: Thu Feb 26, 2009 11:31 am  

gary numan wrote:

cullen needs to make his mind up. It wasn't long ago he was telling us that warrington were good enough defensivly. Last night he's telling us warrington still have those defencsive problems.

I thought that too, did seem a bit contradictory.

: Thu Feb 26, 2009 11:34 am  

You know inside Cull is laughing like a drain at what is happening to Wires under Lowes!

: Thu Feb 26, 2009 11:41 am  

SEB wrote:

I thought that too, did seem a bit contradictory.

No. Cullen said our defence was good enough when we weren't turning cheap ball over and constantly putting pressure on ourselves to defend back to back sets.

As showed at Saints away this year. He is absolutely correct.

: Thu Feb 26, 2009 11:47 am  

Lefty wrote:

No. Cullen said our defence was good enough when we weren't turning cheap ball over and constantly putting pressure on ourselves to defend back to back sets.

As showed at Saints away this year. He is absolutely correct.

All the above is true. But, he also said we have still not corrected the defensive problems we've had for a while. That IS contradicting what you have said. He followed his statement with some replays of our defensive line not being quick enough, of not working together, the line not being straight and not winning collision.

: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:02 pm  

Yes which stems from? Turning the ball over and giving penalties away. It's known we have some issues in defence but so do most teams.

We can easily beat any team if we keep our completion rate up and penalties down. (Easier said than done I know).

: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:39 pm  

Lefty wrote:

Yes which stems from? Turning the ball over and giving penalties away. It's known we have some issues in defence but so do most teams.

We can easily beat any team if we keep our completion rate up and penalties down. (Easier said than done I know).

I believe there is a structural problem. We seem very exposed when the defence has to shift quickly from one direction to another. We seem to fall for the sucker punch every time with players being dragged one way by a dummy runner (esp in the outside 1/3rd of the pitch, outside the second row/hb defensive positions) only for ball to be switched to another runner going the opposite way. The defence fails to read this and respond and almost at the oppositions will an overlap is created as the runner has a centre and winger available, against our winger and centre.

: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:43 pm  

Wires71 wrote:

I believe there is a structural problem. We seem very exposed when the defence has to shift quickly from one direction to another. We seem to fall for the sucker punch every time with players being dragged one way by a dummy runner (esp in the outside 1/3rd of the pitch, outside the second row/hb defensive positions) only for ball to be switched to another runner going the opposite way. The defence fails to read this and respond and almost at the oppositions will an overlap is created as the runner has a centre and winger available, against our winger and centre.

That's just organistation. I agree. Are we currently worse than before because as Cullen mention we have changed our defesive pattern and structure?

: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:51 pm  

Wires71 wrote:

I believe there is a structural problem. We seem very exposed when the defence has to shift quickly from one direction to another. We seem to fall for the sucker punch every time with players being dragged one way by a dummy runner (esp in the outside 1/3rd of the pitch, outside the second row/hb defensive positions) only for ball to be switched to another runner going the opposite way. The defence fails to read this and respond and almost at the oppositions will an overlap is created as the runner has a centre and winger available, against our winger and centre.

You have just described the most basic game-plan of driving one side of the ruck to manipulate the opposition defence then get the link working to the opposite channel. Seen on most amateur junior pitches around the NW every Sunday morning.

If they can't defend against that then god help us.

: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:52 pm  

Biggest defensive frustration for me is never moving up in a line at the play the ball - 10 easy yards for every play the ball, a recipe for disaster.

: Thu Feb 26, 2009 1:05 pm  

mark_m wrote:

You have just described the most basic game-plan of driving one side of the ruck to manipulate the opposition defence then get the link working to the opposite channel. Seen on most amateur junior pitches around the NW every Sunday morning.

If they can't defend against that then god help us.

I dont doubt it Mark, obviously I am no expert but we seem vunerable to this and it concerns me.