Win the ruck, win the game. Simple game plan.
Bozo and Zorba have turned this great club around....Its a results driven business.....fark off, Me personally thinks there is a lot of **** still inside, only difference to last year is its NOW not in the media.
The way Melb have been able to slow the play the ball over the years has been beautiful to watch especially in their least competitive years.I think where we are struggling is in the wrestle. I would have thought since we bought a Melbourne Storm wrestling expert we would see some improvement in that area.....not so. We are getting dominated in the ruck when we have the ball, no quick roll on, no fast play the balls to work off. Then when we are defending teams are just punching through us because we can't slow down their ruck enough for the defence to set, which screws any defensive structure you might be trying to achieve
Like @Lyonstomenzies said, win the ruck go a long way to winning the game. Winning the ruck these days means winning the wrestle.
This has been mentioned a lot, but he only spent two years working with the Storm FG side; 2014-2015. He wasn't involved in their 2012 Premiership and they leaked the most points of any side in the top 8 during the 2014 season. Granted, they did defend well last year, but I don't think this guy is one of Melbourne's top dogs that slipped through their fingers and into the arms of a rival club...for all we know, the Storm released him?!I think where we are struggling is in the wrestle. I would have thought since we bought a Melbourne Storm wrestling expert we would see some improvement in that area.....not so. We are getting dominated in the ruck when we have the ball, no quick roll on, no fast play the balls to work off. Then when we are defending teams are just punching through us because we can't slow down their ruck enough for the defence to set, which screws any defensive structure you might be trying to achieve
Like @Lyonstomenzies said, win the ruck go a long way to winning the game. Winning the ruck these days means winning the wrestle.
The first up contact is soft because our players are bracing for impact not trying to initiate it,(also due to going backwards but other times just not enough in your face substance) more aggression is needed but you also need the right type of players to make it happen.As far as structure goes, I personally don't see a huge problem with our attack. We have enough natural talent to score points and the combinations will come with time. What does worry me is obviously the defence and I agree that part of it comes down to the wrestle and being beaten in the ruck. The other part that hasn't been mentioned is "first up contact" which goes a long way to nullifying the opposition's dominance of the ruck area.
Watching the way the Eels defended against the Bulldogs on Friday Night is exactly what is required to negate the opposition go-forward and keep the edges from being exposed. The Eels forwards come out absolutely raging with anger and they hit hard and the hits stick. We come out like junior school footballers and arm grab and backpedal. It's something that never used to happen with the likes of Stewart, Watmough, Kite, and King.
I hate the Eels and I hate Arthur, but I envy the intensity that he gets from his forwards. He was able to do it last year as well, but they just lacked that little bit of class to finish off games.
Finally, I think Bennett is a coach who sets up simple structures and within the framework of that structure, his players can do as they please depending on what the defence is doing. You see Milford and Hunt pop up in very similar positions during games, with very similar structures around them, but they do a variety of different things within that framework. They play with so much freedom but it's organised around them.
The first up contact is soft because our players are bracing for impact not trying to initiate it,(also due to going backwards but other times just not enough in your face substance) more aggression is needed but you also need the right type of players to make it happen.
It is not just a case of "do it like team X,Y,Z if you don't have the caliber of players to execute such tackles on a consistent effective basis.
If we lack aggressive in your face ball and all in your face defenders then smothering with numbers but with a higher intensity then what Manly are playing at right now has to be a starting point up the middle.Correct. Over the past decade (depending on personnel) Manly have had periods of both up in your face punishing defense and the absorbing smothering defense.
Both can be effective but everybody has to be on the same page and trust his team mates. Don't know what will work with our current crew.
Arthur has a lot of rubbish in his forward pack like Mannah, Kenny Edwards, a fat guy named Junior Paulo, David Gower, Peni Terepo, and Danny Wicks.The first up contact is soft because our players are bracing for impact not trying to initiate it,(also due to going backwards but other times just not enough in your face substance) more aggression is needed but you also need the right type of players to make it happen.
It is not just a case of "do it like team X,Y,Z if you don't have the caliber of players to execute such tackles on a consistent effective basis.
We are not talking about the overall quality of a player but the style of player and physical attributes that lend itself to a more aggressive ball and all attacking defence.Arthur has a lot of rubbish in his forward pack like Mannah, Kenny Edwards, a fat guy named Junior Paulo, David Gower, Peni Terepo, and Danny Wicks.
We have Kapow, Lawrence, Jake T, L Brown, and Nate Myles; three of which are internationals. Problem is, they're playing like pansies.
I just watched the first half of the Tigers game and Manly's defence was the worst I've seen since 2005. A rabble. No line speed, and they were back 13 metres every play with no go forward to tackle. Tigers were all over it and run amok.As far as structure goes, I personally don't see a huge problem with our attack. We have enough natural talent to score points and the combinations will come with time. What does worry me is obviously the defence and I agree that part of it comes down to the wrestle and being beaten in the ruck. The other part that hasn't been mentioned is "first up contact" which goes a long way to nullifying the opposition's dominance of the ruck area.
Watching the way the Eels defended against the Bulldogs on Friday Night is exactly what is required to negate the opposition go-forward and keep the edges from being exposed. The Eels forwards come out absolutely raging with anger and they hit hard and the hits stick. We come out like junior school footballers and arm grab and backpedal. It's something that never used to happen with the likes of Stewart, Watmough, Kite, and King.
I hate the Eels and I hate Arthur, but I envy the intensity that he gets from his forwards. He was able to do it last year as well, but they just lacked that little bit of class to finish off games.
Finally, I think Bennett is a coach who sets up simple structures and within the framework of that structure, his players can do as they please depending on what the defence is doing. You see Milford and Hunt pop up in very similar positions during games, with very similar structures around them, but they do a variety of different things within that framework. They play with so much freedom but it's organised around them.
Team | P | W | L | PD | Pts |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
11 | 9 | 2 | 82 | 20 | |
11 | 8 | 3 | 112 | 18 | |
11 | 8 | 3 | 75 | 18 | |
11 | 7 | 4 | 65 | 16 | |
12 | 7 | 5 | 135 | 14 | |
12 | 7 | 5 | 57 | 14 | |
11 | 6 | 5 | -9 | 14 | |
11 | 6 | 5 | -38 | 14 | |
12 | 6 | 5 | 36 | 13 | |
11 | 5 | 6 | 47 | 12 | |
12 | 6 | 6 | 2 | 12 | |
11 | 5 | 6 | -88 | 12 | |
12 | 5 | 6 | -3 | 11 | |
11 | 3 | 8 | -89 | 8 | |
11 | 3 | 8 | -119 | 8 | |
11 | 2 | 9 | -95 | 6 | |
11 | 2 | 9 | -170 | 6 |