@Tiger In The Gong said:
@stevetiger said:
@Tiger In The Gong said:
All you guys arguing for the positive are taking this high morale ground where you are trying to say that those like myself who are critical of the coaching dont want this or against this.
The thing is almost all of the guys who are critical are critical of the boring attack we are playing, the mundane five hit ups and a bomb to the fullback thing.
You cant argue that because you all know that it is useless and makes no rugby league sense. Instead you try to paint this picture of us being impatient and wanting things to stay the same. Like we are happy to keep being this soft inconsistent team that the good clubs like to beat up.
Happy and a couple of others have tried to bring right and wrong into the argument, like it is so black and white that anyone who disagrees with the coach wants him sacked and doesnt appreciate what he is trying to do.
There is no right or wrong, we are both right. We need to get to where he wants to take us, same as we need to offer more in attack than five boring hit ups and a simple bomb to be classed a good team.
Top post.
I don't think that they guys sticking up for Taylor are getting it at all. .
I have to agree, they just do not see why we are complaining.
OK I'll bite on this one.
I understand why you are complaining: you don't like the quality or style of attack. You think the coach either doesn't have an attacking game plan, or has shelved it. You think improvements in defence should not have to come at the expense of attack.
Nobody is arguing that the defence is good enough. The point of debate is whether we need to stick to more one-dimensional attack until the defence is right. This appears to be the coach's position.
Now personally, I have watched this team attack for 15 years and rarely get the defence right. I'm tired of it, I am tired of having the team that people love to watch on telly but would hate to support because they can't defend a lead. I'm happy for us to be boring for a while, if it means we become tough to score against. I've also watched this team chance their hand in 2015, and a lot of ball goes to ground, a lot of mistakes are made.
Bearing in mind, all the while, just how young our team is and that it may take time for the game plan to stick.
What really interests me is that the current Top 3 teams in the comp are not highly ranked in attack (points per game) - Melbourne (8th), Broncos (6th) and Dragons (15th). However they are well ranked in defence - Melbourne (2nd), Broncos (6th), Dragons (1st).
The best attacking side in the comp are the Raiders, but they are also the 2nd worst defensive team, which breaks them even at 9th on the ladder. Titans are 3rd best attack in the comp and they are 13th on the ladder. Panthers are 3rd-worst attack but they are 8th on the ladder.
We know our attack is there and we know it is being held back somewhat. We know the defence is not really there and is the focus.
So what do you do as coach? Do you just let the team attack at their will, and hope the defence and discipline clicks into place eventually? Because we have 15 years of history showing that it doesn't work like that.
Or do you acknowledge that the weakness in defence, and reign in the attack somewhat, simplify the game plan, until the weakness is fixed?
I guarantee JT does not go out there telling them not to score tries, but to hit the attack button when you have field position. But hey, if your ball control is ordinary, if your defence is crap and the opposition march down into your 20 every set, how do you work into the field position to justify your best attack?
Or maybe we just don't have the cattle right now, maybe Brooks and Moses are not a first-grade attacking powerhouse combo and we are finding that out that it could be a lean few years.
