Our defence

[Sir Chadley]

Just following on from a post from Everton Shark about us not moving up in defence.

Now I didn't play league at all, but to me we need to move up quicker than we have been this year. Someone also mentioned the Broncos game last year when we were extremely aggressive in defence but we have not seen it since. Surely it is a no brainer that you to have to move up quicker and be agressive so why aren't we doing it?

Can anyone shed any light? Is it to conserve energy? I'm at a loss to explain it.

 

[Bundy Shark]

It started in the game v Titans, especially in the 2nd half, they were marching down the field in a set of 6 at will.

 

[Gow's Scissors]

I did read somewhere cant remember where that Peter Sharpe explained why some clubs do and some clubs don't move up, wish I remember where I read it. Long story short it is part of the plan, its not like we simply don't do it.

 

[Mark^Bastard]

Its less risky in some ways apparently. But it can be exploited and our team needs to vary it to suit different teams.

 

[Thresher]

is it do do with teams choosing between umbrella type defence or sliding defence?

 

[Great White Shark]

From my expereince, and from what I can see, we are struggling a little with the speed of the ruck. The refs are enforcing quicker ruck play, making it harder for markers to get into position and for defensive lines to regroup and adjust to the play. When teams get some 'go forward' it is hard to contain good dummy half runners. We are not the only team struggling with this but we are missing some quality at dummy half to counter-act the metres.

The game is changing, we just need to adjust to the game.

 

[Mark^Bastard]

is it do do with teams choosing between umbrella type defence or sliding defence?

Sort of. But its like slide defence and helps against teams that rely on ball playing before the line. Its why we have done okay against melbourne recently.

 

[DeathMoth]

If the plan is actually to not move up, I'm very much against it. I'm no rugby league brain, don't get me wrong, but you don't need to be a genius to see the reasons why.

If you stand the 10m, the opponent advances 10m and you tackle them on that spot, they've made 10m. If you drive them back, they make less than 10m; however the chances of driving back a running opponent from a standing start ain't that great. The chances of the opponent making more than 10m are high. The chances of the opposition making at least 60m before the kick are pretty high. You don't need to be Wayne Bennett to work that out...it's just a simple bit of spatial maths, probability and physics.

The case for moving up as a group is extremely strong especially when the ruck is speeding up. We need the enthusiasm that it breeds. It helps get on top and it helps win the mental battle.

I'd love to hear more about the reasons why coaches might choose this type of defense. Seems like a **** plan to me.

 

[Thresher]

I've seen Melbourne caught out a few times with their outside defence rushing up and in

 

[DeathMoth]

I've seen Melbourne caught out a few times with their outside defence rushing up and in

But that's up and in. Same happens with our outside backs.

I'm more talking about bringing the group forward, as one, not coming in, no weird ****, just bringing the line forward.

 

[Thresher]

But that's up and in. Same happens with our outside backs.

I'm more talking about bringing the group forward, as one, not coming in, no weird ****, just bringing the line forward.

yeah we must have been typing at the same time, wasn't responding to your post, just adding to the one above it

 

[Thresher]

many years ago this used to be the kind of stuff discussed in the press, now the league section is more like the gossip and social pages

 

[evertonshark]

I see absolutely no benefit in the defensive line not moving up, just means by the time the opposition gets to their kick they seem to be in a fairly attacking position, especially since we have a habit of kicking straight down the fullback/wingers throat and they start their set of 6 up near the halfway line.

 

[Thresher]

wonder if it has anything to do with teams constantly running their big men at Carney

 

[evertonshark]

many years ago this used to be the kind of stuff discussed in the press, now the league section is more like the gossip and social pages

Too true thresher, or your more likely to see a full page about supercoach stuff than actual footy tactics.

 

[DeathMoth]

Too true thresher, or your more likely to see a full page about supercoach stuff than actual footy tactics.

Unfortunately, **** sells.

 

[Mr Wright]

I've brought this point up a few times here, but we are really missing Jeremy Smith and Bryce Gibbs in this department. An area these two excell at. It's one of the reasons jez is such a winner. He added so much value and grit to our side. Don't get me wrong, Luke Lewis is a class player and brings a lot to the table in other ways, but personally I'd rather have Jeremy Smith.

Hopefully when Gibbs is fit he can rectify this problem to an extent.

 

[oozy]

Everyone above have made credible examples. what i understand differs slightly though.

Ultimately as a game plan you have 2 major options, they can conceivably vary dependening
on the opponent's !
1. employ a fast no holds bar attack scenario throw caution to the wind where you hope your a mile in front before half time.
albeit you might have used up your major fuel supply in the initial stoush.
(ask for Paul Gallen's opinion if this scenario seems foley)
2. employ a methodology where you play the percentage no risk footy and hope your opposition
makes fundamental mistakes where by you captialize on early mistakes. then use a siege mentality
(home ground) in some cases to graft outta a hard fought win.

There's are other problematic scenarios , but these are the ones you will see on most occasions.
Players aren't machines. 9 times outta 10 they will let you friggen down.
FACT0 CON VERTE = play what's in front of you..

made that ****e up..sue me.:lmao

 

[Gards]

It's a shame we are sitting back cause I think of the games where we have moved up in defense as a unit and we have kicked ass. Intimidating the opposition team and forcing mistakes. It's great to watch as well. But just an observation I'm not the coach...it's just frustrating cause we do have a forward pack that can do some damage in defense.

 

[Frenzy]

I did read somewhere cant remember where that Peter Sharpe explained why some clubs do and some clubs don't move up, wish I remember where I read it. Long story short it is part of the plan, its not like we simply don't do it.

I believe you'd be referring to this.

So I had my semi regular chat with one of the boys on the coaching staff and took the opportunity to ask him about our line speed and defensive system (i.e, why don’t we move up?). I preface this by saying that I was 100% with Quigs in that I thought that moving quickly up off the line and “swarming” in defence was the best thing a team can do (because Melbourne do it).

Evidently this is not the case for all teams. There are two movements in a defensive unit, the up and back (or line speed) and the side to side (or slide/shutting the gate). After early training sessions and considering the relatively advanced age of our props and our taller, slower centres , Petere Sharp (who is in charge of this stuff) decided that swiftly moving up and back took too much out of our pigs and our taller slower centres and harmed their lateral movement. Sharp argues that the side to side movement (which he calls slide for outside plays and shutting the gate for inside balls) is more important to get right than the up and back stuff. So far he has been proved correct. Pundits now look at the Sharks as the benchmark in the NRL for lateral defence. Put a lot of it down to Jezza and Gal who play this way naturally. Melbourne go the other way, Bellyache coaches them into sprinting off the line to cut time down and to wrestle long in the play the ball… But when you move up fast, it’s hard to move sideways....... That works for Melbournes squad, but when you consider we have Gibbs, Best, Pom, Robson, Jez, Gal (None of whom are really built to be consistenly explosive) I can see the logic of it.

Our system relies on a relatively good wrestle (only just behind Melbz) which allows us to rest on the line and move up a few steps, "catch" and focus on our lateral movement. Its why we beat the Storm and Manly, but are susceptible to good individual players like Inglis, Hayne and Barba but then again; who isn’t?

We have also spent a lot of time perfecting the art of turtling the opposition and I believe we are also the envy of the league in our conversion rate of tacklers rolling the attacker on their back thanks largely to Jez Pom and Gibbs.

Im sure Sharpe would like us to move with a bit more urgency when we are under the pump, but rest assured there is a complex system at work and so far, it is working.