Stop turning the ball inside!

ImageImageImage
User avatar
jirskyr
Member
Member
Posts: 6168
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 12:00 pm

Stop turning the ball inside!

Post by jirskyr » Tue 12 Mar, 2013 11:10 am

I can actually cop last night's loss. Plenty of teams are going to get towelled this year, it's just the way the game works now. We need another 6-10 weeks to know for sure how we are travelling.

What I cannot cop however is two things we have not learned from last year:
1) STOP TURNING THE BALL INSIDE!
2) WHERE ARE THE BODIES IN MOTION?

The bodies in motion issue was already touched on in another thread - we simply do not challenge defences because all our plays are 1-out numbers. I know it's hard to do with no ball and dominated forwards blah blah, but the reality is we rarely get our players 1-1 with the opposition. You can’t confuse a defence with only one player coming at speed!

But my major gripe is this continued use of the rubbish "inside ball" move. You know the one - Farah or Marshall shimmy across, turn it back inside to a lumbering forward/centre off a short run. Our opposition is all over this play, because the switch is only useful if your returning runner has fast, evasive feet. We have no such players! Watch the Knights team in comparison last night - they almost never turned the ball back inside.

Most teams these days instead use the “marker draw” where the hooker steps out and commits the markers, before unleashing his runner back in behind the ruck – watch Cameron Smith and you’ll see what I mean.

Reasons why turning inside / switching does not work:
- distributor is running across field and not committing defenders.
- distributor is unable to straighten the attack in any fashion except where the defenders are already coming from.
- distributor has his back to the oncoming defence and will not deliver a pass based on how the defence has reacted; i.e. it’s preordained and executed regardless (cf with the brilliant players “playing what’s in front of them”).
- play is executed when the distributor is ready/forced to pass, rather than the hit up runner being ready to receive.
- hit up runner has to check his run as the pass is technically blind (as opposed to out in front of his angle of attack).
- hit up runner has greater difficulty timing his run as he needs to rely on the distributor crossing his angle of attack at a precise moment, rather than getting the ball when he has hit top speed.
- opposition markers are not tested, instead being able to drift slowly across field and smother the hit-up runner.
- relies on players sliding heavily and over-committing their momentum, which rarely occurs in the centre of the field.
- kills any attacking opportunity for the players out wide.
- commits the distributor to the line and effectively eliminates him from the play.

I don’t know if it’s something Sheens drilled into the boys and they can’t stop executing the play, but this concept of switching on 50% of plays does not work. I know it’s supposed to wrong-foot defenders and open up the field, but modern defences are too well drilled and athletic. FFS boys!


User avatar
cktiger
Member
Member
Posts: 3515
Joined: Fri 12 Nov, 2010 10:37 am

Post by cktiger » Tue 12 Mar, 2013 11:16 am

Wow, couldn't agree more with this - even before I read the actual post!
Again and again and again.....and so it goes.
So much for our supposed attacking ability when we offer the same rubbish repeatedly.

User avatar
Black'n'White
Member
Member
Posts: 1908
Joined: Sat 02 Mar, 2013 6:52 pm

Post by Black'n'White » Tue 12 Mar, 2013 11:50 am

Excellent post and well articulated.

I have repeated myself often about how we sell our forwards out, and you explained it beautifully. If oppositions insist on committing so many bodies to tackles, its all but insane to send props back into the heavy traffic. Why arent we taking advantage of isolated smaller defenders due to backrowers struggling to get back into the line?

This lazy style is the cause and effect of why our pack bunches behind the play the ball, and are so easily picked off by packs of tacklers.

User avatar
smeghead
Site Moderator
Site Moderator
Posts: 9454
Joined: Fri 10 Jul, 2009 11:56 pm

Post by smeghead » Tue 12 Mar, 2013 12:05 pm

100% agree with the OP
Image

User avatar
Yossarian
Member
Member
Posts: 9803
Joined: Sat 11 Jul, 2009 7:46 pm
Location: Central Coast

Post by Yossarian » Tue 12 Mar, 2013 12:21 pm

It's true. Plus it would make Farah a lot more dangerous runner if he's got a big bopper coming of his hip. I think we saw last night how Newcastle made ground just based on the uncertainty of a dummyhalf skipping out with some options.


happy tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 41485
Joined: Sun 27 Feb, 2011 4:49 pm
Location: Watching Waiting Lurking

Post by happy tiger » Tue 12 Mar, 2013 12:23 pm

It will be an effective play once Tedesco is in the squad when we have someone who will be hitting the ball with speed and footwork

The idea of turning the ball on the inside is to tire out a bigger forward packs and then to play the second runner and having the big forwards anchored when they are tired to beat them laterally

Pretty good game plan early on , but even Nostradamus couldn't see what was going to happen for the first 20 of the second half which really ruined any chance of it working

seijai
Member
Member
Posts: 117
Joined: Tue 07 Jun, 2011 10:36 am

Post by seijai » Tue 12 Mar, 2013 12:25 pm

True dat true dat

And on another note, can the players stop running back at the markers??? Dummy passes to runners, and runners always run back at the markers who are already 10m in front of their own defensive line!!

User avatar
smeghead
Site Moderator
Site Moderator
Posts: 9454
Joined: Fri 10 Jul, 2009 11:56 pm

Post by smeghead » Tue 12 Mar, 2013 12:31 pm

That is ingrained into them I fear.

Look at Heighno, at the Sharks and running the same rubbish lines
Image

User avatar
Black'n'White
Member
Member
Posts: 1908
Joined: Sat 02 Mar, 2013 6:52 pm

Post by Black'n'White » Tue 12 Mar, 2013 12:41 pm

happy tiger wrote:It will be an effective play once Tedesco is in the squad when we have someone who will be hitting the ball with speed and footwork

The idea of turning the ball on the inside is to tire out a bigger forward packs and then to play the second runner and having the big forwards anchored when they are tired to beat them laterally

Pretty good game plan early on , but even Nostradamus couldn't see what was going to happen for the first 20 of the second half which really ruined any chance of it working
When people bang on about our Pack, this is the the type of game I dont think our roster is all that suited for, its the arm wrestle best employed by the bigger packs.

happy tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 41485
Joined: Sun 27 Feb, 2011 4:49 pm
Location: Watching Waiting Lurking

Post by happy tiger » Tue 12 Mar, 2013 12:49 pm

Black'n'White wrote:
happy tiger wrote:It will be an effective play once Tedesco is in the squad when we have someone who will be hitting the ball with speed and footwork

The idea of turning the ball on the inside is to tire out a bigger forward packs and then to play the second runner and having the big forwards anchored when they are tired to beat them laterally

Pretty good game plan early on , but even Nostradamus couldn't see what was going to happen for the first 20 of the second half which really ruined any chance of it working
When people bang on about our Pack, this is the the type of game I dont think our roster is all that suited for, its the arm wrestle best employed by the bigger packs.
Actually its the complete opposite BNW

The idea is to wear the big blokes out with different angles and many people in motion and to try and get them to assume the play will go inside again , stop them sliding in defence and create room for the backs

It is something a lot of smaller, more mobile forwards pack try and utilize against bigger sides Hang in there hopefully and then overrun the opposition late


probably would be easier if we were able to match other teams with size ,speed and aggression , but we just don't have that against many sides

User avatar
Black'n'White
Member
Member
Posts: 1908
Joined: Sat 02 Mar, 2013 6:52 pm

Post by Black'n'White » Tue 12 Mar, 2013 1:10 pm

I agree with you in theory 100%, it works, but it is not what we have been doing for a long time, and I think it is a lazy settler in Farrahs eyes... We keep just banging them in there, telegraphed and alone.

I just think we are better suited with the way Robbie bounces out quickly, and Benji floats along the line both drawing up entire defensive lines, and have the forwards nose over the line to their guts for quick play the balls. Using ruck speed to tire the opposition line out and suck teams into penalties. Backed with kicking to the corners keeping opposition props in motion will really work their gas tanks. Its just another form of grind.

Our props are all running out of the same spot, into traffic. They are also getting held up in group tackles, which slows down the play the ball, defences easily making it back the 10 and ready for the next play.

I suppose the end point is they arent a bad group, just under utilised.

happy tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 41485
Joined: Sun 27 Feb, 2011 4:49 pm
Location: Watching Waiting Lurking

Post by happy tiger » Tue 12 Mar, 2013 1:24 pm

What do you expect ?? We had absolutely no field position , and when we did for the brief moments our imbecile 6 puts in grubbers which you can clearly tell no one other than him knows their on

What you are saying is fine if your not being dominated with defence and are winning the ruck If the defence is moving up quickly all that happens is that your forwards are getting smashed at the advantage line

That is the worst thing we need with our ball security and lack of size

Still comes back to the same point . We need to start games with the biggest ,strongest defensive pack we can put on the park and hope we can hang in many games for as long as possible and hope we can out finesse sides at the back end of games

User avatar
Black'n'White
Member
Member
Posts: 1908
Joined: Sat 02 Mar, 2013 6:52 pm

Post by Black'n'White » Tue 12 Mar, 2013 2:56 pm

I am not posting about last nights efforts, more to the way we have utilised our pack for a long time now...

happy tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 41485
Joined: Sun 27 Feb, 2011 4:49 pm
Location: Watching Waiting Lurking

Post by happy tiger » Tue 12 Mar, 2013 3:04 pm

Black'n'White wrote:I am not posting about last nights efforts, more to the way we have utilised our pack for a long time now...
And how has our forward pack been really any different for many years now ??

We have been undersized since 2005 , even earlier

User avatar
Black'n'White
Member
Member
Posts: 1908
Joined: Sat 02 Mar, 2013 6:52 pm

Post by Black'n'White » Tue 12 Mar, 2013 3:14 pm

lol... we are on different topics here.... You are talking "size" and Im talking "Utilise"

User avatar
Yossarian
Member
Member
Posts: 9803
Joined: Sat 11 Jul, 2009 7:46 pm
Location: Central Coast

Post by Yossarian » Tue 12 Mar, 2013 3:15 pm

Problem being Happy, too much of this is happening before the gameline and as you suggest everyone knows in advance who will end up with it (especially the defenders). If that is your main strategy you need some option runners one pass along or for the dummy-half or playmaker to step and take the line on more often. All it achieves right now is giving the defence a headstart and our forwards getting tackled at or behind the advantage line.

happy tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 41485
Joined: Sun 27 Feb, 2011 4:49 pm
Location: Watching Waiting Lurking

Post by happy tiger » Tue 12 Mar, 2013 3:29 pm

Yossarian wrote:Problem being Happy, too much of this is happening before the gameline and as you suggest everyone knows in advance who will end up with it (especially the defenders). If that is your main strategy you need some option runners one pass along or for the dummy-half or playmaker to step and take the line on more often. All it achieves right now is giving the defence a headstart and our forwards getting tackled at or behind the advantage line.
And thats what I said in my first post Yoss

Different options running different angles and decoys

As I also said , this style doesn't usually win the game in the first 5 minutes , but could well win you a game in the last 5 minutes

Yoss , you have a footy brain , trying to go toe to toe with Newcastle last night and we get a similiar result

If we have a game plan , its got to be one that gives us a chance at some stage if we play well enough and stick to the game plan

Playing to Newcastle's strengths would of been madness

User avatar
Yossarian
Member
Member
Posts: 9803
Joined: Sat 11 Jul, 2009 7:46 pm
Location: Central Coast

Post by Yossarian » Tue 12 Mar, 2013 3:53 pm

I'd say that game plan would fail against almost all the NRL. The reason why we were successful in 2005 was because we had options in attack and defenders held off because they weren't sure who would get the ball. That in term opened up the field for Marshall, Prince and Farah. Right now it's Jacob Miller going directly sideways at a polite jog and then one of our forwards from a standing start gets it after jogging a few paces and then soon afterwards is smashed by a defender.

So not only does every man and his dog know what will happen, the whole thing is done so slowly that our forwards get no momentum and receive the ball too late.

Post Reply