Origin 2013 Game 3: NSW drop chances, must drop Pearce

Adam Reynolds and todd carney will be the blues halves next year. Pierce is a great defensive halfback and tough but executes poorly in attack at the most critical moments. Grubbering into queensland players legs or kicking straight down the throat of Billy Slater on numerous occasions. The only way you'll defeat a champion team like Queensland is to starve them of the ball completely. This requires inept kicking from the halfback to get the ball to sit-up in the in goal area. This is why Reynolds must be given the nod for next years series.

You've drawn a form line through the Sharks-Tigers game and then continued it straight through the Qld-NSW games. And concluded that Carney's stats are 3 times better. That's dreadful analysis. For one thing, Carney's quite a number of places behind the Blue's halves on NRL stats - the very argument you're trying to use. Anyway, the chooks have just played the sharks, so that should give you a new form line to draw. 40-zip, Pearce & Maloney stats >> Carney stats. Get to confirm it again in a few weeks when they play again, and then the real test - how all the halves go in the tough, fast, skillful finals. Followed by the WC. Should be enlightening to re-read this column after all that & see how much you know what you're talking about. Good luck! :)

SAID IT BEFORE , SAID IT AGAIN- DROP THE SELECTORS.

Mitchell Pearce Has played a fair few origins. He knows what it is like. Has the experience to handle pressure yet seems to crumble on the big moments . Adam Reynolds and John Sutton are babys to Origin they have never played it . To say they would have definitely done a better job is crap because they would be so nervous that they would make a lot of mistakes as well

Qld are good but if NSW had this team Hayne Morris Ferguson Morris Dugan Carney Reynolds Fifita Farah Tamou Lewis Bird Gallen with Merrin Watmough Reynolds and Cordner. That team would make Qld play every minute of the game not just 30 min halfs

Great article very relevant given NSW have lost game III now. I had the same thoughts about his "alright plays" way of thinking recently as well - Why didn't we persist with Merrit or wallace wolfman, soward for 5 years and develop them? Or or carney most of all - who is a genuine talent and natural footballer in the half / five eighth role, What I have found in RL communities is how much sociological influence can distort the fabric of a team and decision making - sometimes this can be for good such as confidence support etc but sometimes its detrimental to natural dynamics, therefore can be bad. To persist for 5 years with the same bloke without a series win is unheard of especially regarding the position he holds in the team. My opinion is that if pearce didn't play - NSW win. And thats not pearces fault but a consequence of the influence sociology has in decision making in rugby league. The praise that pearce gets from other champions is more a testament to his father. And mitchell pearce may have some of those traits. But his father was a superfit clean living hardworking backrower / lock forward who built his game on this knowing he did not have some of the natural attributes of other footballers (and thats in his own words if you read his book "local hero") Mitchell pearce is a halfback, a position given to the more natural gifted players to create opportunities and capitalise on the work that people like his father used to do in a team - so why would we consider him a natural or genetic champion in the role he plays considering it so different from the role his fathered played. I never saw wayne pearce as a champion in the halfback role (should have I?) - If you are looking at it from a royalty perspective then maybe look at his mother’s background as well and her sporting or organisational instincts to get a better assessment of his right of passage in that position. Or maybe we should have just look at his performances for what it is - the same treatment or condition as every other player gets - to prove yourself as a big match player by game 1 (or at the most game 2). The option he took to kick the ball was the result of someone not knowing what to do when the moment arrived. In the lead up though he did all the things right that come from experience, coaching and development ie where he stood to receive the ball - playing direct to the line to commit defenders - all the things that come from the multitude of coaching and development - that maybe his right of passage ensured he received - but these are the same things any useless or brilliant player could be given. After this though, his vision, decision making and execution were not average but poor, which result was probably compounded by going into the game mentally thinking it was him to be the saviour to prove it to himself and others which ended up with an atrocious result. In this case as it seemed he didn’t know exactly what to do at all so he chose to invent an option where the result could justify and bathe him in glory at this level. He probably would have been better opting to play within himself and choose an average option passing immediately to support, - passing flat to bird to be tackled, - a cut out to the centre to give them a one on one chance on his opposite - even a chip kick between centre and winger as a 50/50. The tape will show the winning play would have been to take the ball to the line as he did, feign the kick and run bird as decoy with a second phase pass out the back with to dugan to score near the posts. The tape will show thurston had started to come in to cover the grubber kick that Pearce’s body language had initiated and that would have given dugan a saloon passage to the line - its easy in hindsight but they seem to be the options that the thurstons, johns and lockyers choose 99/100 times particularly when the stakes are high - (see game II for thurston) Only when there is no option and the game is on the line do they invent one and execute it perfectly to change the game usually having an understanding with other players around them. In this case pearce had 3 options each one better than the next yet he chose to invent a low percentage poorly executed ego (its not a dirty word, but thats what it was) play ended up as the worst option possible giving QLD safe possession. The players around him didn’t show confidence by positioning themselves for him either as they were not sure how to best support him with the ball. So my conclusion is that Pearce’s selection is more a reflection of true believer syndrome from a community of champions that is heavily reliant on social influence in making its beliefs acted upon. That is not to say this sociological value system is totally or even at all bad - but just a consequence of perception that some of the champions have put out there for the wrong reasons. - Even champions have distorted belief systems sometimes if it serves the sociology of a their community enough.

Is it me or was WoobliesFan rambling simply that? Non coherent rambling.Lay off the xxxx Gold buddy. I'm extremely confused @ the comment regarding Luke Lewis' apparent punch? When did this happen? :-/ And if Gallen is such a bad influence at club level then why has Fafitta's career gone to a new level since joining the club? He's gone from a nobody off the bench at the tigers, to the form forward in the competition (Stats support this) Carney since joining the Sharks has reignited his career. Not to mention over high profile players either joining or wanting to join the sharks. And its all because they want to play under Gallen as a leader. How is Cameron Smith any better than Gallen? Why because he says all the right things so everyone likes him? Or because he's the face of Qld & Aus rugby league, all the dirty little tactics & plays he does on the field go un-noticed due to his status in the game. As for our coach...who do you suggest? Daley is from the same era as Meninga and our past coach Stuart. Meninga is nothing special & simply lets his team do the talking and create this elution that he is a super coach.

Hehehe

Pierce and maloney played there hearts out, pierce is a really committed defender. Unfortunately that doesnt mean your up to it at that level. Last tackle kicks couldnt be any easier for slater to return and last tackle options in the qld danger zone proved they dont have the goods. Both couldnt provide enough opportunities for there outside men. And it also meant that too much pressure was put on Farah to fill the gaps that 6 & 7 couldnt provide and took him away from solely concentrating on his 9 role. I would like to see todd carney and adam regnolds. Todd carney attacks the line so well with ball in hand and coupled with the great kicking game of reynolds i think it gives a great double threat to keep qld thinking what are they going to do. Just my opinion though. P.s. handling errors was just as costly if not more. At that level it has to be pressure that makes the best of the best make such amateur errors.

My friends there is no next year screw origin untill the big 4 retire we will LOSE!

Farah is a park footballer compared to the great Cameron Smith. Cameron Smith controls the orchestra and unleashes at the most crucial times. Lets just hope that Farah may learn a little something from the array of skills and experience at Smith's disposal. In other words sit back and observe and learn. Perhaps you were preparing your secret weapon, the bronze Brute Bernard replacement who came on as replacement hooker for poor Robbie Farah......

+1 sledgeross. I was going to ask old wobblies the same thing but after reading his post i was certain he has no fn clue so it wasn't worth it ;)

Yeah, I don't know what Fifita could have done about that. There was no intent in the contact, in fact, looking closely at it, I think he was trying to avoid it.

If we are that bad, why didn't QLD win by 50 points?

I agree in general P, but Pearce HAS had his chance and has come up short.

Woods was disappointing, but he has the skills and should be given a chance to learn from the experience of his first origin series.

No Renegade, he has been a major reason why NSW were within striking distance. Did most of the effective kicking. Though I can't agree that he was best on field. I assume Scott meant to add "in blue". And I wish he would whinge less.

A Few points WoobliesFan; Please explain how he treats Cronulla over his self-absorbed desire to be an Origin messiah? Can you please tell us when Luke Lewis threw a punch in Game 2? The Fifita penalty on Slater. I assume you are talking about when Slater caught the high ball initiated the contact with Fifita with his foot? Finally, I agree we should get a real coach, is Michael Hagen free?

It just wouldn't be NSW Origin without a handful of players picked for the success of their team rather than their individual performance. It might have worked back when players like Gidley and Tahu were getting picked on the merits of Andrew Johns, but it certainly doesn't work when players like Hoffman are getting picked on the merits of the Queensland spine.

Only an issue when 6 & 7 suck, as ours did for the whole series. IF he had a 7 that could kick, he wouldn't do it - look at TIgers when they had Prince - he didn't overplay his hand.