I think it is fair to say that Parramatta's last play options while on attack inside the opponents "red zone" has been POOR all year.
I do not understand why our kicking game (in particular) has been so in-effective as an attacking weapon.
Parramatta hardly ever kicks a genuine well directed high bomb aimed applying pressure on the opponents ball catcher
EVEN WORSE - they don't even really attempt the "grubber" and attempt to force a "repeat set" through a line drop out
What does that tell me ?
Repeat Sets are the signs of a confident and WELL COACHED team. Repeat Sets have success when the Team rely's on patience, as well as their own ability to "break" the opponenet
By abandoning the "grubber" - Parramatta does not see any value in building pressure on opponents, and worse, place themselves under too much pressure to score on THAT final play....often leaving empty handed.....and letting the opponents "off the hook"
Here is Parramatta's LINE DROP OUT record for 2014
19 vs souths 1-0 x
18 vs warriors 4-3 x
16 vs knights 2-0 x
15 vs storm 4-0 x
14 vs Dogs 2-0 x
13 vs cows 3-2 x
12 vs penrith 1-0 x
10 vs drags 5-0 x
9 vs sharks 0-3 Y
8 vs cows 0-2 Y
7 vs tigers 1-1 D
6 vs roosters 2-1 x
5 vs bris 0-1 Y
4 vs penrith 1-0 x
3 vs manly 2-1 x
2 vs roosters 0-1 Y
1 vs warriors 2-0 x
17 games 12 games opponents have forced MORE line drop outs than Parra.
17 games 13 games where OPPONENTS have forced at least 1 drop out
17 games 9 games where PARRA has forced at least 1 drop out
17 games 9 games OPPONENTS have forced 2 or more line drop outs
17 games 4 games where PARRA has forced 2 or more drop outs
17 games 4 games OPPONENTS have forced ZERO line drop outs
17 games 8 games Parra has forced ZERO line drop outs
This is Rugby League 101 - if you don't score, at least attempt to get the ball back.
Sure, a "grubber" on every last tackle is predictable, and I am not suggesting that at all.......but rather, have the "grubber" at least included in the game plan
BA, Norman and Sandow ALL deserve blame....as well as our (c) "on field captains
Lacking the basic fundamentals in attack by gaining "repeat sets" is surely some kind of "antidote" to a mounting injury toll
My Point
Parra play DUMB !!!!........and the coach has to take a fair bit of blame here
Replies
How many repeat sets/drop outs do the Roosters get?
i don't understand the relevance of the question ?
Micky P gave me this link http://live.nrlstats.com/nrl/season2014.html
I went through game by game. I scoured the web looking for some sort of combined stats on this topic, to see where Parra stand V all opponents....I guess you could do the same re Roosters
But the evidence is clear, when it comes to repeat sets and applying pressure - Parra simply IGNORE this tactic , compared to the opponents they play on a weekly basis....which makes no sense with a mounting injury toll
Surely "time of possession" esp in the opponents Red Zone is a sensible tactic to use when you have a team depleted with injury
Roosters have RTS and Tupou on the wings. They're just as likely to score by bombing to those guys on the last as they are grubbering and trying again from the half-way line.
you are right - see above
eg
Roosters #1 Points scored #2nd best defence
Parra #10 Points scores #15th (2nd last) points allowed
The Roosters have smart halves with a smart team and a smart coach, they won the comp last year yet they didn't win many repeat sets off drop outs and they conceeded a lot of penalties. That isn't smart football yet they won the comp using this tactic. That's the relevance of the question.
Superior Talent across the park, is the convenient "missing ingredient" in your summation Ham
Are you suggesting that "repeat sets" are in fact irrelevant, esp when confronted with an injury crisis and where time of possession is "your friend"
Personally. I think "building pressure" and occupying favorable field position is a pretty decent way to go
The Roosters, may be the exception - as superior Talent will always "trump" most things
Interestingly here are the Roosters "repeat set" stats - they are almost identical to Parra's btw
R Opposition
1-2 x
1-2 x
0-2 x
3-0 Y
0-2 x
0-1 x
1-2 x
0-3 x
0-0 D
3-0 Y
3-1 Y
2-1 Y
0-0 D
0-5 X
1-3 X
0-1 X
0-3 X
17 games 12 games Parra opponents have forced MORE line drop outs
17 games 11 games ROOSTERS opponents have forced MORE line drop outs
17 games 13 games where OPPONENTS have forced at least 1 drop out
17 games 9 games where PARRA has forced at least 1 drop out
17 games 13 games where ROOSTERS OPPONENTS have forced at least 1 drop out
17 games 8 games where ROOSTERS has forced at least 1 drop out
17 games 9 games OPPONENTS have forced 2 or more line drop outs
17 games 4 games where PARRA has forced 2 or more drop outs
17 games 9 games ROOSTERS OPPONENTS have forced 2 or more line drop outs
17 games 4 games where ROOSTERS has forced 2 or more drop outs
17 games 4 games OPPONENTS have forced ZERO line drop outs
17 games 8 games Parra has forced ZERO line drop outs
17 games 4 games ROOSTERS OPPONENTS have forced ZERO line drop outs
17 games 9 games ROOSTERS has forced ZERO line drop outs
However, the Talent equation comes in here
Roosters #1 Points scored #2nd best defence
Parra #10 Points scores #15th (2nd last) points allowed
This clearly shows that the Roosters score "easily" compared to Parra when in the "Red Zone" and/or are capable of scoring long range Try's and therefore not needing Red Zone Repeats
It also demonstrated that Parra has difficulty scoring Try's when in the Red Zone
Maybe the Roosters is the new "normal" ,,,,where having the best Team with the best attacking and defending records is the way to go....but for a side looking for an identity like Parra - surely "building pressure" and trying to dominate time of possession and field position - with an injury stricken team is a MUCH better way to go
Then again, you are actually right after all? Give me the team with the best Talent, scoring and defending ability any day (btw)
I'm not saying that they are completely irrelevant but if you have the attacking prowess then they aren't crucial to winning games. Parra for a few years have struggled to look dangerous in the opposition 20 and this is because of our halves. They just can't get the right kick in, we put in too many cross field kicks to our right side, we need to put in a range of cross-field kicks, grubbers, and bombs to keep the opposition on their toes. I don't think a team should be looking to get a repeat set, that should be secondary to scoring a try. Our halves can't produce a try and when the next best option is a repeat set then our halves short kicking game comes into play and as you've pointed out it's terrible. We really need a DCE, Foran, or Hunt.
We speak the same language here Ham
What I said in my original post is that our "bombs" are misguided and that we have abandoned the "grubber" entirely
I did not suggest that we go for "repeat sets" every time....I said that it should be "at least" included in our tactics
The fact that BOTH Bombs and Grubbers are poorly executed and/or abandoned is the fault of BA, Norman sandow and our (c) captains
The fact that Parramatta CANNOT execute an attacking kicking game IS the real problem here.........the "repeat set" stats, simply back this up IMO
Re - Better halves - I agree with you 100% - I just cannot see Parra having the ability to attract DCE or Foran (maybe that's why we signed his brother)....as well as salary cap constraints - but having KEY halves that can execute IS the answer - undoubtedly
Ahh right, I just read the blog title and assumed. I don't see how our captains are meant to make sure that our halves are executing last tackle plays, I just think that's an excuse to blame Hayne and Mannah. And in a sense BA and the coaching staff can tell them how to correct their positions to get better execution and how to somewhat read the play to get a repeat set. At the end of the day when on the field it's all the halves fault, they get the credit when they do something right and they should get the credit when something they do goes wrong.
At the moment none of our first grade halves can get a repeat set as they just don't have the short kicking game to execute nor do they have the vision to be able to set it up if a try can't be scored. It's why I have been an advocate for Hayne to play in the halves for at least this year. He is the only player in our team that can play in the halves and get a repeat set with his short kicking game. Unfortunately I don't think Hayne has had enough training in this position to be able to do exactly what we need from him in the halves but he has all the basic skills to become the half that we need. Definitely something to keep in mind when we get Izzy and DCE in 2016.
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
of 7 Next