Cronks comment on training

[ACTPanthers]

Yep, I don’t watch Storm.

I honestly doubt you watch football at all...

 

[Cockosh]

No. That’s stupid. You should leave the solution finding to others. Just acknowledge there is a problem called wrestling.

Yes it was stupid. Would you believe me if I said it was tongue in cheek? I thought this thread was too but sadly you are serious.

 

[T-Boon]

Maybe the neutral zone should go from 10 metres to 20 metres.

 

[simmo05]

Just an idea but should they ban forwards from tackling? Only allow backs to tackle to take away defence focus. Not centres though because they are big these days.

They suspended garner and kikau, they are trying to stop forwards from tackling!

 

[mave]

There would pretty much be no such thing as a quick play-the-ball.

Bingo. Well not supersonic quick, anyway.
Let's leave the touch footy enthusiasts to their touch footy.

 

[Cockosh]

They suspended garner and kikau, they are trying to stop forwards from tackling!

Hahaha. So true. Maybe the nrl are in here getting ideas. I can see tomorrow’s headline “training ban”

 

[BennyV]

I won’t believe this until I find out how many of Mary’s 14 hours per day are spent on attack and defence.

 

[mongoose]

Its time the NRL introduce multi-ball, lets see Cronk and his Roosters defend that!

 

[Saxon]

They just have the best players and knowledge of how to exploit the ruck.
It is a copy cat league full of crap coaches

Maybe you should find better coaches then?

 

[Valheru]

Maybe the neutral zone should go from 10 metres to 20 metres.

50m IMO and then every 10m breached in opposition territory, the defensive team loses a player to compensate for the neutral zone decreasing.

So if a team is attacking 10m out from the try line the defence only gets 9 players.

 

[southwalesrabbitoh]

He admited on a show I was watching through the week that at the teams he has played with training is 70% focused on defense and 30% on attack. This is the 2 leading teams in the comp with most of the attacking talent.
I've got to be honest, this shows up on the playing field. It is a good explanation for why defense has continued to strangle attack for so long and why the referee has become the most influential creator of opportunities on the field.
I think if a club goes out and recruits the best halfback and fullback in the game they should feel a bit of an obligation to contribute towards the entertainment of the game.
The point is if Melbourne and Roosters are working on defence almost twice as much as they are working on attack what chance do we have of the code addressing the current issues we have. Something has to be done.

During the 2013 World Cup, one of the Aussies said that they're spending 80% of their training time on defence.

 

[DeeJ]

They more train more defence, but players have to have alot more attacking skills and abilities these days.

Fullbacks need to be 5/8ths, hooks are halves who are as as fast as backs, props all have to have an offload, second rowers need to be as fast as centres, wingers jump and catch like AFL players and need to dive and score in impossible situations.

The days of the 50 tackle, no hit up lock and other one dimensional players are over.

 

[Rhino_NQ]

The days of the 50 tackle, no hit up lock and other one dimensional players are over.

The rise and fall of Shaun fensom during the changing of eras sums this up perfectly.

Elijah Taylor is another example. Holds. The record for tackles on a match but can't buy himself a regular starting spot

 

[simmo05]

Hahaha. So true. Maybe the nrl are in here getting ideas. I can see tomorrow’s headline “training ban”

Maybe tboon is greenburg?

 

[simmo05]

But to agree on one point, having a few select coaches, let alone any coaches, on a rules committee is f**king diabolical

 

[Captain Apollo]

He admited on a show I was watching through the week that at the teams he has played with training is 70% focused on defense and 30% on attack. This is the 2 leading teams in the comp with most of the attacking talent.
I've got to be honest, this shows up on the playing field. It is a good explanation for why defense has continued to strangle attack for so long and why the referee has become the most influential creator of opportunities on the field.
I think if a club goes out and recruits the best halfback and fullback in the game they should feel a bit of an obligation to contribute towards the entertainment of the game.
The point is if Melbourne and Roosters are working on defence almost twice as much as they are working on attack what chance do we have of the code addressing the current issues we have. Something has to be done.

You really don't know much about the history of the game then. It was identified more than 50 years ago that physically and mentally, the hardest part of the game is defence. Attack is reasonably easy but defence needs training to get players to be willing to do the hard work. Look at the Dragons teams of the great 1956-66 era, they were great attackers but they knew that to win premierships they had to be good defenders. Their training focused on defence and circuit training to build up stamina.

Jack Gibson codified this when he became a first grade coach in 1967. He took a team that had run dead last in 1966, with virtually the same personnel in 1967 to the semi-finals by focusing on defence and tackling technique. Read his biography by Andrew Webster, he preached defence and fitness as the cornerstone of all his teams. People look at the 1974-75 Roosters and the 1981-82-83 Eels as great attacking teams, but people forget what great defensive sides they also were. Heck John Brass tells the story of how pissed off Jack was after one loss early in the 1975 season that he put a clamp on their attack till a few weeks out fomr the semis because he questioned their desire to do the hard work on the field.

Running 10-20 metres with the ball and throwing a few passes is easy. Try making 2-3 tackles where you have to chase after a player for 20-30 metres, or tackle someone twice your own size to stop a try - that is much harder. Gibson recognised that, as others before him and after him have.

 

[southwalesrabbitoh]

They just have the best players and knowledge of how to exploit the ruck.
It is a copy cat league full of crap coaches (mainly from Bellamys coaching tree) which means all teams are spending only about 30% of their time on attacking skills because the rules and refereeing favour defense.

I wonder what the All Blacks do? I reckon they spend 50% on defence but i reckon 25% on the breakdown, but that is really a part of defence, so i reckon most RU teams spend more time on defence too, nowadays, obviously back in the 90's they spent more time on attack, well they did up here according to Will Greenwood.

 

[T-Boon]

You really don't know much about the history of the game then. It was identified more than 50 years ago that physically and mentally, the hardest part of the game is defence. Attack is reasonably easy but defence needs training to get players to be willing to do the hard work. Look at the Dragons teams of the great 1956-66 era, they were great attackers but they knew that to win premierships they had to be good defenders. Their training focused on defence and circuit training to build up stamina.

Jack Gibson codified this when he became a first grade coach in 1967. He took a team that had run dead last in 1966, with virtually the same personnel in 1967 to the semi-finals by focusing on defence and tackling technique. Read his biography by Andrew Webster, he preached defence and fitness as the cornerstone of all his teams. People look at the 1974-75 Roosters and the 1981-82-83 Eels as great attacking teams, but people forget what great defensive sides they also were. Heck John Brass tells the story of how pissed off Jack was after one loss early in the 1975 season that he put a clamp on their attack till a few weeks out fomr the semis because he questioned their desire to do the hard work on the field.

Running 10-20 metres with the ball and throwing a few passes is easy. Try making 2-3 tackles where you have to chase after a player for 20-30 metres, or tackle someone twice your own size to stop a try - that is much harder. Gibson recognised that, as others before him and after him have.

It is different now. They didn’t know how to tackle back then and had to learn and natural footballers dominated in attack.
We have had 15 years of dominance in the wrestle with attack pretty butt ugly and getting worse and referees getting more influential because nobody can create a break.
Now we hear the best of the best are spending twice as much time working on defense as attack. You can be sure working on defensive structures is code for “up to no good”. Finding ways to twist in the tackle slow down the play the ball etc. “The dark arts”.
If people are okay with that junk then in my book those people are not fans of the game and are happy to see it die.
If Jack was around today he would be preaching what they have been preaching in the NFL for years. People want to see points and attacking football. Sports where teams win by parking the bus f**king suck and should die.

 

[AJB1102]

Yep, I don’t watch Storm.

Then how can you comment on how they play?

 

[This Year?]

Maybe they shouldn't be allowed to train at all.
Imagine the entertainment!

It'd be like watching the dragons play the titans every week. Surely none of us deserve that kind of punishment. Do we?