NRL Round 23 - Knights V Tigers - 4:05pm Sunday 11 August - McDonald Jones Stadium

Timmy said:
Thats exactly right, you don't have to uncontest every kick, there comes a point where its super predictable and the defence no longer jumps etc. If we mix it up we could potentially exploit this, as there were multiple times today where our attack could've easily jumped above the defender like Bula did with Ponga. There needs to be variety.

I can see the positives of the strategy where you essentially can burn an extra two plays by smothering the catcher on the first play, as opposed to making an error and giving away a 7 tackle set.
Click to expand...
There’s value in it when the game is going set for set and you’re trying to get on top in the arm wrestle. If you can kick from 50 out, land it between the 10 and the 20, and be there on time to force the opposition to burn the tackle on play one, awesome. That sets you up for the defensive set and potentially an opportunity to put in a more attacking kick on the next one in possession.

But, once you’re in that good field position, where you don’t have to chase very far to get players both around the ball and slightly behind it to catch a bat-back, capitalise an error, or prevent a breakaway in the case of the opposition getting the ball… just meekly surrendering position with a chip kick is absurd. You really did all the work to get in position like that just to hand over the ball? Really?

You might as well just run it on the last every time if you’re just gonna turn it over.
 
Joshhh said:
Not any fault of his own, bro literally came on to play like 6 minutes passing the ball out of dummy half. That one is on the coach, pointless selection. Having an average specialist half sitting on the bench to play a few minutes of hooker might actually be the least useful way we could use that spot.
Click to expand...
It’s like his selection to bench is because he isn’t good enough to start but we got him to cover 7 but he isn’t quite good enough for that so put him on bench. Few if any sides pick a player to bench to cover 7, we have better options that can be used, yes Hastings to 14 is better.
I feel selection is based a little bit on players we want to move on such as Dan over JSaf, Cogger over anyone, Brailey over Crosslands. If you want clubs interested they have to be firsts standards, they will pay more giving us a bigger return. Drop those three out of firsts and we have no outside interest and will continue to pay them till contract end and unable to improve the squad.
Just my crazy thoughts on selections and internal workings.
Final thought, if you have Brailey 9, Crosslands 7:then Pryce is your best 14, can cover any situation from 1-7 with the slightest of shuffle
 
Also I think we should be contesting kicks when we have people chasing who have a realistic chance of catching the ball eg Ponga, Sharpe, Best, KPP

Marzhew isn’t out leaping anyone and are lot of our players are dumb and will probably just stuff it up and give away a penalty for taking out the catcher

It’s just a matter of getting the balance right. Something that probably should’ve been figured out a bit earlier in the season
 
That kick ahead for Sharpe is something they have been trying to do since he made firstgrade and something he scored a heap of tries from in the lower grades.

Best one I ever saw, we were down against Canberra and got a scrum on halfway with seconds till halftime. The ball came out of the scrum and Kurt Donohue smashed a kick over to the other side of the field and Sharpe was over there racing at top speed - he beat the Canberra players to the ball by about 15 metres and strolled over to score.
 
I was thinking it’s important to contest the kicks for the simple reason that if they succeed 10% of the time there’s potential for a lot more points over the course of the year. If they knock it on so what? It’s a turn over on their line most of the time so who cares. At least it’ll freak the other team out occasionally
 
MBQLD said:
I was thinking it’s important to contest the kicks for the simple reason that if they succeed 10% of the time there’s potential for a lot more points over the course of the year. If they knock it on so what? It’s a turn over on their line most of the time so who cares. At least it’ll freak the other team out occasionally
Click to expand...
It does absorb a tackle immediately, most of the time it’s a surrender tackle, so the other team is bringing it out on second tackle against a set defensive line.
 
HarVeeGee13 said:
There’s value in it when the game is going set for set and you’re trying to get on top in the arm wrestle. If you can kick from 50 out, land it between the 10 and the 20, and be there on time to force the opposition to burn the tackle on play one, awesome. That sets you up for the defensive set and potentially an opportunity to put in a more attacking kick on the next one in possession.

But, once you’re in that good field position, where you don’t have to chase very far to get players both around the ball and slightly behind it to catch a bat-back, capitalise an error, or prevent a breakaway in the case of the opposition getting the ball… just meekly surrendering position with a chip kick is absurd. You really did all the work to get in position like that just to hand over the ball? Really?

You might as well just run it on the last every time if you’re just gonna turn it over.
Click to expand...
I think what annoys me most is the placement and chase on the kicks, especially when we are within range like you say.

Kicking from out 40, sure, put it up, chase the hell out of it and try and catch them on their 15-20.

We will be 40 out, chip it to their 20, and have minimal chase. Absolutely pointless.

The ultimate goal with these kicks inside their half should be landing within 5 metres of the try-line and hitting and driving them back into the in-goal. You would absolutely never see that from us, I don’t even think it’s in our heads as an option.
 
In the presser O'Brien was asked about the halves and he said they did the job well. He was particularly happy with their scramble in defence. It was very noticeable that Pheonix was keeping the left edge together in defence for much of the game, and O'Brien says Gamble was doing the same on the right later in the game. He also said they were working out alright in attack as well.
He was also asked about Hastings at lock and he said Hastings was open to it and he'd review how he went in reserves.
 
MBQLD said:
I was thinking it’s important to contest the kicks for the simple reason that if they succeed 10% of the time there’s potential for a lot more points over the course of the year. If they knock it on so what? It’s a turn over on their line most of the time so who cares. At least it’ll freak the other team out occasionally
Click to expand...

I don't see why they can't achieve both with a bit of effort.

One of the kicks yesterday KP came flying through and tried to put off the receiver with a hand over his eyesight, but there were also people there to wrap up the receiver for tackle 1 no return.

They take short dropouts now by default, yet evidence shows they only come off about 10% of the time. They are willing ro woll the dice on that for small return, yet not on scoring points if it does have a similar return, even if that return is just an extra set, but that extra set is down on their line!
 
Mclovin said:
I dont see why we don't just move Gamble into 7, he is doing all of the kicking and he is involved in so much of our attack. Maybe he gets to comfortably on the right.?
Click to expand...

He's definitely doing what Hastings was doing on the right, but better. They've parked Crossland out on the left not asking him to do much at all other than run the ball and and make his tackles. I guess the point is, does it matter what number is on their backs?
 
Last edited:
slotmachine said:
He's definitely doing what Hastings was doing on the right, but better. They've parked Crossland out on the left not asking him to do much at all other than run the ball and and make his tackles. I guess the point is, does it matter what number is on their backs?
Click to expand...
Yeah AOB’s system includes halves which play a side of the field each and generally gets them on the ball an extra pass wide of the ruck in attacking positions via a ball playing 13. Hastings doesn’t really have a lot of value out there because of his lack of pace. He’s at his best at the first layer of the attack compressing the line and getting more dangerous attacking players in position to target whichever defenders we’ve decided to get at, but we don’t need that from him. This is a big part of why Clune didn’t miss a beat when he came in last year, his role was simplified and he didn’t have to worry about much beyond his own sneaky dangerous running game & ability to deliver the key pass.

Also feel like he and Elliott have been oil and water a lot of the time this year, when Hastings tries to get on the ball more he steps on Adam’s toes. Honestly if I was to pinpoint when Jackson played his best footy for us, it’s when Adam was out early in the season & we needed to play through Jacko constantly. Also reckon a rigid structure isn’t what gets the best out of him, he’s better if you play a bit more loose and just let him focus on fundamentals - compress the defence, count numbers, attack space.

But then the question becomes, which team is more dangerous in attack? One that executes on a system quickly and efficiently & has running threat from both halves (considering the potential hypothetical of having two of Pezet, Pryce, Votano etc in the halves a few years from now, with potentially Cody Hopwood who’s very Isaiah Yeo-esque at lock)? Or one which plays Hastingsball? I think it’s probably the former.

Gamblor is no dynamite running threat himself, but he does like to stick to a preferred side and play a simplified game, and him being the dominant playmaker probably suits what we’re trying to do a lot better at the moment.
 
Yeah after seeing our attack be a slow motion trainwreck for most of the year the right-side ball movement yesterday with Elliott at first receiver and the added spice of Sharpe's pace was a breath of fresh air.

Even KP was looking comfortable out there and he's known more for getting involved on the left.

On a sadder note it has probably ruined my prediction that the right winger wouldn't score more than 10 tries this year!
 
I know it's only the Tigers, but i thought we handled their shifts in attack pretty well yesterday. The defence had them for numbers most of the times, which was encouraging.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top