Re: Segayaro : Wed Sep 07, 2016 10:45 am  

ThePrinter wrote:

What's wrong is what you've posted above. Back when Sinfield played loose (not since 2010) teams actually played a ball player there, since then teams have just started putting an extra big guy there so no we didn't have to cover up having Sinfield in defence who was often our top tackler playing there and didn't mean others from the centres inwards had to increase their numbers.

The idea that a hooker has to make you a load of tackles comes from the fact every team uses their hooker this way. Maybe Saints, Wire and Hull should start hiding Roby, Clark and Houghton out on the wing and save them for attack and see how things go, I doubt it would improve the team.

Teams havent only just started putting a big man at loose. This isnt a recent phenomenon. Sinfield, as a ball playing loose, has always been something of a novelty. His whole career people have argued he was too small to be a 'proper loose'

Roby, Clarke and Houghton dont have the skills Burrow does.

Re: Segayaro : Wed Sep 07, 2016 10:51 am  

Barrie's Glass Eye wrote:

Why did we go out and get Segayaro then, why have our performances improved so much with him in the team.

Whether the 40 plus tackles need to be made by a hooker isn't the point, they need to be made. Bearing in mind for large parts of last year we also played with JJB, Singo, etc at 13 making 30 tackles and Aition making 30 plus tackles. This year with burrow at 9 and JJB at loose there's still 30 tackles missing.

As others have said we can get by but it means essentially rendering Watkins useless.

A hooker is essential and Mac and GH have admitted as much twice this year by scraping the barell with Falloon and then chasing hard for Chicko when that didn't work.

Because Segeyaro is a fantastic player.

Falloon was a proper hooker, one who had made a career as an NRL 'proper hooker'. Didnt work did it.

Re: Segayaro : Wed Sep 07, 2016 10:59 am  

tad rhino wrote:

what people are missing regards aiton. is while he may not be the best hooker ever, he suited our game perfectly. for me, whatever people dress stats up to say, we missed him massively when he got his injury

Did he? he didnt really stand out in 2014. Never really made it in the NRL, never really stood out at Wakefield, and hasnt set the world alight at Les Catalans.

Aiton is a 'proper hooker' People have drawn a line from our success to him when in fact it was the other way around. Aiton didnt make the team better, the team made him look like a world beater. Anyone can look like a great 9 playing behind an utterly dominant pack that was offloading for fun, and inside great strike players.

It wasnt difficult to look like a great 9 in that side, we know this because when we lost Aiton, we didnt miss a beat, our 3 fixtures after losing Aiton were
Leeds Rhinos 25 - 18 Wigan Warriors
Hull FC 22 - 36 Leeds Rhinos
Hull KR 0 - 50 Leeds Rhinos

Re: Segayaro : Wed Sep 07, 2016 11:02 am  

Barrie's Glass Eye wrote:

I get where your coming from if glad, there are many things that have happened this year that our not just down to not having a 9.

Having said that on attack everything starts with the hooker, he touches the ball pretty much every play, and if service from there is poor it's a trickle down effect to everyone in the team.

I also think the effect on defence has looked worse this year because of the blueprint of Massive forwards we have gone for this year, we've really struggled against lateral movement in the middle third. Something a hooker for most of the year. I bet even 37 year old Peacock was (is) more mobile than Mullaly.

I agree though that all this does not excuse players from stepping up, merely that it would be stupid for us to go into next season with the same issue and as a result, the same excuse.

Our defence hasnt been that bad this year. We have only conceded 99 points more than last year. And we conceded 144 points in just three games. By and large our defence has been 'acceptable'.

Our issue has been creative. We have made metres without a problem, but we havent been creating gaps, our passing has often been atrocious, and our last tackle plays have been terrible.

Re: Segayaro : Wed Sep 07, 2016 11:19 am  

finglas wrote:

My opinion is that you need a good distributor at hooker, who can preferably tackle.

Must tackle. Otherwise I don't disagree. Never suggested our season's performance was crap entirely due to the lack of quality at 9. I think I've commented enough on other reasons.
We look better with Segeyaro, but we still look poor. Plenty of other reasons for that.

Re: Segayaro : Wed Sep 07, 2016 11:20 am  

SmokeyTA wrote:

Our defence hasnt been that bad this year. We have only conceded 99 points more than last year. And we conceded 144 points in just three games. By and large our defence has been 'acceptable'.

Our issue has been creative. We have made metres without a problem, but we havent been creating gaps, our passing has often been atrocious, and our last tackle plays have been terrible.

Our defence has been shocking mainly around the ruck ,the right channel & rspecially under our sticks.
99pts more is 99pts too many when yer losing week in week out & miss finishing in the bottom 2 by the skin if yer teeth.

Re: Segayaro : Wed Sep 07, 2016 11:26 am  

SmokeyTA wrote:

Because Segeyaro is a fantastic player.

Falloon was a proper hooker, one who had made a career as an NRL 'proper hooker'. Didnt work did it.

Segeyaro is a good "hooker", Falloon was a crap hooker. You see the difference don't you? Don't try to imply Segeyaro is s good player who happens to be playing 9 for us. He's a hooker and a good one.

Re: Segayaro : Wed Sep 07, 2016 11:33 am  

RHINO-MARK wrote:

Our defence has been shocking mainly around the ruck ,the right channel & rspecially under our sticks.
99pts more is 99pts too many when yer losing week in week out & miss finishing in the bottom 2 by the skin if yer teeth.

Im not arguing that our defence was good. But it wasnt the reason we lost most games. Most games we lost because we didnt score enough, not because we conceded too much.

Re: Segayaro : Wed Sep 07, 2016 11:35 am  

DHM wrote:

Segeyaro is a good "hooker", Falloon was a crap hooker. You see the difference don't you? Don't try to imply Segeyaro is s good player who happens to be playing 9 for us. He's a hooker and a good one.

Segeyaro is a quality player who happens to be a hooker.

You can believe we wouldnt have seen the same uptick in form if instead of bringing in Segeyaro we had brought in say Adam Reynolds if you want, but id hugely disagree.

Re: Segayaro : Wed Sep 07, 2016 12:25 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

Because Segeyaro is a fantastic player.

Falloon was a proper hooker, one who had made a career as an NRL 'proper hooker'. Didnt work did it.

Segayaro is a fantastic hooker, are you suggesting if we'd have signed him and played him at 6 or 1 he'd have the same impact? You measure the quality of the player based on their position. JT is the best in the world but would be a crap prop forward.

Falloon was a proper hooker, but a crap one. The fact we signed him shows the club think it's important to have a 9, that's the point I'm making. In fact a couple of our wins before Chicko got here Falloon played and while he was crap, we as a team looked better.