Opinion Paper thin defense

TwinTurbo

Kennel Legend
Gilded
Joined
Oct 22, 2018
Messages
9,346
Reaction score
15,417


RFM and Elliot
Only one half of the statistics;
Most Tackles 52 = RFM
Tackle Efficiency 87% = RFM

Compared to say Jackson (who no one should complain about);
32 Tackles at 89%

I think you are picking on the wrong guy in RFM. Having him required to make 52 tackles is too much to ask in every game, the rest need to step up and take some of the load.

Go Dogs
 

Jean-Claude Juncker

Kennel Established
Joined
Dec 25, 2018
Messages
983
Reaction score
725
Only one half of the statistics;
Most Tackles 52 = RFM
Tackle Efficiency 87% = RFM

Compared to say Jackson (who no one should complain about);
32 Tackles at 89%

I think you are picking on the wrong guy in RFM. Having him required to make 52 tackles is too much to ask in every game, the rest need to step up and take some of the load.

Go Dogs
Credit to you for sticking up for him. But 7 missed tackles is a joke, no matter how many effective ones.
 

Dingo

Go the dogs
Gilded
Joined
Dec 20, 2007
Messages
5,322
Reaction score
4,976
Only one half of the statistics;
Most Tackles 52 = RFM
Tackle Efficiency 87% = RFM

Compared to say Jackson (who no one should complain about);
32 Tackles at 89%

I think you are picking on the wrong guy in RFM. Having him required to make 52 tackles is too much to ask in every game, the rest need to step up and take some of the load.

Go Dogs
Sure they aimed lots of traffic his way, probably knowing he would miss his fair share. Some of his misses directly lead to tries. Not knocking his effort but I'm not sure he is fit enough to play 80 mins yet.
 
Last edited:

maroondog72

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Apr 6, 2017
Messages
15,086
Reaction score
25,897
Our entire back line bar maybe Lewis are fucking turnstiles and when you add half of our forward pack to that list if things don’t turn around very quickly it’s going to be another long season of head butting walls and wanting to scratch my own fucking eyes out
 

Chris Harding

Steam Powered Dog
Premium Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2004
Messages
11,089
Reaction score
11,628
Defense wins games and Pay's defensive structures against the Warriors were the worst we've seen in years. We displayed.

Very poor defensive reaction: by not restricting second-man sweep play behind a lead runner thus allowing the Warriors to sweep around at pace to create the extra man.

Losing the ruck: our markers failed to initiate the speed of the game and remove all momentum by not engaging the hooker, to either shut him down or limit his options at the defensive line.

Very slow line speed: by not limiting progress over the advantage line. Our inside defenders failed to focus on the halves restricting their room to move and time to think. This allowed Blake Green to exploit us with his kicking game and the luxury of going to the line with support. Our inside defenders also failed to pressure their forwards, allowing them to gain easy ground and/or plenty of time to work the ball to the outside men.

Poor coordination when employing ‘shut the gate’ (middle defenders move up and slide with the play, keeping a uniform line and not dropping off too early, ensuring they are ready to tackle a runner on an inside line). Very slow and poor execution of rush forward and ‘wedge in’. Our defenders employed 'wait and hold' instead of 'move up fast' thus giving up 10 or 15 meters before stopping the attacking play.

Poor communication caused failure to shut down the attack by not staying on the defender’s inside shoulder, nominating the attacker and avoiding going past the ball.

Mistake riddled outside edge defense. Our Edge defenders are not flexible, instinctive and proactive in their movements. Their response, summary, commitment and positioning awaits disaster by making the wrong calls. To compound the problem our tight forwards are not forcing the play makers decisions and our third man (usually the half) in the line must be prepared to leave the lead runner and drift onto the fullback. He determines what the outside two defenders do, giving them a chance of stopping attacking players steaming through on the edges and the chance of herding the opposition towards the sideline. .

As Warren Ryan once said " tackling is the individual’s responsibility. Defense? That is the team’s responsibility".
The thing I noticed early in the first half is how the Warriors were rushing up in defence and tackling us before we could run a metre, while the Dogs were back peddling and letting the Warriors get a full head of steam up, then flick a pass out from the tackle to a running back. We were losing metres easily in defence; then had to fight our way out of our own half, with no opportunity to set up any scoring options.
 

Deathspell

Kennel Established
Joined
Oct 19, 2017
Messages
521
Reaction score
315
And yet last year our defence was pretty good. For example we finished with less points scored against us last year than the Broncos who finished 6th. Plainly scoring points was the problem not defence. With the same coaching and a very similar playing roster did everything turn to shit in just one game?

Personally I don't think so, most of what you have noted is recognising the full game occurrences. But with the start of game roll on and weight of possession the Warriors had fatigue was unavoidable, and with that comes mistakes. It's a circular reference, the defensive lapses contribute to the fatigue and in turn the fatigue contributes to the defensive lapses. For me it will take more than one game to believe that we have "paper thin defence".

Go Dogs
I was only commenting on the Warriors game and I do acknowledge it was our first game of the season.

Granted, early possession did contribute to fatigue, but the Warriors completion rate was marginal and their error rate was above average. Disadvantaged on-field positioning was contributed by sub standard, misdirected, ineffective kicking, easy meters gained by the Warriors and the lack of urgency by our markers (allowing their hooker, first receiver and kicker too much time on the ball). Throughout the game the Warriors pinned us inside our half and/or quarter.

I presuppose that you are a competent judge of the game, therefore I will not bore you with all the Dogs negative stats. But any team that misses 38 tackles in a game (majority of them due to poor execution, technique and communication), against a team that in honesty did not display a fluent attack and ultimately ended up with average attacking stats, has no hope of competing successfully in the NRL.

We are the Bulldogs, a breed that everyone used to dread to play against. As our theme song states : " We play it hard, we play it tough. We have a mighty pack of forwards"
So for the first time in over 50 years and with a bleeding heart, ashamedly I associated our team with "paper thin defense". Why? Because like everyone else here, we all refuse to accept and be subjected to more mediocre defensive displays. It is evident we have numerous defensive issues to address, ignoring the facts, making excuses, sticking our heads in the sand and singing "Kum ba yah" ("Come by Here") will result in the dreaded wooden spoon.

Bulldogs Forever.
 

coach

Kennel Legend
Joined
Sep 22, 2013
Messages
11,447
Reaction score
6,504
Only one half of the statistics;
Most Tackles 52 = RFM
Tackle Efficiency 87% = RFM

Compared to say Jackson (who no one should complain about);
32 Tackles at 89%

I think you are picking on the wrong guy in RFM. Having him required to make 52 tackles is too much to ask in every game, the rest need to step up and take some of the load.

Go Dogs
Well said
 

Straight18

Kennel Enthusiast
Joined
May 5, 2018
Messages
2,042
Reaction score
1,152
Only one half of the statistics;
Most Tackles 52 = RFM
Tackle Efficiency 87% = RFM

Compared to say Jackson (who no one should complain about);
32 Tackles at 89%

I think you are picking on the wrong guy in RFM. Having him required to make 52 tackles is too much to ask in every game, the rest need to step up and take some of the load.

Go Dogs
I tend to not get into statistics as there not a true reflection, rfm will need to make 50 plus tackles a week cause he does not fucking move up and fucking hit hard enough and the opposition know it, so they will keep going at his and elliots channel cause elliot is easy yards and a quick play the ball as well. Teams will go at foran all day so the second rower and lock need to be top notch defenders and they are not. They need to get there shit together hes a kiwi backrower if he cant handle 40 to 50 tackles every game cause that's what hes gonna get, fuck him off for someone that can. Sick of hearing soft cock excuses and stats for our team. They were fucked, the fucking lot of them were fucked and need to take a real good fucking look at themselves. Make excuses up for the pussies they need to pull there fucking socks up. 50 tackles woop dee fucking doo !
 

SweetFA

Kennel Enthusiast
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
1,149
Reaction score
1,060
I don’t like to bag players but I’m sorry Montoya is the weakest centre we have ever had he needs to be punted ASAP anybody would be better
He’s a distant second to Holland, he was woeful on the weekend he made his inside defenders work so hard & look ordinary- should be the player dropped from last weekend.
 

SweetFA

Kennel Enthusiast
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
1,149
Reaction score
1,060
Only one half of the statistics;
Most Tackles 52 = RFM
Tackle Efficiency 87% = RFM

Compared to say Jackson (who no one should complain about);
32 Tackles at 89%

I think you are picking on the wrong guy in RFM. Having him required to make 52 tackles is too much to ask in every game, the rest need to step up and take some of the load.

Go Dogs
Forget reading the stat sheet, watch the game. I’ll keep repeating, RFM is a poor decision maker in defence and doesn’t communicate with his inside & outside partners, teams target him & run numbers on him
 

TwinTurbo

Kennel Legend
Gilded
Joined
Oct 22, 2018
Messages
9,346
Reaction score
15,417
I was only commenting on the Warriors game and I do acknowledge it was our first game of the season.

Granted, early possession did contribute to fatigue, but the Warriors completion rate was marginal and their error rate was above average. Disadvantaged on-field positioning was contributed by sub standard, misdirected, ineffective kicking, easy meters gained by the Warriors and the lack of urgency by our markers (allowing their hooker, first receiver and kicker too much time on the ball). Throughout the game the Warriors pinned us inside our half and/or quarter.

I presuppose that you are a competent judge of the game, therefore I will not bore you with all the Dogs negative stats. But any team that misses 38 tackles in a game (majority of them due to poor execution, technique and communication), against a team that in honesty did not display a fluent attack and ultimately ended up with average attacking stats, has no hope of competing successfully in the NRL.

We are the Bulldogs, a breed that everyone used to dread to play against. As our theme song states : " We play it hard, we play it tough. We have a mighty pack of forwards"
So for the first time in over 50 years and with a bleeding heart, ashamedly I associated our team with "paper thin defense". Why? Because like everyone else here, we all refuse to accept and be subjected to more mediocre defensive displays. It is evident we have numerous defensive issues to address, ignoring the facts, making excuses, sticking our heads in the sand and singing "Kum ba yah" ("Come by Here") will result in the dreaded wooden spoon.

Bulldogs Forever.
This is really a chicken and egg discussion, did RFM miss more tackles because he's defensively inept and they knew/spotted this and ran more at him, or was he forced to make (and therefore miss) more tackles because he was trying to cover for those around him? I'm not in a position to know and I suspect that no one will aside from the coach and the players involved.

As you yourself pointed out the first 20 minutes was pretty even, so if the defence was always "paper thin" then it wouldn't had stood up for those 20 minutes. My read, which may be different to yours, is that structurally the defence isn't terrible, just that once fatigued it broke down. As most defences will against opposition that, in this instance, was still fresh and firing. In regards to "execution, technique and communication" that always suffers under fatigue, it does not have to be as a result of anything structural.

Don't get me wrong I'm not suggesting that there aren't players with questionable defence technique and execution, but after 1 game I'm loath to paint the whole team with that brush. There is another game this weekend so we get another look at seeing if it's endemic.

Go Dogs
 

Straight18

Kennel Enthusiast
Joined
May 5, 2018
Messages
2,042
Reaction score
1,152
This is really a chicken and egg discussion, did RFM miss more tackles because he's defensively inept and they knew/spotted this and ran more at him, or was he forced to make (and therefore miss) more tackles because he was trying to cover for those around him? I'm not in a position to know and I suspect that no one will aside from the coach and the players involved.

As you yourself pointed out the first 20 minutes was pretty even, so if the defence was always "paper thin" then it wouldn't had stood up for those 20 minutes. My read, which may be different to yours, is that structurally the defence isn't terrible, just that once fatigued it broke down. As most defences will against opposition that, in this instance, was still fresh and firing. In regards to "execution, technique and communication" that always suffers under fatigue, it does not have to be as a result of anything structural.

Don't get me wrong I'm not suggesting that there aren't players with questionable defence technique and execution, but after 1 game I'm loath to paint the whole team with that brush. There is another game this weekend so we get another look at seeing if it's endemic.

Go Dogs
Obviously you saw my blow up. I just think most teams are going to go at his channel. He has foran and monty next to him. Im not fully blaming rfm, i think the coach has something to answer for for moving him there. Our best defender needs to play right side second row in my opinion. Oooooor try harper there and sack monty. Oooooor chn next to him at centre. Jacko to lock and i dont rate elliot but he is a second rower so put him out there, gets dominated in the middle. I think deano can shuffle team around so they play in there strongest positions will help.
 

TwinTurbo

Kennel Legend
Gilded
Joined
Oct 22, 2018
Messages
9,346
Reaction score
15,417
Obviously you saw my blow up. I just think most teams are going to go at his channel. He has foran and monty next to him. Im not fully blaming rfm, i think the coach has something to answer for for moving him there. Our best defender needs to play right side second row in my opinion. Oooooor try harper there and sack monty. Oooooor chn next to him at centre. Jacko to lock and i dont rate elliot but he is a second rower so put him out there, gets dominated in the middle. I think deano can shuffle team around so they play in there strongest positions will help.
I agree, some positional adjustments seem obvious (to me anyway), plus there are some players that I suspect won't make it past this week in the 22. For the 17 I'd certainly start with CHN (for solidarity) and bring RFM off the bench (for impact). Plus I'd tell Napa to go hard for as long as he can, we need a good old softening up period.

Go Dogs
 

Howie B

Kennel Enthusiast
Joined
Jun 6, 2017
Messages
3,889
Reaction score
10,402
What about the zero kick pressure on Blake green who’s kicking game ripped us a new arsehole
Yep that was the clincher for me. He had time to make a cup of tea before every kick. We literally just sat back and watched him set up tries.

Ironically we could use a good half and we used to have Blake Green on the books. We played him in the second row.

Kind of sums up our retention and recruitment policy to be honest
 

KiwiDog7

Kennel Immortal
Joined
Feb 26, 2016
Messages
15,762
Reaction score
23,894
Sure they aimed lots of traffic his way, probably knowing he would miss his fair share. Some of his misses directly lead to tries. Not knocking his effort but I'm not sure he is fit enough to play 80 mins yet.
RFM was gassed after 15 and Pay didn’t have the foresight to at least spell him after 20 odd

That’s what happens when you brush trials

No match fitness
 

Deathspell

Kennel Established
Joined
Oct 19, 2017
Messages
521
Reaction score
315
This is really a chicken and egg discussion, did RFM miss more tackles because he's defensively inept and they knew/spotted this and ran more at him, or was he forced to make (and therefore miss) more tackles because he was trying to cover for those around him? I'm not in a position to know and I suspect that no one will aside from the coach and the players involved.

As you yourself pointed out the first 20 minutes was pretty even, so if the defence was always "paper thin" then it wouldn't had stood up for those 20 minutes. My read, which may be different to yours, is that structurally the defence isn't terrible, just that once fatigued it broke down. As most defences will against opposition that, in this instance, was still fresh and firing. In regards to "execution, technique and communication" that always suffers under fatigue, it does not have to be as a result of anything structural.

Don't get me wrong I'm not suggesting that there aren't players with questionable defence technique and execution, but after 1 game I'm loath to paint the whole team with that brush. There is another game this weekend so we get another look at seeing if it's endemic.

Go Dogs
Thank you for your reply, I find it most refreshing to have respectful discourse. Basically you are pointing out that fatigue was the main contributing factor whilst I'm attributing the lapses to an ill-prepared and/or lazy defense. In reality both statements combined are correct. Question is as you termed it "a chicken and egg discussion". What was the cause that led to the effect?

Bulldogs Forever
 

SweetFA

Kennel Enthusiast
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
1,149
Reaction score
1,060
Thank you for your reply, I find it most refreshing to have respectful discourse. Basically you are pointing out that fatigue was the main contributing factor whilst I'm attributing the lapses to an ill-prepared and/or lazy defense. In reality both statements combined are correct. Question is as you termed it "a chicken and egg discussion". What was the cause that led to the effect?

Bulldogs Forever
Enough of the analysis;

Let’s see what happens Sunday afternoon from 4:05pm when the rubber hits the road
 

wendog33

Kennel Immortal
Premium Member
Ladder Champion
Joined
Aug 6, 2016
Messages
24,741
Reaction score
27,950
Thank you for your reply, I find it most refreshing to have respectful discourse. Basically you are pointing out that fatigue was the main contributing factor whilst I'm attributing the lapses to an ill-prepared and/or lazy defense. In reality both statements combined are correct. Question is as you termed it "a chicken and egg discussion". What was the cause that led to the effect?

Bulldogs Forever
Respectful discourse! I asked you twice for your theory re Pay changing R to L etc JJ, RFM, Holland, Foran etc ;)
 
Top