Post Contact Metres for Manly

Are post contact meters still important ?

Isn't the new true measure .. a quick play the ball.

However, considering we are probably coming last in that stat also .. I'll just shut up now.
 
XV-1 said:
Power puffs who are lazy and outside of Jake and Croker, fail in the 1%ers.

Look at the top teams and they live n die with their controlled aggression, 2nd and 3rd person into many tackles ( over and over) and do the 1%ers all game.

Our forwards are lazy waiting for that one good Instagram shot to make them happy.
Click to expand...
Yes I’ll admit I should have added Froggy into that , his defence is first class.

However that’s pretty much all he’s got.
 
Woodsie said:
Are post contact meters still important ?

Isn't the new true measure .. a quick play the ball.

However, considering we are probably coming last in that stat also .. I'll just shut up now.
Click to expand...
Probably coming last in every stat bar the ladder !!
 
Ryan said:
What exacerbates this subject, is we aren't a lean, big, fast team. We are an immobile apparent "power" team, so post contact metres should be our forte. Des bench rotation doesn't help mind you. But I'm a firm believer of a tradition bench. A hooker utility type, and three big, fast, mobile forwards who make consistent impact.

We are carrying way too many plodders unfortunately.

Jake will never make you metres
Schuster isn't a metre muncher - he's a ball player
Olakau'atu is probably our best forward - and capable of 100+ metres a agame
Sipley / Keppie ? Paseka will have a rare standout game but plateau at 60-70 metres
Taupau (one of my favorites), is honestly a shell of his former self, and I can't keep defending him.
Davey tries hard - has the speed and effort - but good for 50-60 metres a game
Bullemor probably houldn't be in first grade.
Click to expand...
There are a lot of 'absolutes' there - no shades of grey.

For example - feel free to insert a behavior or label (like 'plodders'):

"Jake will never____"
"Schuster isn't_______"
"Sipley / Keppie / Paseka..........plateau"
"Tapau is a shell of his former self"
"Davey...good for 50-60 metres a game"
"Bullemor probably shouldn't be in first grade"

I like to see possibilities - I'm not a rainbows and unicorns type, I'm far too much of a pragmatist - but I'd like to think I'm a glass half full type.

I've seen varying amounts of positive play from all of the above, and I am completely convinced that they can all play as well - if not better - than their opposing forwards from the last round, the Melbourne Storm. That we lost the middle, and then the game, speaks volumes.

Even as that occasional insight dispenser Andrew Johns said recently, "forwards win games - backs decide by how much". There's Manly's season in eight words.

Undisclosed injuries or other factors we don't know about - may be there. We've also got some youngish forwards on our rotation that lead with emotion (heads go down based on circumstances / retaliation) when the situation calls for 'smart' football.
Form is temporary - good coaches (and importantly, the complete football 'system' at a club) are there to put it right.

Put it this way - close your eyes and imagine that all the above listed players were on the Storm's roster. Would they be playing better than they are now? Would we be calling them 'plodders'?

Or would their talents be amplified and accentuated, the way countless no-name players have been in the Storm system in the last few years? I've gotta say, once they got over the two books / cheating thing, the Storm knuckled down on how to get the best from the talent that was there and what they brought in.

And no, I don't love or like the Storm in any way - I want to see us so good that we beat them every time. And if we have to copy and improve on some of their methodologies to do it so be it.

And @Ryan - re "But I'm a firm believer of a tradition(al) bench. A hooker utility type, and three big, fast, mobile forwards who make consistent impact" - I agree with you.

PS - Bullemor is apparently faster than all but 3 or 4 of the backs at our club, and he's 110 kgs. That's 'weapon' potential, not 'plodder' potential. He could easily be one of those 'three big fast mobile forwards who make consistent impact' - and ideally he should go on to do so.
 
Brookie Bob said:
There are a lot of 'absolutes' there - no shades of grey.

For example - feel free to insert a behavior or label (like 'plodders'):

"Jake will never____"
"Schuster isn't_______"
"Sipley / Keppie / Paseka..........plateau"
"Tapau is a shell of his former self"
"Davey...good for 50-60 metres a game"
"Bullemor probably shouldn't be in first grade"

I like to see possibilities - I'm not a rainbows and unicorns type, I'm far too much of a pragmatist - but I'd like to think I'm a glass half full type.

I've seen varying amounts of positive play from all of the above, and I am completely convinced that they can all play as well - if not better - than their opposing forwards from the last round, the Melbourne Storm. That we lost the middle, and then the game, speaks volumes.

Even as that occasional insight dispenser Andrew Johns said recently, "forwards win games - backs decide by how much". There's Manly's season in eight words.

Undisclosed injuries or other factors we don't know about - may be there. We've also got some youngish forwards on our rotation that lead with emotion (heads go down based on circumstances / retaliation) when the situation calls for 'smart' football.
Form is temporary - good coaches (and importantly, the complete football 'system' at a club) are there to put it right.

Put it this way - close your eyes and imagine that all the above listed players were on the Storm's roster. Would they be playing better than they are now? Would we be calling them 'plodders'?

Or would their talents be amplified and accentuated, the way countless no-name players have been in the Storm system in the last few years? I've gotta say, once they got over the two books / cheating thing, the Storm knuckled down on how to get the best from the talent that was there and what they brought in.

And no, I don't love or like the Storm in any way - I want to see us so good that we beat them every time. And if we have to copy and improve on some of their methodologies to do it so be it.

And @Ryan - re "But I'm a firm believer of a tradition(al) bench. A hooker utility type, and three big, fast, mobile forwards who make consistent impact" - I agree with you.

PS - Bullemor is apparently faster than all but 3 or 4 of the backs at our club, and he's 110 kgs. That's 'weapon' potential, not 'plodder' potential. He could easily be one of those 'three big fast mobile forwards who make consistent impact' - and ideally he should go on to do so.
Click to expand...

So it's coaching as the reason we've been flogged 5 of the past 6 weeks , and allowed 20+ points for the first time in 6 consecutive games in our history, then?
 
Ryan said:
So it's coaching as the reason we've been flogged 5 of the past 6 weeks , and allowed 20+ points for the first time in 6 consecutive games in our history, then?
Click to expand...
It is a major factor. After Des's disastrous Jorge selection last week, I think he's lost the plot.
 
Last edited:
Ryan said:
So it's coaching as the reason we've been flogged 5 of the past 6 weeks , and allowed 20+ points for the first time in 6 consecutive games in our history, then?
Click to expand...
No - I said 'system', not narrowed down to 'coaching', or specifically, the coach.

The reasons we've been flogged - or beaten - or whatever (it may be a good time to look as objectively as we can at it, although we've all been guilty of looking at it emotively, particularly after a loss) - is completely multi-factorial.

Each game has to be looked at it isolation, and in light of what is going on in the competition as a whole. A multitude of teams are either racking up big scores on the opposition, or having it done to them. I've used statistics to support my research for 30+ years, and while stats tell a persuasive story, they also have to be used in context of a wider picture. Every club outside the 8 at present are examining their stats to see what's wrong, and all those in the 8 are having a sideways glance to see if the stats are confirming what they told their stakeholders at the start of the year.

It's almost too easy to talk about coaching, and we all tend to think of 'good' coaches versus 'bad' coaches. We seldom think about how 'coach-able' the players are, until they end up in the headlines for the wrong reasons.

No - I'm thinking about our club-system holistically. The Broncos were 'broken' a couple of years ago, not because Seibold didn't have coaching ability. The ethos there was poor, there was a culture of entitlement in the playing group, no true 'hard work' mentality. Players with plenty of ability (on good coin) were let go - maybe the hierarchy didn't think their (the players) entitled mentality could be turned around. That's taken over 2 years to get results.

I saw the whole Manly team dig deep after Lawton was sent off in the Souths game. Both ability and effort (and execution) were great, and that had me in hope for the rest of this season. The Parra game - 2 points in it - was a stitch up - even opposition fans thought so. Melbourne - we were not in it (and we should have been) - very disappointing. The Cronulla and Brisbane games - a forensic investigation needed (get Tooves on to it 😎 ).

If I have to be pinned down to a generalization - and we all do here all the time - I would say that we need a re-think from the whole coaching staff (conditioners, everyone) on how we get a winning edge from all our forwards each week in both attack and defense, and a primer on how to 'win the ruck' (and the referee, whether we like it or not) in light of this years' rules in this area.

Our backs can play what's in front of them, but our forwards need more work as a unit.
 
Brookie Bob said:
No - I said 'system', not narrowed down to 'coaching', or specifically, the coach.

The reasons we've been flogged - or beaten - or whatever (it may be a good time to look as objectively as we can at it, although we've all been guilty of looking at it emotively, particularly after a loss) - is completely multi-factorial.

Each game has to be looked at it isolation, and in light of what is going on in the competition as a whole. A multitude of teams are either racking up big scores on the opposition, or having it done to them. I've used statistics to support my research for 30+ years, and while stats tell a persuasive story, they also have to be used in context of a wider picture. Every club outside the 8 at present are examining their stats to see what's wrong, and all those in the 8 are having a sideways glance to see if the stats are confirming what they told their stakeholders at the start of the year.

It's almost too easy to talk about coaching, and we all tend to think of 'good' coaches versus 'bad' coaches. We seldom think about how 'coach-able' the players are, until they end up in the headlines for the wrong reasons.

No - I'm thinking about our club-system holistically. The Broncos were 'broken' a couple of years ago, not because Seibold didn't have coaching ability. The ethos there was poor, there was a culture of entitlement in the playing group, no true 'hard work' mentality. Players with plenty of ability (on good coin) were let go - maybe the hierarchy didn't think their (the players) entitled mentality could be turned around. That's taken over 2 years to get results.

I saw the whole Manly team dig deep after Lawton was sent off in the Souths game. Both ability and effort (and execution) were great, and that had me in hope for the rest of this season. The Parra game - 2 points in it - was a stitch up - even opposition fans thought so. Melbourne - we were not in it (and we should have been) - very disappointing. The Cronulla and Brisbane games - a forensic investigation needed (get Tooves on to it 😎 ).

If I have to be pinned down to a generalization - and we all do here all the time - I would say that we need a re-think from the whole coaching staff (conditioners, everyone) on how we get a winning edge from all our forwards each week in both attack and defense, and a primer on how to 'win the ruck' (and the referee, whether we like it or not) in light of this years' rules in this area.

Our backs can play what's in front of them, but our forwards need more work as a unit.
Click to expand...
A very articulate assessment mate, totally agree with everything you said, just saying.

But could please remind me on what post contact meters is? Haven't seen any in a while
 
I certainly wouldn't agree that Aloiai has let us down... he has been high quality. I certainly don't think Davey has let us down - he is all heart. I think Haumole in the main has been pretty damn good. Schuster will be good. Paseka is great in moments - needs to be more consistent. Marty has been good in moments but his time has come. Our problems though is with the consistency and our other props - Keppie is an error machine, Sipley was pretty decent in the first half last week but rarely bent the line before then, Boyle/KDL plodders. Jake fabulous except for the penalties and Croker great in defence - average in attack. Our problem is that we have been caught with contracts not running out so we can't get rid of some of the deadwood and our season last season was very impressive and so Des and we all thought a great year was beckoning. You just can't make changes when other teams wont take our players off our hands and contracts are still live. I think we all including you thought we had so much to look forward to this year. I absolutely thought Keppie would be a beast this year but his errors and boneheadedness are a complete joke. I said at the beginning of the year that I thought Keppie would step up and said that on here. How wrong was I. Our problems yes lay with the lack of metres from those props - Sipley and Keppie but our problems have much more to do with giving penalties away letting teams bounce out of their own end and DCE's woeful decision making in defence on his side of the field. His indecisiveness causes havoc on his side of the field.
 
Supreme Leader said:
A very articulate assessment mate, totally agree with everything you said, just saying.

But could please remind me on what post contact meters is? Haven't seen any in a while
Click to expand...
Good question. I think that the players don't know the difference between 'good' and 'bad' post contact metres. Most of them just think that running straight and hard at the defence - any defence - will achieve good post contact metres.

Forwards who can step are like gold. Run at gaps.

Create gaps if there aren't any by changing running lines. Remember how to palm-off defenders who are tired / lazy and arm-grab in defense.

If they don't have the lower body strength to bust the odd tackle, sessions in the gym doing squats will help.

Post - contact metres are not just driven by size - Ronnie 'Rambo' Gibbs (as you all know) was only 90 kgs (and played second row) and smashed the opposition in attack and defense. I wish he would come back more often and have a chat with our forwards! ('Rambo' Gibbs glad to be back at Brookie )
 
What we do have is one of the quickest back 5 in the comp if they can get their hands on the ball. If the forwards aren’t making the impact we should up the offloads in the tackles, risky but we aren’t changing the forwards this year. Get the back 5 more around the ball, especially Saab in broken play and we suddenly get on the front foot and the forwards then aren’t running into set defensive lines.
 
40 nil said:
It is a major factor. After Des's disastrous Jorge selection last week, I think he's lost the plot.
Click to expand...
Add to that the post covid Harper selection that cost us the Sharks game and subsequent weeks of still picking him, the post covid Taupau selection that pretty much cost us the souffs game , the poor tactics, the non existent game plans, the horrendous defensive structure, the junior grades level of conditioning etc etc etc.
 
We can disect our games and each player all u want , we have a team with no leadership, a half back who has no game plan, a coach which has brough the same style bulldogs DNA all over again in our play.
 
Woodsie said:
Are post contact meters still important ?

Isn't the new true measure .. a quick play the ball.

However, considering we are probably coming last in that stat also .. I'll just shut up now.
Click to expand...
I'd imagine those two things are pretty related.

Chicken or the egg though.

... or to make it simpler, it's probably just that the forwards haven't been able to compete week in week out
 
Some of the storm players last week made plenty of metres crawling forward after they were tackled and before they played the ball.

These are post post contact metres, illegal sure, but rarely policed by the refs.
 
When it comes to our forwards (and possibly consistency), I think the frustrating thig is we KNOW they all have the ability and capability to dominate a game. It's just bringing that intensity week in, week out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Staff online

  • Jethro
    Jethro
    Star Trekkin' across the universe

Members online

Total: 348 (members: 21, guests: 327)

Latest posts

Team P W L PD Pts
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0

Online statistics

Members online
21
Guests online
327
Total visitors
348
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Latest posts

Newest members

Stay Connected

Back
Top Bottom