Dragons v Storm Round 2

While we know that the Storm games are always hard fought, we can beat them. There might be an unlikely chance that we will play against Lomax in this match even though it appears that the Eels and Storm are very close in reaching an agreement which would allow him to play for the Storm. I think by the time Round 2 comes around it might be a bit early for him to be playing for the Storm, but maybe not too far into the comp.

The game will be played at WIN Stadium on Saturday 14th March at 5.30. Go Dragons weather the Storm.

Breaking: No Agreement reached between the Eels and Storm on Lomax. However agreement reached between the Eels and Lomax enabling him to play at another club after 31.10.27 instead of 31.10.28. The Eels are willing to work with Zac and his agent to find an NRL club that wants to sign Zac in exchange for the Eels receiving appropriate value for its football program.


So it will be Dragons v Storm without Lomax definitely.

Dragon David said:

Breaking: No Agreement reached between the Eels and Storm on Lomax. However agreement reached between the Eels and Lomax enabling him to play at another club after 31.10.27 instead of 31.10.28. The Eels are willing to work with Zac and his agent to find an NRL club that wants to sign Zac in exchange for the Eels receiving appropriate value for its football program.

BREAKING: Ugly Lomax legal saga over as shock twist leaves Eels star in limbo

BREAKING: Ugly Lomax legal saga over as shock twist leaves Eels star in limbo

www.foxsports.com.au

So it will be Dragons v Storm without Lomax definitely.

Click to expand...

Honestly, Storm always come out fast the first few rounds. Give them the same field position as the Dogs had and they'll score plenty of tries.

Lomax for 2 years

Has to be a better winger or centre than anything we currently have

No Surrender said:

Lomax for 2 years

Has to be a better winger or centre than anything we currently have

Click to expand...

Sorry mate cant agree, that flog didn't realise what he had and decided to be a huge destabilising influence on the team. No thanks !!!

No Surrender said:

Lomax for 2 years

Has to be a better winger or centre than anything we currently have

Click to expand...

While Lomax might be "better" that what we have, his attitude stinks. The Dragons won't want him back after the dramas he caused us and now what he has done to the Eels. Poor Brad Arthur didn't even get to coach him and he was the one that had him over to his place for a baked dinner, cooked by Mrs Arthur to entice him to go to the Eels which we know happened.

I just wonder if Brad has a daughter and when the roll was called at school and the teacher would call out surnames - "Arthur" - a girl pops up and says "present Miss".

Sorry, I never was good at joking.

Justadragon said:

Sorry mate cant agree, that flog didn't realise what he had and decided to be a huge destabilising influence on the team. No thanks !!!

Click to expand...

Understand completely

We could give Parra, Lawrie.

Wondering whether the hiding he got in court humbles him.

Hope we play with a bit more variety in attack, some offloads and early shift out to the edges would be nice.

No Surrender said:

Lomax for 2 years

Has to be a better winger or centre than anything we currently have

Click to expand...

Flanno will never forgive Lomax for putting his hand up to play 5/8 when Flanno had already said that was Kyle's position.

I think Lomax as a 6 would run more than twice for 17 metres.

RufusRex said:

I think Lomax as a 6 would run more than twice for 17 metres.

Click to expand...

Not to make this a thread about you know who but I think Lomax would be much better. Brad Fittler started out as a centre.

anyway - the backs vs the dogs were pretty under-utilised ... may have been contributed to by the narrower field or a game plan that was all around "long season get the defence right"

We will need to score more than 2 tries against the storm to get within a point of them.

I think it was caryanis who said the game plan was to play conservatively. I assume it'll be the same against the storm and most teams.

I think we can play with a bit more freedom but still show respect to the footy. Smart offloads, shifts to edges & support play. Nothing complicated nor too risky but still has variety so oppo defences don't compress and load up like the dogs did.

We did it in our trials and looked good but hardly sighted against the dogs.

This game is an important early measure of where the squad stands mentally. Many people thought we were the stronger side last week and were unfortunate to concede late in the game. A win over the Storm in round 2 would signal that the team has made real progress in its mindset compared with previous years.

I'm not sure George they thought we were the stronger side but certainly the hard done by side.

We did everything we could with what we have and Flannos defensive mindset. ........can we find an attacking side as well, I dont think so.

dragonheart said:

I'm not sure George they thought we were the stronger side but certainly the hard done by side.

We did everything we could with what we have and Flannos defensive mindset. ........can we find an attacking side as well, I dont think so.

Click to expand...

I think our season will need to be built on defensive strength, D dragonheart, because our attacking capacity is limited. I’m hopeful Ennis can introduce a set of plays that can be applied at the appropriate moments during games, giving us the ability to produce a competitive score.

I think we are all on the same page and im sure the club are as well...... We have to attract 2 or 3 top x factor marquee backs.

dragonheart said:

I think we are all on the same page and im sure the club are as well...... We have to attract 2 or 3 top x factor marquee backs.

Click to expand...

Around the top where Melbourne will be, it looks like a very even competition. Unfortunately I just don't see us being around the top.

Yes, that game against the Dogs in Vegas should have been at least a draw as our best outcome. At the 1 min 40 sec mark to go in golden point we were about 52 metres out and Atkinson went for an unlikely field goal which went left of the uprights and Tracey caught it and the Dogs got the 7 tackle start on their 20 metre line and a little later we got penalised for stripping the ball held by Xerri and the result became a loss by 1 point instead of us sharing 1 point on the ladder. It was a risky attempt by Atkinson from that far out - the kick had the height and distance but not the direction. He could have ended up the hero but obviously wasn't to be. There was a time in the first half of golden point I think that Atko was closer to the goal posts to take a kick but the pass to him was slow so he had to pass the ball which then went to Holmes who I think was injured and he missed to the left as well. No luck unfortunately. The attack just wasn't really there on that night for us and in tight games, luck plays a big part in the final outcome.

Whoops, sorry guys. Posted the above on the wrong thread.