What part ? The part about Parramatta being as poor in many elements as Manly?
Still no explanation to read ?
They were better in every key area - you may have been watching a game from another season
Hard for Manly to stay in the grind when the middle lacks size,explosiveness, power and toughness, this is basically the only area where Parramatta had a clear advantage,(yes a big part but we made it easy for Parramatta) it had nothing to do with Parramatta having an all-round better game.
First half if anything Manly in many patches looked better but in the end if you lack size power and playing tough the defence will be more about containment/submissive, the go forward will lack penetration and not even hurt/drain the defensive line.
Parramatta's attack was nothing special, scoring a try off a tap restart pleasssse---more about Manly's issues than great Parramatta attack. Flooding areas with numbers in attack yeah Parramatta did that well.
I would actually like to see more teams have a more open minded attacking line where numbers go where the space is not just left and right players in general to catch structured "somewhat" zone defences lacking numbers---not just a FB or half off a second man play creating the overlap or wrapping around. The big risk is losing structure with players flooding at will but everything has to be in balance---pick your moments after creating space through structured plays or off the back of dominant go forward it is the science behind the play leading up that creates a conducive environment to flood open space.
The worrying thing is when teams feel like they are getting steamrolled up the middle they tend to play tighter not trusting the inside man one on one or not even trusting two man in which will expose the outside and isolate the smaller halves also.
In one instance DCE planted his feet was isolated and defending in too tight not trusting the middle and also inside defenders not getting across in numbers to protect across the field.
Weak submissive defence up the middle will cause havoc all over the park, the only way to work around this is improving the "slowing down of the play the ball" techniques that Melb in most part have been the benchmark or gang tackling with good technique which if not done well will expose the outside also.
This past few years Manly has obviously become more containment orientated in defence due to losing players and an ageing squad that is less aggressive and not winning the point of impact all that often.
Go forward needs more variation also to fatigue the defensive line and reduce point of impact, also looking for softer metres on the edges which we are known to do anyway.
So in short Parramattas completions were not that great(yeah first half), attack was nothing special, go forward was nothing special other than dominating with size and power when it counted in the second half----more about Manly playing poor than Parramatta playing well.
Defensively Parramatta was not great either on the edges and even through the middle at times---they will be caught out if teams maintain the intensity as there is laziness and fatigue on show.
Not saying Parramatta will not beat many sides at home with that performance but it was nothing special which is more worrying about Manly than Parramatta.
Going to be a lonnnnng season for some supporters here....