Question about defensive structure

[old_man_tiger]

Hi guys, I'm not old enough to remember the early 80s too well, believe it or not old man tiger is just a name. However when I first started playing and watching the game I seem to remember the half's job was to work almost full time as a cover defender, lurking just behind the line and well in front of the fullback. Am I remembering guys like steve Mortimer incorrectly?

Did slide defence kill this off? Because I think an up and in defence, with the centre and winger joined at the hip and cramping in on the attack would work better for us than the current indecisiveness shown by our three quarters. Brooks could then play the sweeper role on the weaker side (wherever Richards is seems to be a bit safer), with support from Teddy. I really worry that we've worked hard on toughening up the middle but are lacking genuine 1st grade wingers when it comes to defensive decision making and technique. This will leak as many points as a bad ruck.

I'm not a coach, nor a historian, and was nowhere near being a great player. Just curious about whether the current orthodox approach is actually the best one for us.

 

[Saturnalia]

Hi guys, I'm not old enough to remember the early 80s too well, believe it or not old man tiger is just a name. However when I first started playing and watching the game I seem to remember the half's job was to work almost full time as a cover defender, lurking just behind the line and well in front of the fullback. Am I remembering guys like steve Mortimer incorrectly?

Did slide defence kill this off? Because I think an up and in defence, with the centre and winger joined at the hip and cramping in on the attack would work better for us than the current indecisiveness shown by our three quarters. Brooks could then play the sweeper role on the weaker side (wherever Richards is seems to be a bit safer), with support from Teddy. I really worry that we've worked hard on toughening up the middle but are lacking genuine 1st grade wingers when it comes to defensive decision making and technique. This will leak as many points as a bad ruck.

I'm not a coach, nor a historian, and was nowhere near being a great player. Just curious about whether the current orthodox approach is actually the best one for us.

Sounds like you're describing a traditional lock forward. who apparently had ball playing abilities back in the day.

Mind you I know nothing and am just regurgitating what happy_tiger told me when I asked about lock forwards from the land before time.

 

[Black_n_White]

In recent weeks it has looked like we took a page from an old Dogs book and have been working a defence based on quick line speed to meet opponents on the advantage line. Not to many years back the Storm were employing an umbrella defence not dis-similar to what you proposed with success though…

Brooks isnt being exposed too much, he is having a rough time of it but that is to be expected. It also hasnt helped that his minder has been repeatedly concussed during games. He is only young and an obvious target for wide running backrowers, and even though he has been bouncing off alot of them he is in there and slowing them down enough until troops arrive to clean up. I think he is going ok in the current system.

 

[old_man_tiger]

Hi guys, I'm not old enough to remember the early 80s too well, believe it or not old man tiger is just a name. However when I first started playing and watching the game I seem to remember the half's job was to work almost full time as a cover defender, lurking just behind the line and well in front of the fullback. Am I remembering guys like steve Mortimer incorrectly?

Did slide defence kill this off? Because I think an up and in defence, with the centre and winger joined at the hip and cramping in on the attack would work better for us than the current indecisiveness shown by our three quarters. Brooks could then play the sweeper role on the weaker side (wherever Richards is seems to be a bit safer), with support from Teddy. I really worry that we've worked hard on toughening up the middle but are lacking genuine 1st grade wingers when it comes to defensive decision making and technique. This will leak as many points as a bad ruck.

I'm not a coach, nor a historian, and was nowhere near being a great player. Just curious about whether the current orthodox approach is actually the best one for us.

Sounds like you're describing a traditional lock forward. who apparently had ball playing abilities back in the day.

Mind you I know nothing and am just regurgitating what happy_tiger told me when I asked about lock forwards from the land before time.

I think you're right, that's the other memory that makes me doubt the halfback one!

 

[old_man_tiger]

In recent weeks it has looked like we took a page from an old Dogs book and have been working a defence based on quick line speed to meet opponents on the advantage line. Not to many years back the Storm were employing an umbrella defence not dis-similar to what you proposed with success though…

Brooks isnt being exposed too much, he is having a rough time of it but that is to be expected. It also hasnt helped that his minder has been repeatedly concussed during games. He is only young and an obvious target for wide running backrowers, and even though he has been bouncing off alot of them he is in there and slowing them down enough until troops arrive to clean up. I think he is going ok in the current system.

I agree about Brooks, think he's doing ok. More worried about the wingers TBH

 

[happy_tiger]

Clubs are always looking at playing numbers in this day and age and isolating defenders one on one

That would be the main reasons , along with the chip kick and grubber was used more often under the 5 metre rule

Playing rugby league under the 5 metre rule compared with the 10 metre rule is completely different game

 

[Tiger_Watto]

Many years ago this was a common occurrence with the 5 meter rule… Wally Lewis was one of he greatest players of all time and he was a very good exponent at this type of second line defence. This type of structure left the game by the late 80's.

The speed and power in the game today doesn't allow for this type of structure, as decoy runners and second phase play is very good at isolating defenders one on one. We cant actually hide Brooks, but we can provide him with more cover by allowing him to defend 1 in from where he was on Saturday. On the weekend, he was defending on the outside next to a centre. The best place is to have him one in with a hard-hitting backrower on his outside, not inside him.

Brooks was the problem on that Left Side on Saturday, and once the Warriors found him flat footed on a couple of occasions, they just kept coming. At one stage, Rowdy was defending up against 3 men as Luke didn't even move off his line.

He will get better over the next few years, but positioning him tighter is a far safer option for now until he can hold his own.

 

[yeti]

Ahhh!!!! The days of the cover defending lock forward! One of the greatest of these was Ron Coote (Rabbitohs and Chooks). Another exceptional exponent was Neil Pringle (Newtown and Balmain). It was Jack Gibson who 'killed off' the cover defending lock, by bringing him up in a straight line with the other defenders. It wasn't long before all teams were doing this, although some clubs (Bulldogs for one), sent their half back into a cover defending role and Mortimer was brilliant in this capacity.
As Watto alluded to, even this was phased out of the game towards the end of the '80s. It's a shame in many ways - it was one of the great sites to see an attacking three quarter in full flight being hunted across the ground by a fleet of foot lock (or even half back). The last time we saw this was Scott Sattler for Penrith running down the chooks winger in a Grand Final in 2003.

 

[old_man_tiger]

Speaking of things we don't see anymore in defence, can anyone explain to me why tackling a guy around the legs and slowing him down by pushing his face in the dirt and enquiring after his mother's health is illegal, but bending him backwards and twisting him at right angles is allowed.

The game isn't what it was even compared to the 90s and reading the posts about the golden years makes is pretty depressing.

I guess on the upside wingers are counted as part of the team…

 

[happy_tiger]

Speaking of things we don't see anymore in defence, can anyone explain to me why tackling a guy around the legs and slowing him down by pushing his face in the dirt and enquiring after his mother's health is illegal, but bending him backwards and twisting him at right angles is allowed.

The game isn't what it was even compared to the 90s and reading the posts about the golden years makes is pretty depressing.

I guess on the upside wingers are counted as part of the team…

Don't want to dint your thoughts on the game , but we were being taught judo moves to help with our defence in the eighties

It was based on using your weight to its best advantage

 

[Tiger_Watto]

Speaking of things we don't see anymore in defence, can anyone explain to me why tackling a guy around the legs and slowing him down by pushing his face in the dirt and enquiring after his mother's health is illegal, but bending him backwards and twisting him at right angles is allowed.

The game isn't what it was even compared to the 90s and reading the posts about the golden years makes is pretty depressing.

**I guess on the upside wingers are counted as part of the team**…

and Fullbacks… All the Back 3 are classed as Football Players now?! :crazy

 

[AmericanHistoryX]

Speaking of things we don't see anymore in defence, can anyone explain to me why tackling a guy around the legs and slowing him down by pushing his face in the dirt and enquiring after his mother's health is illegal, but bending him backwards and twisting him at right angles is allowed.

The game isn't what it was even compared to the 90s and reading the posts about the golden years makes is pretty depressing.

I guess on the upside wingers are counted as part of the team…

Don't want to dint your thoughts on the game , but we were being taught judo moves to help with our defence in the eighties

It was based on using your weight to its best advantage

lucky Dallas got out when he did.

 

[happy_tiger]

Speaking of things we don't see anymore in defence, can anyone explain to me why tackling a guy around the legs and slowing him down by pushing his face in the dirt and enquiring after his mother's health is illegal, but bending him backwards and twisting him at right angles is allowed.

The game isn't what it was even compared to the 90s and reading the posts about the golden years makes is pretty depressing.

**I guess on the upside wingers are counted as part of the team**…

and Fullbacks… All the Back 3 are classed as Football Players now?! :crazy

How the bloody hell did I miss that :brick:

The reason for having cover defenders is because halves couldn't tackle an old pillow attached to a rope hanging off the clothes line let alone a moving object

Swear some halves had it written into their contracts they only have to make 3 tackles in a game , and they class flopping on the 6th player involved in the tackle a tackle :laughing:

 

[stryker]

Haha very rich coming from a fullback. Happy.
Their traditional role was to stand behind a line of footballers, screaming in a petrified voice for everyone to take their man.
… and occasionally they would participate in girly kicking duels.

 

[happy_tiger]

Haha very rich coming from a fullback. Happy.
Their traditional role was to stand behind a line of footballers, screaming in a petrified voice for everyone to take their man.
… and occasionally they would participate in girly kicking duels.

Notice how you didn't pick on the wingers :roll

Still dating one I assume :laughing:

 

[stryker]

*disclaimer* he is joking Blake 93.

I like wingers…I guess.

 

[happy_tiger]

*disclaimer* he is joking Blake 93.

I like wingers…I guess.

You do realize it says wingers not swingers 😱pen_mouth: :laughing: