VOTE BHQ Player of Round Two

[rnabokov]

To be tedious, I'll answer your rhetorical question literally:

In round 1 you were only given 2 votes, but 109 members voted. In round 2 you got 3 votes, but only 71 voted. Right now, that's skewed the votes towards the top 2 standouts in round 1. This most notably hurt Herbie Farnworth in third place, as he might've polled another 20-30 votes had there been a third choice. Croft and Coates would also have benefited from a third choice, and maybe Isaako.

Milford looked like he was returning to form in round 1. Or at least, he'd been told not to overthink it, just get the ball to Xavier, and that worked pretty well until Coates went off. Then he fell to shit. Or something like that. In round 2, he was up against David Fifita, who knew his shortcomings back to front. He knew all he had to do was run at Milford or Isaako near the line and 9/10 times that would be a try. So Milford got badly exposed, and hence no votes in round 2. The entire spine was jelly. None of them deserved a single vote.

Round 2 was harder to pick a standout as the entire team really was woeful. Niu and Riki weren't perfect, but were clearly busting their guts, and TPJ stood out in the forwards as being able to inflict pain on Fifita and break their defensive line. Beyond that though, it was tough to praise anyone else.

It might also be worth mentioning, just for the sake of accuracy as opposed to overt bias, that BOTH times the ball went to Fifita for his tries, the Titans had, in the first try, 4 on 3 with Isaako way out of the picture after positioning himself on the wrong side, and in Fifita's 2nd try, Titans had at the start of the play, 7 on 4, again no Isaako, and we had also stacked the short side when the attack was clearly going long, with NOBODY talking to move to the long side where the bloody ball was obviously heading.

At the point that Titan's shape formed before the ball went to Fifita (how bleeding obvious was that play ) they had 4 on 3 with Milford exposed, Niu standing flat footed and, they also had a 2 on 1 outside Fifita.

THAT is shit FB play, shit defensive structural organisation and no communication.

To attribute all the blame simply to Milford for his admittedly poor attempts at one on one with Fifita is for mine, utterly missing the point.

As well, and what's worse, for Walters to ALSO do that by simply swapping Croft for Milford without acknowledge both the shitty defensive reads by Isaako and our lousy defensive structures is, well, not a good look for a new coach in his 1st season.

If I am missing something in my analysis, please let me know.

 

[Sproj]

It might also be worth mentioning, just for the sake of accuracy as opposed to overt bias, that BOTH times the ball went to Fifita for his tries, the Titans had, in the first try, 4 on 3 with Isaako way out of the picture after positioning himself on the wrong side, and in Fifita's 2nd try, Titans had at the start of the play, 7 on 4, again no Isaako, and we had also stacked the short side when the attack was clearly going long, with NOBODY talking to move to the long side where the bloody ball was obviously heading.

At the point that Titan's shape formed before the ball went to Fifita (how bleeding obvious was that play ) they had 4 on 3 with Milford exposed, Niu standing flat footed and, they also had a 2 on 1 outside Fifita.

THAT is shit FB play, shit defensive structural organisation and no communication.

To attribute all the blame simply to Milford for his admittedly poor attempts at one on one with Fifita is for mine, utterly missing the point.

As well, and what's worse, for Walters to ALSO do that by simply swapping Croft for Milford without acknowledge both the shitty defensive reads by Isaako and our lousy defensive structures is, well, not a good look for a new coach in his 1st season.

If I am missing something in my analysis, please let me know.

In fairness to Kevvie, he may well see it but it is just one of many defensive problems with the team. He needed a quick fix and swapping Milford and Croft was the quickest fix he had available.

Also, as bad as Isaako is, there isn't anything to replace him at present. Maybe once Staggs is back he can go there or put him at centre and move Niu or Farnworth back there. He could give Walsh a chance but hey, they got is going, he signed his bed and so needs to lay in it now I suppose. No point us continuing to help develop him for the Warriors next year.

 

[McHunt]

It might also be worth mentioning, just for the sake of accuracy as opposed to overt bias, that BOTH times the ball went to Fifita for his tries, the Titans had, in the first try, 4 on 3 with Isaako way out of the picture after positioning himself on the wrong side, and in Fifita's 2nd try, Titans had at the start of the play, 7 on 4, again no Isaako, and we had also stacked the short side when the attack was clearly going long, with NOBODY talking to move to the long side where the bloody ball was obviously heading.

At the point that Titan's shape formed before the ball went to Fifita (how bleeding obvious was that play ) they had 4 on 3 with Milford exposed, Niu standing flat footed and, they also had a 2 on 1 outside Fifita.

THAT is shit FB play, shit defensive structural organisation and no communication.

To attribute all the blame simply to Milford for his admittedly poor attempts at one on one with Fifita is for mine, utterly missing the point.

As well, and what's worse, for Walters to ALSO do that by simply swapping Croft for Milford without acknowledge both the shitty defensive reads by Isaako and our lousy defensive structures is, well, not a good look for a new coach in his 1st season.

If I am missing something in my analysis, please let me know.

If only he got on his kelpie dog the way Seibold taught him and Darius:

 

[BroncsFan]

It might also be worth mentioning, just for the sake of accuracy as opposed to overt bias, that BOTH times the ball went to Fifita for his tries, the Titans had, in the first try, 4 on 3 with Isaako way out of the picture after positioning himself on the wrong side, and in Fifita's 2nd try, Titans had at the start of the play, 7 on 4, again no Isaako, and we had also stacked the short side when the attack was clearly going long, with NOBODY talking to move to the long side where the bloody ball was obviously heading.

At the point that Titan's shape formed before the ball went to Fifita (how bleeding obvious was that play ) they had 4 on 3 with Milford exposed, Niu standing flat footed and, they also had a 2 on 1 outside Fifita.

THAT is shit FB play, shit defensive structural organisation and no communication.

To attribute all the blame simply to Milford for his admittedly poor attempts at one on one with Fifita is for mine, utterly missing the point.

As well, and what's worse, for Walters to ALSO do that by simply swapping Croft for Milford without acknowledge both the shitty defensive reads by Isaako and our lousy defensive structures is, well, not a good look for a new coach in his 1st season.

If I am missing something in my analysis, please let me know.

The only thing I would say in regards to swapping Milf and Croft is the possibility that Croft is a better communicator than Milf when it comes to defense... he sure as shit has less missed tackles and that may be associated with his ability to organise his edge in defence.

In the video you are referring to Seibold uses a cowboys example of Morgan and Dunn telling Drinkwater to flip sides... potentially Croft is better at reading and reacting in defence to communicate overlaps (he is from the storm system) and therefore him being up against Fifita may create a better organised edge defense in Kevvie's eyes

 

[Finbar]

If only he got on his kelpie dog the way Seibold taught him and Darius:

Fuckin' Juzzy from twitter, stealing my specially made GIF from right here on BroncosHQ! It was a high quality GIF too! Very stable image, seamlessly tracking the ball and it even has some bonus mouse cursor footage.

 

[McHunt]

Fuckin' Juzzy from twitter, stealing my specially made GIF from right here on BroncosHQ! It was a high quality GIF too! Very stable image, seamlessly tracking the ball and it even has some bonus mouse cursor footage.

Image credit:

POST GAME - Round 4 - Roosters vs Broncos

broncoshq.com

 

[rnabokov]

The only thing I would say in regards to swapping Milf and Croft is the possibility that Croft is a better communicator than Milf when it comes to defense... he sure as shit has less missed tackles and that may be associated with his ability to organise his edge in defence.

In the video you are referring to Seibold uses a cowboys example of Morgan and Dunn telling Drinkwater to flip sides... potentially Croft is better at reading and reacting in defence to communicate overlaps (he is from the storm system) and therefore him being up against Fifita may create a better organised edge defense in Kevvie's eyes

Good point. Thanks. It still leaves the issue of Isaako's effectiveness at the back - say, why he positions himself on the short side when the attack is clearly going left long side and that's where their million dollar baby is waiting for them ball to run at Milford. As well, why did the team stack the short side for the same reason Isaako did. I mean, 7 on 4 on the long side?

 

[rnabokov]

In fairness to Kevvie, he may well see it but it is just one of many defensive problems with the team. He needed a quick fix and swapping Milford and Croft was the quickest fix he had available.

Also, as bad as Isaako is, there isn't anything to replace him at present. Maybe once Staggs is back he can go there or put him at centre and move Niu or Farnworth back there. He could give Walsh a chance but hey, they got is going, he signed his bed and so needs to lay in it now I suppose. No point us continuing to help develop him for the Warriors next year.

Agreed about the quick fix. Let's see tomorrow if our defensive structures, Isaako's positioning and Milford's tackling have improved.

 

[McHunt]

Agreed about the quick fix. Let's see tomorrow if our defensive structures, Isaako's positioning and Milford's tackling have improved.

Seibold is such an inarticulate communicator. All he was saying is if the attack moves to a side lacking numbers the fullback should come up into the defensive line, and then fall back and mark the ball carrier if it's switched in the other direction. His postion is roving across the back looking for holes in the defensive line.

This isn't what makes a "good fullback." This is a defensive pattern that's not up to the individual player. It's a team dynamic determined by the coaching staff.

Suggest you watch the match tonight and see how that pans out in practice.

 

[BroncsFan]

Good point. Thanks. It still leaves the issue of Isaako's effectiveness at the back - say, why he positions himself on the short side when the attack is clearly going left long side and that's where their million dollar baby is waiting for them ball to run at Milford. As well, why did the team stack the short side for the same reason Isaako did. I mean, 7 on 4 on the long side?

That aspect is inexcusable ... how do you even fit 7 players within 20m of the sideline without realising there is a serious issue.

The only element I could see that may have caused that was a lack of controlling the ball runner and slowing down the ptb (i.e. wrestling and getting the ball runner on their back). This has been a major issue with our team seemingly forever.... It was also the cause of Reed scoring in the first game (Carrigan being caught at the ruck).

If you concede a quick ptb it can be difficult for anyone to recognise where a weakness is in the defensive line before the attack is already on you and found the overlap (remember the attacking halves are watching the defensive line and reacting... eyes up footy... whereas the defensive team are constantly running up and back as a line and difficult to get a decent perspective on where the overlaps are forming, unless you're the hole).

The video didn't show the whole play to see how quick the ptb was, but you could see Herbie running back (also had his back to the attack, which is a big no no)... I believe the positioning of the center can be a trigger for the dummy half. If the center is stuck in the marker there's an opportunity that the winger is posted up alone (can create a blind side opportunity) or the half is located at the center's usual position (creates a miss match where the defense has a half and a winger possibly defending the DH, center, winger and possibly also the half if he decides to burst down there with them (Moses was excellent at this play a few years back).

In this instance we may have noticed Herbie was out of position and overcompensated with additional players to cover him... but any time you have 3 players at the ruck and a quick ptb the attack is on. It's your absolute best opportunity with ball in hand and would be a trigger for the attacking team, as the d-line will be disorganised (do we cover the missing player, do we hold our position and hope he recovers, etc.).

I think the real screw up was that the ptb was 15m in from touch (so not even the 20m tram line)... that is too tight a blindside to really do too much, so we heavily overcompensated... but our defence has been sooo shit for so long that our players aren't good enough at controlling the ruck (to prevent the quick ptb in the first place), and aren't used to recognising when they're losing a ruck and should slow it down (force a penalty if you have to... just prevent that quick ptb).

 

[rnabokov]

Seibold is such an inarticulate communicator. All he was saying is if the attack moves to a side lacking numbers the fullback should come up into the defensive line, and then fall back and mark the ball carrier if it's switched in the other direction. His postion is roving across the back looking for holes in the defensive line.

This isn't what makes a "good fullback." This is a defensive pattern that's not up to the individual player. It's a team dynamic determined by the coaching staff.

Suggest you watch the match tonight and see how that pans out in practice.

I watched the match tonight, if that's the game you meant, and I saw both sides get their numbers right on either side close to 100% of the time. And that is one issue for me with our defence, we don't set lines with numbers balanced sensibly based on reading the attack. No wonder the attack immediately goes to the side with such a major weakness, where Fifita is waiting for the chance to run at Milford. Someone needs to be controlling that. Seems no one is.

As for the FB, he started off wrong in the first place. Wrong spot in the defensive line. So yeah, he should have come up but he didn't because he was out of position.