Wayne Bennett has stuffed Brisbane for 2018

[Morkel]

We are actually one of the best teams in the comp when it comes to converting opportunities in the opposition 20 into points.

IIRC, in 2015 and 2016 we had the best strike rate in the comp.. And this year we were better in the opposition 20 than what we were anywhere else on the field.

64 of our 109 tries were scored from inside the opposition 20. I would wager that's one of, if not the best, in the comp. That number increases by a fair amount if you include tries scored from within the opposition 30.

These are the stats of the players that either set up the try or were responsible for the try being scored.

Milford - 17
Boyd - 6
Hunt - 15
McCullough - 6
Roberts - 1
Nikorima - 5
Marshall - 6
Blair - 1
Moga - 1
Thaiday - 1
TPJ - 1
Gillett - 1
Sims - 1
McGuire - 1
Glenn - 1

I doubt there would be a stat for it, but I would like to know how many of these try-scoring occasions were started in the opposition 20, like for example a penalty on their line.

Because when we had sets that started on their line, we were clueless. The vast majority of those scored in your list would have come from when we started the set out further, and got to their line and eventually broke them through momentum and their defensive back-pedalling. Without that momentum, without the defence being stretched, we had nothing. Which is the main issue with having two running halves. Small halves running at a set defence is pointless - having a half that can organise the forward, use decoys to manipulate the defensive line, and having a genuine short kicking game is what gets results in those situations.

But that's not to say our season is a write-off. For one, there's nothing to say that Kodi can't be groomed in those subtleties. And for the other, if our pack starts growing towards its potential, the momentum and offloads will create the gaps that our halves can't do on their own.

 

[M.B.88]

So frustrating! Argh! Watch any game and our attacking 20m options and organisation were rubbish. OUr opposition half attack lacked strategy. The only time we wrestled was through grunt and energy. Wayne knows this and every other team now knows this. Kodi will be easy shut down and with Kodi shut down - Milf will be limited. We are in for a long season of frustration. great go forward - solid backs but confused in the middle.

You're so negative. Why do you even watch if it makes you this cynical..

 

[M.B.88]

We are actually one of the best teams in the comp when it comes to converting opportunities in the opposition 20 into points.

IIRC, in 2015 and 2016 we had the best strike rate in the comp.. And this year we were better in the opposition 20 than what we were anywhere else on the field.

64 of our 109 tries were scored from inside the opposition 20. I would wager that's one of, if not the best, in the comp. That number increases by a fair amount if you include tries scored from within the opposition 30.

These are the stats of the players that either set up the try or were responsible for the try being scored.

Milford - 17
Boyd - 6
Hunt - 15
McCullough - 6
Roberts - 1
Nikorima - 5
Marshall - 6
Blair - 1
Moga - 1
Thaiday - 1
TPJ - 1
Gillett - 1
Sims - 1
McGuire - 1
Glenn - 1

This 100%!

We unlike other teams, don't usually go for the repeat sets because we're so good at converting field position. It's our forwards who aren't dominating that mean we are always trying to charge up field. But IMO, it doesn't necessarily matter.

Bigger forwards get tired quicker. Our forwards are more agile and can scramble better / cover gaps in defence. They're also faster at the line, meaning they can position themselves better for releasing an offload or getting a faster play the ball. Both things our electronic backs like Milford Kodi and JimmyTJ need to pull a line break.

Tada! Don't need line bending big bopper props to make up the 20, 30, 40 extra metres, we just did it in one play.

Then we score so well in the opp 20 because we have players like Boyd and now Bird who can draw the defenders or create the extra man.

With Kathy's kicking back above 80%, we can afford to score most of our points through our wingers.

I'm telling you. If we get the game plan right, we can beat anyone. Even Melbourne. We proved it last year.

 

[M.B.88]

I doubt there would be a stat for it, but I would like to know how many of these try-scoring occasions were started in the opposition 20, like for example a penalty on their line.

Because when we had sets that started on their line, we were clueless. The vast majority of those scored in your list would have come from when we started the set out further, and got to their line and eventually broke them through momentum and their defensive back-pedalling. Without that momentum, without the defence being stretched, we had nothing. Which is the main issue with having two running halves. Small halves running at a set defence is pointless - having a half that can organise the forward, use decoys to manipulate the defensive line, and having a genuine short kicking game is what gets results in those situations.

But that's not to say our season is a write-off. For one, there's nothing to say that Kodi can't be groomed in those subtleties. And for the other, if our pack starts growing towards its potential, the momentum and offloads will create the gaps that our halves can't do on their own.

This too is 100%. Ripper of a post!

It's true our game plan and strengths are open field attack. If the defence is set, we do thend to struggle with creating options. Hopefully Kev will have a solution..

Perhaps that's where take the 2 helps.

Also forced drop outs. Gives our attack some room to move while carting it back..

 

[Porthoz]

This too is 100%. Ripper of a post!

It's true our game plan and strengths are open field attack. If the defence is set, we do thend to struggle with creating options. Hopefully Kev will have a solution..

Perhaps that's where take the 2 helps.

Also forced drop outs. Gives our attack some room to move while carting it back..

You do realise that Morkel's post mostly contradicts Super Freak's post... and yet you agree with both 100%?

 

[lynx000]

You do realise that Morkel's post mostly contradicts Super Freak's post... and yet you agree with both 100%?

I did not actually want to mention that. It is a bit like Fawlty Towers, whatever you do, don't mention the war.

 

[Viti]

Bigger forwards get tired quicker. Our forwards are more agile and can scramble better / cover gaps in defence. They're also faster at the line, meaning they can position themselves better for releasing an offload or getting a faster play the ball. Both things our electronic backs like Milford Kodi and JimmyTJ need to pull a line break.

Our forwards aren’t able to position themselves against a set defensive line with the way the wrestle is at the moment. We need that one line bending run at the start of the set from the likes of Lodge to get momentum then work from there.

 

[Mr Fourex]

You do realise that Morkel's post mostly contradicts Super Freak's post... and yet you agree with both 100%?

The term "tada!" was involved.

This makes anything possible ......

 

[Alec]

Our forwards aren’t able to position themselves against a set defensive line with the way the wrestle is at the moment. We need that one line bending run at the start of the set from the likes of Lodge to get momentum then work from there.

This, though just one a set isn't enough. 2 or 3 heavy punches followed by a kick to the gonads. Hopefully Lodges lives up to his previous hype and his QLD Cup promise.

 

[Viti]

This, though just one a set isn't enough. 2 or 3 heavy punches followed by a kick to the gonads. Hopefully Lodges lives up to his previous hype and his QLD Cup promise.

That’s true but I’ll be happy with at least one person bending the line as a starting point. Really it’ll all come down to what Macca can do with a roll on and if I can keep that momentum rolling.

 

[M.B.88]

You do realise that Morkel's post mostly contradicts Super Freak's post... and yet you agree with both 100%?

They didn't completely contradict at all. They were both correct?

 

[Porthoz]

They didn't completely contradict at all. They were both correct?

Come on... read the posts again, seriously!

 

[M.B.88]

I doubt there would be a stat for it, but I would like to know how many of these try-scoring occasions were started in the opposition 20, like for example a penalty on their line.

My interpretation of the post was weighed out by the italics. It's when we have a set that starts in the opposition 20. That created the exception in the first post. Because it's true, we are one of the better teams at converting once we have tackles down the other end, but we do seem to wobble once we restart our penalty count between the 20zone.

That's not that hard to understand?

Why I also went on to say that perhaps there's merit then in taking the 2 because usually to restart the tackle count within the 20 it's from a penalty.

 

[GCBRONCO]

My interpretation of the post was weighed out by the italics. It's when we have a set that starts in the opposition 20. That created the exception in the first post. Because it's true, we are one of the better teams at converting once we have tackles down the other end, but we do seem to wobble once we restart our penalty count between the 20zone.

That's not that hard to understand?

Why I also went on to say that perhaps there's merit then in taking the 2 because usually to restart the tackle count within the 20 it's from a penalty.

Momentum helps a lot for two running halves when the sets of six allows them to keep it up and has the defensive line backpedaling and there are potential holes. But repeat sets of six, largely from opposition errors or penalties in that area leaves us in serious trouble and why? Because we haven't got the momentum, suddenly the room and momentum the running halves had is gone, the defensive line has more to work with and we need more then just shifting the ball from left to right, we need real communication and direction from the spine players on where they need their players to be, we need a short kicking game too. We were too guilty of making the oppositions job too easy in these situations. Sure we scored a good amount of tries there when we had the roll on, but we could have had a hell of a lot more addressing those issues.

 

[M.B.88]

Momentum helps a lot for two running halves when the sets of six allows them to keep it up and has the defensive line backpedaling and there are potential holes. But repeat sets of six, largely from opposition errors or penalties in that area leaves us in serious trouble and why? Because we haven't got the momentum, suddenly the room and momentum the running halves had is gone, the defensive line has more to work with and we need more then just shifting the ball from left to right, we need real communication and direction from the spine players on where they need their players to be, we need a short kicking game too. We were too guilty of making the oppositions job too easy in these situations. Sure we scored a good amount of tries there when we had the roll on, but we could have had a hell of a lot more addressing those issues.

I agree. Another 100%er

 

[Porthoz]

Momentum helps a lot for two running halves when the sets of six allows them to keep it up and has the defensive line backpedaling and there are potential holes. But repeat sets of six, largely from opposition errors or penalties in that area leaves us in serious trouble and why? Because we haven't got the momentum, suddenly the room and momentum the running halves had is gone, the defensive line has more to work with and we need more then just shifting the ball from left to right, we need real communication and direction from the spine players on where they need their players to be, we need a short kicking game too. We were too guilty of making the oppositions job too easy in these situations. Sure we scored a good amount of tries there when we had the roll on, but we could have had a hell of a lot more addressing those issues.

Yup, that is the problem when we play the better structured teams, against which we invariably struggle for momentum.

We'll beat most teams in the NRL, many with ease, but without a proper "general" on the field and a good kicking game, we will keep struggling against the very top.

 

[007]

I disagree with the momentum comment in this sense: If there is no momentum, the halves and to some extent the fullback, is required to generate and steer this. Halves are on either side of the coin, they use the momentum and they generate momentum with steering and control.

We lack the steering and controlling as well as maturity. 9 & 1 have the vision and maturity to see the game turn, 6 is half way there but still an opportunistic player and 7 is out of his depth trying too hard to be a 7.

 

[M.B.88]

I disagree with the momentum comment in this sense: If there is no momentum, the halves and to some extent the fullback, is required to generate and steer this. Halves are on either side of the coin, they use the momentum and they generate momentum with steering and control.

We lack the steering and controlling as well as maturity. 9 & 1 have the vision and maturity to see the game turn, 6 is half way there but still an opportunistic player and 7 is out of his depth trying too hard to be a 7.

I think we just need better structured set plays for this situation. We can't just rely on Boyd out the back even though he's the best at it going around. It gets VERY predictable. We have strike centres. We need to build plays around getting then some space. Like getting tackled on the left side of the field near the set mark and setting up a sweeping backline movement with all bodies in motion to the right etc

I feel that's what we're missing in those moments.