For all the discussion about this player versus that player and what went wrong against the Roosters, there has been little discussion about what I believe was the single, biggest factor that killed us in that game - penalties.
In today's game, penalties are just about the single, most influential factor in deciding which way a game swings. Almost all game-plans are based around one simple objective. Do not let your opposition into your red-zone. There are generally three ways to get into the opposition twenty.
1) The opposition loses the ball
2) The opposition gives you a penalty
3) You earn it by making a break or dominating the opposition in the territory battle.
As we all know, most teams play very mistake free football, unless they themselves are in the opposition twenty. As such, factor one is definitely an area you can't rely on to get you home in any game. It's definitely a way you can lose again. North Queensland's error count against the Broncos undid a sizeable advantage they should have had on the penalty front.
Penalties not only generally gift you a good 20+ metres on the kick, but you get six more tackles and as such any penalty almost always put you into the opposition 20 by the end of a set. The Roosters kickers did exceptionally well by making a lot more than the 20 metres on the kick as well, so basically every penalty was resulting in sustained on-line defence.
We gave up a massive 11 penalties, against a very-well disciplined Roosters side who only gave up five. That's six times we invited the Roosters to score, and by the second-half every time we did, they did. You set yourself mission impossible with those kinds of stats.
However, the most critical aspect of this was the early penalties we gave up that led to the opening two tries. The Eels had started quite well to that point but two penalties and two tries later, we were immediately behind the eight ball.
It has been a recurring theme for Parramatta for the past number of years - consistently losing the penalty count, but crucially the early penalty count has meant that we have had to come from behind continually in recent seasons and as such there is little wonder we've achieved the results we have.
This year, getting off to a strong-start is more important than ever. If your forced to do a lot of early defending, with the speed of the game, you are going to become fatigued quicker and you will have your blow-outs.
As such, it's a part of Parramatta's game that Brad Arthur just has to get fixed. Even against the Warriors we gave up 9 penalties - we were just fortunate that the Warriors were equally ill-disciplined.
Ricky Stuart, of course, made the point last year that he thought referees found it easy to penalise his young time and while not denying the penalties might have been deserved, he didn't think the Eels were getting the same rub of the turf as their oppositions.
Penalties, of course, tend to come when you're getting dominated in the forwards. When big forward packs get a roll-on, opposition defences feel under more pressure to try and slow down the play and hold down too long and get penalised. Or you might feel that you can't hold out the next six, so you try a sneaky rake. A lack of confidence in your own on-line defence is another factor in how many penalties you're likely to give away.
The Eels competed physically very well against the Warriors, and they need to produce that week-in, week-out so that they can get into new habits where they can focus on discipline and not giving away those penalties and piggy-backing the opposition into their twenty. We've seen Brad Arthur has prioritised defence to date, but he needs to take a hard-line against players who continually give up penalties because he won't get the kind of football team he's looking for, or the results, until we kick the habit of . Selection decisions like Vai Toutai over Ken Sio are built on Arthur's desire to have a team who will win the territory battle and all these are undone when we continually give up penalties.
Replies
I think we were chalk and cheese between rounds 1 and 2 in this area, I don't know if the guys got flogged too hard at training or what but where as against the Warriors we showed great energy getting back with the ref and then up quickly we were really lethargic against the Roosters. Some of our players were simply standing offside the whole time.
I think we have struggled in wet conditions for as many years as I can remember as well, whenever it rains I always think we are going to lose (this point is off topic but just an aside)
1 penalty equals 1 extra hour worth of training for the whole team, after 8, 9, 10 penalties a game the players will get it through their heads eventually
And we make it like the opposition are playing in dry conditions. So very frustrating.
Good distraction from the player v player debate, I agree.
I have mentioned the penalties a fair bit and I agree (have stated) that penalties are one of the biggest game changers in the modern game. The attack has become so adept in the red zone (and at times, the defence so poor) that teams cannot sustain multiple sets of 6 and opposing teams can gain that critical 'momentum shift' from only a handful of penalties and a couple of tries, very quickly. I just wrote about it another blog.
11-5 is horrific an symptomatic of a lot of our early troubles last year. I agree that Ricky attempting to stand up for the team over penalties last year was one of the few positives he imparted on the club.
I think it is partially an attitude/discipline problem with Parra players. BUT, I also think that teams are CLEARLY advantaged/disadvantaged through the effect of penalties in the following ways:
(a) home team/crowd pressure;
(b) 'favourites' tag of some teams (meaning favoured teams, ie. Storm, Roosters, etc); and
(c) momentum shift
(a) and (b) are very debatable and have happened historically, however, the more recent trend I am seeing is for a referee to 'get on the back' of a side who gains the momentum and give them an additional lift. It doesn't seem to matter if its a team getting ahead - like what the Roosters did to us the other night, or a team climbing back into a game to cut a large deficit - or a ref seemingly picking a team in the early going to give them a head-start in games. Its very real and you see examples of all of this happen week in week out and in almost EVERY match. It has to stop - Its killing the game.
the other thing you will invariably see is an early penalty in the first or second set of a match for deadest, next to nothing. players 'slightly, maybe' offside. players' slightly' holding down in the ruck, etc. Its like some refs just like to assert their authority just for the hell of it in the early stages - especially for/against one team. that early possession shift can have a huge cumulative influence throughout the rest of the game......
You're not wrong with your last point. When I refereed football at park level we were told to pick up everything in the first 10-15 min and then relax. I never did that because I thought I should be consistent across the entire game but I know other referees did it.
Where I think we lost the Roosters battle, was that their pack, dominated from the word go.
It all starts from the middle. When the opposition dominate the hit ups, and get a quick play the ball, we are penelised either offside or trying to slow it down-resulting in fatigue, and more penalties.
When Parramatta took hit ups, we were easily dominated, giving more time for the defence to retreat.
Forward battles win the match, not penalties.
I disagree in part chief.....
I say in part because I do agree that our forwards were clearly dominated and that is where things went pear-shaped from the beginning. I also agree that forward battles more often than not decide games. That is often a given.
What I do disagree with is the notion that penalties to not heavily influence or decide games. The momentum shifts that penalties - especially 50/50 or just plain bad calls - create often go a long way to deciding games in recent years, or changing the outcome of a game at critical points. I see it every week almost.
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
of 4 Next