Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
I'm not, but it's a good question. Especially when we are told by some posters that the coach can never be at fault when the players don't perform a (a more complex, assumed?) game plan, even when that plan is not at all evident from the kick off in a first half...
I think it's fair to suggest that the focus on physicality is higher at our club than at most other clubs.
True.
I didn't know we had the highest completion rate but probably shouldn't be surprised given the emphasis BA puts on it. But yeah, the two don't seem to go together. Unless we do a lot of safe offloads, and I can't think how you'd measure that exactly but it does look that way for the most part. Parraball happens but not so often.
It was Blocker that said it so its probably wrong.
I think he was right about the offloads at least.
Just checked stats on completions. We are second to Penrith but not much in it.
I'm sure it's always an option, but it's an option that doesn't include Moses or Gutherson so maybe whenever the runaround is on there are louder merkins calling the ball. In the middle of a game there is no time to stop and have a discussion. The man with the ball (in this case Mahoney) has to make a quick decision on the play. It also requires Paulo to be in position and onboard with the call.
We've had a couple of wins against better teams in recent years, so I'm sure we know what to do. The question is whether the better teams we're facing will let us do it.
Yes... but it could be (as others have said) that the coach instructed to not overplay that move this week, and for Mahoney to try and service other players (Moses/Gutherson) instead?
YUp and whoever does it better wins.whoever has a plan b and c might overcome it
Yeah, like mahoney to ja in the first half against souths
Of course we don't know, but some of us are better equipped to make good assessments on these things.
Well as you say, I don't know that they're wrong, but if they're a regular poster here then they probably are. I'm just playing the percentages.
I think when our attack has been poor it hasn't been the game plan at fault. Just like when we win big it hasn't been tactics that made the difference. I think the types of footy nerds that spend time discussing this stuff on social media are inclined to see tactics as some sort of magic bullet. When you don't win the ruck, whatever you do tactically will look like garbage. Then smartarses will pass judgement on the tactical knowledge of a bloke who's coached over 100 NRL wins.
So after all of that the comment from another poster which you indictaed must be wrong, wasn't necessarily wrong at all. Cheers.
That was the strangest game plan / first half interpretation of a game plan I've seen for a while. And a lack of willingness to adapt or try and change (by on field leadership, or trainer instruction) during the half, when it clearly wasn't working.
Or it was all reeds doing and he didn't listen to the leadership
Well I don’t know the comment you’re referring to, but rarely am I certain about anything. So if I gave the impression that I thought somebody was 100% wrong about something it would be because that’s the only style of argument half these nitwits understand. So where I can give an assessment in a professional setting that something was likely or probable, and merkins would understand what I mean, here ‘probably’ will doubtless be met with “So you have no idea?!?” because small minds don’t cope well with uncertainty.
Good to know. Cheers.
