1. Why do we give our winger ball and they have 4 to beat and get smashed over the sideline. Both Fergo and Sivo are good finishers and score if given half a chance, they are just not given that chance. Why are we not creating more room for them. Believe some posters have touched on this? Not just Moses fault - he was playing straight and digging into the line against the Panthers.
2. Why do we not have a plan of attack when the opposition gets up fast giving our attack no room? Opposition have been doing this for years and we still seem to have no answer.
3. Why did Moses/Matterson switch with Brown/Lane? Like that we are trying new stuff but why the switch? Is Brown being given teh better side for a right footer or is he being asked to do more of the play making?
Replies
Responding to Muttman's description of Eels vs Bunnies back line movements, it seems we are talking very different philosophies. Bennet wants to get his team to put the opposition under a lot of pressure to get their defensive reads right. A poor read is a line break and they're away.
BA appears to want to edge forward safety-first. He appears happy to grind out 10m a play and hope there is an offload, missed tackle or a little extra post-contact meters that scrapes an extra 10-25m to the default 40-50m he can get via safety-first grinding. The result is that on the 5th or 6th tackle we are in the opposition quarter for a kick. Rinse and repeat. Yawn. This safety first style is compatible with the lateral movements Muttman describes.
Brissyeel and I exchanged a few posts about this Bunnies/Eels contrast as well. I accept Brissyeel's point that the Eels can still run up points via their conservative style. Where I might part company with Brissy, though, is that I think the Eels' style is not suited to challenging Top 4 or even Top 6 teams, and instead is designed to beat weaker teams or teams off their game. It will probably get us bottom 8 but rolled easily in the finals. I wonder if that is the point? To settle for repeated finals appearances?
It's a delebrate plan void of any imagination or creativity the game was never meant to be played that way maybe BA would have been a master coach 50 years ago but putting all your eggs in one basket is foolish
Why? because BAs a very simple man.
I have a bad feeling I'm going to be making a lot of comfort soup this season.
Perhaps it's called being overcoached and loosing the instinct that you once had
1. We need to be deeper, even when we are on their lines we need to get back a bit and run onto it
2. Again we are too flat
3. Trialing defence strategies, (it was odd ti see but if it stops that weak edge defence then go for it)
Eels were too flat and a lot of one out runs. Moses needs to get the ball in his hands a lot more as does Dyl Brown as there was far too much Mahoney to a forward. Easy to read but they might have had a simple game plan for the trial just to get some kilometres into their legs. Still pretty good in defence but doing too much of it.
I noticed the Prof refers to South's attacking style around the halves. Very simple with someone running hidden behind a playmaker to make an extra man with a relatively easy try. Slater did that all the time. We have the quality players to do that stuff and we rarely see any attempt to do something similar. We are still stuck with the one-up power plays which rarely get us anywhere..You would think something would click with trying something different
What gets to me is when Sivo and Fergo get criticized when they don. t score tries when they have a 6 inch side line strip to work with
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
of 4 Next