Not scoring enough points early.

[The Who]

Interesting debate. Conundrum:
In our last two games our first half defence was terrific and conceded no tries... yet we didn't win both?
Discuss the reasons why!

 

[Technical Coach]

Well if you are only talking about the last two games there is more concern with our completion rates.(ball in hand is attack also even when it is just simple go forward)

If our completion rates were good in both games and our attack clinical we win both, conversely we have had good/great/adequate defence in both and only won 50%. The defence is giving us a chance to still win games not winning games due to our defence.

Look at the Broncos......

Defence is always a great platform and shows your mind and effort is in good working order but is not always the underlying factor like many people make it out to be.

You very rarely win premierships without a clinical attack but you can win premierships with a great attack and a "reasonable" defence. Many times the best attacking teams have the best defence also due to their attack taking pressure off their defence. (remember attack in my eyes includes completion rates and go forward also don't get into a limited thinking mindset with attack just meaning red zone being clinical)

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

First of all i did not state "defence does not win you games"

No need to be so defensive TC

I agree that points scored early are a great idea, I don't know why more coaches aren't alert to this tactic. Toovey should also remind our players not to drop the ball in the first half. :huh:

 

[MK Eagle]

Interesting debate. Conundrum:
In our last two games our first half defence was terrific and conceded no tries... yet we didn't win both?
Discuss the reasons why!

In a nutshell the problem was the opposition scored the 1st & 2nd try against the Titans & our attack looked just as dangerous yet poor execution gave them a 14-0 break before chasing the lead.
Bottom line against Titans, though we kept them to zero 1st half tries & the defence was working well, Manly were a little flat in that half & they were a little outenthused by their pack....
Against Tigers the attack started flat, poor execution ect & it was the on line defensive efforts that lifted the tempo in attack, imo paving the way for a solid victory. The attack improved dramatically after that super repeat set line defence - simple as that.
The major difference between those 2 games - against Titans defence reliable enough but no zing & down tempo - against Tigers we completely blotted them out with enthusiastic defence showed by the speed of the line & control in the wrestle.
Almost like 3rd gear defence against Titans getting the job done with a pass mark but against Tigers the defence was 5th gear & a pass with honours.
Regardless of what anyone says the defence has & always will lay the platform for the attack.
If the attitude, enthusiasm & high octane defence does not let up, the opposition will eventually lye down & roll over leading to a late blowout score after 80 minutes.
The important difference also in the 2 games is the intensity was slightly down with the Titans, demonstrated by them scoring first ,whereas against tigers, Manly had them for attitude & were always going to run over them in time, not over 40 minutes but 80.
Im sure if Tooves was asked which was more important- us scoring 26 or 32 in recent games he would say none - the preference is the opposition 0....

 

[Rex]

Both attack and defence are important. However one is more controllable than the other for any particular group of players:
1. Successful attack relies on the opposition making mistakes.
2. Successful defence doesn't.
3. At similar levels of competence, the best attacking play can be shut down by a mistake-free defence.
4. Successful attack is more dependent on natural gifts.
5. Successful defence is more dependent on application.
6. How many games are lost if the opposition doesn't score?

 

[Technical Coach]

First of all i did not state "defence does not win you games"

No need to be so defensive TC

I agree that points scored early are a great idea, I don't know why more coaches aren't alert to this tactic. Toovey should also remind our players not to drop the ball in the first half. :huh:

Not being "defensive" at all--- just on the attack(in line with the topic) when the majority who reply twist my views so that their point of view gains more traction and holds more weight/substance. Before you know it a whole bunch of replies are due to a lack of comprehension skills.

No problem with differing view points it is intelligent debate after-all but don't add lines of comment for increased mass appeal.

---

Both attack and defence are important. However one is more controllable than the other for any particular group of players:
1. Successful attack relies on the opposition making mistakes.
2. Successful defence doesn't.
3. At similar levels of competence, the best attacking play can be shut down by a mistake-free defence.
4. Successful attack is more dependent on natural gifts.
5. Successful defence is more dependent on application.
6. How many games are lost if the opposition doesn't score?

Replies to each point.

1)You increase the chances of the opposition making mistakes in defence with creative clinical attacking options, straighter line running well timed decoys and composed class under pressure when executing a play. Good structures stand up to pressure and make it easier to execute this is why Manly and Melb have dominated the attack and defence stats regularly.

2)Great defence will limit the points against you and keep you in games but it does not matter how great your defence is against the "top sides" if you keep spilling the ball and giving the opposition quality possession you are not going to hold them out. The only attack i never rated highly that won a comp recently is the Dragons 2010 some of the best defensive efforts in the red zone i have seen.

3)This is why you need to have a clinical well structured attack that is always one step ahead of the standard defensive level. Most sports if you don't have great attacking weapons your defence will suffer as a result.

4)Natural talent is great against fatiguing defensive lines in a no or limited interchange environment but it is the combination of talent and well structured plays that defeat structured fresh defensive lines of the modern game.

5) Agree with you but no matter how great your defence is spilling the ball too often will in "most" cases break a defence down eventually.

6)How often do you ever hold a team down to zero during most seasons on average you need to score more than 20-24 points per game. If your attack is unable to do that regularly against the "top 8 sides" you are in major trouble and no chance against the better performing defensive outfits.
Only two teams in the bottom 8 scored on average above 20.7 points per game compared to 6 in the top 8.

I would take the above stat even further and be more concerned with the standard deviation from the mean as more important and when the points were scored in the game. One or two games can easily make your attack look better than it is like the Cowboys and Raiders from last season and at the back end of games some teams give up allowing easy points to be racked up. (same with defence also)

 

[Hamster Huey]

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.

We were doing that in 2008/11. One of the things worth noting in those premiership years was how we didn't dominate on the scoreboard in the first halves, in comparison to the second where we would put teams away.

2008 - Half Time (Full Time)
Week 1 - 20-6 (38-6)
Week 3 - 12-0 (32-6)
GF - 8-0 (40-0)
First Half Points 40 - Second Half Points 70

2011 - Half Time (Full Time)
Week 1 - 0-8 (42-8)
Week 3 - 16-0 (26-14)
GF - 12-2 (24-10)
First Half Points 28 - Second Half Points 64

 

[Chip and Chase]

I just like how we are not fading in second halves this season. We are finishing over the top of teams now instead of running out of gas with 20 to go. We look as strong at the 80th minute as we do at the 40th.

Does anyone know if there has been a change in training techniques or philosphy this year that has brought about that improvement ?

 

[Utility Player]

A smoothie of calves blood, beetroot juice, tree bark and Mrs Hoppa's go juice.

 

[wombatgc]

I just like how we are not fading in second halves this season. We are finishing over the top of teams now instead of running out of gas with 20 to go. We look as strong at the 80th minute as we do at the 40th.

Does anyone know if there has been a change in training techniques or philosphy this year that has brought about that improvement ?

Maybe Donie has upped the training
schedule, new techniques, bigger stick?!
My bet is the new guys have brought a tonne of enthusiasm with them, as several are at the all or nothing crossroads of there careers.

 

[Technical Coach]

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.

We were doing that in 2008/11. One of the things worth noting in those premiership years was how we didn't dominate on the scoreboard in the first halves, in comparison to the second where we would put teams away.

2008 - Half Time (Full Time)
Week 1 - 20-6 (38-6)
Week 3 - 12-0 (32-6)
GF - 8-0 (40-0)
First Half Points 40 - Second Half Points 70

2011 - Half Time (Full Time)
Week 1 - 0-8 (42-8)
Week 3 - 16-0 (26-14)
GF - 12-2 (24-10)
First Half Points 28 - Second Half Points 64

I'm not asking for complete domination and 4 tries in the first half i'm seeking clinical execution and a points return when we dominate field position or the early exchanges.

We all want our fitness levels and our performance to be finishing over the top of the opposition in the 2nd half that goes without saying especially when the potential for line breaks and tries increase against a fatiguing opposition. It is also unrealistic to expect to score tries easily in the first half against quality defences and fresh defensive lines all the time but you improve your chances with good attacking structures.

When you look at stats you have to look more deeply into the real world effects of them and how they impact the majority of performances.

Week one and week three in 2008 are realistic games that you come across more often during the year and in both of those games we were ahead comfortably at half time and in control the 40-0 result is a one in 50/100 game result.

Week 1 in 2011 the first half against the Cowboys was utter crap and too much sideways movement not enough direct go forward and sharpness around the ruck. We came over the top in the 2nd half by getting back to basics and rolling forward and the attack followed.(once again scoring 40 points in the second half is a 1 in 50 outcome)

Week 3 and the GF in 2011 are far more realistic game performances and we established control and a nice lead at half time rewarding the effort that was put in during that half. The Warriors were coming over the top of Manly from the 60th minute due to all that defensive line speed intensity in the first half was starting to take it's toll on our troops but we did not panick and had a good points buffer.

As we have seen in the past it only requires the loss of one key attacking player in a squad and you start losing games on a frequent basis, take one key defensive element from a squad and the impact is nowhere near as bad.

 

[MK Eagle]

I just like how we are not fading in second halves this season. We are finishing over the top of teams now instead of running out of gas with 20 to go. We look as strong at the 80th minute as we do at the 40th.

Does anyone know if there has been a change in training techniques or philosphy this year that has brought about that improvement ?

Its a combination imo CAC, new blood vying for positions adding enthusiasm for the full 80 minutes & the players are all fairly mobile except maybe Kingy in the pack.
The recruits are agile compared to most teams & it appears this is a tactic from Tooves & his team that suits the modern game with the increased speed around that ruck area.
Fitness levels also look increased across the park so you are most prob right in reference to training , seems to be really focused on endurance & it shows.