- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
Roar Rookie
Joined January 2023
0
Views
0
Published
9
Comments
Published
Comments
I would also argue if Nicholls was still at Souths our performances for the last 12 months would look very different. I don’t think line speed is an issue if you are reducing PCM in defence and increasing them in attack. I think that more than line speed is the issue with Souths at the moment. I would also suggest that when we get PCM is important. I find if you watch Souths a lot, we lose the tackle on the last more than most other teams, so we get little chance to put pressure on opposing kickers and have a lot of pressure put on ours.
Too old, too slow: Do these two stats explain why Souths have fallen off a cliff in 2024?
I don’t think what has gone wrong at Souths is that hard to work out.
Letting Mark Nicholls go is I think the catalyst. He seems to have carried the rest of the front rowers, Tom Burgess aside. Since he left, Souths have been unable to create any type of go forward, and every other player has suffered. Illias and now Cook have been made scapegoats (and I think Walker has been playing worse than both of them). If Reynolds was still at Redfern, we would all be talking about his loss of form for exactly the same reason.
Add to that the lack of speed in the three quarter line an you have a recipe for the wooden spoon despite the class of the backrow and spine.
Rabbitohs rubbish Meninga rumour as Cook admits he's 'frustrated, angry and sad' over losing his spot
One other positive – it is noticeable how much more both sides Souths attack is with Ilias. I know some of it is Campbell Graham building into first grade, but with Reynolds the attack was almost all left sided. Also, how much of Souths, and by extension Ilias’, poor season was due to opposition teams working out Alex Johnston has no pace anymore so they can jam up inside knowing the cut out ball to Johnson won’t hurt them? That’s not Ilias’ issue but it makes his performance look much worse.
On the time for kicking, and while I wouldn’t go Jamie Soward I think he should stand a couple of metres deeper, the real issue was the injury list through the forwards, solve that and much of Ilias’ problems go away.
Ilias v Reynolds: Will 2024 be the year that proves why Souths were right to let their talisman go?
I tend to agree, with one Caveat. He seems so ingrained in the Panthers system, we really don’t know how good he is. He might just be a good player in a system that makes him, and maybe everyone else, better that they are. I think he basically had the entire Penrith backline around him at Samoa didn’t he, whereas I think he has played one good game out of about 9 at SOO level. But IIRC he did seem to play with more freedom that one game, so maybe he could be even better away from the Panthers system? I just don’t know.
For the Tigers though, it seems a no brainer, if you are going to go after someone for big money, any of the other non 9 Penrith spine to hook up with Api seems as good a way to go as any.
Smart Signings: Why the Tigers need to throw the keys to the team - and the cheque book - at Jarome Luai
I don’t think you are right there Tim. At 4 tackles then a handover, it is far more likely the game would have become a game of kick, kick, kick. You would have a limited set of hit ups before needing to kick, and that would necessitate even more structure than what we have now. Probably just as many scrums as teams kicked for touch.
The fact that everyone talks about how much more open the game became immediately also suggests they got it right, at least initially.
I think the Brits had trialled a scrum after every tackle which may have swayed them towards a handover rather than scrum, and I can see how that would be unplayable.
Forward pack dominance: A look back at John Sattler and his Cardinal and Myrtle wrecking crew in the 1960-70s
I think the main difference is that when you run a structured play the same people pass to the same people whereas a pattern involves getting everyone running the same lines then making a decision.
So to take Souths left hand side from a decade ago, the left 2nd rower would run a decoy outside Sutton, who would pass to Inglis who would either pass to the centre or take the line himself. Occasionally on the first or second time the play was run the second rower would get the ball, dropping it as often as not, just to remind the defence there was another option.
Look at today though, Walker gets the ball, and will as often as not give it to Host running on the angle back in as he does pass to the outside, where Mitchell gets the ball and either runs, passes to the centre or cuts out to go directly to Johnson. If the centre gets the ball, he has options either outside to Johnson, back inside to Mitchell or Walker, or to take on the line. The patterns look the same, but the actual ball play is much less forced, and each player in the process gets to make a decision rather than have a specific role (I catch and pass to him is now I catch and work out what to do).
The other thing is that patterns work everywhere on the field, you can run a pattern from your own end, middle of the park or the opposing red zone. A structured play is really determined by your location on the field, a block play really only works in the red zone, the out in ball only works centre field etc.
Holding patterns: How the NRL's best are setting new platforms for their stars to shine
What exactly di Luai do in Game 1 that made you think he was one of NSW’s better players? It seemed to me that his whole evening involved sitting back from the line and dumping the ball out to Crighton and hoping he would do something with it. The ball to Martin for NSWs first try was an absolute cracker, but why no repeat for the rest of the game?
I tend to think Luai looks much better for Penrith because something in their system, probably the way Yeo plays, allows Luai to get the ball with space and/or a numbers mismatch, which he then goes about exploiting. Whereas Munster in game 1, or Walker or Hynes on a weekly basis, go to the line to try and make a 3 on 3, sometimes even a 3 on 4, into a 3 on 2. That is, even outside their normal system they can create the space for others to exploit, not just exploit space already made. I think that is why so many Panthers end up in the NSW team, not because of Cleary but Luai.
Not sure though I would be going down the ‘OK, now just add Souths players she’ll be right’ path. Just pick the best players in the best positions for them, so Turbo or Edwards to fullback, Mitchell and Graham (or Turbo) in the centres, maybe as mentioned Murray to 13 or out of the squad altogether (he was wasted in game 1), probably Reynolds and Hynes as the halves, and let them get on with it with something resembling a game plan. I know I have mentioned a few Souths players there, but that is because they are playing good footy, not because of ‘combinations’.
SOS Reyno: How the Souths connection can fire the Blues to victory in Game 2
I would think the Dolphins are by far the best placed to survive long term, given they are an existing club so they don’t have to build the club infrastructure from scratch. Reading the recent ABC report on the Crushers, it appears they tried to build the club from the ground up first rather than just rely on the firsts (like Melbourne) but got screwed over by the Broncos…. sorry “Super League”.
If Perth are the next club as they should be, then they should be focusing on developing talent within the state, and indeed the club should be an offshoot of the WARL (or whatever the call the governing body these days).
Forget the flights of fancy around PNG or the Pacific, the game can probably be best served by a stronger international game serving as a feeder for new talent for the NRL/ESL. That would help the talent pool, but I can’t also help thinking there are a lot more Nicho Hynes and Cody Walkers drifting around the development set ups just waiting for a chance.
Those who cannot remember past NRL expansion errors are condemned to repeat them
I have thought for a while, in general play as well not just on the kick off, that we should have a 7 tackle set for a ‘mark’ anywhere on the field, not just in the in goal. I think this would help in a couple of ways, by trying to encourage kicks along the ground, and removing the benefit of dropping a high ball just outside the tryline. Just because you catch the ball in the in goal or field of play shouldn’t really be a difference.
I would take the play the ball at either the 10 metre line or where the closest defender is, e.g. if you take a mark on your own 30 meter line, but the closest defender is at halfway, you get a play the ball at halfway and a 7 tackle set.
I doubt you would slow the game down much, because you would encourage kicks that find the ground rather than the interminable kick high and long which I find terribly boring.
NRL Round 8 Talking Points: The kick-off is on borrowed time, so what replaces it?