Slater beats Hayne for a deserved Storm victory
Columnist
By Spiro Zavos, 5 Oct 2009 Spiro Zavos is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- Billy Slater, grand final, Jarryd Hayne, Melbourne Storm, NRL, Parramatta Eels, Rugby League
NRL Grand Final against the Parramatta Eels at ANZ Stadium, Sunday, Oct. 4, 2009. The Storm won the 2009 NRL premiership with a 23-16 win over the Eels. AAP Image Dean Lewins.
Jarryd Hayne’s last touch in the 2009 NRL Grand Final, a dropped ball, summed up his play throughout the match. Nothing he tried came off. His opposite number, Billy Slater, had a tremendous match, scoring a try, running the ball back strongly and injecting himself into the line to try and make something happen for his well-organised and methodical side.
Before the match I noted that only one fullback (Robbie O’Davis) had won the Clive Churchill medal for best on the field since the medal’s introduction in 1986. The suggestion was made that if Hayne or Slater won the medal, then that player would lead his side to victory.
And this is what happened. The Storm scored in the first five minutes and it seemed to me that Hayne should really have been in a position to prevent the try. But a earlier he’d been tested with a kick across the flow of play which he just defused. Perhaps he was hanging around the posts again waiting for a repeat when the try was scored out wide.
Then in the second half Hayne had waited for a towering up-and-under to be caught by one of his team-mates instead of handling it himself. Greg Inglis caught the ball unchallenged and beat Hayne with a swerve to score a try for the Storm.
Slater followed this by running off a pass from the base of the scrum, and then backing up to take another pass to clear out for the decisive try.
It seemed to be that the difference between Slater’s style of play and that of Hayne is that Slater actually creates breaks for himself with his fearless and speedy running, while Hayne tends to set up plays for his team-mates.
Hayne’s problem in the Grand Final was that the Eels outside backs didn’t seem to be putting themselves in a position to capitalise on any chances offered to them. Too much of the backplay was virtual slow-motion passing with few players being prepared to charge on to the ball.
The Storm were the better team throughout the match. They had to play against a determined opposition and a seemingly even more determined crowd. It is one of the most difficult thing in sport to defeat a committed side (and the Eels had that commitment as their fightback towards the end of the match revealed) which has the unconditional support of a vast crowd.
That the Storm could do this and win more emphatically than the 23 – 16 suggests indicates that the side and the Storm franchise deserves now to be considered with some of the great teams in the past, all those Broncos sides that won premierships with Wayne Bennett, and those great Parramatta sides with Jack Gibson as their coach.
The broadcast of the match was exemplary, especially the commentary from Peter Sterling and Phil Gould who were quick and expert on picking up aspects of interest for the viewers. But Channel 9 somewhat ruined things a bit with the inappropriate plug by Darryl Somers for his ‘Hey, Hey It’s Saturday’ revival show.
In the past there has been talk of taking the NRL Grand Final out of Sydney. The vast passionate crowd of 82,538, with its tumultuous sea of yellow flags, provided the reason why this special occasion should remain a Sydney occasion, just as the AFL Grand Final should always be a Melbourne special occasion.
The Storm and Slater might have ruined the Eels party. But at least the party was held in western suburbs of Sydney, the spiritual home of the rugby league code in Australia.
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby League articles
- New dawn for rugby league gets underway (3)
- Rugby league commission ushers in new era (2)
- Ennis confident about his NRL fitness
- Why sporting seasons should never cross paths (30)
- Independent Commission four years in the making, but worth the wait (16)
- Kearney still to choose Eels kicker
- Federal Court has it wrong on sports broadcast copyright (40)
- Federal Court has it wrong on sports broadcast copyright (40)
- An open letter to Channel Nine (98)
- The NRL’s scariest players (56)
- Is the All Stars match increasing the divide? (25)
- Channel Nine needs NRL-cricket ODI compromise (36)
- The NRL needs a vision (52)
- New breed of NRL players continue to develop (24)
- Explore:
- Billy Slater, grand final, Jarryd Hayne, Melbourne Storm, NRL, Parramatta Eels, Rugby League
znotty said | October 5th 2009 @ 4:09am | Report comment
dont worry about juniors or a Leagues Club or a supporter base just go & buy the comp, a total disgrace
Mr cheese said | October 5th 2009 @ 6:45am | Report comment
Dear Spiro
you said in another article that Rugby Union brings a high calibre of supporter i.e. middle class.
Is it still like that over in Aussie ? Traditionally in England, Rugby Union has been controlled by the middle class. I didn’t realise you had the same thing over in the prison colony.
Bill Baxter said | October 5th 2009 @ 8:18am | Report comment
Channel 9′s telecast of the Grand Final was NOT exemplary!!!!.
Viewers in Victoria and I guess the ‘other non NRL States’, were insulted when the telecast terminated abruptly at the conclusion of the game. No post match comments, no post match awards, no post match celebrations!!!.. Channel 9′s arrogance towards the Melbourne Storm continues and this from a Sponsor!!!. Who needs Sponsors like this?.
Richard said | October 5th 2009 @ 11:02am | Report comment
Well said Bill. At the end of a terrific and absorbing, tension filled match we were all just left hanging. I don’t know whether the telecast was cut short only in Melbourne, but nine definitely lost the plot there. Clearly they care not for the Storm or their Melbourne viewers. I feel this exemplary finals performance by this great Melbourne team has done more than the all the other Storm wins to raise interest in NRL in Melbourne. Combined with the new stadium, League could now be on the verge of major growth here. Channel Nine could have played their part to help this process. Instead they demonstrated how little they understand what being a team player means. From a predominately AFL fan, well done Storm. Great, great win in a thoroughly engaging and thrilling game.
Hilly61 said | October 5th 2009 @ 8:03pm | Report comment
I’m sorry Richard but I thought the game rated about a 3 out of 10 for excitement. “Tension filled”, are you serious ? My mate next to me on the lounge, nodded off for 20 minutes before the Eels mounted a ‘minor comeback’ late in the second half. If it wasn’t for those ten minutes, the game was BORING and PREDICTABLE. Melbourne’s defence smothered Parramatta in the first half and game was as good as over. I’m not an Eels or rugby league fan for that matter, but the game just didn’t live up to it’s hype. The Storm have now played in four consecutive NRL GF’s and I bet you the general public in Melbourne still couldn’t name you more than three players in the team. The AFL pay a lot more for TV rights than the NRL, so I believe the Storm will never get the full support they need in AFL heartland to get ‘major growth’ as you hope.
John Ryan said | October 5th 2009 @ 10:25pm | Report comment
Well in WA they showed it right through presentation as well,very unusual for 9 who dont like RL very much in this state
Dan said | October 5th 2009 @ 8:53am | Report comment
Mr Cheese,
Rugby Union traditionally did have a more middle class supporter base, but is far more diverse than that now, with half their players coming from public schools (public schools meaning.. errr public – never could understand why England insist on calling their private education sector ‘public’). Nevertheless, League does have a far stronger working class supporter base still thanks to it’s deep social and cultural penetration and general high level of accessibility. Union remains constrained by its short Super 14 season that remains completely wedded to cable television and the inferior quality (compared to the NRL) of the club competitions that play after it.
Mr cheese said | October 5th 2009 @ 9:13am | Report comment
Dan,
you have a point about the English tendency to use their own language in a peculiar way. I went to an English state school. My family was nowhere near rich enough to send me to a public school.
As for ‘Super 14′, I didn’t know until v recently that there was no Rugby Union competition in Aussie. That surprises me. You even have a football league, for kangaroo’s sake !!!!! Surely 15 man egg-chasing is more popular than football.
I am a football man myself, but I thought you lot preferred the egg.
Dan said | October 5th 2009 @ 12:06pm | Report comment
Soccer (I never use the word ‘football’ – to me it’s an umbrella term for all the codes) is played in the summer here so it doesn’t compete with the the other three codes. It enjoys a moderate level of success, but ultimately Australians generally prefer the AFL or NRL over either Union or Soccer (spectator wise at least – soccer’s mild physical nature means it enjoys high levels of participation, but it seems that the fans prefer watching the more gladatorial sports of League and AFL).
Ultimately though Australia is very hard to pin down sporting wise though. In England it’s fair to say soccer is the national game and is entrenched so deep that it seems being a fan of a team is tantamount to being a member of a gang (never could understand the EPL’s ability to generate a gang culture). Whereas in Australia the country is split over AFL and Rugby League, with soccer having a strong level of niche support the nation over and Rugby having it more limited to NSW and Qld.
Mr cheese said | October 6th 2009 @ 10:53am | Report comment
First of all you have to understand that ‘the EPL’ is a foreign thing. We don’t call it that. People over here probably think that EPL is that drug used by the cyclists.
I am afraid that I will continue to use Football to describe, er, Football.
Anyways, Football over here is the number one sport by 5000 million miles. The clubs have been around for 125 years or something, and Rugby League is very very very small.
It’s still quite funny, though, that you have a football league but not Rugby union league. Bizarre.
Dan said | October 6th 2009 @ 6:35pm | Report comment
Wasn’t telling you not to call it football, was just explaining why I don’t so you didn’t get all shitty with me using the word ‘soccer’ (as my experience with the English soccer fan – the ones who don’t try and kill you for the colour of your jumper at least – is that they think this is some how an illegitimate and offensive word, despite being of English origin and having significant utility in confusion avoidance in countries where soccer is more of a peripheral sport).
In any case we do technically have a Rugby Union ‘Leagues’ here, it’s just that they remain city centric, with the largest being in Sydney. Australia is geographically too large for a national league without the proper funding and well thought out club-transcending team divisions given that it would compete directly with Rugby League and AFL. Moreover, a ‘League’ in Australia is not what, say the EPL (or whatever the local English vernacular for it is), is. They’re leagues with knockout competitions made up of the top half of each league tacked on to the end of it. It is like this in all our football codes, even the Super 14 involving South Africa and NZ.
Union in Australia is ultimately very dependent on the success of the wallabies and, to a lesser extent, the 4 (soon to be 5) Super 14/15 sides we have. We have roughly one 6th of the player numbers of England, so our success in that sport is quite remarkable in many ways. The same could be said of soccer here too I fancy, given that for so long it was derided as a game for girls. We’re doing quite well in that though too now, despite the relatively low quality of the competition here.
Dan said | October 6th 2009 @ 6:53pm | Report comment
Mick from Giralang said | October 5th 2009 @ 8:56am | Report comment
Slater had a terrific game but I don’t understand how the Churchill medal for best player on the field didn’t go to Nathan Hindmarsh or Fui Fui Moi Moi, who were both standouts. Hindmarsh made 65 tackles and took the ball up relentlessly. Not even the great Ray Price could have matched that effort.
Luke W said | October 5th 2009 @ 9:08am | Report comment
I’ve never valued workhorse forwards. Yes, Hindmarsh did make a lot of tackles, but how many times was he the second, third or even fourth man into the tackle? I remember Anthony Watmough getting criticised for missing a lot of tackles, but Des Hasler defended him saying that he misses those tackles because he is usually rushing off the line, looking to make solid contact and force an error. Fui Fui Moi Moi did less than half the work, but his runs and tackles were much more effective for Parramatta than Hindmarsh’s.
As for Clive Churchill medallist, how did it not go to Cooper Cronk? His linebreak set up the second try, his bomb for Greg Inglis’ try was pinpoint and when the Storm were in front and looking to hold off the Eels, he controlled the game through his kicking. Saying that though, Slater was probably the second best on field, and was probably the more obvious choice over Cronk.
Brett McKay said | October 5th 2009 @ 1:57pm | Report comment
Luke, I’d agree with that, I thought Cronk was BoG by a considerable margin, had a hand in Blair and Inglis’ tries, and maybe the kick for Slater’s too (?). Slater was good, but I’m not sure he was the best. But then he also won the Ch9 MotM too, so maybe we’re all wrong…
Hammer said | October 5th 2009 @ 9:02am | Report comment
Mick – I thought the same thing – no way did he deserve the Churchill medal – sure as always good on attack but his defence is still lacking … if the medal needed to go to a Storm player – then Blair, Smith and Cronk were well ahead of Slater …
skull said | October 5th 2009 @ 9:04am | Report comment
As far as I’m concerned Melbourne would not have won without Dallas Johnson if ever there is a freak it is this guy. He would have done at least 50 tackles and plenty of hit ups, offloads as many as Hindmarsh and was always there to tackle Moi Moi and Hayne. Fantastic effort, wish my team had him.
GB said | October 5th 2009 @ 9:11am | Report comment
Skull, could not agree more. Dallas Johnson was in the thick of it the entire match. He hit Fuifui in the first tackle of the match and was still taking it up towards the end. All this after being by pole-axed by Fui Fui early in the first half. Lesser players would have been out for the count but he kept coming back to dish out and take more punishment for himself. In my eyes, a clear best on ground performance.
Campbell Watts said | October 5th 2009 @ 12:19pm | Report comment
Suspect he may not remember much of his effort though! Was clearly concussed from the Moi Moi shot but full credit for the effort – tough as teak!
sheek said | October 5th 2009 @ 9:11am | Report comment
If I may say so, I suggested in a previous article from Spiro that Hayne might come back to the pack in the GF, & this is precisely what happened.
Hayne is a huge talent, & both he & Parramatta will be better for this loss. But perhaps it’s a loss that needed to happen. In recent weeks I detected Hayne had got carried away with all the adulation being directed at him. He was “hogging” the Eels attack, & he still had that erraticness in his play that I thought Melbourne might exploit.
He’s young, & he will learn from this disappointing experience.
Spiro, we rugby union fans can only look on with envy at last night’s extravaganza. As is often the case, the match didn’t quite live up to expectations, but the occasion was a sea of colour & joy. Even the SMH dedicated 30 pages of wrap-up this morning. Not to mention the pages upon pages of previews these past few days.
Right now, rugby union is a very sick puppy dog on so many fronts.
Luke W said | October 5th 2009 @ 9:23am | Report comment
Completely agree about Hayne “hogging” the play at the Eels. I’m not sure if this came from the fact he was becoming arrogant and believing the hype around him, or the fact that Jeff Robson is one of the worst halfbacks ever to compete at first grade level, but in the last few weeks, Hayne was doing far too much kicking and ball playing. Hayne is a great ball runner (easily the best in the league right now, probably of the modern era) but his kicking and ball playing skills are pretty mediocre. Flashes of brilliance like his chip and chase and his ball for Joe Gulavao’s try last week masked this a bit, but it came to the front last night.
reds fan said | October 5th 2009 @ 9:56am | Report comment
It wasn’t just Hayne. When you look at the traditional attacking spine of a league team; hooker, half, 5/8, fullback, and then consider the players from both teams in those positions it becomes obvious. Smith, Cronk, Finch, Slater v Keating, Robson, Mortimer, Hayne. Its not really a contest is it?
Campbell Watts said | October 5th 2009 @ 12:24pm | Report comment
I thought Mortimer was the only one of these players to stand up for Para.
Wilba said | October 5th 2009 @ 10:01am | Report comment
That was a very solid performance by the storm, worthy gf winners. What stood out for me was the intensity of the defensive work by the storm early on, combined with the clever kicking by Cronk and Smith that really pinned Parra into the corners and gave the storm an edge. It was a bit like an origin in intensity and I was waiting for the storm to fall into a hole at the backend of the game. This may have happened if not for Slater and Inglis(x2) who supplied the knockout punches.
I thought foifoi and hindy were fantastic, a performance worthy of the CC medal if they got up; however, the rest of the parra side looked a bit flat/weren’t allowed to play. That makes it very hard for Hayne to do his thing when the team had very little momentum and about a quarter of the offloads compared to recent weeks. Whereas all of the storm players looked on the ball, particularly Blair (dominated the ruck), Cronk (steered the team well), Johnston (regular machine like performance) and it was only a matter of time before Slater and Inglis cut loose.
I have no problem with Slater picking up the CC medal he puts his body on the line with his suicidal runs a least 5 times every game. That is 150 time a year and yet oppositions can not stop him. Hayne has become the master of exploiting an opportunity, Slater consistently creates the opportunity. In a tight gf I know which guy I would want on my team.
Well done Storm.