LIVE GAME Round 21 versus Panthers

Live Game Discussion
Benji made a few statements that were telling post game and gave some insight the the frustration the team must be feeling. We were supposed to play a simialr style of game to them but with more energy and shifting the ball early. Which we did for the first twenty minutes or so before we were overcome by Penrith's grind.

The warning I highlighted when I penned what I thought the game plan should be was that "we must avoid getting into the grind with Penrith by playing conservatively – this plays into their hands."

That is where we ended up; but I don't think it was through a lack of effort. It was though a combination of having the energy sapped from trying to play an up tempo game while concurrently being suffocated.

So we can moan about how the coach knows nothing and our players are shit or we could look at the game a little more closely and see where we continue to build from. Overall the stats, less kicks and kick return m, were pretty close; so certainly not completely dominated. The kicks and kick return m reflect relative field postion so really don't tell much of a story other than that. So we can finish on a high note let's start with what needs to be improved:
  • Ruck Dominance. We were dominated in all aspects around the ruck. Sukar and AD with PTB speeds in excess of 4 seconds and Hope just short of 6. It is hard to compare the stats elsewhere as we were continually returning the ball from deep in our own half; rarely having an opportunity to win momentum unless we shifted early. Twal, Sukkar and Seyfarth were ineffective. May took plenty of carries but did not impact the defensive line. AD was ineffective as a lock in attack - he played more like a half (possibly under instruction) but was MIA when it came to making the hard yards.
  • Penrith's forwards, less Garner and ICE, all had PTB speeds of sub 3.5s. This means that we did not control the ruck, we were unable to control the ruck as we were given less lattitude or Penrith have a significantly better techinque. Whatever the underlying issue, it had us on the back foot on both sides of the ruck.
  • Attack. We suffered from errors at crucial times that gave Penrith territory. Trying to force our way out of our own end against a compressed and rushing defence had us struggling for meters. Combine this with an "average" long kicking game and Penrith started most sets with an attacking mindset and finished them with kicks applying pressure on our line. There were not many attacking opportunites as a result.
  • In addition AD's role as a lock was not productive. He tried to play more as a running half - not taking the hard yards to put the defence in two minds. It is a bit early to state that AD as a lock is a failure - but he certainly wasn't effective in attack on Saturday as a lock, or as a half when Latu was switched to lock and eventually hooked.
  • Kicking game. I counted two long kicks that I considered to be effective in the entire game. From memory it was one each by Luai and AD - both finding the turf and running on to enable the chase to apply pressure. Api's 40/20 attempt went straight down Edwards throat. From memory there were two contested kicks and the rest went directly to a player so deep there was no time for the chase to arrive. We simply don't have a good long kicking game so we are starting our sets much further back than the opposition and rucking it out from the deep set after set.
  • With Penrith dominating our attack with their line speed we again failed to react with an appropriate kick response. One 40/20 and one early set long kick will not upset the defensive line. We need to execute our early kick sets much better - in behind the line to Taylan/Toa or early 40/20/kicks to seagulls to disrupt their line speed and defensive strategy. This showed a clear lack of smarts.
  • Benji raised it in the presser - our kicking game was poor. It has been a weakness all season and was on show for all to see on Saturday. We need a lot of work in this area.
So what positives can we take away from the game?
  • Defence. Our line speed and compressed defensive line was pretty good in the middle third of the field. We were also easily able to deal with many attacking raids with a combination of slide and cover defence. However, the toll of having to cart the ball out from deep in our own half and new centre/wing combination led to simple lapses. Latu coming too far out of the line, misreads by Toa/Skelton and then later in the game our edges starting to be pulled apart.
  • The positive is that we can execute good defensive structure within a solid framework - but it fell off under a combination of pressure and fatigue. Lessen the mistakes and win some field postion and this will become less of an issue.
Hidden in what became a rabble towards the end of the game is the nucleus of a team that can climb the ladder. If we can't find a way to manage/change momentum to our advantage, through a combination of better smarts and a few more dominant forwards 2026 will be another long year anchored in the bottom 4. For the most part the ability is there, just below the surface. But not all of our starters in 25 can be starters in 26 otherwise we will be fighting for the spoon again.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Jolls. Your passion is on display by the work you do. As many posters have said our forwards still need work in terms of being able to match pace and play the ball, aggression and to be able to dominate., Getting them is the big issue isnt it? Few coming on the market, almost none within the club (NRL ready) and soon to be competing with Perth building their team too..
 
liltiger said:
If I'm Benji I'm tapping Hodgo and looking for a new attacking coach. Instead of running plays with the guys I'm working 1on 1 with Latu, Madden, Luai on their game management and kicking games. Latu needs to think run first. He will grow into the 7 role. At the moment he just seems to be shovelling the ball off. No idea why. I'd tell him and Luai to run first. Straight at the line. First touch each has do a ruck just one directly straight. Massive problem we have is we do this one out hit up play, there's absolutly noone pushing up with the ball carrier were all flat footed and way to shallow were all in each other's pockets. We have mo depth at all in our sets. Last night our attack struggled because Penrith were mightily quick off the line and were in our face and we had no time. Firstly the guys should have gotten more shape deeper to buy that extra second of time and secondly the halves should have squared up at the rushing defence with that extra second and firstly ran at them to engage the quick moving defence for a shift or run at any holes developed. I would have put a few kicks on the 3rd in as well just to keep the winger and centres in their line a bit deeper. Even a chip kick 5 metres behind their rushing line. We don't need it to work we just need to make them think, that'll get them to start second guessing themselves and slow their line speed down just a wee bit to buy us a fraction more time. Another thing, I'd not bomb on the fifth nowhere near as much. I'd be drilling it along the ground trying to get it into touch as much as possible to get the back 3 out of the game as much as possible. They were just eating up the bombs uncontested and running on to them making easy metres.
Click to expand...
It took us over 20mins to get down their end, a chip kick or grubber behind the line 50m+ out would have had everyone on here baying for blood. For better or worse if we want to be a competitive team we have to be able to grind it out up the middle, earn the right to throw the ball around and try a few trick shots. Once you can defend your errors and recover field position it opens the game up and the options for you in attack. This was why the dogs attack was so dour last year and everyone was calling for Ciraldo's head. They were building the resiliency and systems in defence and attack until it was just muscle memory.
 
Spacecub said:
3 Spoons and on track for 4, there's no one I'd wet the bed over who left tbh, just want benji and Richardson gone
Click to expand...
I don't support chucking out the bosses AGAIN - for whom, who would be the next CEO and coach? It was originally Sheens' fault, going all senile, then JT for being too pasty, then Potter not being aggressive enough, then Ivan's fault for snaking us, then Madge for being too tough, then Sheens came back but was still too senile, now it's Benji's fault. And in the middle somewhere Kimmorley, the Warriors coach and our old reserve grade coach all had a spin.

Oh and Meyer and Pascoe and Humphreys and Marina Go and Lee Fedora and all those other blokes.

What really interests me is all the chat that Benji can't coach, it comes up every second week when we win. We are ironically just 2 wins off the Top 8, to the point where if we went on a run of wins we could realistically jag a Finals spot. We won't, but it is feasible, because you are competing with Dolphins, Manly, Roosters, Cowboys, Dragons and we've beaten half of those sides.

But it's all Benji and Richo's fault, nothing to do with 15 years straight of failure. There are 10 teams within 2 wins of us. We currently have more wins than the Dragons, Eels, Knights, Rabbits and Titans. Same # wins as Cowboys. 1 behind Roosters, 2 behind Manly and Dolphins.

Now can Kristian Woolf coach? Seibold? Trent Robbo? Payten? Flanagan and Ryles? Dessie? How about old Wayne at the Rabbits? Because that's the kind of company we are keeping in 2025. Nothing close to good but most of the teams outside the Top 8 are fairly equal.
 
Twal is one I've always supported because of his 30+ tackles but he is one constant right thru all our spoons and low finishes for years
IMO he just doesn't penetrate much .He gets ball and runs very upright at the defensive line 5m or so in front of him .He also braces for impact making him an easy target .He also burns a lot of 4th or 5th tackles looking for that elusive 3rd try. I just think he's a great forward at cup level but not at Nrl level
Like his loyalty and dedication but don't think he's ever going to get us to finals
 
jirskyr said:
I don't support chucking out the bosses AGAIN - for whom, who would be the next CEO and coach? It was originally Sheens' fault, going all senile, then JT for being too pasty, then Potter not being aggressive enough, then Ivan's fault for snaking us, then Madge for being too tough, then Sheens came back but was still too senile, now it's Benji's fault. And in the middle somewhere Kimmorley, the Warriors coach and our old reserve grade coach all had a spin.

Oh and Meyer and Pascoe and Humphreys and Marina Go and Lee Fedora and all those other blokes.

What really interests me is all the chat that Benji can't coach, it comes up every second week when we win. We are ironically just 2 wins off the Top 8, to the point where if we went on a run of wins we could realistically jag a Finals spot. We won't, but it is feasible, because you are competing with Dolphins, Manly, Roosters, Cowboys, Dragons and we've beaten half of those sides.

But it's all Benji and Richo's fault, nothing to do with 15 years straight of failure. There are 10 teams within 2 wins of us. We currently have more wins than the Dragons, Eels, Knights, Rabbits and Titans. Same # wins as Cowboys. 1 behind Roosters, 2 behind Manly and Dolphins.

Now can Kristian Woolf coach? Seibold? Trent Robbo? Payten? Flanagan and Ryles? Dessie? How about old Wayne at the Rabbits? Because that's the kind of company we are keeping in 2025. Nothing close to good but most of the teams outside the Top 8 are fairly equal.
Click to expand...
Beautiful work!
 
Jolls said:
Benji made a few statements that were telling post game and gave some insight the the frustration the team must be feeling. We were supposed to play a simialr style of game to them but with more energy and shifting the ball early. Which we did for the first twenty minutes or so before we were overcome by Penrith's grind.

The warning I highlighted when I penned what I thought the game plan should be was that "we must avoid getting into the grind with Penrith by playing conservatively – this plays into their hands."

That is where we ended up; but I don't think it was through a lack of effort. It was though a combination of having the energy sapped from trying to play an up tempo game while concurrently being suffocated.

So we can moan about how the coach knows nothing and our players are shit or we could look at the game a little more closely and see where we continue to build from. Overall the stats, less kicks and kick return m, were pretty close; so certainly not completely dominated. The kicks and kick return m reflect relative field postion so really don't tell much of a story other than that. So we can finish on a high note let's start with what needs to be improved:
  • Ruck Dominance. We were dominated in all aspects around the ruck. Sukar and AD with PTB speeds in excess of 4 seconds and Hope just short of 6. It is hard to compare the stats elsewhere as we were continually returning the ball from deep in our own half; rarely having an opportunity to win momentum unless we shifted early. Twal, Sukkar and Seyfarth were ineffective. May took plenty of carries but did not impact the defensive line. AD was ineffective as a lock in attack - he played more like a half (possibly under instruction) but was MIA when it came to making the hard yards.
  • Penrith's forwards, less Garner and ICE, all had PTB speeds of sub 3.5s. This means that we did not control the ruck, we were unable to control the ruck as we were given less lattitude or Penrith have a significantly better techinque. Whatever the underlying issue, it had us on the back foot on both sides of the ruck.
  • Attack. We suffered from errors at crucial times that gave Penrith territory. Trying to force our way out of our own end against a compressed and rushing defence had us struggling for meters. Combine this with an "average" long kicking game and Penrith started most sets with an attacking mindset and finished them with kicks applying pressure on our line. There were not many attacking opportunites as a result.
  • In addition AD's role as a lock was not productive. He tried to play more as a running half - not taking the hard yards to put the defence in two minds. It is a bit early to state that AD as a lock is a failure - but he certainly wasn't effective in attack on Saturday as a lock, or as a half when Latu was switched to lock and eventually hooked.
  • Kicking game. I counted two long kicks that I considered to be effective in the entire game. From memory it was one each by Luai and AD - both finding the turf and running on to enable the chase to apply pressure. Api's 40/20 attempt went straight down Edwards throat. From memory there were two contested kicks and the rest went directly to a player so deep there was no time for the chase to arrive. We simply don't have a good long kicking game so we are starting our sets much further back than the opposition and rucking it out from the deep set after set.
  • With Penrith dominating our attack with their line speed we again failed to react with an appropriate kick response. One 40/20 and one early set long kick will not upset the defensive line. We need to execute our early kick sets much better - in behind the line to Taylan/Toa or early 40/20/kicks to seagulls to disrupt their line speed and defensive strategy. This showed a clear lack of smarts.
  • Benji raised it in the presser - our kicking game was poor. It has been a weakness all season and was on show for all to see on Saturday. We need a lot of work in this area.
So what positives can we take away from the game?
  • Defence. Our line speed and compressed defensive line was pretty good in the middle third of the field. We were also easily able to deal with many attacking raids with a combination of slide and cover defence. However, the toll of having to cart the ball out from deep in our own half and new centre/wing combination led to simple lapses. Latu coming too far out of the line, misreads by Toa/Skelton and then later in the game our edges starting to be pulled apart.
  • The positive is that we can execute good defensive structure within a solid framework - but it fell off under a combination of pressure and fatigue. Lessen the mistakes and win some field postion and this will become less of an issue.
Hidden in what became a rabble towards the end of the game is the nucleus of a team that can climb the ladder. If we can't find a way to manage/change momentum to our advantage, through a combination of better smarts and a few more dominant forwards 2026 will be another long year anchored in the bottom 4. For the most part the ability is there, just below the surface. But not all of our starters in 25 can be starters in 26 otherwise we will be fighting for the spoon again.
Click to expand...
One thing that annoys me in particular is our reaction to an offload or off the cuff midfield pass. Nine times out of ten, the man receiving the ball will do a phoney side-step/bunny-hop, spin around and pretend they're going to pass to no-one and then walk into 3 defenders. The ref treats it as a surrender and therefore a slow ptb. It should be second nature, as soon as you receive the ball in the middle of the ruck, to simply head straight into the line at full tilt and either attempt to break the line or get a quick ptb.
As you said, the game is about momentum and we need to be able to manage or change it. To do that, you have to be able to play at a certain pace and strolling into the defensive line doesn't allow you to do that.
 
TheEnz said:
It took us over 20mins to get down their end, a chip kick or grubber behind the line 50m+ out would have had everyone on here baying for blood. For better or worse if we want to be a competitive team we have to be able to grind it out up the middle, earn the right to throw the ball around and try a few trick shots. Once you can defend your errors and recover field position it opens the game up and the options for you in attack. This was why the dogs attack was so dour last year and everyone was calling for Ciraldo's head. They were building the resiliency and systems in defence and attack until it was just muscle memory.
Click to expand...
Agree totally, my point is if we are going to play a simple grinding game plan then we need our speedsters and halves constantly sniffing around the ruck and need bodies in motion pushing up with the ball carrier for an offload or to capitalise on a quick play the ball. Atm were rucking the ball one out, our players are shallow with no depth and everyone is just watching the tackle being completed.
 
Jolls said:
Benji made a few statements that were telling post game and gave some insight the the frustration the team must be feeling. We were supposed to play a simialr style of game to them but with more energy and shifting the ball early. Which we did for the first twenty minutes or so before we were overcome by Penrith's grind.

The warning I highlighted when I penned what I thought the game plan should be was that "we must avoid getting into the grind with Penrith by playing conservatively – this plays into their hands."

That is where we ended up; but I don't think it was through a lack of effort. It was though a combination of having the energy sapped from trying to play an up tempo game while concurrently being suffocated.

So we can moan about how the coach knows nothing and our players are shit or we could look at the game a little more closely and see where we continue to build from. Overall the stats, less kicks and kick return m, were pretty close; so certainly not completely dominated. The kicks and kick return m reflect relative field postion so really don't tell much of a story other than that. So we can finish on a high note let's start with what needs to be improved:
  • Ruck Dominance. We were dominated in all aspects around the ruck. Sukar and AD with PTB speeds in excess of 4 seconds and Hope just short of 6. It is hard to compare the stats elsewhere as we were continually returning the ball from deep in our own half; rarely having an opportunity to win momentum unless we shifted early. Twal, Sukkar and Seyfarth were ineffective. May took plenty of carries but did not impact the defensive line. AD was ineffective as a lock in attack - he played more like a half (possibly under instruction) but was MIA when it came to making the hard yards.
  • Penrith's forwards, less Garner and ICE, all had PTB speeds of sub 3.5s. This means that we did not control the ruck, we were unable to control the ruck as we were given less lattitude or Penrith have a significantly better techinque. Whatever the underlying issue, it had us on the back foot on both sides of the ruck.
  • Attack. We suffered from errors at crucial times that gave Penrith territory. Trying to force our way out of our own end against a compressed and rushing defence had us struggling for meters. Combine this with an "average" long kicking game and Penrith started most sets with an attacking mindset and finished them with kicks applying pressure on our line. There were not many attacking opportunites as a result.
  • In addition AD's role as a lock was not productive. He tried to play more as a running half - not taking the hard yards to put the defence in two minds. It is a bit early to state that AD as a lock is a failure - but he certainly wasn't effective in attack on Saturday as a lock, or as a half when Latu was switched to lock and eventually hooked.
  • Kicking game. I counted two long kicks that I considered to be effective in the entire game. From memory it was one each by Luai and AD - both finding the turf and running on to enable the chase to apply pressure. Api's 40/20 attempt went straight down Edwards throat. From memory there were two contested kicks and the rest went directly to a player so deep there was no time for the chase to arrive. We simply don't have a good long kicking game so we are starting our sets much further back than the opposition and rucking it out from the deep set after set.
  • With Penrith dominating our attack with their line speed we again failed to react with an appropriate kick response. One 40/20 and one early set long kick will not upset the defensive line. We need to execute our early kick sets much better - in behind the line to Taylan/Toa or early 40/20/kicks to seagulls to disrupt their line speed and defensive strategy. This showed a clear lack of smarts.
  • Benji raised it in the presser - our kicking game was poor. It has been a weakness all season and was on show for all to see on Saturday. We need a lot of work in this area.
So what positives can we take away from the game?
  • Defence. Our line speed and compressed defensive line was pretty good in the middle third of the field. We were also easily able to deal with many attacking raids with a combination of slide and cover defence. However, the toll of having to cart the ball out from deep in our own half and new centre/wing combination led to simple lapses. Latu coming too far out of the line, misreads by Toa/Skelton and then later in the game our edges starting to be pulled apart.
  • The positive is that we can execute good defensive structure within a solid framework - but it fell off under a combination of pressure and fatigue. Lessen the mistakes and win some field postion and this will become less of an issue.
Hidden in what became a rabble towards the end of the game is the nucleus of a team that can climb the ladder. If we can't find a way to manage/change momentum to our advantage, through a combination of better smarts and a few more dominant forwards 2026 will be another long year anchored in the bottom 4. For the most part the ability is there, just below the surface. But not all of our starters in 25 can be starters in 26 otherwise we will be fighting for the spoon again.
Click to expand...
Great analysis as always Jolls. Quick question, in your view, to fix our deficiencies in the ruck do you think we just need bigger bodies in the forwards or do you think it's purely a technique issue in our tackling and wrestle.
 
liltiger said:
Great analysis as always Jolls. Quick question, in your view, to fix our deficiencies in the ruck do you think we just need bigger bodies in the forwards or do you think it's purely a technique issue in our tackling and wrestle.
Click to expand...
On the defensive side I think the focus has to be on making a dominant tackle and trying to turn them 90 degrees to the sideline to force them to get to their feet and re-orient. You can dig even deeper into that aspect as well - winning the contact is essential as a legs tackle is not going to faciltate what you want. The second part of it though is to win the wrestle to get them, if not on their back, at least facing the wrong direction. Bigger bodies, although not essential, are an advantage. However, for mine strength and technique can over come size a lot of the time.

On the offensive side it is about winning the contact and to e that is about height and leg drive, too high and you are held up and they can fight with you for the play the ball. Get low and force your way though the tackle/line and find your front. The other option, that we don't see often any more, is the round the body pass; drive low step deliver the ball back on the inside of where you came from. It can get quite technical and into running X/Y lines (that we don't do) and hit and spin plays. Whatever you are trying to achieve it is about winning the contact os it is more about leg drive and technique than size. Having said that it doesn't hurt to have bigger bodies - as long as they have the conditioning to make a difference.

So a long way to get there bit I think the answer lies in technique as guys like Twal and Sukkar have plenty of strenght but lack technique and as much as I like May he has technique but appears to be short on leg drive. Royce has what we need but not enough motor. We are thereabouts; we have the size, strength, attitude and technique - it is spread across the pack instead of residing in individuals.

The first of the weekly Deep Dives was on mastering the ruck. You can find it here if you want to look at the overview.
 
Jolls said:
Benji made a few statements that were telling post game and gave some insight the the frustration the team must be feeling. We were supposed to play a simialr style of game to them but with more energy and shifting the ball early. Which we did for the first twenty minutes or so before we were overcome by Penrith's grind.

The warning I highlighted when I penned what I thought the game plan should be was that "we must avoid getting into the grind with Penrith by playing conservatively – this plays into their hands."

That is where we ended up; but I don't think it was through a lack of effort. It was though a combination of having the energy sapped from trying to play an up tempo game while concurrently being suffocated.

So we can moan about how the coach knows nothing and our players are shit or we could look at the game a little more closely and see where we continue to build from. Overall the stats, less kicks and kick return m, were pretty close; so certainly not completely dominated. The kicks and kick return m reflect relative field postion so really don't tell much of a story other than that. So we can finish on a high note let's start with what needs to be improved:
  • Ruck Dominance. We were dominated in all aspects around the ruck. Sukar and AD with PTB speeds in excess of 4 seconds and Hope just short of 6. It is hard to compare the stats elsewhere as we were continually returning the ball from deep in our own half; rarely having an opportunity to win momentum unless we shifted early. Twal, Sukkar and Seyfarth were ineffective. May took plenty of carries but did not impact the defensive line. AD was ineffective as a lock in attack - he played more like a half (possibly under instruction) but was MIA when it came to making the hard yards.
  • Penrith's forwards, less Garner and ICE, all had PTB speeds of sub 3.5s. This means that we did not control the ruck, we were unable to control the ruck as we were given less lattitude or Penrith have a significantly better techinque. Whatever the underlying issue, it had us on the back foot on both sides of the ruck.
  • Attack. We suffered from errors at crucial times that gave Penrith territory. Trying to force our way out of our own end against a compressed and rushing defence had us struggling for meters. Combine this with an "average" long kicking game and Penrith started most sets with an attacking mindset and finished them with kicks applying pressure on our line. There were not many attacking opportunites as a result.
  • In addition AD's role as a lock was not productive. He tried to play more as a running half - not taking the hard yards to put the defence in two minds. It is a bit early to state that AD as a lock is a failure - but he certainly wasn't effective in attack on Saturday as a lock, or as a half when Latu was switched to lock and eventually hooked.
  • Kicking game. I counted two long kicks that I considered to be effective in the entire game. From memory it was one each by Luai and AD - both finding the turf and running on to enable the chase to apply pressure. Api's 40/20 attempt went straight down Edwards throat. From memory there were two contested kicks and the rest went directly to a player so deep there was no time for the chase to arrive. We simply don't have a good long kicking game so we are starting our sets much further back than the opposition and rucking it out from the deep set after set.
  • With Penrith dominating our attack with their line speed we again failed to react with an appropriate kick response. One 40/20 and one early set long kick will not upset the defensive line. We need to execute our early kick sets much better - in behind the line to Taylan/Toa or early 40/20/kicks to seagulls to disrupt their line speed and defensive strategy. This showed a clear lack of smarts.
  • Benji raised it in the presser - our kicking game was poor. It has been a weakness all season and was on show for all to see on Saturday. We need a lot of work in this area.
So what positives can we take away from the game?
  • Defence. Our line speed and compressed defensive line was pretty good in the middle third of the field. We were also easily able to deal with many attacking raids with a combination of slide and cover defence. However, the toll of having to cart the ball out from deep in our own half and new centre/wing combination led to simple lapses. Latu coming too far out of the line, misreads by Toa/Skelton and then later in the game our edges starting to be pulled apart.
  • The positive is that we can execute good defensive structure within a solid framework - but it fell off under a combination of pressure and fatigue. Lessen the mistakes and win some field postion and this will become less of an issue.
Hidden in what became a rabble towards the end of the game is the nucleus of a team that can climb the ladder. If we can't find a way to manage/change momentum to our advantage, through a combination of better smarts and a few more dominant forwards 2026 will be another long year anchored in the bottom 4. For the most part the ability is there, just below the surface. But not all of our starters in 25 can be starters in 26 otherwise we will be fighting for the spoon again.
Click to expand...
Wish I could see what you see. All I saw were boys playing men
 
Jolls said:
On the defensive side I think the focus has to be on making a dominant tackle and trying to turn them 90 degrees to the sideline to force them to get to their feet and re-orient. You can dig even deeper into that aspect as well - winning the contact is essential as a legs tackle is not going to faciltate what you want. The second part of it though is to win the wrestle to get them, if not on their back, at least facing the wrong direction. Bigger bodies, although not essential, are an advantage. However, for mine strength and technique can over come size a lot of the time.

On the offensive side it is about winning the contact and to e that is about height and leg drive, too high and you are held up and they can fight with you for the play the ball. Get low and force your way though the tackle/line and find your front. The other option, that we don't see often any more, is the round the body pass; drive low step deliver the ball back on the inside of where you came from. It can get quite technical and into running X/Y lines (that we don't do) and hit and spin plays. Whatever you are trying to achieve it is about winning the contact os it is more about leg drive and technique than size. Having said that it doesn't hurt to have bigger bodies - as long as they have the conditioning to make a difference.

So a long way to get there bit I think the answer lies in technique as guys like Twal and Sukkar have plenty of strenght but lack technique and as much as I like May he has technique but appears to be short on leg drive. Royce has what we need but not enough motor. We are thereabouts; we have the size, strength, attitude and technique - it is spread across the pack instead of residing in individuals.

The first of the weekly Deep Dives was on mastering the ruck. You can find it here if you want to look at the overview.
Click to expand...
What do you reckon about they're running style. Imo Seyfarth, Twal and May need to run with alot less verticality, what I mean is run more head first into tackles leaning forward more as they hit the line would help them land forward and hit the ground on their front. Atm when they run at the line particularly Twal he looks like he's hitting it standing straight making it much easier for the opposition to grab, wrestle and dominate the tackle.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TSP
liltiger said:
What do you reckon about their running style. Imo Seyfarth, Twal and May need to run with alot less verticality, what I mean is run more head first into tackles leaning forward more as they hit the line would help them land forward and hit the ground on their front. Atm when they run at the line particularly Twal he looks like he's hitting it standing straight making it much easier for the opposition to grab, wrestle and dominate the tackle.
Click to expand...
I agree and I think far too many of our forward plays are formulaic and frequently broadcast. We need more bodies in motion (mentioned earlier), angles and second phase.

Our hit ups are too vanilla.

We don’t exactly have an assertive pack, so we need more guile and threat beyond strength.

Benji wants the safety of basic meters, but some teams, we can match their athleticism and force.

We waste a lot of possession I think. We might want to keep turning teams around earlier than do very little up the middle. Depends on the opponent I guess.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 471 (members: 11, guests: 460)
Back
Top