i have been a staunch supporter of des as a coach needs time to develop,even more so than a player.However I am starting to join the throng calling for a change of approach both in giving young players a go and developing a solid defensive unit and depth in attack.many good judges north of the border can't believe Ballin is yet to make his debut.the coaching gulf between des and elliot was so obvious on saturday -the deep runners with decoys at our uncertian outside backs and then the second half targeting of a tired king,dunley,kite and co in the middle of the ruck.our tactics were high risk chip kicks over a defence we knew would be coming off their line.their were too many kicks by monaghan and orford for it not to be a game plan.looks good but rarely works.
the most obvious tactical weaknesses for Manly since the middle of last year have been slow play the balls and a lack of runners in motion when we have the pill.that side of the game is about attitude and coaching,not real footballing ability.mata had a good point about mitchell seargents development in this area.as i said earlier it is ridiculous to judje props entirely onaverage metres gained per hitup-the quality of the runs, involvement in decoy play and offloads is more important to the top sides as seargent and scott showed on Sunday(both were less than king and kite).our boys rarely threaten the advantage line and never seem to work in tandem and it never changes which is something that should reflect on the coach.a good manly prop charge is usually a great one off surge up the middle with no support.looks good but rarely produces results.
in a nutshell the jury is out until we produce a game that is tactically good enough to beat a side across the park because individual brilliance from orford,bell,bk won't cut it against good side-and almost every side this year looks very capable.
next week is vital.if we get flogged it is difficult seeing a decent year with the horror draw with night games that follow.
