Sack Griffin

[Walpole]

Some examples of what a properly coached team can do when they are given shape and structure to attack with...

Watch the depth they set up with. The 15, 11 and 3 only job is to hold up the inside defenders enough to provide the room on the edge. They all know they aren't getting the ball and their primary job is to keep the opposition interested, for that split second, to create the space on the edge



Watch a team that actually encourages the 6 and 7 to link up. Wilton knows his job is to hold up Townsend and then Kennedy comes from outback to create the two on one. Wilton knew exactly what he had to do and that was to keep Townsend interested long enough, and he did, and Townsend couldn't make the tackle in the end. Again the depth and shape creates the space...



And then setting up with depth, like that's where they are going, they choose to hit Wilton on a lead run. Slight variations to keep the opposition guessing



I defy anybody to go back and watch the games we've played the last two and a half years and find where we have been on attack and set up with this kind of depth and shape. I'm not joking when i say that you'd probably be able to count them on one hand. It's no surprise to me that Fitzgibbon, who spent so many years under Robinson, is bringing this to the Sharks. I guarantee if we had managed to sign him as coach we wouldn't be producing the garbage in attack that we are at the moment.

And sure people will say we don't have the speed. But it's not just the speed it's the shape the pulls apart the defence.

There's a reason our edge's get the ball with the defence on top of them and no room to move. Our attack is flat, uninspired and directionless. Even when the opportunity arises we don't set up to strip an opposition edge. We are coached to play "Ben ball". Just get the ball to him, wherever he goes, and cross your fingers.

It's not good enough and the time for Hook to go has long come and gone...

Good analysis. Reminds me of the way we used to play from 2009-11.

 

[Wolfgang90]

hope it's Sullivan & Sloan as their skillsets are more valuable imo. x2

Yea, I really hope Amone proves me wrong but he looks like a player that makes himself look good without really improving others around him (not like in a selfish way but that's just his style at the moment). He had a really nice cut out pass for a try. I hope we see more of that from him moving forward as those plays make others better too.

When Sullivan was in the team, he was directing others around him to change angle runs, hand offs, taking tackles when passes weren't the correct option etc. He was doing things to make others better, which I love to see. Same with Sloan v Roosters in his ability to open running lanes for Suli & Moga.

I haven't seen that sort of stuff from Amone consistently, I hope we see it in the future but he might not be the right fit for this team. I'm happy to give him a longer chance to get it right because those years spent playing football with Sullivan & Sloan is a massive competitive advantage. We nearly saw it work with Amone grubber to Sloan in the Anzac day clash which would've won us the match.

 

[Mojo]

Good analysis. Reminds me of the way we used to play from 2009-11.

Exactly. When did a deep backline go out of fashion? It's a staple component of RL. It's the whip like momentum that has always been difficult to defend. Backs standing flat in attack is embarrassing and pointless and so easy to defend.

 

[steerlerbab]

I'd like to know why so many on here would settle for a rookie or untried coach. For me, Hasler is the only available coach that could turn this basketcase of a club around.

I doubt Hasler would come in as caretaker. He should be probably be negotiated for next year and beyond so that he can start planning and managing roster. Remember, It took Bennet a year to set up Dolphins roster. No point in getting Hasler in OCT as most top players have signed by then. In the meantime one of our lower grade coaches or assistants can run the reminder of this season.

 

[Wolfgang90]

Agree. I've never rated Amone (I think he's way too slow for 5/8) - except I'd love to see his combo with Sullivan at 7 at 1st grade level - if it works, great; if not, I'd drop Amone. I think Hunt is a 5/8 (I actually don't think he's a great hooker - he's a very good freelancer when he's in a great (e.g.; rep level) footy side). I also agree that what Lomax lacks for FB is speed - but he's a big body, he's a different player when he has an opportunity to hit a gap - he's not evasive enough to break the line; he needs to be put through it or run into a gap. Liddle and Hunt sharing 9 would be fairly deadly too IMO.

Fair points, imo Hooker allows Hunt to use his greatest strength which is ad-lib footy through his running game. That really stands out in rep teams when opportunities to attack are fewer. Lomax could be a handy 13 imo, some of his skills tend to translate well to modern day 13s

 

[Phantom V]

Good analysis. Reminds me of the way we used to play from 2009-11.

When you have the ball in Rugby League, it’s all about creating numbers and deception. Problem is when Hunt and Amone get the ball our outside backs are the ones left scratching their heads!

 

[Hound of Dracula]

I'd like to know why so many on here would settle for a rookie or untried coach. For me, Hasler is the only available coach that could turn this basketcase of a club around.

Though Hasler as coach makes me shiver
Like a dressing room door all a quiver
It is pretty grim
But they will play for him
And Grand Finals he can deliver

 

[Old Timer]

Fair points, imo Hooker allows Hunt to use his greatest strength which is ad-lib footy through his running game. That really stands out in rep teams when opportunities to attack are fewer. Lomax could be a handy 13 imo, some of his skills tend to translate well to modern day 13s

I've been saying for years Lomax is an out and out 13.

Aggressive, tough, good pace for a 13 but not enough for a 3 or 4, some ball playing skills and an offload and is a far better front on tackler than when he has to slide.

More of a Brad Clyde type than a Radley.

 

[Dragon David]

Exactly. When did a deep backline go out of fashion? It's a staple component of RL. It's the whip like momentum that has always been difficult to defend. Backs standing flat in attack is embarrassing and pointless and so easy to defend.

We played too much with our players all bunched up against the Dogs even when we had 13 to 12 guys. Why the F didn't Hunt get his guys to spread out and run onto the ball rather than getting the ball at slow speed and running one out? No thinkers in our team.

 

[Mojo]

I've been saying for years Lomax is an out and out 13.

Aggressive, tough, good pace for a 13 but not enough for a 3 or 4, some ball playing skills and an offload and is a far better front on tackler than when he has to slide.

More of a Brad Clyde type than a Radley.

Worth a try.
OT: What do you think of Sloan as a FB - or alternative backline positions?

 

[Illusion]

I've been saying for years Lomax is an out and out 13.

Aggressive, tough, good pace for a 13 but not enough for a 3 or 4, some ball playing skills and an offload and is a far better front on tackler than when he has to slide.

More of a Brad Clyde type than a Radley.

x2

 

[JohnnoMcJohnno]

Some examples of what a properly coached team can do when they are given shape and structure to attack with...

Watch the depth they set up with. The 15, 11 and 3 only job is to hold up the inside defenders enough to provide the room on the edge. They all know they aren't getting the ball and their primary job is to keep the opposition interested, for that split second, to create the space on the edge



Watch a team that actually encourages the 6 and 7 to link up. Wilton knows his job is to hold up Townsend and then Kennedy comes from outback to create the two on one. Wilton knew exactly what he had to do and that was to keep Townsend interested long enough, and he did, and Townsend couldn't make the tackle in the end. Again the depth and shape creates the space...



And then setting up with depth, like that's where they are going, they choose to hit Wilton on a lead run. Slight variations to keep the opposition guessing



I defy anybody to go back and watch the games we've played the last two and a half years and find where we have been on attack and set up with this kind of depth and shape. I'm not joking when i say that you'd probably be able to count them on one hand. It's no surprise to me that Fitzgibbon, who spent so many years under Robinson, is bringing this to the Sharks. I guarantee if we had managed to sign him as coach we wouldn't be producing the garbage in attack that we are at the moment.

And sure people will say we don't have the speed. But it's not just the speed it's the shape the pulls apart the defence.

There's a reason our edge's get the ball with the defence on top of them and no room to move. Our attack is flat, uninspired and directionless. Even when the opportunity arises we don't set up to strip an opposition edge. We are coached to play "Ben ball". Just get the ball to him, wherever he goes, and cross your fingers.

It's not good enough and the time for Hook to go has long come and gone...

You could have used Souths vs Brisbane or Eels vs Knights as equally good examples. Heck, you could have even used Wests Tigers as an example. All these sides can construct a backline move, and create some space for their faster guys to exploit. We can't. Our attack is based on one man out, run straight into the oppositions middle defence, and then kick on the last while everyone stands around. Starting to wonder what's the point of following this side.

 

[justadragon]

We all said at the beginning of Hook's tenure that he was probably the best of a bad lot, as a matter of fact we assume he is the lowest paid coach in the NRL, I think the figure was around the $450k / yr mark. He did have a rep and we knew about it, we knew he was old school, wanted to have discipline brought back in the side. We got what we paid for, a non modern day coach who is very stubborn with his ideas. Here we are 3 years down the gurgler with nothing to show for it except possibly a wooden spoon. And for those of you who consistently bring up the wonderful thing he has done with our salary cap, can you please show me how this has emanated into the Dragons having this money to buy a raft of wonderful players that all want to come to the Dragons because its such a great club.

 

[Old Timer]

Worth a try.
OT: What do you think of Sloan as a FB - or alternative backline positions?

IMO all the hype re his attacking skills is undermined by his obvious inabilities in so many areas both decision making and technique.

His only potential position is wing and he could potentially develop along the lines of JAC or Nathan Blacklock both of whom had many faults early on in their careers but with a simplified role became great players.

Sloan has hypnotised many in here for years with his junior and lower grade attacking success but the many faults that were ignored were soon identified by good opposition coaches and playmakers.

Just on that point that is one thing that shits me to tears with our team and especially the likes of Hunt & De Belin because they never identify the weak link in any opposition team and target that area we just continue to attack in a very random and disorganised fashion.

 

[possm]

Well, we have delayed the inevitable too long now. It's time for the shake-up required to ignite this squad:

1. Lomax
2. Matt Fegai
3. Amone
4. Suli
5. Max Feagai
6. Sloan
7. Sullivan
8. De Belin
9. B Hunt
10. Lawrie
11. Couchman
12. Su'A
13. Bird

14. Liddle
15. Molo
16. J Hunt
17. BMM

 

[Dragon David]

We all said at the beginning of Hook's tenure that he was probably the best of a bad lot, as a matter of fact we assume he is the lowest paid coach in the NRL, I think the figure was around the $450k / yr mark. He did have a rep and we knew about it, we knew he was old school, wanted to have discipline brought back in the side. We got what we paid for, a non modern day coach who is very stubborn with his ideas. Here we are 3 years down the gurgler with nothing to show for it except possibly a wooden spoon. And for those of you who consistently bring up the wonderful thing he has done with our salary cap, can you please show me how this has emanated into the Dragons having this money to buy a raft of wonderful players that all want to come to the Dragons because its such a great club.

Agree with all your past and present dialogue on Mr Hook, justa. Cheap and nasty doesn't work in this modern day of NRL where high flying marquee players and up to date coaching techniques and well thought out game plans are needed to win matches. You need a coach that the players respect at all times by doing things that are right on and off the field. We need a replacement coach who can instil in the players a never say die will to win attitude and players wanting to wear the Red V jersey with pride.

The old coaching ways just don't cut it now and Hook has clearly failed in many of the KPI's he has been given to achieve.

We need a coach that will help to attract better players to the club which has been a failing for so many years now and the rot has to stop once and for all.

 

[justadragon]

Agree with all your past and present dialogue on Mr Hook, justa. Cheap and nasty doesn't work in this modern day of NRL where high flying marquee players and up to date coaching techniques and well thought out game plans are needed to win matches. You need a coach that the players respect at all times by doing things that are right on and off the field. We need a replacement coach who can instil in the players a never say die will to win attitude and players wanting to wear the Red V jersey with pride.

The old coaching ways just don't cut it now and Hook has clearly failed in many of the KPI's he has been given to achieve.

We need a coach that will help to attract better players to the club which has been a failing for so many years now and the rot has to stop once and for all.

Well put Dave, my only concern is if there is a coach out there capable of doing the job at the Dragons because we are so far gone. I still believe Hasler maybe the only one, I would totally understand if he refused the offer.

 

[Dragon David]

IMO all the hype re his attacking skills is undermined by his obvious inabilities in so many areas both decision making and technique.

His only potential position is wing and he could potentially develop along the lines of JAC or Nathan Blacklock both of whom had many faults early on in their careers but with a simplified role became great players.

Sloan has hypnotised many in here for years with his junior and lower grade attacking success but the many faults that were ignored were soon identified by good opposition coaches and playmakers.

Just on that point that is one thing that shits me to tears with our team and especially the likes of Hunt & De Belin because they never identify the weak link in any opposition team and target that area we just continue to attack in a very random and disorganised fashion.

I agree O/T about those two, Hunt and De Belin not identifying the weak link in the opposition team. These guys have been playing league for most of their lives and in competition either these players and to me the coach moreso should identify the weaknesses of all teams. I am sure that other coaches do this without fail.

Just like in many sports, a player can identify a weakness or two in another player like in tennis who a player has studied his opponent and works out that his backhand is weak so he plays a lot of shots to the opponents back hand.

 

[TheRev]

It is a shame the new coach couldn't have been a month earlier while the good part of the draw was still in front of us and maybe the season was still alive.. but actually I think the board will have it done very quickly now... and then we will hear from Webb and co.

 

[Dragon David]

Well put Dave, my only concern is if there is a coach out there capable of doing the job at the Dragons because we are so far gone. I still believe Hasler maybe the only one, I would totally understand if he refused the offer.

Yes I agree justa. Out of the available coaches, who would be the one to get us out of this mess? That is the dilemma we face because I keep on saying, we cannot take any Tom, Dick or Harry to take the reins for the next X number of years. We can't take the second best option.

The next coach has to be a dead set miracle worker and has to have the utmost capabilities of turning us around. Is that guy Hasler? Is he the Messiah? He might get us more wins, achieve making the top 8 regularly but stopping short of reaching top 4 status. Is that enough? Is this what we want? Yes, it is better than what we have endured. What do we REALLY WANT TO ACHIEVE because unless we get this right coach and the right players, this wanting to win a premiership without these ingredients might be a thing too hard for us fans?

I genuinely would be happy to see us make the top 8 regularly and at some point sneak in a top 4 possie. Is this too much to ask for? At this stage of where we are at, I'd say it isn't.