Eels 10 defeated by Warriors 22

Crowd: 13,526

Well this game was both positive and negative. The positive was that we started better and played better than the past few weeks. The unfortunate negative was our game management.

In my opinion, there was a lesson to be learned from the 2015 grand final. Although they were in the ascendancy, the Broncos resorted to negative play by continuously kicking the ball into touch. It’s fine if it creates pressure on the opposition to bring the ball back from right on their line. That wasn’t what the Broncos did and it lost them the grand final, not the Ben Hunt drop.

Parramatta’s game also failed to secure any pressure or advantage and they paid the price against a rejuvenated Warriors team.

So lets look at the stats that matter for Parramatta.

Score Flow

Parramatta Eels
H	Min	Name	Event	Score
1	20	N.Brown	TRY	0 – 4
1	21	C.Gutherson	CONVERSION	0 – 6
1	25	B.Thompson	TRY	4 – 6
1	27	S.Johnson	CONVERSION	6 – 6
1	31	S.Mannering	TRY	10 – 6
1	32	S.Johnson	CONVERSION	12 – 6
1	35	B.Thompson	TRY	16 – 6
1	36	S.Johnson	CONVERSION MISS	16 – 6
2	45	J.Hoffman	TRY	16 – 10
2	45	C.Gutherson	CONVERSION MISS	16 – 10
2	62	K.Maumalo	TRY	20 – 10
2	63	S.Johnson	CONVERSION	22 – 10

 

Full Time Stats

WAR	Team Stats	PAR
55	Possession (%)	45
31/39 (79)	Complete/Total Sets (%)	25/32 (78)
44:42	Time – Opposition Half	36:03
13:53	Time – Opposition 20	8:16
2452	Metres Gained	1932
9	Scrum Win	4
0	Goal Line Dropout	2
7	Penalty Conceded	9
0	Forty Twenty	0

 

Even though completions where fairly high for both teams, once again our opposition dominated us in all major facets of the game. The Warriors time in possession, time in our half, time in our red zone and metres gained all pointed to a convincing win.

From a statistical perspective it’s a worrying sign for the Eels. At this quarter mark of the season other teams tare taking advantage of position and possession to finish over the top of us.

 

1^st Half Stats

WAR	Team Stats	PAR
59	Possession (%)	41
19/21 (90)	Complete/Total Sets (%)	12/14 (86)
30:13	Time – Opposition Half	9:55
7:52	Time – Opposition 20	4:15
1291	Metres Gained	856
4	Scrum Win	1
0	Goal Line Dropout	1
4	Penalty Conceded	4
0	Forty Twenty	0

The pleasing aspect of the first half was the outstanding completion rate. Any league follower would expect that a completion rate of 86% would see a team flying high into the sheds at half time.

Unfortunately, when you’re not doing anything with the ball, it doesn’t really matter.

In contrast, the Warriors turned in a very “unWarriors” performance to complete at 90%!!!

But they weren’t just holding onto the ball, they were using it! Repeat sets gave them chunks of possession and they enjoyed an extra 7 sets of the ball. We were just smashed territorially by a big, fast moving Warriors forward pack led by Johnson and Foran. We had nothing to compare. We had no answers.

 

2^nd Half Stats

WAR	Team Stats	PAR
51	Possession (%)	49
12/18 (67)	Complete/Total Sets (%)	13/18 (72)
14:29	Time – Opposition Half	26:08
6:01	Time – Opposition 20	4:01
1161	Metres Gained	1075
5	Scrum Win	3
0	Goal Line Dropout	1
3	Penalty Conceded	5
0	Forty Twenty	0

 

The Warriors did fall into their old habits in the 2^nd half, but again we just failed to capitalize. Despite spending plenty of time in the Warriors half, we spent little time in their 20 and were therefore unable to mount any pressure. The Warriors defence was rarely challenged and the kicking game failed to place any pressure on their back three. The Titans showed up Ayshford in the previous week and Maumalo tires easy and turns like the Queen Mary out the corner of the field. It was a puzzling tactic that produced no dividends.

 

Attack:

Top 5 Runs
	Name	R
WAR	R.Tuivasa-Sheck	19
WAR	S.Mannering	19
PAR	S.Radradra	17
WAR	K.Maumalo	16
PAR	K.Auva’a	15
Top 5 Run Metres
	Name	RM
WAR	R.Tuivasa-Sheck	206
WAR	S.Mannering	183
WAR	K.Maumalo	158
PAR	K.Auva’a	147
WAR	S.Kata	144

 

Well what can you say about our attack?? The numbers certainly don’t look great. Only 4 players made 100 metres or more, and three of those were backs. Only ONE forward achieved the 100 metre mark and he started off the bench. Our forwards have not controlled the middle of the field in recent weeks and it’s showing in the statistical columns and the scoreboard.

In contrast, ten Warriors players made 100 metres or more.

 

Kirisome Auva’a	147m
Semi Radradra	136m
Clint Gutherson	107m
Peni Terepo	100m

 

Defence:

Top 5 Tackles
	Name	TAK
PAR	K.Pritchard	54
WAR	S.Mannering	48
WAR	R.Hoffman	39
PAR	B.Scott	37
PAR	N.Brown	35
Top 5 Missed Tackles
	Name	MT
PAR	K.Auva’a	4
WAR	I.Luke	3
PAR	T.Moeroa	3
WAR	C.Gubb	3
PAR	K.Pritchard	2

 

Again the Eels were made to make many more tackles than their opposition. This is an alarming and growing statistic as it is climbing each week.

The Eels made close to 70 more tackles than the Warriors. This equates to an extra 12 sets that the Warriors had at us.

Understandably, the possession rates resulted in 11 Eels making 20 or more tackles. In contrast the Warriors had 7 players who exceeded this workload. With 4 ‘fresher’ players, the Warriors were at a distinct advantage.

One massive issue for me lately is that we are giving up chunks of possession. Errors in possession are compounded by giving away penalties when the opposition has the ball. These chunks of time without the ball are giving metres and momentum to our opponents.

The control and game management so evident in first two rounds has completely disappeared and an answer needs to be found.

As we head into our traditional Easter Monday clash against the Tigers, let’s hope we see a much improved attack from the Eels and discipline with the ball.

Questions for this week:

Can Norman recapture his best form?

Can we commit fewer errors?

Can control our penalties and consequently our frustration?

Is Taka the answer at 5/8?

With Gutho’s move to fullback, could we avoid using stop gap players and consider a specialist half such as Dargan?

Can our forwards stand up to what is arguably an average Tigers pack?

I guess time will tell. With the Eels looking at the possibility of 5 losses in a row, you would think that should be motivation enough.

This game usually draws a massive crowd and with it being an Eels home game we should see the blue and gold army out in force.

Let’s hope that this will help to lift the Eels and get them back on the winners podium.

Stat Attack Player of the Week

Clint Gutherson

In what wasn’t a great game across the park, Gutherson showed his versatility and once again didn’t disappoint in moving from the halves to full back.

With the ‘possible’ imminent arrival of Mitchell Moses, Gutherson provided a timely reminder of his value to the team.

In true ‘Guth’ style he once again showed it doesn’t matter where he plays, he will give 100% and would never let the side down with his performances.

Possessions	41
Runs	12
Metres	107
Errors	0
Minutes Played	80

Colmac

Champion Data

Stats courtesy of Champion Data. All these stats and more can be viewed on our match centre at http://mc.championdata.com/nrl/ including live game stats.

– Colmac

Champion Data

Follow @championdatanrl

mc.championdata.com/nrl/