Nathan Brown

Beaumont said:
When I was 17 or 18 I hit an "old bloke" with what I thought was a great swinging arm. I got a tad nervous as we were about to pack the next scrum and the "old bloke" at hooker was smiling at me. I remember packing the scrum but unfortunately that was all I remembered. The smelling salts were putrid and the mud on the cricket pitch at Harker Oval was cold. The old bloke's name was Peter Edmunds.
Click to expand...

"Terry Pannowitz readies to make a tackle. He remembers Peter Edmonds as a player who did not feel pain."

MAITLAND rugby league legend Terry Pannowitz has no doubt: ‘‘Peter Edmonds was the hardest man I ever played with or against. You can print that. He just didn’t seem to feel pain like other people.’’
 
EASBay17 said:
But doesnt cutting a bloke in half and dropping him to the ground allow for a quicker play the ball then wrapping up a player and wrestling him to the ground. wrapping the ball up and slowly tacking him to ground gives the defensive line more time to set i always thought.
Click to expand...

True, but tackled players don't tend to get to their feet as quickly when they've been smashed by a textbook tackle and hit the ground like a sack of crap, especially after a few hit-ups.

Maybe video sessions should incorporate a montage of the big hits we used to see with an angry backing track.

Just saying...

 
The very last tackle in that video is exactly what I'm talking about! No chance of an offload happening there!!!!!
 
Glanville special.

The problem with that first video is most of those tackles were either around the ribs and ball and not the hips, or they hit simultaneously with the player receiving the ball so no offload chance. Many of them offloaded and several of them that tried to go down low at the hips with a player charging already in possession of the ball got bumped off or steamrolled.

It looks good when it comes off, but coaches coach the percentage plays. First contact these days is up high and around the ball, as that is the most effective tackle these days. You just can't guarantee a player is going to "buckle" his opponent each time or even half the time, and unless you have a player simultaneously hit them up top they will offload.

Better off coaching initial contact up high and wrapping up the ball, with a second player at the legs/feet to stop their metres after contact.
 
If you go up in 2s it is effective. Its all about WANTING to defend aggressively. If making your tackles is what you want then that's all you'll do. No good percentage comes out of first contact up high if your by yourself or you don't stick which what happens 9 times out of 10.
 
Rugby union is nothing like NRL, no need to offload as you play the ball back after tackle, is all about the team getting to the ruck, understand that 1 or 2 in a tackle can be more effective if done correctly but doesn't anyone else see the difference in the games. Not the ideal comparison or lesson.
 
You rarely see a tackle one on one these days, pretty much all tackles get 2 in the tackle, often 3. Broken play and spreading the ball wide is where the one on one tackles happen, but up the middle, contact first up high, then player comes in down low. Our problem in tackling is we often have two and three players all up high waltzing down field until one of them realises they need to get the legs to stop them. We need to get one up high and quickly one down low.

Question - how good do the Knights look when defending offloads? Crap is how, going in down low is just inviting offloads and second phase play which a lot of the time against us ends up with a gain of a further 20m.

If hitting down low at the hips was effective in the NRL, that is what you would see coaches having players do. That tackling drill 88 posted is great, in training, none of those players were looking to offload as it was training.

There is a reason coaches don't get players to hit down low at first point of contact.
 
The reason coaches dont want low tackles is cause the wrestle slows the play.

Now ill say it one last time.

First in low, stops the momentum.
Second over the top to stop the offload and slow the play the ball.

The only reason an i mean the only reason for hitting high is to slow down the play.

As a spectator id rather speed the game up, massive forwards are not getting gased which is why the interchange keeps dropping.
 
I was reading an article last night about the Tigers. 2 x 30 yo plus reserve graders and 73 yo Benji Marshall playing the house down. It's already been asked but why from season's kick off could the new look Tigers defend and we still look clueless ?
 
Beaumont said:
I was reading an article last night about the Tigers. 2 x 30 yo plus reserve graders and 73 yo Benji Marshall playing the house down. It's already been asked but why from season's kick off could the new look Tigers defend and we still look clueless ?
Click to expand...

Cuase our line looks like a mountain range.

6 up 4m, 3 up 3m, the rest waving at the crowd waiting for the play to come to them.
Zero aggression in the D or will to close down the play.

Watch the tigers atm, they are running from everywhere to close down the play
 
Really respect what Brown has done with the knights. Every year the team improves. I see Knights on a similar path to the Dragons, Post Bennet Dragons were a mess but they resigned and kept faith with their coach if they panicked and kept sacking coaches no way they sign Hunt, Vaughan, Graham, etc. Yes players will sign for money but more important they want goals/vision that brings confidence in game plan and routine. Its taken years for Dragons to get the level their playing at and the Roster McGregor wants.
Honestly I feel Brown signs the players he going for from the rumours we hearing and Knights will be year or so from top 8.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top