Football Analysis Only Zone

[The Damo]

That's far too simplistic.

So you would have four forwards on for how long before you took them off, and how long would you leave them on the bench before you bought them back on?

If the starting forwards played 20 minutes, the benchies would play for 40 (+halftime) then the starting forwards play the last 20?

Also as far as I can tell, Bellamy, Bennett, Cleary, Henry, Arthur, Hasler, macguire all carry a utility on the bench who generally gets limited minutes. Not saying Our bench use can't be better, would prefer to see some more minutes for a fast utility. But it's same principle used by all the top coaches.

 

[possm]

For me the big worry is our game seems to be moving away from how we were playing earlier in the year and we are playing closer to last year.

At the start of the year our forwards were a relentless wave punching it back in behind the ruck, in the Cronulla game they were running wide of the play the ball and moving a lot more sideways. I know Cronulla were holding down and wrestling but early in the year one of the impressive things was how good the forwards were at staying on their stomachs and playing it quickly.

I also think that we need our secondrowers to be running off short balls using an unders line rather than using them as decoys and shovelling out the back all the time. We have reverted back to the big backline second man plays, double blocks of last year and it still doesn't work for us. Start of the year we picked up some tries from forwards running hard off the dummy half near the line, we are now pushing it wide all the time.

I do not like the consistency in our halves (McCrone and Widdop) with regard to game management and playmaking. It looks like our playmakers want to dictate where the runner needs to run rather than letting the runner find the right running line and then pick them up. Its like we are trying to run the plays exactly like at training without the ability to modify the play on the fly as required. Also, we are not controlling the flow of the game anymore. Kicks too long, kicks in the wrong places, wrong kick for the situation. Looks like we are trying to score all the time rather than building pressure and then taking the opportunities as they arise.

The thing I dislike most about our defence is the team has started standing back, the line speed early in the year was brilliant but now has started to resemble last year.

In short most of what I think needs to be addressed is attitude and commitment, and I don't mean they aren't trying. What I'm getting at is the guts and grit to do small things, to work your butt off and to understand you need to earn respect by being in the battle the whole game. Workhorses vs show ponies.

I agree with you Carlton and have been predicting such things since round one. The 'power game' is fine if you have a long list of forward playing in the 17 and reserve grade who can be rotated each few weeks to take care of the exhausting task the power game demands. Our boys have played 13 continuous games of 'power game' without relief and it is showing.

Good strategy to gain a good place on the ladder for a coaching extension but serves little else; maybe it lifts the value of players negotiating for a contract extension or a contract with another club. However, the cost of such a strategy is made clear towards the back end of the season when fatigue sets in - as in 2015 when the Dragons were the keeper of the great defensive wall until they became burned out or injured. Fatigue was prevalent for the backend of 2015 and results clearly showed the fallacy of such a strategy.

Any success Mary has achieved has been short lived and achieved mainly on the back of a super fit team being asked to do the near impossible rather than some creative game plans individually devised to explore opposition weaknesses and at the same time focus on our teams strengths.

 

[Dragonslayer]

Yes he does carry in the wrong hand but he's not the 1st nor will he be the last.
Interesting to see how many tries he gets of gathering dropped ball, intercepts (which does bring out the worst in defence in some players) and out jumping players.
When you look at the Storm wingers, Corey Oates, Radradra etc they score tries in a very different manner so the Titans obviously had a style of play for Mc Donald which we can't emulate and IMO he looks ordinary in our side compared to his highlights.

For mine Nene is a left winger. Its really about comfort and what I mean by that is that on his preferred left side he actually leaps from the left leg first which is your leading leg on that side. So in reality your left leg is your springboard so to speak. Change to the right side and now your right leg becomes the dominant one which in Nene's case is not his springboard leg. You see it when there is a kick to him because (a) his body is in the wrong position (b) he tends to prop and leap from his preferred leg (c) he looks to bat back becuase he's not balanced on the right leg when he lands.

It's such a mystery to me that McGregor won't swap Nene and Nighty and play them on their preferred sides. Basic management really. The only thing i can think of is that most (not all) tall wingets play on the left sides for their teams and McGregor thinks by having Nene on the right will counter that. Hasn't worked so far.

 

[SBD82]

For mine Nene is a left winger. Its really about comfort and what I mean by that is that on his preferred left side he actually leaps from the left leg first which is your leading leg on that side. So in reality your left leg is your springboard so to speak. Change to the right side and now your right leg becomes the dominant one which in Nene's case is not his springboard leg. You see it when there is a kick to him because (a) his body is in the wrong position (b) he tends to prop and leap from his preferred leg (c) he looks to bat back becuase he's not balanced on the right leg when he lands.

It's such a mystery to me that McGregor won't swap Nene and Nighty and play them on their preferred sides. Basic management really. The only thing i can think of is that most (not all) tall wingets play on the left sides for their teams and McGregor thinks by having Nene on the right will counter that. Hasn't worked so far.

I'd never considered the leaping leg of a winger.

Great post.

 

[SBD82]

The intensity of the game, quality of the opposition and the interchanges by the opposition coach will all have some bearing on when you make a change.
As I said Mary wants to pigeon hole it which you simply can't do.
Our biggest issue is that when we make a change we do not have a noticeable lift in intensity nor do we inject an impact player we just basically substitute with a workhorse.
In saying that Sele is trying to bring something else and people who bagged him for last weeks game are far too critical as he is a young guy learning and good on him for not being robotic.
He will learn and become an impact player in the near future I am sure.

Agreed that flexibility is important, but I think there should also be some structure so the forwards have an idea of how much energy they are going to need in the tank eg a bloke who is about to have a rest needs to know so that he can push himself for a big final hit up.

With the substitutions being workhorses, the alternative would be to change the prop rotation- eg move sims to start and Vaughan to bench (or ah mau/packer).

This might be worth trying but I think the impact of Vaughan and packer starting and the platform they lay in the first twenty is the reason we are running the prop rotation as is.

 

[watatank]

I do not like the consistency in our halves (McCrone and Widdop) with regard to game management and playmaking. It looks like our playmakers want to dictate where the runner needs to run rather than letting the runner find the right running line and then pick them up. Its like we are trying to run the plays exactly like at training without the ability to modify the play on the fly as required. Also, we are not controlling the flow of the game anymore. Kicks too long, kicks in the wrong places, wrong kick for the situation. Looks like we are trying to score all the time rather than building pressure and then taking the opportunities as they arise

Good post but as for the quoted area the playmakers are the leaders and should absolutely be dictating where they want their runners to be. Especially when our halves will be the highest paid players next year and one is still here and our captain. I get that we seem premeditated and the approach needs to be changed, though

 

[Carlton]

Good post but as for the quoted area the playmakers are the leaders and should absolutely be dictating where they want their runners to be. Especially when our halves will be the highest paid players next year and one is still here and our captain. I get that we seem premeditated and the approach needs to be changed, though

I do not believe that a playmaker should be premeditatedly putting the ball where he wants his runners. Yes, he should be calling the play but he also needs to allow the runner to adjust his line based on the defences response and give him the ball, not dictate the exact line the runner must run. This is one aspect of playing what's in front of you. If you watch Thurston he is very clear what he wants his runner to do but then allows them to run the gap and he finds them. It is the playmakers role to call the play, it is the runners role to find the gap and hit it, it is the playmakers role to find them.

This is not exactly the same thing but how many times have you seen the sweeping backline play and we run it even though the decoy runners are moving into space but never modify the play to use them.

 

[Old Timer]

Good post but as for the quoted area the playmakers are the leaders and should absolutely be dictating where they want their runners to be. Especially when our halves will be the highest paid players next year and one is still here and our captain. I get that we seem premeditated and the approach needs to be changed, though

Thurston is the expert at this and he sets it all up a few plays in advance.
He is like a great orchestra conductor and in 2010 Soward had in spades as well.
The good halves have great hands and can throw the soft short ball whilst the opposition think it could be the long cut out.
Those are not skills that we currently have and as a result we are predictable re the running lines of our back rowers and FB.

 

[Belta]

Carlton said; ...Also, we are not controlling the flow of the game anymore. Kicks too long, kicks in the wrong places, wrong kick for the situation. Looks like we are trying to score all the time rather than building pressure and then taking the opportunities as they arise..."

Nailed it. The game is all about momentum, a poor kicking game, defensive lapses and drop balls are momentum killers and definitely proved costly against the dogs.

 

[Dragons 09]

I'm still stuck on the 4 forward bench. I can't see how it would work with 8 interchanges and giving our very very good props enough game time. Have you got an idea about this?

I don't think you can premeditate something like this to be honest, it's just about balance. If we want to play a power game, then we need the team to be balanced towards that objective and i just don't think a back who gets 10 minutes of game time is the right balance for the game plan we have adopted this year.

Yes, i agree, you want to give your best players the maximum amount of game time possible, but the correct amount of game time (particularly for our forwards) is the "quality minutes" that each player is physically able to give you and that will differ depending on your opposition and on how you control field position. If you play the Storm for example, the way they hold a player up for a period of time before twisting them and putting them on their back and then wrestling them on the ground, is a total energy zapper for the guy who just took the hit up. Where as a team like Souths or the Roosters, while they have big forward packs, they tend to go for big solid shots but are not as taxing as say the Storm. Therefore, our forwards would start feeling fatigued at different times depending on who we are playing. Also, if we are failing to control field position, our forwards would start to feel the pinch sooner than if we were playing on the front foot. There just isn't a single premeditated rotation plan that works across all scenarios.

I could be totally wrong and we may come out and dominate Parra which would would wipe this theory completely out of the water, but I honestly think Packer and Vaughan are starting to show some cracks due to such a dominant and physically draining start to the season. With these guys knowing exactly how many minutes they are going to have to contribute each week before they get a spell, i think they might be starting to pace themselves rather than just ripping in like at the start of the season when they were fresh as a daisy. An extra forward on the bench would help to support these guys and give them the comfort to go like the clappers until they start to fatigue, with the knowledge we have the support on the bench to give them a spell at the appropriate time. There are a lot smarter guys than me looking after selections, interchange use, fitness monitoring etc and therefore these guys are the ones to adequately rotate a 4 x forward bench appropriately. The rotation won't look the same every week, but it can be done and needs to be done (obviously my opinion only) if we want to continue the power game.

 

[WardyRedV]

I don't see why our forwards should be tiring halfway through the year compared to other teams. The power game we play relies on us getting on the front foot and attacking the holes that come up as a consequence of the opposition being on the back foot. If they are falling behind wouldn't that be the conditioning teams fault? Every other forward runs at the opposition in order to set a platform for their backs, why should ours tire halfway through the comp? I thought the last couple of weeks it hasn't been put forward pack tiring but more our backs trying to be way flashier than they are (maybe due to the fact we were the top attacking team two or three weeks ago and it got to their heads). Maybe I'm not wrapping my head around this "power game" but our forwards still seem to make the metres but our backs are not executing properly. Seems we are going around the opposition way too often.

 

[WardyRedV]

Although I just checked the stats from our last two games and it seems we beats the tigers considerably in metres gained but still couldn't turn it into points. While against the bulldogs we weren't to far behind in total runs but lacked in the metres gained stats.

 

[BringTheNoise]

That's far too simplistic.

So you would have four forwards on for how long before you took them off, and how long would you leave them on the bench before you bought them back on?

If the starting forwards played 20 minutes, the benchies would play for 40 (+halftime) then the starting forwards play the last 20?

That's pretty much how our front row rotation works at the moment - Vaughan and Packer play the first 25 or so minutes before subbing off for Ah Mau and Sims and then swapping back over about 15-20mins into 2nd half.

Personally I'm not a fan of a pre-planned interchange - I think it should go with the flow of the game. If we're dominating possession in the first half then leave starting front rowers out there. If they spend first half tackling and back peddling then make the interchange sooner. I actually started a thread about our interchange after we got beaten by Parramatta because I felt like that was one of the issues - we were on the wrong end of possession and Parra were running our middle forwards ragged and making a lot of metres off the back of it. We needed fresh legs but Mary persisted with his pre-planned 25min change.

For what it's worth I'm not even a huge fan of the interchange anymore. The NRL looked to reduce the number of interchanges to open the game up a bit more for attacking footy, but with the HIA it has pretty much gone back to where it was as players and coaches know how to utilise it for a free interchange. I'd like to see it go right down to 4 interchanges per match. We would see front rowers playing 65-80min games each week, get rid of a lot of the wrestle and open the game right up for the more exciting attacking players.

 

[The Damo]

I don't see why our forwards should be tiring halfway through the year compared to other teams. The power game we play relies on us getting on the front foot and attacking the holes that come up as a consequence of the opposition being on the back foot. If they are falling behind wouldn't that be the conditioning teams fault? Every other forward runs at the opposition in order to set a platform for their backs, why should ours tire halfway through the comp? I thought the last couple of weeks it hasn't been put forward pack tiring but more our backs trying to be way flashier than they are (maybe due to the fact we were the top attacking team two or three weeks ago and it got to their heads). Maybe I'm not wrapping my head around this "power game" but our forwards still seem to make the metres but our backs are not executing properly. Seems we are going around the opposition way too often.

Spot on. This worry about our forwards wearing out as we're playing a 'power game' is frankly a bit silly. Every team wants their forwards to play a 'power game'. Basically everyone has 2 props a backrower and a hooker/utility on the bench. You'd be hard pressed to name a team who don't want their props doing what ours have been doing. Our biggest problem was missing Widdop and duges, and now it's pushing offloads, poor linespeed and completions, and McCrone reverting back to crap particularly his kicking.

 

[watatank]

I do not believe that a playmaker should be premeditatedly putting the ball where he wants his runners. Yes, he should be calling the play but he also needs to allow the runner to adjust his line based on the defences response and give him the ball, not dictate the exact line the runner must run. This is one aspect of playing what's in front of you. If you watch Thurston he is very clear what he wants his runner to do but then allows them to run the gap and he finds them. It is the playmakers role to call the play, it is the runners role to find the gap and hit it, it is the playmakers role to find them.

This is not exactly the same thing but how many times have you seen the sweeping backline play and we run it even though the decoy runners are moving into space but never modify the play to use them.

For your example that's just bad football. The playmakers should already recognise and pass the ball short. If the playmakers were just concerned on where they want their intended receiver to be then they're not really being playmakers. They should be looking at what they need to create space and then exploit it, whether thats getting defence on the back foot, compressed or keeping them interested enough they don't just slide out to the winger. The ball runner needs to be where they are needed, and there can be multiple players giving options. The playmaker has to be the one to make the correct play.

 

[WardyRedV]

I

That's pretty much how our front row rotation works at the moment - Vaughan and Packer play the first 25 or so minutes before subbing off for Ah Mau and Sims and then swapping back over about 15-20mins into 2nd half.

Personally I'm not a fan of a pre-planned interchange - I think it should go with the flow of the game. If we're dominating possession in the first half then leave starting front rowers out there. If they spend first half tackling and back peddling then make the interchange sooner. I actually started a thread about our interchange after we got beaten by Parramatta because I felt like that was one of the issues - we were on the wrong end of possession and Parra were running our middle forwards ragged and making a lot of metres off the back of it. We needed fresh legs but Mary persisted with his pre-planned 25min change.

For what it's worth I'm not even a huge fan of the interchange anymore. The NRL looked to reduce the number of interchanges to open the game up a bit more for attacking footy, but with the HIA it has pretty much gone back to where it was as players and coaches know how to utilise it for a free interchange. I'd like to see it go right down to 4 interchanges per match. We would see front rowers playing 65-80min games each week, get rid of a lot of the wrestle and open the game right up for the more exciting attacking players.

Just had a look through our interchanges over the season and it seems packer has consistently been coming off between the 21-26 minute mark. Vaughan on the other hand started the season with similar minutes before recently having his interchange bumped up closer to the 31 minute mark. This could explain why his impact is being lessened over the course of the game ( a suggestion merely). He also seems to bring them back in between the 51-55 and 60-65 min marks respectably. He does seem in some games to switch jdb for sele anywhere between the 41-55 mins but has also switched him out for front rowers as well. I didn't include the games with forced injuries however. Does seem his interchange isn't like clockwork as some are convinced though.

 

[Dragonslayer]

I think we just hitting a plateau stage and we are as fit as we can be at this present time, however, goung into rd 20 and beyond is when you want the momentum to build again. I think you'll find we are still on the front foot its just that wr cant convert that into points in the last 2 games.
The Dogs game was dominated by our defense which indirectly proves we are a fit team. If you look at the stats and see McInnes with over 60 tackles and most forwards over 40 tackles its not unexpected we would caputulate late in the game. Add to thst the Dogs only scored 16 not 36.
In saying all the above this weeks game is going to he tougher than we think we need to get on the front foot frombthe kick off and then maybe our stats will show a more fluid range in attack.

 

[WardyRedV]

I think we just hitting a plateau stage and we are as fit as we can be at this present time, however, goung into rd 20 and beyond is when you want the momentum to build again. I think you'll find we are still on the front foot its just that wr cant convert that into points in the last 2 games.
The Dogs game was dominated by our defense which indirectly proves we are a fit team. If you look at the stats and see McInnes with over 60 tackles and most forwards over 40 tackles its not unexpected we would caputulate late in the game. Add to thst the Dogs only scored 16 not 36.
In saying all the above this weeks game is going to he tougher than we think we need to get on the front foot frombthe kick off and then maybe our stats will show a more fluid range in attack.

Agree 100%. We are also still the 3rd best defensive team in the comp. Maybe Mary has had them in a more defensive mind set at training after some serious defensive blunders. We have seen it in the past two season where our teams get criticised for our poor attack, only for us to come it with some attacking flair but then leak more points. Seems like we got our attack down so they focussed on defense which makes our attack suffer. This is all just a theory I've had since last year and I have no idea what they do at training.

 

[Carlton]

For your example that's just bad football. The playmakers should already recognise and pass the ball short. If the playmakers were just concerned on where they want their intended receiver to be then they're not really being playmakers. They should be looking at what they need to create space and then exploit it, whether thats getting defence on the back foot, compressed or keeping them interested enough they don't just slide out to the winger. The ball runner needs to be where they are needed, and there can be multiple players giving options. The playmaker has to be the one to make the correct play.

I agree with you Watatank but that's what I think a lot of the problem is with our playmakers and its something that's been happening for a long time. I don't think they assess options, they run a predetermined play regardless of whats unfolding. If, you're a runner and you see your defender slide too far across and you straightened your run slightly to be on the inside of your defender, I would expect that a playmaker could cope with this and give you the appropriate ball for the slightly changed line you're running.

 

[denis preston]

I don't really think that a "power " game takes that much more out of you than a normal game. It is the completions and time without the ball that is the killer.Even if this was the case time for Host to play big minutes in support for the forwards and for the team to value the time in possession.The wrestling by other sides kills our momentum as well.

The game against the Eels is going to be very interesting.If we can't dominate their pack it really will be a sign that something is not right.