Sack Griffin/New Coach Discussion

[Coxy]

Can someone do some stats on our points for and against in the last 33 games?
And maybe do points for and against overall for Griffin vs Henjak.

I reckon what you'll see with the Griffin vs Henjak comparison is that Henjak would've had more points per game on average, and more points against per game.

It just goes back to what I've been saying for ages - the defensive focus of Griffin is fine, but he can't continue to ignore attack. Especially if due to player injuries, suspensions or just plain old fatigue they can't apply the same rigour in defence they did for 2011 and the first third of 2012.

I also think it'd show that in the last 33 games, the points for is significantly less and points against significantly higher, which highlights the issue with being so reliant on defence, control and field position. Our inability to score long range tries is killer when we're not getting out of our opponent's end regularly.

 

[Dexter]

We have the ability to score long range tries, what makes it impossible is not having any intention until we need a hail mary to get out of trouble. How many times have we had overlaps from 40 or more out but just keep pumping down the centre getting inside 20 and putting in a shit kick.

It's still footy, there is no rule that you can't have fun and if we are bored as batshit watching it the players must be bored as batshit playing it.

To rehearsed to dour and to predictable, thats out plan and that's the public personality of the coach and the type of players he chooses.

 

[Porthoz]

with smith and thurston we wouldnt be butchering tries left right and centre, thats the thing.

Really? You think Norman would stop butchering overlaps, and Maranta would suddenly develop an instinct for the try line?

Anyway, that wasn't the point. It is obvious that any idiot understands that having Thurston and Smith in the team would improve it...:001_rolleyes:

 

[Anonymous person]

Really? You think Norman would stop butchering overlaps, and Maranta would suddenly develop an instinct for the try line?

Anyway, that wasn't the point. It is obvious that any idiot understands that having Thurston and Smith in the team would improve it...:001_rolleyes:

norman wouldnt get the ball as thurston would just hit hoffman on the chest with a cut-out, ala Boyd in Game 2.

we are bombing trys, no doubt, but players like thurston and smith hand players trys on a platter, not just give them the ball with a good chance of a try like norman and co do at the broncos. maranta would be getting the ball down if he was being put through untouched by thurston or smith like ash graham/darius boyd/billy slater/etc are.

the point you were making that was even if we had them, we still wouldnt win a premiership because of our defence. when we're only losing by 1-12 each game while missing 30+ tackles, yes, i think we could actually put up a premiership run if we had smith/thurston/etc.

 

[Allo]

Can someone do some stats on our points for and against in the last 33 games?
And maybe do points for and against overall for Griffin vs Henjak.

I reckon what you'll see with the Griffin vs Henjak comparison is that Henjak would've had more points per game on average, and more points against per game.

It just goes back to what I've been saying for ages - the defensive focus of Griffin is fine, but he can't continue to ignore attack. Especially if due to player injuries, suspensions or just plain old fatigue they can't apply the same rigour in defence they did for 2011 and the first third of 2012.

I also think it'd show that in the last 33 games, the points for is significantly less and points against significantly higher, which highlights the issue with being so reliant on defence, control and field position. Our inability to score long range tries is killer when we're not getting out of our opponent's end regularly.

I literally had a whole spiel typed up the other day saying exactly that (with W/L %'s and everything) but it got lost on me by the site :(

Basically Hook is ahead, but if you take out 2011 with Locky's Farewell Tour, there's not much in it there. Yes Henjak had Locky and Izzy etc, but we were in the finals up to rd 26 in '10. I think the Inglis fiasco was the knockout punch for Henjak, otherwise compared to Hook right now, dumping him on stats and one missed finals campaign would (will) be seen as a massive overreaction

 

[rnabokov]

norman wouldnt get the ball as thurston would just hit hoffman on the chest with a cut-out, ala Boyd in Game 2.

we are bombing trys, no doubt, but players like thurston and smith hand players trys on a platter, not just give them the ball with a good chance of a try like norman and co do at the broncos. maranta would be getting the ball down if he was being put through untouched by thurston or smith like ash graham/darius boyd/billy slater/etc are.

the point you were making that was even if we had them, we still wouldnt win a premiership because of our defence. when we're only losing by 1-12 each game while missing 30+ tackles, yes, i think we could actually put up a premiership run if we had smith/thurston/etc.

They can only hand out tries on a platter if the players are there to take the sacred offering. We don't. Our support play sucks.

Our defence sucks because (a) we don't move up fast, in a straight line and (b) as a result, there are gaps all over the place making one-on-one tackles so much more difficult that they should be.

These for mine, at the team level, expose Hook's greatest shortcomings as a coach. He can't get those 2 basics happening

 

[winslow_wong]

A few tries have been on a platter for maranta but dip shits foot was over the side line. I think we've only scored one long range try this year which was round 1

 

[rnabokov]

A few tries have been on a platter for maranta but dip ****s foot was over the side line. I think we've only scored one long range try this year which was round 1

For us, long range means 20 metres out

Hook seems to have created this mentality by playing "safe and secure" football - one out x 4 > kick, until we are about 20 meters out. Then, you can see these little light bulbs light up above the players' heads.

Whoa! Let's all start trying something different, like passing the ball.

 

[Renegade]

If we throw around the ball, we won't have high completion rates. Everyone knows you can't win games with low completion rates, it's why we're, uh.. nevermind.

 

[Anonymous person]

Hook seems to have created this mentality by playing "safe and secure" football - one out x 4 > kick, until we are about 20 meters out. Then, you can see these little light bulbs light up above the players' heads.

Whoa! Let's all start trying something different, like passing the ball.

thats what is called the wayne bennett mentality. only works when you actually have some superstars.

 

[CaptainHook]

I don't know what to make of the coach anymore tbh. I have read some comelling reasons on this board for why he should go and for why he should stay. I am flip flopping between the two. Today, I'm in the 'stick with Griffin' camp.

 

[theshed]

Griffin really impressed me for the first year and a half. He seems like a great bloke and the players appear to love him. I don't agree with some of his line up choices, and our attack has disappeared. What seemed like his strongest asset was defence but that has gone too. Maybe he would be more successful with at least 1 x-factor player in his team, or maybe he needs better coaching staff. How Kearny got a defensive coach gig is beyond me, but this year we are defending like the eels.

 

[Culhwch]

I don't know what to make of the coach anymore tbh. I have read some comelling reasons on this board for why he should go and for why he should stay. I am flip flopping between the two. Today, I'm in the 'stick with Griffin' camp.

I think I missed those arguments...

 

[rnabokov]

As I see it, if something is developed and works, it is repeatable ... and repeated. This side has shown it can score great tries left, right, edges and down the middle.

It is not being repeated. We were doing this stuff in the first 5 rounds. We have hardly since.

I can't understand why not. Norman may botch some tries, and Maranta a few, but that scoring ability is so sporadic as to be insignificant and our position on the ladder shows that.

I believe that the coach's task is to bring out the energy and attitude, skills and moves developed and practised at training. It doesn't seem to be happening.

The question is therefore how long do we put up either with players not pulling their weight, or more likely, the coach not being able to motivate what is a good squad.

Relying on a superstar or 2 to save our arse is simply ridiculous, and if it happens, why pay the fucking coach his salary if he needs superstars to pull off well executed plays.

I don't see too many superstars in 3 or 4 teams above us on the ladder.

 

[Huge]

thats what is called the wayne bennett mentality. only works when you actually have some superstars.

The old WB mentality ! Only works when you have superstars ! You mean like the team running fifth at the moment ? The team which has scored 80 points more than us ! The superstars names roll off the tongue like err, and umm.

 

[noisetheory]

the knights should be a better side than they are, although they've started to put it together lately. you'd take every player in their spine over every player in our spine.

 

[Kimlo]

the knights should be a better side than they are, although they've started to put it together lately. you'd take every player in their spine over every player in our spine.

That isn't saying much, we have arguably the worst spine in the competition...

 

[Alec]

1. Boyd
6. Mullen
7. Roberts
9. Buderus

It isn't gamebreaking like the Storm or Manly spine or anything, but it's still pretty damn good.

It's like Babe and ours is like Babe Pig in the City.