Not scoring enough points early.

[Jatz Crackers]

I'm perplexed as to why this continues. I am not cambo and I'm sure the couple of posters I have met and recommended this site can vouch for me. Not that I should have too.

Back to my post I apologise if it offended I just don't understand why Technical cops a pasting from people. His level of thought is refreshing in my humble opinion.

Cambo was/is anti moderator. If you are not cambo, then I most certainly retract & apologise.

As for TC I really have no issue with. I do like to take the p!ss every now & then but thats to be expected considering the length of his/her posts.

50 shades of Tech.

 

[anthonyb1965]

I too like TC's posts, as a perspective/personal opinion but, I also like people having a dig or "taking the p!ss". Makes for more interesting reading and should not be mixed up with "OMG, the moderators are picking on me"

 

[Technical Coach]

Just because i made that comment does not mean i personally give a shyte. I just found it funny that the owner or moderator of a site who wants to promote constructive debate for the long term benefit of the site followed the simple low path of the masses.

In reality i have every come back under the sun but in a place like this it is in Daniels interests to set a standard but it's his call, having a dig is one thing but smart arse replies that lack any talent will just fuel more crap and redneck responses.

 

[mickqld]

Keep up the analysis TC it's always a great read. I agree with the thoughts that we get in the grind too much. There are many times we should have put teams away that turned into close contests when it shouldn't have. If we want to be remembered as the team of the decade we have to be better than the Storm and that means stepping up our standard in how we win. I really think this season is the watermark of who will reign as the best team either Manly or Storm.

 

[PONTIAN SEA EAGLE]

Huh the storm in 08, & the warriors in 2011 should have taken up your advice TC.

 

[Technical Coach]

Huh the storm in 08, & the warriors in 2011 should have taken up your advice TC.

No idea what you are on about other than in 2011 i suggested if the Warriors play like they did against the Storm they might be too strong for us but doubted they could put two performances like that together.

I did not go to the 2007 GF as i knew it was a waste of time, attended 2008 and 2011 though if that means anything after the fact.

2008 Manly's attack evolved and was more polished with more variation more offloads and second phase play and improvement in slowing down the play the ball. Defensive intensity increased and line speed, outside backs coming up and in more earlier reading all of Melb's pet plays not getting caught on the backfoot and steam rolled.

Melb stagnated Manly improved and this cycle has been happening for the past 6yrs---it's now time for Manly to take it to another level and i want a Manly v Melb GF with a full compliment of players to end this era with Manly taking the honours.

2008 without Smith still does not sit right, we would still have won that GF but not 40 - 0 and there is still a weak mental side evident when Manly play a full strength Melb at times.

 

[mickqld]

So TC what do we have to change to put teams to the sword early in games ?

 

[Technical Coach]

Without a whiteboard hard to illustrate but for starters i would sometimes shorten the pass from dummy half to our halves and having the decoys that are used further on the edges closer in to drag defenders in more opening up the outside backs.

I would also create more outside in plays where the ball is shown to the outside Brett running an inside run but as a decoy and a second hole runner like Watmough hits the hole.

What usually happens with these standard pet plays is the ball goes from the hooker to the half the marker or inside defenders notice Bretts run and try and cover the play but further in the defence gets lazy thinking if Brett is covered no need to cover the inside, there is usually a yawning hole behind this defender.

I have 100's of ideas in attack but those two are the more simple ones just to start adding some variation and different structures.

Our attack in the red zone allows defences too much time to either slide or read the play early and come up and in. Many times our decoys are so close to the edges(not talking sideline) it makes it predictable where the ball is going to go as there is a lack of numbers to choose from the further out you go.

More ballplaying and decoys with sharper flat runs 5mtrs either side of the posts forcing our halves to play more straight and direct otherwise they risk a sheppard.

Showing the ball outside stepping back in early against the defensive grain to draw both the inside and outside defence to the ball carrier then releasing the ball will open up the outside backs with more hole running options before they are cramped.

The list goes on and on and more detailed with training methods to promote straight more direct half ball playing but i don't freestyle for free lol.

 

[wombatgc]

More ballplaying and decoys with sharper flat runs 5mtrs either side of the posts forcing our halves to play more straight and direct otherwise they risk a sheppard.

Spot on. This is why i really think Kane Lawton can give us the edge in direct flatstick dummy half running, after replacing Ballin at the 30 min mark.
From our seats at ground level on Sat night you could really see the sideways movement. No outside runners taking an inside line. When Beau Falloon came on for the Titans he gave them a great surge in front foot momentum.

 

[Jatz Crackers]

Im with you Wombat. Ive been wanting a late-dummy halfer (Lawton) in for ages, but the inevitable issue of Buhrer and then of course the subsequent backrow/bench shuffle raises its head.

Might have to shuffle my own cards on this and start another thread.

 

[Masked Eagle]

So TC what do we have to change to put teams to the sword early in games ?

Sometimes the opposition don't do what they are supposed to do either. They do unexpected things, like read the play and not miss tackles. They also don't drop the ball, run hard and kick great.

 

[Manly To Win!]

errors cost us at least 4 tries, Wolfman holds onto the ball at least once we win, end of story. Manly have never been fast starters but we usually win so why whinge about it? I'd rather start slow than finish slow. People are reading far too much into simple facts and a 2 point loss.

 

[Napper]

4 unanswered points in the first half from the Sea Eagles.

22 iunanswered in the second.

TC, is it possible Manly did this on purpose? Just to make you look like an idiot?

 

[Eagles2nv]

I know we only scored 4 points in the first half and went on to win 26 nil.

But our defence bashed them out of the game, physically and mentally. Defence is so important. They had consecutive sets on our line, and they still went home scoreless.

 

[The Who]

I think we scored more points in the first half than we did completing sets.

 

[ManlyBacker]

I know we only scored 4 points in the first half and went on to win 26 nil.

But our defence bashed them out of the game, physically and mentally. Defence is so important. They had consecutive sets on our line, and they still went home scoreless.

The forwards did that. Gave the Tiges absolutely nothing and went over the advantage line consistently. Best part was the forward's defence. One sour note is that Blair is still a Storm thug and his time is limited.

 

[Napper]

I know we only scored 4 points in the first half and went on to win 26 nil.

But our defence bashed them out of the game, physically and mentally. Defence is so important. They had consecutive sets on our line, and they still went home scoreless.

The forwards did that. Gave the Tiges absolutely nothing and went over the advantage line consistently. Best part was the forward's defence. One sour note is that Blair is still a Storm thug and his time is limited.

He's filthy grub. Lawrence AND Blair are lucky he didn't do his shoulder or pec or they'd both be having quite a few weeks off. Wasn't a good look at all!!

 

[manlyfan76]

Our kick returns and kick chase had a big part in our win.

 

[MK Eagle]

Defence does win games & pinpointing when you need to score can create panick & basically makes no sense.
With this logic its almost - "Its 10 - 15 minutes into the game & we havn't scored. Lets push a few low percentage passes or try something more unconventional where we throw an intercept or turn the ball over gifting the opposition field position".....
I made a thread 2 weeks ago relating to the defence that imo Tooves has based the backbone on mobility & line speed & this is the reason big George cant get in the 17 as much as his fitness.
Does it win games - if you ask Newcastle or Tigers it does.
If you ask the Dogs after the GF last year they will also agree, the Storm strangled them out of it with defence - NOT attack.
If your arguement was we need to start better in relation to completions ect I totally agree because last night the FT score looked pretty, but with that poor early field position Melbourne would have had a hand on Manlys throat & made it very,very difficult to fight their way out of it.
The great thing we have up our sleeve is Gift resting up on the sideline who is the games best 1 on 1 defender & will add another bolt to the iron defence.
How can defence not win games - defence is not just speed, strength & technique - above all its attitude & you dont win footy games without that.

 

[Technical Coach]

First of all i did not state "defence does not win you games" i stated that it is over exaggerated/over hyped in many instances. You have to treat each teams performance and look beyond the simplistic point of view, yes sometimes it is defence other times it is not.

Like i stated a good defence is primarily a good attitude and made great with good proactive structures with fast line speed and not staying back on your heels sliding all the time with the outside backs. Manly have had a good attitude for 5-6yrs and our defence has been one of the better well structured defences in the NRL setting structures and standards for others to follow.

The only concerning issues with our defence in my opinion was the size,mobility and age factor of our squad that really struggled under fast intense periods with fatigue and plugging up holes around the middle, both have been addressed this year to my liking. Our mobility and punch with our go forward is more direct and relentless this year also with added depth more leg drive and explosiveness in line with what i have stated in the past, Toovey is on the right track in this department great recruitment.

What I'm referring to with our attack is it's lack of clinical execution during our dominant stages in the early exchanges in the past and still evident.(but i can tell it has been worked on which is the encouraging)

Over the past few years many times we have dominated the start and struggle to crack a fresh defence.(will always be a challenge breaking fresh defences but the great attacking sides do)

I would rather be 10-0 after 20mins going into half time at 10-0 than 0-0 at 20mins and 10-0 by half time as to me if you can cut through a defensive line early it shows your attack is too good for even the oppositions fresh defensive structures.

With all the ball the Tigers had even in a rain soaked game they never looked like breaking our defence, yes our defence was excellent but the attack was nothing special. Some people will say in a general sense not just relating to this game that our defence made them look bad and i totally agree other times it is the combination of both.

If the Tigers cracked our great defence a few times it would have added pressure to our squad to perform, pressure increases the chances of more mistakes rushed execution and can lead to dominant field position and more points.

Attack is not just about the red zone but is everything with the ball in hand from good direct go forward good completion rates good kicking games and kick chase etc etc and we are not helping ourselves obviously in that department.

I'm just referring to though about our early attacking times in the red zone that needs to be more clinical with better structures and straighter line running.

For example after all that defence yesterday in the first half the crap play going through Brent Kites hands where 99% of the time he throws a second man play and in auto pilot it eventually goes to Taufua even when it was not on lacked composure and building pressure after all that defensive effort.