(04-15-2024, 07:56 AM)kruddler link Wrote:In fairness, we did have 5 rushed behinds (they had 0)
So it was essentially 14.9 to 16.4, and we had at least 1 hit the post, and 1 go down as touched when it was a goal. So its not so bad when you dive down into it.
It was more of a case of them not being able to miss more than it was our bad kicking.
And they couldn't miss because so many of their shots on goal were 'easy.' When a side has 20 shots on goal and nails 80% of them, you look at your defence... it wasn't 'luck', it was simply that their shots on goal were 'a walk in the park.' Poor pressure. We gave the 'suckers' an even break and made them look much better than they were.
Only our ruthless best, from Board to bootstudders will get us no. 17

