I haven’t seen the first half but I actually thought Brooks had one of his better games. He succeeded in getting a couple of drop outs and was ok with his running game. Still though, his overall game is not good enough, just no nuance. Too predictable, the opposition knows when is going to run, pass or kick.
the fact we dominated the game stats wise is the reason I was disappointed.
We made ground on the edges all afternoon, on both sides. We had more possession, better field position, were required to defend less, were given more piggy backs and created far more second phase play. That is all new for us. Rarely do we return effort like that.
Not turning that effort into points though….that is us. Losing at home to a low ranked peer, is also us.
See how we go this weekend as we really need to win against these teams we’ve been fortunate to start the year off facing.
I said the same thing in the other forum. When he took a pre-meditated run he was a legitimate threat. When he ran a backline play he invariably ran sideways and cut down the space for his backs. You should always straighten before you pass, but Brooks often does not.
Brooks on the other hand is running most times yesterday on an angle with the ball tucked under his left arm. He is less likely to be front on to the defensive line and never carries the ball in two hands.
Wanted to jump in again to explain what I mean with Brooks "straightening" the attack. I agree with you (and Garry on the pod) that he ran on an angle. My point is that in the past on a backline move to the left Brooks would take the ball at the same pace as the backline move, whereas last night as soon he got the ball, he hit the gas and hit close to top speed at the line. The critical point that relates to what Ive been saying about Brooks "straightening the attack" is on at least (from memory) 4 occassions, he hit a left foot step into the defensive line, straight at a gap. Each time he nearly broke through and I think once he did. Coupled with his increased pace (IMO we played a faster tempo than previous years) meant that the defensive line had to compress to Brooks, leaving more space for Naden & Staines.
I agree with most of what you are saying mate. He does that when he runs the ball but he also needs to be doing this on the majority of our sweep plays to create space for his outside men, specifically Laurie. On a number of occasions last night he ran his support players out of space.
There was a telling comparison when AD set up the Laurie try, where after either taking the line on or throwing a wide pass for every previous play, he straightened and put Laurie into the gap. AD wore a big shot for his trouble but that willingness to take the ball into the line (and his previous threat of the run) set up the defensive error that opened up space for Laurie to waltz over.
Can't tell you last time Brooks wore a shot a la Cronk or Sam Walker in an attempt to draw the defence in right until the last millisecond.
Great comparison and a well made point. Brooks doesn't draw defenders in ever. He relies on the edge player outside him running a strong line or he needs a quick play the call to poke his head through a retreating defence.
I would go further to say Brooks is not shirking it by avoiding wearing a shot. He is a tough player. It's just because he doesn't carry the ball with two hands so he has to make the decision to kick, run or pass well in advance.
To round out my assessment - he still stands too flat (receives the ball too close to the defensive line) and is flat footed when he does get it.
I was actually going to go back and watch some 2017-18 WT games to see when and where Brooks received the ball. My recollection of the "success" we had during that period was that it was often built around props running hard and straight one out off the ruck and winning the PTB (much like JFH and Leota do for Penrith these days). Is it that hard to implement here ?
