The Wayne Bennett Super thread!

[Coxy]

Fair enough. I don't know what this supposed BennettBall is. Do you have a short one or two sentence definition ? It's true every team uses their forwards to gain ground and its equally true some teams use more off loading with their forwards. What I'm getting at though is the Knights are getting downfield with their forwards and then using other players to score. Is this the famous BennettBall ?

I think Bennett ball is best defined as a game plan with minimal ball movement until you're in attacking range. Coming out of your end, strictly dummyhalf runs and one-off rucks.

The difference with teams like Manly, Melbourne, Bulldogs, Roosters, Souths etc is that they recognise you need more than dummyhalf runs and one-off rucks. They have neat plays involving the forwards on rucks - 2-offs, decoy 2nd man ruck, dump the ball inside on an angle etc.

The Broncos under Bennett and Griffin (less so Henjak to be honest) MOST of the time are STRICTLY one offs and dummyhalf. This is OK if you've got the defence a bit tired, you've got momentum, you can get a roll on, and you can get a quick play the ball. But when the defence is on top, it's mindnumbingly easy to pick them off, slow down the play the ball and repeat.

The other major difference with the "good" teams and the BennettBall clones is their tactics in attack. Griffin and Bennett basically hit it up, hit it up, hit it up to one side, 2nd man play back towards the corner, ad lib on the 5th, then bomb or (rarely) grubber on the last. That's a game plan that can work if a) you have elusive, strong back rowers who can punch holes in the defence in those early rucks, causing the defence to compress and b) have a half and fullback that can execute the 2nd man play consistently. The Broncos have a), but unfortunately Glenn is woefully out of form and Gillett woefully inconsistent. We completely lack b). The loss of Hunt and then Lockyer has really shown up just how ineffective we are in those positions.

Contrast it to the Storm. When they're on the attack they will work to a plan, which is similar in regards to hitting it towards one side and then look to put a move on the other way. But rather than just following that plan to the letter and hitting it up mindlessly, you have Cam Smith who is looking at the defence and weighing up if something else is on. The forwards run better lines. The centres are always looking to get on the outside of their opposite. The whole attacking line while not necessarily involved is looking for opportunities.

The Broncos, and BennettBall teams like them, tend not to be doing that. They just execute the plan as they're trained.

I think that's THE fundamental difference between the good teams, and the ever growing list of average teams of which the Broncos are one.

 

[Huge]

Okay, we have at least two opinions which differ only slightly but are different nevertheless. It would seem in the recent Origin series both teams tended towards a BB approach. Generally you had big forwards hitting it up and fast scoots from dummy half. If you lack the class of Melbourne/Souths/roosters (yuk) and Manly (puke) then you don't seem to have many options other than one out stuff.

Of course I hate the predictability as much as anyone but far from being unfairly labelled as BB it has been the basis of rugby league since days long gone. The game has always been won or lost in the forwards. I can see the teams mentioned seem to have greater creativity than our own but they do a great deal of one out stuff too. It would surprise many how much predictable football these teams play.

Watching St George the other night reminded me of the Warriors approach and for the remainder of the season I'd like to see more ball movement. We may go down in completions but perhaps we'd find more holes and opportunities. I would like to change the title from BennettBall to,'The classic approach'

 

[Anonymous person]

Irrespective of the troops he has had at his disposal he has managed to coach his teams to semi final and grand final glory. At the same time we have managed to miss the semi finals once and are almost certain to again.

how did newcastle go in the semi finals last year?

 

[Huge]

About as well as the broncos in 2010. Every team has missed the finals at least once since 2002. Your point ?

 

[Coxy]

I think Bennett's been cursed with the invention of it because of what he did with the Broncos in 1999-2000.

The 10m rule is hugely responsible for the boring game we see today. Under the 5m or 8m rule attacking teams had to have some skill, tactics and precision to break the defence. These days you score tries by earning penalties, get a repeat set and get the defence tired from back pedalling.

It's boring.

Excitement comes when a team that's been under the pump finally gets the ball and conjures something against the odds. But it rarely happens these days.

 

[Anonymous person]

About as well as the broncos in 2010. Every team has missed the finals at least once since 2002. Your point ?

my point is youre telling porkies.

Irrespective of the troops he has had at his disposal he has managed to coach his teams to semi final and grand final glory. At the same time we have managed to miss the semi finals once and are almost certain to again.

he didnt coach his team to a semi final last year.

why point out that the broncos missed the semi finals once in that same time frame, when bennetts team missed the finals once also? why say "irrespective of the troops at his disposal" when his troops missed the finals?

again, my point is that your argument is all over the place. youre basically saying:

you: "you might hate bennettball, but he makes the finals every year, unlike the broncos who missed them once"
me: "but the knights didnt make the finals last year...."
you: "everyone misses the finals at least once"
me: "......wtf"

you see the problem? you said that irrespective of the troops at his disposal he makes the semi finals.

apart from that time he didnt.

which was his latest season.

you cant say someone always makes the finals when youre coming off a season when they didnt make the finals lol.

 

[Huge]

As usual you dwell on insignificance and avert the questions. Although I did not state catergorically he makes the semis every year you could infer I meant he never fails. Given this is his second year at Newcastle and is on target to make the finals the statement that he takes teams to semis irrespective of the talent he has at his disposal holds true. Since he has left Brisbane he has won two minor premierships, one Grand Final and a world club challenge. In his least successful season at St George he again led them into the semis.

So three out of four years he has been in the semis and looks like making it four out of five. Sure he hasn't been there every year but better than most. Ftr he has 37 losses 58 wins. For the corresponding period the Broncos have 41 losses and 55 wins. His departure and our demise are no co-incidence . If we include this year the stats are even worse.

 

[Anonymous person]

.... the statement that he takes teams to semis irrespective of the talent he has at his disposal holds true. ...

again, apart from the fact that he didnt last year lol.

In his least successful season at St George he again led them into the semis.

and in 2 of his 3 seasons at the dragons, which team was it that knocked St George out of the finals? ill give you a hint: it was the broncos. bit too much of a hint, but i had to make it easy for you as you dont seem to get these things too easily lol.

His departure and our demise are no co-incidence . If we include this year the stats are even worse.

we were on a downwards slide while he was with us, getting rid of him was the only option. we had a great 2009, same win/loss as 2008, and got knocked out by the eventual premiers. 2010 was bad, but had lockyer not been injured we would have made the finals without doubt. we missed out by a single win. we also lost dave taylor, tonie carroll and khunt after 2009. 3 pretty big names, wouldnt you say? in 2011, had lockyer not gotten injured in the game where we knocked out the wayne bennett led dragons, who the broncos finished ahead of on the ladder with the broncos finishing 3rd, winning 18 of 24 games, 4 more than we won in 2006 when we won the premiership (hell, it was the most wins we've had in a season since the year 2000, in which we *also* won 18 games, and even then it was 18/26, against 18/24 in 2011) we couldve taken the premiership out IMO.

what we didnt do was plan for "life after lockyer", and that is where our demise really began. lockyer was 100x more important to the team than bennett was, as he was the one that enabled the BennettBall style to be effective. get the ball in lockyers hands inside the opposition 20 and he will get you points. didnt matter which nuffies were around him, he would get points on the board. when he left, we were left with a completely impotent wallace to take over. again, that was our demise, not bennett leaving.

in many of bennetts seasons with the broncos we got to the finals only to be bundled out without so much as a whimper. in years like that, and i said it even back then, its better to NOT make the finals IMO. it just makes idiots think that they dont need to change anything because they made the finals. made the finals on the back of 8 straight losses of 40+ points? doesnt matter, made the finals, season successful. thats a terrible way to look at it, but sadly that seems to be the common train of thought.

 

[Huge]

We got rid of Bennett in the pursuit of better results because,obviously we would not have done it to go worse. So what happened. No excuses, did it work or not. Simple yes or no . Well we all know the answer. We used to be great. Now we are shit. People wanted to come to Brisbane for a chance to be coached by Bennett or do you deny that too ? Bennett coached us to premierships before Lockyer. He coached St George to a premiership and two minor premierships without a superstar team so no bullshit about anyone being able to do it.

 

[Coxy]

Wayne Bennett's initials are the same as Warner Brothers

 

[Porthoz]

I like football

 

[LittleDavey]

WOW [MENTION=2221]Porthoz[/MENTION] - so do I!! Incredible!!

 

[mieko]

My 2 cents....


I've said it before and here it is again, League isn't the toughest game to work out/play, you ruck it up, kick to the corner and defend. Then you get back up and you do it again. This is Bennetts style (and 14 other teams in the comp) and it works.


The Broncs for example, can ruck it up well an do with the likes of McGuire, Hanant, Hala, Parker... Have a passable kicking game finding space 81% of the time with Wallace, Prince & Macca to a degree....but the defence is what's killing us, to many missed tackles and unfortunately we just miss the killer punch to get over the line more often than not.


Also on the "boring" game as per above structure, if you want entertainment, head to Love n Rockets. If boring structures wins games (al la St George and Knights under Bennett) then boring games it is, cause at the end of the day winning is winning.


St George's premiership year was very "boring" but they won games and the one that counts, so that would do me if I supported the Dragons.


Newcastle is heading the same way. Mason is playing fantastic as is Houston, Snowden with Mullens kicking game on fire and defence right up there, another year they will be pushing top four again if not top two.


TLDR: Bennetts style is Rugby League, the basic fundamentals of the game. Do all three spot on and you are in for one great year.

 

[Huge]

Totally agreed. Your last two lines support my view that rather than say its BennettBall we should just call it 'The Classic Approach'. I think with the greater fitness, 10 metre rule and a constant interchange the chance to overcome the other teams forwards has been severely reduced and consequently less opportunity for flashy plays. A lot of the boring stuff the teams like Melbourne do is overlooked and really there isn't that much separating the best from the also rans.

 

[Anonymous person]

We got rid of Bennett in the pursuit of better results because,obviously we would not have done it to go worse. So what happened. No excuses, did it work or not. Simple yes or no . Well we all know the answer. We used to be great. Now we are ****. People wanted to come to Brisbane for a chance to be coached by Bennett or do you deny that too ? Bennett coached us to premierships before Lockyer. He coached St George to a premiership and two minor premierships without a superstar team so no bull**** about anyone being able to do it.

Yes AND no.

2011 was our best non-premiership year by a country mile. the regular season was our best season, even better than some of our premiership ones, in well over a decade. every man and their dog was giving us short odds to win the premiership. every man and his dog was saying we WILL win a premiership in the next few years. then we lost lockyer, made some horrible positional selections and then stuck with them for faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar too long, got some injuries, and its become apparent that our coach isnt up to it. bennett wasnt up to it either though.

bennett did coach us to premierships before lockyer........but he had langer, walters, lazarus, renouf, carne, matterson, johns, hancock, oneill, gillmeister, ryan, etc. the broncos have, without doubt, had the most star studded lineups in history. they werent stars because of his coaching, they were natural talent.

st merge had no superstars? lol pull the other one.

A lot of the boring stuff the teams like Melbourne do is overlooked and really there isn't that much separating the best from the also rans.

lolz.

theres a gap the size of the grand canyon between Souths/Melbourne/Roosters/Manly and the rest of the competition. the knights might be fifth but theyre still only 1 win ahead of 11th. the knights are only 6 points ahead of 15th, and 10 points behind first.

 

[Kimlo]

And all of Bellamy's single premiership win is from getting a star studded lineup, all natural born to be superstar players who would have have been as good as they are under any other coach.

 

[Anonymous person]

And all of Bellamy's single premiership win is from getting a star studded lineup, all natural born to be superstar players who would have have been as good as they are under any other coach.

by star studded lineup you mean 3 stars and 14 nuffies, right? and isnt the general consensus on cronk around her that he is anything but a born superstar? that he worked incredibly hard to be as good as he is?

the broncos teams of old had 7+ of those stars, and were generally nuffie-free.

 

[Kimlo]

by star studded lineup you mean 3 stars and 14 nuffies, right? and isnt the general consensus on cronk around her that he is anything but a born superstar? that he worked incredibly hard to be as good as he is?

the broncos teams of old had 7+ of those stars, and were generally nuffie-free.

3 immortals to be and 14 fantastic players who keep getting poached by other teams. Look at how many of the "nuffies" Melbourne have lost over the years, continously. Other teams see high value in the melbourne nuffies like Folau, Inglis, Chambers (union), Hoffman (ESL), Johnson (Cowboys), Widdop (St Merge), Neilsen (Warriors), Lowrie (Warriors), Blair (Tigers).

Cronk was born to be a star.