the injuries had given them a bad case of
: nerves.  On balance, the determination they sporadically showed through
: to the end gets them as a bad case of the nerves.

Saints were knocked out of the game. It usually takes the first half to
out muscle a side and then consoldiate your *** in the second half.
Auckland did it in the first set of six.

Too big, too fast and too strong.

This competition will prove to be good experience for British sides. If
nothing else it will prove to them attacking play when not in possession of
the football is more effective than when you are in possession.

Auckland v Saints looked like men against boys. I began to wonder if
Goulding would need anything shaving for his hernia operation.

--
Chris Russell           | Bradford Bulls - Wembley 1997
Electronic Imaging Unit |
University of Bradford  | Tough on St.Helens
TEL: +44 1274 385463    | Tough on the causes of St.Helens.