Defence : Tue Apr 09, 2013 12:59 am  

Not working and watched the 5 mins of highlights of the Bradford game. A couple of things stood out. We are often exposed on the edges, by the tramlines. But this game was a bit different. Here's what having a quick butchers made me think. Don't know all our players names by sight, so numbers will do

Bradford's tries.

1. Bryant in 10. After making previous tackle gets back in at B rushes up quickly and gets stepped beaten on inside shoulder. MIDDLE.

2. Gap between D&E means Gower is caught out by what he thinks is a dummy runner and a forward pass. MIDDLE.

Ironically our third try is then scored after Bradford try the same move but Gower ignores the same dummy run and manages to force an error in his tackle on the Bulls player's flick pass.

3. Why was Dixon glued to the try line and not up in play? Bulls player's momentum carries him over as a result. WIDE

4. Can't do much about that. Notice Gower is the only player pointing and actually points out the eventual try scorer in Defence to our centre. WIDE

5. Bryant is up quick again, not in a line which drags 11 up who then misses tackle. Witt then finds himself in front of ball and creates a space for their play to step into. They score off another forward pass. MIDDLE

6. Witt rushes out of line. 11 tries to catch up but 22 in Defence isn't quick enough over and misses tackle. MIDDLE

7. Ineffective tackle from Witt allows offload and the rest in just 4 or 5 grabs from 22 and 11 and full back again. MIDDLE

8. Witt rushes out of line allow runner to get behind him. Susbequent play allows them to spread and get in in corner WING



Line speed in defence is a great thing. If you all go up in a line! A couple of players in that 5 min clip seem to do it a lot. More tries were scored inside than outside the tram lines in this game which was surprising given all the complaints about outside backs.

Re: Defence : Tue Apr 09, 2013 7:35 am  

Rooster Booster wrote:

Line speed in defence is a great thing. If you all go up in a line! A couple of players in that 5 min clip seem to do it a lot. More tries were scored inside than outside the tram lines in this game which was surprising given all the complaints about outside backs.

I think this just goes to show that we have different definitions of middle and edge. For me, the middle unit is 4 players, then there is a back rower (usually) and then the edge. Perhaps proper coaches call these positions by different names - I don't know much of the jargon as I haven't played for 20 years. For me, a try going through Witt or wider on the right or Gower or wider on the left is the edge. As I've said previously, Witt and Gower need to find new positions in defence - or they need better centres than Channing and Sarginson on their outside.

Bryant had a shocker in defence - I think that was unusual. As did Lee - again unusual.

EDIT: Right across the field, some of the tackling in the second half is just shameful. Lazy? Unfit? Fatigued?

Re: Defence : Tue Apr 09, 2013 9:24 am  

I've just realised that I didn't clarify something. Apologies. Tries were scored in the middle or out wide. So for example I meant the tries were in the middle and not the inital line break necessarily. have a butchers at the vid.

Re: Defence : Tue Apr 09, 2013 10:04 am  

Not sure I can watch that video again, RB!

From memory, the middle unit are guilty of switching off/laziness/fatigue, whereas the wider defenders are making wrong decisions/leaving each other isolated/being outmuscled.

To a degree, the middle unit's issues can be resolved by freshening the players up, knowing who needs a rest etc. But I don't see the wider defenders ever improving so let's try new personnel/combinations rather than aping Powell's failed structure.

Re: Defence : Tue Apr 09, 2013 12:51 pm  

The damage was done in the first half-the Bulls wore us down gradually, as they were massive across the park, resulting in an inevitable collapse.

Re: Defence : Tue Apr 09, 2013 1:38 pm  

I think that all but four of their side were 6 footers. They just over-powered us. If we had kept the ball, kicked well, and played the percentages we could have worn them out second half.

Re: Defence : Tue Apr 09, 2013 10:42 pm  

wire quin wrote:

The damage was done in the first half-the Bulls wore us down gradually, as they were massive across the park, resulting in an inevitable collapse.

So size, physicality, ball retention and the amounts of sets against us resulted in us fading towards the end? Nothing unusual there in a game of footy. You very rarely see a team come back from that sort of pressure and amount of defence in a first half. You can see why people talk about fitness levels. But our players are all fit. They just got bulldozed.

I think a couple of players when watching their vids during the week will see they need to not rush out creating holes for at least three of Bradford's tries. "Up, fast, in a line and hold"

Re: Defence : Wed Apr 10, 2013 5:01 am  

Roosty have you swallowed the RL coaching book of "overused and often not understood" terms

You sound like Paul Cullen

Re: Defence : Wed Apr 10, 2013 6:38 am  

wire quin wrote:

Roosty have you swallowed the RL coaching book of "overused and often not understood" terms

You sound like Paul Cullen

Sorry WQ. Repeating the stuff I hear week in week out. Though I did just paraphrase what you had said happened. At least I get an idea of what's happening with your comments.

btw. I even had to look up who Paul Cullen was. Sorry.

Re: Defence : Wed Apr 10, 2013 8:01 am  

Rooster Booster wrote:

So size, physicality, ball retention and the amounts of sets against us resulted in us fading towards the end? Nothing unusual there in a game of footy. You very rarely see a team come back from that sort of pressure and amount of defence in a first half. You can see why people talk about fitness levels. But our players are all fit. They just got bulldozed.

But, Rooster, this is not the first time we've been shut out 20 or 30-nil in a second half. It's the fourth or fifth time in eleven games.