Short Kickoffs and Drop-Outs

[Nashy]

I don't like the Broncos threads discussion, so I wanted to ask this more generally.

Do you like them? If so, why?

I hate them. They are studpid hugh risk, and 9/10 come down to absolute chance.

The Walker brothers obviously saw some success in 2015 and there abouts when absolutely no other team were doing them, fast forward to today, teams expect it, and opposition teams often end up with the ball. Worst case, one day it might cost a team a grand final.

Why is is so popular now? It's useless.

 

[mrslong]

I only like them if you are being absolutely pummelled and you need a Hail Mary (see also “short kickoff”). If you’re leading by 10 with 10 minutes to go you ABSOLUTELY BOOT THE BALL AS FAR AS YOU POSSIBLY CAN FFFFFFSSSSSSS.

 

[1910]

I don't like the Broncos threads discussion, so I wanted to ask this more generally.

Do you like them? If so, why?

I hate them. They are studpid hugh risk, and 9/10 come down to absolute chance.

The Walker brothers obviously saw some success in 2015 and there abouts when absolutely no other team were doing them, fast forward to today, teams expect it, and opposition teams often end up with the ball. Worst case, one day it might cost a team a grand final.

Why is is so popular now? It's useless.

The Walkers focused more on short kick off then short dropouts- They did the short drill it at some poor prop standing 10m away and he'd drop it, or it would go into touch near the second rower over near the sideline.

Or Capewell was fantastic at the high 10m one- he could land it on the 10m. They had assigned kickers for assigned types of kick offs.

The key is to have assigned roles and practised skills- Jets would treat it like an AFL ruck- you stay down, I go up, I will tap it this way.

If you just do it randomly and hope you end up with misery.

The Walkers logic was kick it off 55m and a prop brings it back he probably gets to nearly the 20m anyway but you're no chance of getting it. Short planned kick even if you lose it you've only cost yourself 20m.

 

[Mr Fourex]

I don't like the Broncos threads discussion, so I wanted to ask this more generally.

Do you like them? If so, why?

I hate them. They are studpid hugh risk, and 9/10 come down to absolute chance.

Agree......I feel the same way about short drop-outs.

Great if/when they come off.........you're immediately on the back foot when they don't.

I like to play the percentages......the game is based on field position.

 

[Mr Fourex]

The Walkers logic was kick it off 55m and a prop brings it back he probably gets to nearly the 20m anyway but you're no chance of getting it. Short planned kick even if you lose it you've only cost yourself 20m.

Dunno....I reckon you should be able to chase the kick hard and keep them to at least the 35m mark.

 

[JayPee]

I assume you are talking about short drop outs? I commented on this in the post game grand final thread.

I cannot understand the logic that it is high risk. It isn't at all depending on if you know when to do it and when not. I have said this before but you should always do a short drop out when you are up 4, 6, 10, 20, 50 etc. No risk at all. Obviously don't do it when you are up 2 because not kicking it 10m, out on the full etc is an easy penalty kick in front to tie the game.

When you are down. Do not do it when you are tied or down 4, 6, 10, 12, 16, 18 etc. Obviously when it starts getting above those numbers you may aswell because you are getting smoked and it is probably worth it to change momentum. Or if there is 1min left you do it know matter what because you need the ball.

Basically the logic is teams will take the 2 if you stuff it to go up in converted tries or past a converted try. Eg if you are a down 10 and you don't kick it 10m 90% of teams are kicking that penalty goal to go up 12.

The average dropout goes say 50m? By the time the defensive line gets to the "prop" in this example the best the defensive line makes the tackle is the 30m for tackle 1? A short drop out goes 10m to 15m. If the team on the attack doesn't bat the ball back to one of their teammates out to say the 20m line which happens alot.

So you are really only costing yourself 15m at most or 20m if you stuff the short drop out and they take a tap 10m out and get tackled 5m out. That's why I don't understand the push back on it. If you know when to do it every team should do it because the reward of getting the ball back outweighs the extra 15 to 20m on the defensive set. Not to mention deflating the team that you do it on. You finally apply pressure through a nice kick and the other team gets the ball back.

Using the grand final as an example in my strategy reynolds should not have went the short drop out down 6 because it is too risky to go down 8 which is more than a converted try. The short drop out for the try is just unlucky and guys not doing their assignment. It was a perfect kick. That would have been deflating for Penrith if capewell just took the ball or a teammate was behind waiting. Those two ones in the 2nd half by reynolds was great strategy. They were up 4. Penrith aren't taking the 2 down 4. Cleary made a special play and so did Martin (was a difficult catch). The strategy was even better because the wind was apparently howling so the average 50m drop out would not have been attainable.

Sorry about the long post but I couldn't believe how much people were complaining about it. I have constantly harped on about it when teams don't do it in the game threads. It's dumb imo. It's basic strategy. Somebody alot smarter than me could probably explain it better.

 

[JayPee]

I also forgot to mention in my rant that it is widely regarded by teams and I have heard this mentioned before by ex players that is alot easier to defend on your line than 20m out because there is room to move especially these days when a penalty for racing up off your goal line is only a 6 again call.

 

[Nashy]

I fixed the title to include both the instances. I hate them both equally.

 

[JayPee]

I fixed the title to include both the instances. I hate them both equally.

I dont think the short kick off is widely used at all. Only the last 10mins really when you need the ball and you are behind chasing points. I honestly don't remember a team ever doing a short kick off when they are up on the scoreboard except for that Ipswich team back in the day.

My rant is specifically about short drop outs which I love. I genuinely get annoyed when the Cowboys don't do it on those examples I said.

 

[Organix]

I don't really like them. I always think a better option would be driving it low and hard towards the sideline, aiming for space. In fact, drop-outs should either be long or well-placed to counter the field positioning of the receiving team. Kick-offs should really just be long, maybe once in a while, if the opportunity presents kick it hard at low to the sideline.

 

[Allo]

Even if you’re gonna go short, why do they always put it barely 10m? The amount of penalties for not making the distance or kicks going out on the full is very high

Go 15 or 20 and your backs can get a running start at it

Also if there’s a bat back it’s not directly endangering the tryline …..

 

[Culhwch]

I don't have an issue with them if used well, it's just that when they go wrong they often go catastrophically so. It's interesting to think back to the Melbourne prelim - Paps did the exact thing Reynolds did in the first half of that game, a couple of bad strikes, one of which led to the penalty that put us eight ahead.

I think Reynolds' kick choice was a lot better in that game - exemplified by the touch finder over Munster's head. It seemed he was trying to pull off the same thing against the Panthers, but they were ready for it. The wind probably nixed trying to put one on the ten metre line, because it would have been hard to judge the weight and could easily have blown back for a penalty. Trying to belt it long probably wouldn't have worked great either. Maybe high, try to get it to hang in the wind, and just have Peeks or Riki steaming at whoever is catching it might have been a good option.

I'd like to see a little more guile being used, rather than putting them away for good. Set up like you're going short, and go long. Make it look like you are going long, and go short. Belt some towards the sideline. Grubber some ten metres straight ahead if the defense gives you a little space, and have Walsh speed after it. Make it so that the opposition doesn't know what you are doing in any given scenario.

 

[McHunt]

I don't like the Broncos threads discussion

 

[Nashy]

View attachment 24621

How many times I gotta tell you to stay out of my office, man?

 

[Jimmy]

It would be interesting to see for the whole competition, but if anyone’s interested in the Broncos’ 2023 dropout stats (in every game before the grand final) they are below:

• They kicked 29 dropouts in total: 19 were short (up to 25m but usually 10-20m) and 10 were long.
• Of the short dropouts, the Broncos regained possession 7 times in that play (37% of the time).
• Of the long dropouts, they regained possession twice (bounced overhead).

Of course this doesn’t consider what happened in the remainder of the set. I think only 1 short dropout resulted in a penalty against the Broncos, but I would have to confirm this.

 

[Big Del]

Agree......I feel the same way about short drop-outs.

Great if/when they come off.........you're immediately on the back foot when they don't.

I like to play the percentages......the game is based on field position.

It can work if the players communicate with each other .
We saw the bat back by Carrigan from a short kick off that very nearly went wrong in the closing moments of a regular season game . I want to know why when you have a clean grab at the ball with two hands why you bother batting it back ?


If you get the ball back it makes kicking into the in goal a waste of energy for the attacking team and relieves the fatigue of back to back sets . Less energy used running up field to meet the attack .

Inside the 10 there are 13 in the defensive line . Penrith had a hard time scoring close to the try line . Till they didn`t .

 

[Culhwch]

It can work if the players communicate with each other .
We saw the bat back by Carrigan from a short kick off that very nearly went wrong in the closing moments of a regular season game . I want to know why when you have a clean grab at the ball with two hands why you bother batting it back ?

I imagine it's because you aren't sure if the opposition are doing the same, so the bat-back seems like a safer option than trying to take a contested ball and risk a knock on. In practice, I bet it's more often the bat-back that doesn't work out too well, but that's anecdotal and possibly influenced by recency bias.

 

[winslow_wong]

I like them if everyone’s absolutely on the same page. No one was within cooee of Herbie when he tapped it to the grass. You need to have players all around it.

I’d go further and suggest setting up for a short kick but then drill it long to mix it up. But when in doubt, safety is always most important.