: Mon Apr 06, 2009 12:04 pm  

King Monkey wrote:

Leeds have played a flat attack for a few years but its been picked up on so we have to stand further back. There is still the option for flat but a decision has to be made. Leeds are struggling with that. I've never seen so much ball go to ground out of the ruck.

Agree entirely with that.

In all honesty, despite the championship last season, I think we started to be "found out" then, and we have not addressed to a plan B.

: Mon Apr 06, 2009 12:18 pm  

Eurob0y wrote:

A while ago, St Helens were masters of the flat attack. For the past few seasons, probably since DA arrived we have a new attacking structure whereby we attack from deep, with countless runners, running good lines. We can still use the flat attack well, when needed, but I feel we have more success by attacking from deep. With the pace Leeds have, if they can master the same structure we use, they will pretty much be unplayable.

I've always been a fan of the deep line. Great to watch when played at speed. Whilever we get results playing a flat line I'm happy but still prefer the attack from deep option for entertainment value.

: Mon Apr 06, 2009 12:39 pm  

tvoc wrote:

So you'd rather I compared their first seven games V St Helens instead then?

Brian McClennan:

Played 7, Won 2, Drawn 0, Lost 5, Pts For 112, Pts Agst 164 (Avg Scr 16-23) 29%

Tony Smith:

Played 7, Won 4, Drawn 0, Lost 3, Pts For 192, Pts Agst 171 (Avg Scr 27-24) 57%

Is that better?

Weren't the bulls our closest rivals in Smith's early years?

This is the problem with stats to some extent you're always comparing apples and oranges.

: Mon Apr 06, 2009 12:41 pm  

King Monkey wrote:

Leeds have played a flat attack for a few years but its been picked up on so we have to stand further back. There is still the option for flat but a decision has to be made. Leeds are struggling with that. I've never seen so much ball go to ground out of the ruck.

Our ball retention was awful yesterday.

On the positive side we do have 6 months to get the deep attack working.

: Mon Apr 06, 2009 12:47 pm  

G1 wrote:

No. I dont mean beat them, I mean comprehensively out play them and take them to the cleaners, like Smith's sides did twice in 2007. We blew them away in the league encounter at Headingley and in the GF with some exhilerating rugby. Mclennan's wins last year were nowhere near the same manner and I take nothing away from our GF win.

The problem is the coach IMO. We were very, very flat yesterday apart from the last 15 mins. They were 1st to all the loose balls. Look at the PTB before Gidley's 2nd half try. We had three tacklers, none of who were off the floor by the time the tackled player had played the ball.

You have mentioned in the past that a great coach improves players. Do you think JJB has improved under McLennan? What has happened to Burrow's defence? Where's the fluency in attack?

I have a suspicion that his arm around the shoulders and rah rah approach is starting to wear off and the team needs something with a little more substance.

Agreed. Kylie was grasping several times today. I'd assumed Bailey was still injured but of he was ommitted that is a huge gaff on Mclennan's part.

2007 GF what happened to Saints happened to Melbourne in the 2008 Aussie GF it was simply a bridge too far - the play off game did for them - more to do with that that any Smith masterplan IMO. The game at Headingley did they not have half a side out or was that the previous year?

Under McClennan the following players have improved in my opinion Hall, Smith, Burgess, Ablett, Kirke, Bailey, McGuire is far better stand off now than he was under Smith and Donald in 2008 but his swop seems to have had the reverse effect. Those that have got worse JJB - who was Smith's pet project - and Diskin the rest are much as they were. Some of the senior players are simply not going to improve - Webb, Senior, Sinfield, Peacock they just become more consistent.

On Burrow his confidence must be shot - two serious concussions in a short period of time cannot help - a big centre will simply run over him and they do regularly.

The only issues I have with McClennan is team selection - having said that he is hampered by the lack of attacking options on the right and until GH sorts that out the only structured attacking outlet is to Senior

: Mon Apr 06, 2009 12:50 pm  

Vic Mackey wrote:

Weren't the bulls our closest rivals in Smith's early years?

2004 - on the league table it was Bradford and yet Leeds beat them four times out of five that season while only winning two from four V St Helens.

2005, 2006 and 2007 St Helens finished on top at the end of the SL Regular Rds so it'd be difficult to place them below anyone else as Leeds' chief opponents, a situation continued in 2008 and 2009 thus far.

: Mon Apr 06, 2009 12:55 pm  

Eccleshill Rhino wrote:

2007 GF what happened to Saints happened to Melbourne in the 2008 Aussie GF it was simply a bridge too far - the play off game did for them - more to do with that that any Smith masterplan IMO.

Had Mclennan come up wit hthat performance I suspect you wouldn't be explaining it away, you'd have been creaming yourself. BTW, if they were shot from the playoff game who coached us in that?

The game at Headingley did they not have half a side out or was that the previous year?

They had some injuries but no less than they had yesterday.

Under McClennan the following players have improved in my opinion Hall, Smith, Burgess, Ablett, Kirke, Bailey, McGuire is far better stand off now than he was under Smith and Donald in 2008 but his swop seems to have had the reverse effect.

OK, its' just opinions I guesss but if Hall didn't improve Mcl;ennan would be a lousy coach, under Smith he was a part time kid. Burgess didn't play under Smith so that is a strange statement. Donald was the same in 2008 as he was in 2007 9and 2006 for that matter). he's gone so far backwards under McLennan's master stroke of switching sides.

Those that have got worse JJB - who was Smith's pet project

What does that mean? I know you've always had an issue ith JJB but surely you can see what a tremendous player Smith made him. Bluey has failed to keep that up. Maybe Bluey can't improve players the way Smith could??

On Burrow his confidence must be shot - two serious concussions in a short period of time cannot help - a big centre will simply run over him and they do regularly.

Agreed. One wonders why the coach would ask him to defend a player like Matt Gidley.

The only issues I have with McClennan is team selection - having said that he is hampered by the lack of attacking options on the right and until GH sorts that out the only structured attacking outlet is to Senior

What has changed on the right since that pinnacle in 2007 GF, or even Mclennan's effort in last years?

: Mon Apr 06, 2009 12:56 pm  

Eccleshill Rhino wrote:

2007 GF what happened to Saints happened to Melbourne in the 2008 Aussie GF it was simply a bridge too far - the play off game did for them - more to do with that that any Smith masterplan IMO. The game at Headingley did they not have half a side out or was that the previous year?

Under McClennan the following players have improved in my opinion Hall, Smith, Burgess, Ablett, Kirke, Bailey, McGuire is far better stand off now than he was under Smith and Donald in 2008 but his swop seems to have had the reverse effect. Those that have got worse JJB - who was Smith's pet project - and Diskin the rest are much as they were. Some of the senior players are simply not going to improve - Webb, Senior, Sinfield, Peacock they just become more consistent.

On Burrow his confidence must be shot - two serious concussions in a short period of time cannot help - a big centre will simply run over him and they do regularly.

The only issues I have with McClennan is team selection - having said that he is hampered by the lack of attacking options on the right and until GH sorts that out the only structured attacking outlet is to Senior

The Burrow of the last few years would have scored from that break, he took the complete wrong option, Gardner was still in the defensive line and Meli was on the other side.

It was like:

|--------------- Try Line ----------------|
|
|
|---------------Wellens-----Meli
|
|
|-------------Burrow
|
|
|--Defensive Line------------------------|

Burrow dummied his run to the left then came back on the right, now if he had either done it the other way round or just carried on running left he would have scored and usually you'd expect him to make the right desicion.

: Mon Apr 06, 2009 1:31 pm  

Burrow makes the break




Burrow runs to the left where he would beat Wellens to the line




Burrow comes back to the right where Wellens and Meli are.




Burrow is tackled

: Mon Apr 06, 2009 1:39 pm  

Burrow's decision was to take the tackle and look for a quick PTB.

Which achieved a 3 V 2 option on our right side attack

The error was in the subsequent play......