Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Roosters Win with Their Defence

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Roosters Win with Their Defence

    It was in another thread, I cant remember which one, but there was a debate about repeat sets vs 20m restarts, and someone said that the early 2000 roosters team used to deliberately kick deep into the opposition territory, sometimes over the dead ball line, and win games off the back of their defence. However some others rubbished that claim. Watching the roosters vs tigers semi, early in the second half, Fittler says 'it's a blue we used to use at the roosters, we would get to the 40, and just kick it, regardless of the tackle. It means that youre going into the game to win with your defence'.

    So there you have it. Comps are won on the back of defence.

  • #2
    all I no is that we havnt been defending like we hav in 2013 since ive been following them, which its been since 2003, and I was too young to even remember games except the grand final ps. ive been on the bourbon bit too much tonight.
    was born a sydney roosters fanatic
    "we're the roosters, we'll be fine"

    Comment


    • #3
      ji just hopped on the nrl site and noticed that we don't appear in any of the top 5. tackles, points, try assists, line breaks and tries.

      what a shame these stats are
      1911 1912 1913 1923 1935 1936 1937 1940 1945 1974 1975 2002 2013 2018 2019 2020

      Comment


      • #4
        Its a good tactic imo. Kick it early , force the opposition to turn around in their 20 and work it out. The errors will eventually happen. Its a tactic I use very well in rugby league live 2

        Comment


        • #5
          One worrying stat for me when I see us is that we often have lower completion rates and less possession than the losing team.

          Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe this was the case against the dragons... 36-0 on the board but we had something like 49% possession and less completions.

          On top of that we had close to double the kick metres gained (possibly proving the OP's point) and significantly more line breaks...etc.

          Conclusion... are we missing the value of kick metres gained when looking at repeat sets alone? Repeat sets are great but if it's GI/Slater/Dugan/Hayne...etc taking the ball, you'll struggle to force a repeat set IMO because they have a freakish knack for slipping tacklers + holding onto the ball. In the absence of repeat sets, you can still gain metres through kicks, which we appear to be doing!

          ---

          On that note, how do you calculate kick metres gained? For example if we kick from half way and tackle the opposition on their 20, is that 30m gained?

          Comment


          • #6
            can you imagine if we win the penalties and decisions in games how much we could slaughter a side?
            Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by kegs1 View Post
              It was in another thread, I cant remember which one, but there was a debate about repeat sets vs 20m restarts, and someone said that the early 2000 roosters team used to deliberately kick deep into the opposition territory, sometimes over the dead ball line, and win games off the back of their defence. However some others rubbished that claim. Watching the roosters vs tigers semi, early in the second half, Fittler says 'it's a blue we used to use at the roosters, we would get to the 40, and just kick it, regardless of the tackle. It means that youre going into the game to win with your defence'.

              So there you have it. Comps are won on the back of defence.
              I believe it was Teabags who scoffed at the notion mate.

              Repeat sets over tries.



              The FlogPen .

              You know it makes sense.

              Comment


              • #8
                The tactic that you talk about Kegs back in 2002 did work quite well for us back then, but that tactic does not work as well for us these days cause the refs penalize the living shit out of us! More time spent with us having the ball in our hands means less opportunities for the refs to screw us over with penalties, which means that gaining repeat sets is a must for us when it comes to playing sides such as the storm and $ouff$!

                We can get away with winning games having less possession and conceding loads of penalties against lesser teams, but against storm and $ouff$ it is a different story and we will need to have our fair share of possession!
                The year 2013 marks the beginning of the Roosters next 'decade of excellence', and it will prove to be more successful than the last!

                Here's looking at you, kid.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by ism22 View Post
                  One worrying stat for me when I see us is that we often have lower completion rates and less possession than the losing team.

                  Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe this was the case against the dragons... 36-0 on the board but we had something like 49% possession and less completions.

                  On top of that we had close to double the kick metres gained (possibly proving the OP's point) and significantly more line breaks...etc.

                  Conclusion... are we missing the value of kick metres gained when looking at repeat sets alone? Repeat sets are great but if it's GI/Slater/Dugan/Hayne...etc taking the ball, you'll struggle to force a repeat set IMO because they have a freakish knack for slipping tacklers + holding onto the ball. In the absence of repeat sets, you can still gain metres through kicks, which we appear to be doing!

                  ---

                  On that note, how do you calculate kick metres gained? For example if we kick from half way and tackle the opposition on their 20, is that 30m gained?
                  what I believe is trent has told the boys not to contest the 5th kick bomb unless you are 100%sure of catching it and either scoring of an accurate off load. I think his reasoning is to make sure they get no advantage from the catch (zero tackle) and no fear of off side, knock on or tackling a player in the air.
                  1911 1912 1913 1923 1935 1936 1937 1940 1945 1974 1975 2002 2013 2018 2019 2020

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by The Rooster Oracle View Post
                    The tactic that you talk about Kegs back in 2002 did work quite well for us back then, but that tactic does not work as well for us these days cause the refs penalize the living shit out of us! More time spent with us having the ball in our hands means less opportunities for the refs to screw us over with penalties, which means that gaining repeat sets is a must for us when it comes to playing sides such as the storm and $ouff$!

                    We can get away with winning games having less possession and conceding loads of penalties against lesser teams, but against storm and $ouff$ it is a different story and we will need to have our fair share of possession!
                    I see examples of the reverse weekly mate.

                    Just the other night The Cowplods hadn't made a mistake and had dominated possession a few mins from 1/2 time but trailed on the scoreboard.

                    Melba had a lot of possession before 1/2 time Sunday but it was all down their end and they trailed on the scoreboard.

                    I keep saying it but Melba and Souffs play a different style to what we do. They play a more roll down the field style of footy then look for field position and grind you out of the contest. It's boring but it works for them.

                    What's important for their gameplan to succeed is different to what's important for our gameplan to succeed.

                    We play more like woManly. Based on defence and the ability to shift very quickly and use our edges to our advantage. We can both strike quickly and with plenty of quick tries. It's almost rope-a-dope stuff. We lull then strike.

                    Not saying repeat sets don't have their place and aren't effective it's just not as important in the way we are playing footy.

                    I don't believe we can beat Melba or Souffs at their game.

                    We have to play our way and spoil their control. We need our defence to be dominant.

                    Repeat sets won't win us the comp IMO.

                    Scoring tries will though.



                    The FlogPen .

                    You know it makes sense.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by stsae View Post
                      I see examples of the reverse weekly mate.

                      Just the other night The Cowplods hadn't made a mistake and had dominated possession a few mins from 1/2 time but trailed on the scoreboard.

                      Melba had a lot of possession before 1/2 time Sunday but it was all down their end and they trailed on the scoreboard.

                      I keep saying it but Melba and Souffs play a different style to what we do. They play a more roll down the field style of footy then look for field position and grind you out of the contest. It's boring but it works for them.

                      What's important for their gameplan to succeed is different to what's important for our gameplan to succeed.

                      We play more like woManly. Based on defence and the ability to shift very quickly and use our edges to our advantage. We can both strike quickly and with plenty of quick tries. It's almost rope-a-dope stuff. We lull then strike.

                      Not saying repeat sets don't have their place and aren't effective it's just not as important in the way we are playing footy.

                      I don't believe we can beat Melba or Souffs at their game.

                      We have to play our way and spoil their control. We need our defence to be dominant.

                      Repeat sets won't win us the comp IMO.

                      Scoring tries will though.

                      I agree with certain things you say Stsae. We have to play our way. We do play more like womanly than $ouff$ or storm, we need our defense to be dominant and yes scoring tries will win us the comp.

                      Manly are very much like us this year in that they don't get the benefit from the refs anywhere near as much as $ouff$ do. Hence why little toovey nearly has a coronary most weeks.

                      We have to have a fair share of possession against the storm and $ouff$ in order to defeat them. You know as well as I do mate, that there is no chance in hell of us ever winning a penalty count against $ouff$ for the near foreseeable future, as 'certain people' want $ouff$ to be successful!! And because of this we need to even the balance out of possession with gaining more repeat sets. I can't really see us beating the storm or $ouff$ with only 45% (or even less) possession. I can easily see us beating both those sides if we can have 50% possession.

                      Some people on here see getting repeat sets as a bad thing, and I don't understand that? As a few people have said, it's not repeat sets versus tries, it's repeat sets versus handing over possession through most times a 20m restart and then the opposition getting a penalty and going right down the other end of the field on the attack. It makes a huge difference this, as we could so easily have the ball on be the one's on the attack instead, wearing down the opposition, taking the petrol out of their tank instead of ours. It really helps to win tight games at the back end of the game!

                      Pearce needs to study the opposition players who are the most successful in grubbering kicks into the ingoal and forcing line drop outs, learn from them and improve this aspect of his game. For me it comes down to several things such as, the position he is standing to kick the ball, the angle he directs the kick and the angle of the ball as he drops it down onto his boot. Good kickers can get the ball to curve along the ground, dog leg it so that it stands more of chance of staying in the in goal, and harder for the opposition to pick up. Pearce only ever kicks the ball so that it runs end on end, which means it always goes dead straight and is easier for the opposition to pick up.

                      The two examples you mentioned against repeat sets with the cowgirls and the storm in recent times, both teams were without their origin players, so that makes a big difference in the potency of their attacks and being able to take advantage of repeat sets.
                      The year 2013 marks the beginning of the Roosters next 'decade of excellence', and it will prove to be more successful than the last!

                      Here's looking at you, kid.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by The Rooster Oracle View Post
                        I agree with certain things you say Stsae. We have to play our way. We do play more like womanly than $ouff$ or storm, we need our defense to be dominant and yes scoring tries will win us the comp.

                        Manly are very much like us this year in that they don't get the benefit from the refs anywhere near as much as $ouff$ do. Hence why little toovey nearly has a coronary most weeks.

                        We have to have a fair share of possession against the storm and $ouff$ in order to defeat them. You know as well as I do mate, that there is no chance in hell of us ever winning a penalty count against $ouff$ for the near foreseeable future, as 'certain people' want $ouff$ to be successful!! And because of this we need to even the balance out of possession with gaining more repeat sets. I can't really see us beating the storm or $ouff$ with only 45% (or even less) possession. I can easily see us beating both those sides if we can have 50% possession.

                        Some people on here see getting repeat sets as a bad thing, and I don't understand that? As a few people have said, it's not repeat sets versus tries, it's repeat sets versus handing over possession through most times a 20m restart and then the opposition getting a penalty and going right down the other end of the field on the attack. It makes a huge difference this, as we could so easily have the ball on be the one's on the attack instead, wearing down the opposition, taking the petrol out of their tank instead of ours. It really helps to win tight games at the back end of the game!

                        Pearce needs to study the opposition players who are the most successful in grubbering kicks into the ingoal and forcing line drop outs, learn from them and improve this aspect of his game. For me it comes down to several things such as, the position he is standing to kick the ball, the angle he directs the kick and the angle of the ball as he drops it down onto his boot. Good kickers can get the ball to curve along the ground, dog leg it so that it stands more of chance of staying in the in goal, and harder for the opposition to pick up. Pearce only ever kicks the ball so that it runs end on end, which means it always goes dead straight and is easier for the opposition to pick up.

                        The two examples you mentioned against repeat sets with the cowgirls and the storm in recent times, both teams were without their origin players, so that makes a big difference in the potency of their attacks and being able to take advantage of repeat sets.
                        That bolded sentence I don't see mate. I think some over emphasise their importance to our style of game. But everyone I've seen on this site seem to understand the concept that building pressure thru repeat sets is not a bad thing.

                        I doubt it's in PearceOrf to learn the art of the grubber into the in goal at this point of the season or his career. It's just not his go, or Baloneys or Morteins to be fair, hence the coach using different tactics to suit his 1/2s.

                        I like the way we are playing in the oppositions 20 this season personally. And I've been one whose called for someone, anyone, to roll one in and earn the ball back.

                        I believe what we have been doing, gameplan or tactic wise, has worked thus far, hence our position on the ladder. I also don't believe the coach is gonna drastically overhaul our gameplan before the semis. That would be madness IMO.

                        Sure continual improvement is what's required. But why try to fix what isn't broke???

                        The anomaly that started all this was when we played The Bros. we earned more repeats than I've seen in a game in the last 4-5 years I reckon, but we still lost. I still can't find anyone to explain that bizarre result.

                        Last edited by stsae; 07-16-2013, 07:06 PM.


                        The FlogPen .

                        You know it makes sense.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by stsae View Post
                          That bolded sentence I don't see mate. I think some over emphasise their importance to our style of game. But everyone I've seen on this site seem to understand the concept that building pressure thru repeat sets is not a bad thing.

                          I doubt it's in PearceOrf to learn the art of the grubber into the in goal at this point of the season or his career. It's just not his go, or Baloneys or Morteins to be fair, hence the coach using different tactics to suit his 1/2s.

                          I like the way we are playing in the oppositions 20 this season personally. And I've been one whose called for someone, anyone, to roll one in and earn the ball back.

                          I believe what we have been doing, gameplan or tactic wise, has worked thus far, hence our position on the ladder. I also don't believe the coach is gonna drastically overhaul our gameplan before the semis. That would be madness IMO.

                          Sure continual improvement is what's required. But why try to fix what isn't broke???

                          The anomaly that started all this was when we played The Bros. we earned more repeats than I've seen in a game in the last 4-5 years I reckon, but we still lost. I still can't find anyone to explain that bizarre result.

                          old habits, methinks.

                          we just sort of it expected it to happen is my best guess. We played the dogs the week after and my guess is that the boys once again were just looking ahead to next week.
                          add in the fact that we were being frustrated by a solid up-and-in defence and a couple of warriors run away tries, and I lose $50 to a warriors supporting mate.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by kegs1 View Post
                            old habits, methinks.

                            we just sort of it expected it to happen is my best guess. We played the dogs the week after and my guess is that the boys once again were just looking ahead to next week.
                            add in the fact that we were being frustrated by a solid up-and-in defence and a couple of warriors run away tries, and I lose $50 to a warriors supporting mate.
                            I thought we were beaten by the better side on the night whose much maligned coach played it to a tee and outsmarted his younger inexpierenced counterpart. And they defended like mofos which relates to your point our enthusiasm was down a bit, they were flying.

                            Doesn't explain how we got repeat set after repeat set, built pressure like many seem to think is the way we should play, but struggled to score points, looked frustrated and like we'd run out of ideas and lost the game.

                            As I've said mate, it's not bagging the repeat set concept, it's just I believe it's not something we are planning for cos the coach sees for our side as it stands it's lower on the priority scale of things to do when we are in the oppositions 20.

                            Square peg round hole.



                            The FlogPen .

                            You know it makes sense.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by kegs1 View Post
                              it was in another thread, i cant remember which one, but there was a debate about repeat sets vs 20m restarts, and someone said that the early 2000 roosters team used to deliberately kick deep into the opposition territory, sometimes over the dead ball line, and win games off the back of their defence. However some others rubbished that claim. Watching the roosters vs tigers semi, early in the second half, fittler says 'it's a blue we used to use at the roosters, we would get to the 40, and just kick it, regardless of the tackle. It means that youre going into the game to win with your defence'.

                              So there you have it. Comps are won on the back of defence.
                              lol!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X