Broncos Halves Analysis: Short kicks in opposition 30

[Super Freak]

Hunt's long kicks and bombs are just fine.

The problem are the players around him.

Rarely do we put on a good chase, and very rarely do the players contest the bombs. They stand there and wait for the opposition to grab it. Most of the time the bombs go where he wants it to go, but neither Oates or Kahu contest them. Neither do our centres.

When the other players actually chase the long kicks hard, we are able to trap the opposition down their end.

 

[Dash]

I disagree. There is what is known as the 'Hunt Bomb'. Milford has a much better distance maker, but less polished attacking bomb than Hunt. The problem with Hunt's bombs is you get the feeling he couldn't make up his mind quick enough and it just sort of plops.

That last sentence more or less describes the team's entire kicking game.

 

[holdzy]

That last sentence more or less describes the team's entire kicking game.

They each have good points. It's about combination and communication. Team harmony was fucked last year.

 

[theshed]

Wow what a resource this video is. Amazing job, thanks or putting it together.

It does seem like too many poor kicks from both players (Hunt especially struggled) but i don't want to say too much without having seen the same video for other teams, maybe this isn't as far from the mean as it seems.


I would love to see the same type of video with the Sharks halves or Cowboys/Storm. I think that would give you a real indication of where the bench mark sits. Not that I'm requesting anyone do this because I can't even imagine how long a video like this takes to compile.

 

[Porthoz]

Hunt's long kicks and bombs are just fine.

The problem are the players around him.

Rarely do we put on a good chase, and very rarely do the players contest the bombs. They stand there and wait for the opposition to grab it. Most of the time the bombs go where he wants it to go, but neither Oates or Kahu contest them. Neither do our centres.

When the other players actually chase the long kicks hard, we are able to trap the opposition down their end.

His bombs are generally too shallow and too far from the try line to be effective in attack. I highly doubt they go where or how he wants them.

They're his defensive weapon of choice because he doesn't have the accuracy for attacking kicks, so he puts them up to keep the opposition as far back as possible, while giving our line time to position themselves to stop their kick returner. We rarely attack the ball for that reason too!

He does have a reasonable long range kick (less accuracy required) imo, some pearlers amongst those, and our kick chase is generally very good!

 

[Dash]

After watching the clip, I think that most of the 'bad' kicks from both Hunt and Milford were the result of trying to be too cute or taking the easy way out. Run out of room? I'll just kick and hope. Made a half break? Rather than looking for support and throwing a good pass, I'll just lazily kick across field. Desperately need a try? I'll grubber for myself and try to be a hero.

I reckon 80% of those poor kicks were down to a lack of concentration or application to the task at hand, and were symptomatic of a year where the whole team was just a little bit off - Hunt (and Milford in patches) in particular.

 

[Porthoz]

After watching the clip, I think that most of the 'bad' kicks from both Hunt and Milford were the result of trying to be too cute or taking the easy way out. Run out of room? I'll just kick and hope. Made a half break? Rather than looking for support and throwing a good pass, I'll just lazily kick across field. Desperately need a try? I'll grubber for myself and try to be a hero.

I reckon 80% of those poor kicks were down to a lack of concentration or application to the task at hand, and were symptomatic of a year where the whole team was just a little bit off - Hunt (and Milford in patches) in particular.

I don't think Hunt's short kicking was particularly better in 2014 or 2015 tbh. Milford's improved from 2015 imo...
We'll find out when SF does those years as well I guess.

P.S. @Morkel, where's the Dante's inferno you're talking about in this thread? It's all so mellow... :pokeytongue:

 

[Morkel]

I don't think Hunt's short kicking was particularly better in 2014 or 2015 tbh. Milford's improved from 2015 imo...
We'll find out when SF does those years as well I guess.

P.S. @Morkel, where's the Dante's inferno you're talking about in this thread? It's all so mellow... :pokeytongue:

It was more that, even with video of every single kick (of that type), people then found ways of justifying their existing stance by adding their own interpretation to what is a "good" kick, etc. SF went to a massive amount of effort, and still everyone just took up their regular position, one side or the other. It was more twilight zone. "Is this really happening?"

FWIW, no one's mentioned one very important point - looking at the games that we lost or where the opposition racked up a lot of points before we could reply, you'll notice that there were very few kicks, sometimes none, in that opposition 30 for up to en entire half of football. Yes there were some very poor kicks, (more often than not from ad-lib plays or ones where the kicker ran right to the defensive line and chose their kicking line poorly), but the decisive factor was we DID NOT HAVE THE FIELD POSITION to even have those kicking opportunities in the first place. There were some games where there were one, maybe two, kicks within the 30 for the entire game!

 

[Big Pete]

If more posters put forward an effort like Freaky, the board would be a better place.

The video highlights the halves inability to redeem mediocre sets of six. That's the issue with playing such an off-the-cuff style, it doesn't allows the halves to execute their plays from set positions.

In comparison, watch North Queensland or Melbourne play. Their play is like clockwork and outside of rehearsed set plays there's rarely any ball movement. You'll rarely see a forced offload from either side, only a select few players carry that license (Bromwich) while the rest have to play what's infront of them.

In contrast, Blair, Gillett, McGuire, Parker, Thaiday, Pangai Jr, Milford, Wallace etc. wouldn't be afraid to promote the ball and keep the opposition guessing. At times it resulted in brilliant play, for instance watch that try against Melbourne in Round 15 2015. When it works, it looks great but if the opposition can cover up, it limits what the halves can produce.

That isn't making an excuse by the by. The elite halves can all conjure up those set-redeeming kicks. If Hunt was valued at half his asking price, you'd be able to live with it, but at a million?

 

[Super Freak]

Milford's improved from 2015 imo...

I'll admit, I didn't pay much attention to his kicking in 2015. I was too busy watching him tear apart opposition teams.

But at the moment, I'm 12 rounds in and his short kicking is perfect.

Time will tell whether the remaining rounds end up telling a different story.

 

[Porthoz]

It was more that, even with video of every single kick (of that type), people then found ways of justifying their existing stance by adding their own interpretation to what is a "good" kick, etc. SF went to a massive amount of effort, and still everyone just took up their regular position, one side or the other. It was more twilight zone. "Is this really happening?"

FWIW, no one's mentioned one very important point - looking at the games that we lost or where the opposition racked up a lot of points before we could reply, you'll notice that there were very few kicks, sometimes none, in that opposition 30 for up to en entire half of football. Yes there were some very poor kicks, (more often than not from ad-lib plays or ones where the kicker ran right to the defensive line and chose their kicking line poorly), but the decisive factor was we DID NOT HAVE THE FIELD POSITION to even have those kicking opportunities in the first place. There were some games where there were one, maybe two, kicks within the 30 for the entire game!

I explained what my interpretation of a good kick is for clarity, not to justify my existing stance.
Hunt's (and Milford's) attacking kicks ability is there for everyone with a functioning set of eyes to confirm. If you disagree with my assessment of good, feel free to explain why.
Btw, who is everyone? This thread is actually very quiet, with the silence of otherwise very vocal "Hunt lovers" really telling it all.

There are approximately 100 short kicks in attacking position to judge from, and you want to argue that we didn't have field position... for what purpose? So that we would have 200 kicks to judge from instead of 100?

Would the fact that we didn't have field position have something to do with the inability to MAINTAIN it? We certainly gained it often enough!

As BP said:

The video highlights the halves inability to redeem mediocre sets of six.

I would add that our halves are generally unable to redeem most sets of six against the better defensive teams, which is why we find ourselves more often than not on the back foot against the likes of Cowboys or Storm for example.

Our halves definitely do thrive with the ad-lib footy we were allowed to play, which would otherwise be very "un-Bennett" like. Problem is that the better teams can generally contain that ad-lib footy, even if we do score an occasional pearler against them. But often it's not enough, and we don't have someone capable of an alternate tactic, like building pressure, against them. Imagine if we did...

 

[Allo]

Had another half-look at the video. Around 5:00 where we have a massive overlap with Gillett and Roberts running at a man-short sliding goal line defence and Hunt punts it flat across to Kahu who gets tackled by the time it gets there.

Sure it was against the Knights, but it's exhibit A of Hunt's inconsistency in making the right decision. Not a costly one, but 15/16 halfbacks would feed that through the hands and one of the three outside him score.

To add to that, the next play he grubbers dead in-goal.

 

[Big Pete]

Everyone is going to have a theory why the Broncos lose the big games.

The general concensus surrounding the grand final is that they went away from what was working. Instead of playing attacking football, they were finding the touchline as early as the 50 minute mark. Now, I don't think that was actually the approach the Broncos wanted to take, in some instances the ball just took an awful bounce or a player would put themselves in trouble so the halves would have to try and salvage it but that's just how it happened.

Personally, I don't think the Broncos approach has been the problem. If you watch the replay of Round 25 2016, Brisbane showed every single team how to play Melbourne and it was clear the Storm were frazzled. Hell, even in the games we lost to the Cowboys, the Broncos were the better team each time. What happened was both times, the Broncos suffered an injury to their left fringe, the Cowboys took full advantage and barely escaped with a narrow victory.

Also, I don't think Hunt or Milford struggle in the big games. If anything, that's where they've made a name for themselves, proving the difference against the competition heavyweights. I think they struggle to close games out, which is where the frustration lies, but they're just as likely to play well against a Melbourne as they are a Warriors or Tigers.

 

[Super Freak]

Personally, I think Bennett wanted them to do that.

I think he took the same approach as he did with the Storm in 2006.

But Hunt and Milford have shown multiple times they can handle the big games.

 

[Porthoz]

I didn't say they don't play well, I said they're not capable of changing the tactic if/when required by the way the opposition is playing, like keeping them in a choke hold (unable to close games, with the Grand Final as example), or apply continuous pressure when we need to come from behind.

Those two factors are the main reason for our losses against the top teams, because as you say BP, albeit we were often the better team overall, we didn't score enough points for safety, and ended up under great pressure by the opposition almost every time.
Let's not forget that in 2015, our Goal Line defense was often the reason for our wins and/or staying in those games.

A better kicking game (and last tackle decision making) is paramount to go to the next level imo.

 

[Sproj]

A bit harsh on Milf about not closing it out in the '15 decider (if I'm reading these posts right, sorry if not), he was easily the best on field and was giving the Broncos every opportunity to win. I'd say the failure to close it out was more due to our 7 and 9 who changed the game plan to just hold on and hope (or implode).

 

[Mister Wright]

A bit harsh on Milf about not closing it out in the '15 decider (if I'm reading these posts right, sorry if not), he was easily the best on field and was giving the Broncos every opportunity to win. I'd say the failure to close it out was more due to our 7 and 9 who changed the game plan to just hold on and hope (or implode).

I actually lay more blame on Milford than Hunt or McCullough. McCullough very well could have passed to Parker who could have tripped and dropped the ball and well, anyone can drop the ball from the kick off. However, Milford makes a break with 40 seconds to go on the halfway line and decides to offload to Hunt who has the ball stripped. How about wrapping up the ball and taking the tackle?

 

[Sproj]

I actually lay more blame on Milford than Hunt or McCullough. McCullough very well could have passed to Parker who could have tripped and dropped the ball and well, anyone can drop the ball from the kick off. However, Milford makes a break with 40 seconds to go on the halfway line and decides to offload to Hunt who has the ball stripped. How about wrapping up the ball and taking the tackle?

Really? So if Macca had passed the ball and Parker had tripped, he probably would have still fallen over the try line. So because that 'could' have happened, even though very, very unlikely, Macca is all good?

Hunt had the ball but 'could' have held on and not had it stripped, because he didn't pass the ball, he is all good?

Milford made a break, passed it to a player in a pretty safe position and then said player has it stripped despite it not being in Milf's control, he is at fault for the GF?

Am I reading you right? Because to me, Milf was easily the best player on the field the whole night and if any of Macca passes, Hunt doesn't spear tackle, have the ball stripped, drop the ball or Oates stays on his wing, Broncs win. Given Milf also had a major hand in pretty much all our tries and all the breaks he made, I'm thinking assigning him blame is more than a little unfair.