Wests Tigers 2016...The winning formula..

[innsaneink]

Where did I state he purposely lost games? What if he felt the best way to have the team in the best place moving forward was to spend 6 months working on the defense of the team?

I do believe that the people we have in place at the moment are looking at the long term health of the club. Why else would we be looking at cleaning up the backloaded contracts.

That is what you and others are basically stating. Its complete palava of course. He just stuffed up.

I'm hopeful that he has learned his lesson and will send the team out to win games which obviously includes playing defence.

Steve,remember the five hit ups and a bomb,Taylor ball,other clubs use it and are very good at it because they understand about a defensive structure and how to implement it.Our young guys had no real idea of implementing an NRL defensive structure because they DIDNT know it..Taylor was teaching them what it will be like to go into a game and play to a defensive structure,not just attack and hope they can score a try..Obviously you just have it in your mind to hate on Taylor because you dislike him and his coaching methods,you can't build a strong house if you have a weak foundation,for to long now we have had a weak defensive structure and Taylor is trying to correct it so our team can be competitive in attack and defense,don't forget some of our younger players were like turn styles when it came to tackling,this year because of Taylor their techniques for tackling may improve..

I find this completely delusional. It has nothing at all to do with hating on Taylor either. I want him to be successful.

I love all the excuses that are put up. You have to learn a defensive structure and therefore you can't attack. It was all about teaching them defence. You need a solid foundation. Its all platitudes that are meaningless. If any of this is true why didn't the defense improve ?

It did improve:
2013 = 120
2014 = 110
2015= = 99 tries conceded

So who is delusional Steve?

 

[stevetiger]

We were last on the ladder and letting in points left, right and centre. In the last 5 rounds we let in 26 points on average. If that is what JT's vaunted success at teaching the kids how to defend means then we are in big trouble.

Lets hope that I'm right and JT recognises the mistakes that he made and fixes it.

 

[TrueTiger]

We were last on the ladder and letting in points left, right and centre. In the last 5 rounds we let in 26 points on average. If that is what JT's vaunted success at teaching the kids how to defend means then we are in big trouble.

Lets hope that I'm right and JT recognises the mistakes that he made and fixes it.

Actually Steve,let's hope the players learn from their ineptness and can finally understand JTs defensive structure as well as build on their tackling techniques..otherwise they will leak plenty of points like last year….

 

[ricksen]

The defensive numbers definitely got worse as the season went on, so hopefully JT takes the necessary steps to rectify that (extra depth will help).
But the talk about 'positive' gameplans doesn't really make sense to me. We scored the 6th most points in the competition, incl. more than half of the top 8.
As much as our defence opened up in the second half of the season, our attack did likewise - shouldn't JT get credit for that?

 

[stevetiger]

We were last on the ladder and letting in points left, right and centre. In the last 5 rounds we let in 26 points on average. If that is what JT's vaunted success at teaching the kids how to defend means then we are in big trouble.

Lets hope that I'm right and JT recognises the mistakes that he made and fixes it.

Actually Steve,let's hope the players learn from their ineptness and can finally understand JTs defensive structure as well as build on their tackling techniques..otherwise they will leak plenty of points like last year….

The players need to improve but the coach needs massive improvement as well. JT made some extremely poor rookie like mistakes last year. Lets hope that he gets his act together and the players that we are hopeful kick on do kick on. If that happens I think we can have a good season.

 

[stevetiger]

The defensive numbers definitely got worse as the season went on, so hopefully JT takes the necessary steps to rectify that (extra depth will help).
But the talk about 'positive' gameplans doesn't really make sense to me. We scored the 6th most points in the competition, incl. more than half of the top 8.
As much as our defence opened up in the second half of the season, our attack did likewise - shouldn't JT get credit for that?

I think what happened is that JT realized his mistakes and we started playing some positive footy. That is why I have some hope for this season. I definitely give him credit for the change in approach and I think it has to continue.

 

[goldcoast_tiger]

I understand that this is your perspective but I think it's clearly wrong. If you want proof look at where we came last year. That is what having a myopic focus on defence does.

.

Steve,in order to win games,both your defence and attack must be very good,we all know how much flair and brilliance our team has in attack,however their defense at times was woeful,hence the big leads in games and then being beaten right at the end.Taylor knew this and put a defensive game plan in place so they could learn how to defend and keep a lead,that was Taylor ball..this gave the majority of the young guys an education in defence at NRL level,it wasn't pretty and it can be boring,however the team can't just learn it at training one night and understand it the next game,it takes time and this year I reckon the whole team will be better for last years experiences… 😛ray:

This is spin and its clearly false. **_Taylor stuffed us up with his defensive game plans and we came dead last._**
You need to attack just the same as you need to look past spin.

I heard Paul McGregor interviewed last year when Saints put in a performance and lost but their defence was good. His comments were something like you have to threaten with the ball in hand because otherwise it makes it way too easy for the opposition. They just have it all left in the tank and you can't win games like that.

Defence matters however its just one part of the game.

You are absolutely right Steve it is just one part of the game.

Unfortunately you obviously don't think it is 50% of the game. BUT it is!
You also don't seem to grasp that Taylorball was a tool to get the youngsters to understand structures, goal line defence, positions in defence and how to tackle as a 1,2 or 3 player unit. These young guys had no idea (of tackling with any structure or technique - it was non existent in lower grades). As JT didn't have much time with them - part of the schooling was game time.

They understood more as the season went on and with this pre season behind them, they will improve even further. Unfortunately you think logical and truthful explanations are just spin because you do not wish to believe it. That is ok - your prerogative.

Please understand though - attack is only 50% of the game – yes, yes - heard it said on here many times "all we have to do is score more points than the opposition".

You still won't win if you have no defence....guaranteed, unless it is a fluke.

Actual Russell, if you score more points than the opposition, it's impossible to lose, unless miracles are now happening in NRL games….Guaranteed( I think)

 

[TrueTiger]

Unfortunately GCT,the WTs find it difficult to score more points than the opposition,therefore guaranteed they won't win..they have proved that many times,even when they have scored more than the opposition in the first half of a game they still end up losing because they can't defend a lead,I'm with Russ on this one,you were only throwing your 2 cents worth in…but I'm onto you..

 

[innsaneink]

We were last on the ladder and letting in points left, right and centre. In the last 5 rounds we let in 26 points on average. If that is what JT's vaunted success at teaching the kids how to defend means then we are in big trouble.

Lets hope that I'm right and JT recognises the mistakes that he made and fixes it.

Wow
How desperate are you?
I just laugh

 

[everett]

Defence is all about attitude and players commitment.

We need to be more patient and win back the ball with repeat sets then score points.

Hard to defend when a team has repeat after repeat sets. Something usually gives.

 

[doublesonthemain]

Where did I state he purposely lost games? What if he felt the best way to have the team in the best place moving forward was to spend 6 months working on the defense of the team?

I do believe that the people we have in place at the moment are looking at the long term health of the club. Why else would we be looking at cleaning up the backloaded contracts.

That is what you and others are basically stating. Its complete palava of course. He just stuffed up.

I'm hopeful that he has learned his lesson and will send the team out to win games which obviously includes playing defence.

Steve,remember the five hit ups and a bomb,Taylor ball,other clubs use it and are very good at it because they understand about a defensive structure and how to implement it.Our young guys had no real idea of implementing an NRL defensive structure because they DIDNT know it..Taylor was teaching them what it will be like to go into a game and play to a defensive structure,not just attack and hope they can score a try..Obviously you just have it in your mind to hate on Taylor because you dislike him and his coaching methods,you can't build a strong house if you have a weak foundation,for to long now we have had a weak defensive structure and Taylor is trying to correct it so our team can be competitive in attack and defense,don't forget some of our younger players were like turn styles when it came to tackling,this year because of Taylor their techniques for tackling may improve..

I find this completely delusional. It has nothing at all to do with hating on Taylor either. I want him to be successful.

I love all the excuses that are put up. You have to learn a defensive structure and therefore you can't attack. It was all about teaching them defence. You need a solid foundation. Its all platitudes that are meaningless. If any of this is true why didn't the defense improve ?

I thought the defence did improve on the previous 2 seasons.

 

[doublesonthemain]

I'm just wondering what people's expectations in terms of improvements in defence were last year when it was said that it would be the focus? I would've thought any substantial improvement on points conceded from the previous year would be a reasonable guide. Sure, Brooks and Moses weren't great but they're very much on a learning curve and will hopefully improve this year, actually thought Moses improved in the latter part of the season last year. What are our expectations this year in terms of attack and defence?

 

[TrueTiger]

I'm just wondering what people's expectations in terms of improvements in defence were last year when it was said that it would be the focus? I would've thought any substantial improvement on points conceded from the previous year would be a reasonable guide. Sure, Brooks and Moses weren't great but they're very much on a learning curve and will hopefully improve this year, actually thought Moses improved in the latter part of the season last year. What are our expectations this year in terms of attack and defence?

My expectations are that the team as a whole understand that it is important to get the defense right and that points will come on the back of a stringent defensive structure…no ifs or buts,get the defense right the rest of the game plan will fall into place..

 

[goldcoast_tiger]

Unfortunately GCT,the WTs find it difficult to score more points than the opposition,therefore guaranteed they won't win..they have proved that many times,even when they have scored more than the opposition in the first half of a game they still end up losing because they can't defend a lead,I'm with Russ on this one,you were only throwing your 2 cents worth in…but I'm onto you..

I agree with you on the fact that we find it difficult. But that wasn't Russell's point.
Russ made a completely false statement, I merely corrected that , and I think my 2 cents worth is the same value anyone else's.
Besides that, we weren't talking about half games, just games
In fact, your statements about those games that we lost after a big lead, proves my point.
The reason that we lost them, was that we didn't score more than the opposition
: :smiley:

 

[goldcoast_tiger]

I'm just wondering what people's expectations in terms of improvements in defence were last year when it was said that it would be the focus? I would've thought any substantial improvement on points conceded from the previous year would be a reasonable guide. Sure, Brooks and Moses weren't great but they're very much on a learning curve and will hopefully improve this year, actually thought Moses improved in the latter part of the season last year. What are our expectations this year in terms of attack and defence?

My expectations are that the team as a whole understand that it is important to get the defense right and that points will come on the back of a stringent defensive structure…no ifs or buts,get the defense right the rest of the game plan will fall into place..

Some first grade standard defence would be nice, for starters.
Especially our soft defence near our line.
In most cases last year our line defence was as bad as it usually has been.
Unless that improves, (and not just for one or two games,) we are still Going to be near the bottom.

 

[TrueTiger]

Unfortunately GCT,the WTs find it difficult to score more points than the opposition,therefore guaranteed they won't win..they have proved that many times,even when they have scored more than the opposition in the first half of a game they still end up losing because they can't defend a lead,I'm with Russ on this one,you were only throwing your 2 cents worth in…but I'm onto you..

I agree with you on the fact that we find it difficult. But that wasn't Russell's point.
Russ made a completely false statement, I merely corrected that , and I think my 2 cents worth is the same value anyone else's.
Besides that, we weren't talking about half games, just games
In fact, your statements about those games that we lost after a big lead, proves my point.
The reason that we lost them, was that we didn't score more than the opposition
: :smiley:

GCT,let's not play mind games here,yes you were right and yes Russ was right,let's not lose sight of the core of the conversation,WTs defense has been woeful to say the least,JT is trying to implement a structure that our youthful side can understand so as when they are in a game they can DEFEND a lead and learn about what it takes to win a game defensively and therefore winning the game with a lead…..we know they can score points,trouble is the opposition score twice as many because they can't defend...a learning curve as per 2015..

 

[goldcoast_tiger]

I wasn't playing mind games TT, what I said, despite being truthful, just a joke, but since you want to defend the original statement.
That comment has been bandied around here a lot in the last season, but the fact is that a team that has the capability of running up good scores, can at times finish high in the comp, despite having a mediocre defence,
As we did in 2005.
Our defence was patchy at times in that season, and our defence wasn't exactly a brick wall type at times.
The difference was that we unearthed some great attacking players, who helped to shoot that old saying down in a big way.
The Cowboys have had a similar run, and always seem to finish near the top end, and have for years relied a lot more on their attack than on defence.
All I'm saying is that whenever that saying is used it is actually wrong.

 

[goldcoast_tiger]

I wasn't playing mind games TT, what I said, despite being truthful, just a joke, but since you want to defend the original statement.
That comment has been bandied around here a lot in the last season, but the fact is that a team that has the capability of running up good scores, can at times finish high in the comp, despite having a mediocre defence,
As we did in 2005.
Our defence was patchy at times in that season, and our defence wasn't exactly a brick wall type at times.
The difference was that we unearthed some great attacking players, who helped to shoot that old saying down in a big way.
The Cowboys have had a similar run, and mostly seem to finish near the top end, and have for years relied a lot more on their attack than on defence.
All I'm saying is that whenever that saying is used it is actually wrong.

 

[goldcoast_tiger]

I wasn't playing mind games TT, what I said, despite being truthful, just a joke, but since you want to defend the original statement.
That comment has been bandied around here a lot in the last season, but the fact is that a team that has the capability of running up good scores, can at times finish high in the comp, despite having a mediocre defence,
As we did in 2005.
Our defence was patchy at times in that season, and our defence wasn't exactly a brick wall type at times.
The difference was that we unearthed some great attacking players, who helped to shoot that old saying down in a big way.
The Cowboys have had a similar run, and mostly seem to finish near the top end, and have for years relied a lot more on their attack than on defence.

All I'm saying is that whenever that saying is used it is actually wrong.
Wests success with mostly all out attack was a result of having the players that that sort of game suited].
As well as a Coach who recognised the attacking talent that he had in his team.

 

[goldcoast_tiger]

I wasn't playing mind games TT, what I said, despite being truthful, just a joke, but since you want to defend the original statement.
That comment has been bandied around here a lot in the last season, but the fact is that a team that has the capability of running up good scores, can at times finish high in the comp, despite having a mediocre defence,
As we did in 2005.
Our defence was patchy at times in that season, and our defence wasn't exactly a brick wall type at times.
The difference was that we unearthed some great attacking players, who helped to shoot that old saying down in a big way.
The Cowboys have had a similar run, and always seem to finish near the top end, and have for years relied a lot more on their attack than on defence.
All I'm saying is that whenever that saying is used it is actually wrong.

WTs , in 2005 had success with a game that relied a lot more on attack than defence, they had the players to do it and luckily , the Coach that had the ability to see the talent that he had , and to get the most from that talent.

Apologies for the post double up.