Round 27 v Raiders

[Gareth67]

Barry Beath was the person

I have only now gone back and actually read some of the previous posts where Beaths name appears . I didn’t realize that information was there .

My apologies to all .

 

[Dragon David]

justadragon said -

"In saying that though, there still needs to be a level of scrutiny on Young, what were his achievements when he was with us , then the cows and now back with us. You have to call a spade a spade at some stage."


Are they the same culprits missing tackles? If so, it is on Young to fix it and to warn them that if they continue to stuff it up, they are in reserves in the next few games or until Young knows that they have fixed their defence issues.

Young is the defence coach and he should know better because he played under Bennett whose theory is that great defence wins games in most cases. We lost so many games by big scores this year and so have so many other teams. The Rules have made the game faster, so unless a team is in tune for the match, they will tire sooner than they should and get run down or scored against many times over for a blowout score by a more in tune team.

For us to have been run down by the Raiders after we went way ahead on the scoreboard makes me wonder what allows our players to let the lead slip and that answer is that the Raiders lifted and defended better than us so that we couldn't score again and they had the momentum to actually score while our defence went south.

 

[since77]

justadragon said -

"In saying that though, there still needs to be a level of scrutiny on Young, what were his achievements when he was with us , then the cows and now back with us. You have to call a spade a spade at some stage."


Are they the same culprits missing tackles? If so, it is on Young to fix it and to warn them that if they continue to stuff it up, they are in reserves in the next few games or until Young knows that they have fixed their defence issues.

Young is the defence coach and he should know better because he played under Bennett whose theory is that great defence wins games in most cases. We lost so many games by big scores this year and so have so many other teams. The Rules have made the game faster, so unless a team is in tune for the match, they will tire sooner than they should and get run down or scored against many times over for a blowout score by a more in tune team.

For us to have been run down by the Raiders after we went way ahead on the scoreboard makes me wonder what allows our players to let the lead slip and that answer is that the Raiders lifted and defended better than us so that we couldn't score again and they had the momentum to actually score while our defence went south.

To me the defensive frailties this year are indicative of either one of two things:

1. The structures and systems are flawed. If this is the case the coach is responsible.

2. The players aren't up to the job and their attitude and application to the task is poor. If this is the case, the "guilty" players are not good enough and need to be replaced with better players.

I've said it quite a few times during the season and I just can't see any evidence that number 1 above is the actual problem. To my eyes it is always number 2 that is the issue. The defensive efforts made by some players this year were woeful and any defensive structure is going to struggle once the line is breached by what is in most cases simple one on one misses.

Personally I don't think anything gets fixed defensively until the roster is stronger and we have a core group of players who can perform the basic task of tackling. It boggles my mind that we have an NRL team in which a large percentage of the roster literally aren't good enough to defend at this level......

By all means bring in a new defensive coach and make DY the scapegoat. But I don't think it will fix the issue until we have better players on the field.

 

[Dragon David]

To me the defensive frailties this year are indicative of either one of two things:

1. The structures and systems are flawed. If this is the case the coach is responsible.

2. The players aren't up to the job and their attitude and application to the task is poor. If this is the case, the "guilty" players are not good enough and need to be replaced with better players.

I've said it quite a few times during the season and I just can't see any evidence that number 1 above is the actual problem. To my eyes it is always number 2 that is the issue. The defensive efforts made by some players this year were woeful and any defensive structure is going to struggle once the line is breached by what is in most cases simple one on one misses.

Personally I don't think anything gets fixed defensively until the roster is stronger and we have a core group of players who can perform the basic task of tackling. It boggles my mind that we have an NRL team in which a large percentage of the roster literally aren't good enough to defend at this level......

By all means bring in a new defensive coach and make DY the scapegoat. But I don't think it will fix the issue until we have better players on the field.

Very good analysis. Definitely agree about our defence improving with a better roster and that includes players who can think ahead and make the right decisions to make the tackle effective. Shane Flanagan did mention at the start of the year that the aim was to get the squad fitter and get the players to be more resilient and that those things should help our defence. Flanno was well aware of our defence deficiencies. Things didn't turn out that way though so I agree that from what I have seen, the players themselves were defensively poor.

Just as a side. After looking at some of the highlights, in that last raid by the Raiders with only a couple of minutes to go, Horsburgh kicks ahead and if bloody RFM didn't come in and hit the ball sideways with his knee, the ball would have gone to the young 5/8th of ours, LKT who might have caught the ball and we hold on to win rather than the ball being kneed back by RFM to Horburgh to catch? That was luck and not poor defence.

Dragons v Raiders – Round 27, 2024

The St George Illawarra Dragons and Canberra Raiders face off in Round 27 of the 2024 NRL Telstra Premiership

www.nrl.com

 

[justadragon]

Very good analysis. Definitely agree about our defence improving with a better roster and that includes players who can think ahead and make the right decisions to make the tackle effective. Shane Flanagan did mention at the start of the year that the aim was to get the squad fitter and get the players to be more resilient and that those things should help our defence. Flanno was well aware of our defence deficiencies. Things didn't turn out that way though so I agree that from what I have seen, the players themselves were defensively poor.

Just as a side. After looking at some of the highlights, in that last raid by the Raiders with only a couple of minutes to go, Horsburgh kicks ahead and if bloody RFM didn't come in and hit the ball sideways with his knee, the ball would have gone to the young 5/8th of ours, LKT who might have caught the ball and we hold on to win rather than the ball being kneed back by RFM to Horburgh to catch? That was luck and not poor defence.

Dragons v Raiders – Round 27, 2024

The St George Illawarra Dragons and Canberra Raiders face off in Round 27 of the 2024 NRL Telstra Premiership

www.nrl.com

The final nail in the coffin was Hunt gifting them a 7 tackle set.

 

[Dragon David]

The final nail in the coffin was Hunt gifting them a 7 tackle set.

Yes , you are right and with just a few minutes only left to play. There was that burst by Sloan towards the end if you watch the highlights and for all money and with some luck (there is that word again) we might have reached 30+ points and made it a win. But, in the end the Knights beat the Dolphins, it didn't end up a draw so all these ifs and buts go out the window for some fresh air into 2025.