JOHN CARTWRIGHT

[Titanic]

what happened to Ioane who I thought was named originally?

[TITAN PETE]

what happened to Ioane who I thought was named originally?

He warmed up but was left out obviously because Michaels is better

[Titanic]

of course, I don't know I didn't get it ... much better to fight fire with a fart.

[Griff0]

This headline isn’t just because I tipped the Titans and therefore fell further behind in my tipping comp.

The Warriors deserved their win. They looked more likely throughout – which brings me to the main point of all this.

There’s less than two minutes left on the clock, the Warriors leading 24-22 and New Zealand manage to gift Gold Coast a set of six inside their territory. Aiden Sezer finds touch 40 metres out from the Warriors’ line.

This is it. Not just the result of the game but the Titans’ season is in the balance.

Six tackles to get a try or a penalty.

Now let’s begin one of the most feeble last attacking sets for a victory that I’ve seen in 30 years. It is emblematic of a larger problem afflicting many of the coaches in our game: an unwillingness or inability to foster creativity in their players.

Tackle 1: Brad Takairangi taps, passes to Aidan Sezer who hands it to Myles for a “settler” (what we’re settling I have no idea). Fair enough. I’ll let them burn one tackle centring the ball and setting themselves for…

Tackle 2: Beau Falloon out of dummy half, turning it inside for Taylor, hitting the ball at medium-fast speed (1 min to go, remember). Dave Taylor pushes forward, hands free. Nobody near him pushing up in support.

Tackle 3: Falloon to Nate Myles, who looks outside, sees nobody coming on to the ball and decides to take a slow hit-up.

Tackle 4: No playmaker in sight as Dave Taylor once again takes the ball at three-quarter speed, never looks to pass and dies with the football.

Tackle 5: Sluggish second-man play as Sezer throws it behind Ryan James to Ashley Harrison jogging into the defence with little support.

Tackle 6: Lottery. Cross-field kick. Too big. Kevin Gordon almost pulls off a miracle. Game over.

Really? This is the best a playoff contender can throw at the opposition with their final set?

The New Zealand Warriors, not exactly a defensive juggernaut, were forced to defend one play in that final set, a mediocre bomb. (And they still barely managed to hold them out.)

John Cartwright is to blame: either he hasn’t coached his unit to be more creative in their challenge or the players aren’t listening.

You choose. Either way, he has to go. And other coaches should be watching.


By MG Burbank, 26 Aug 2013

http://www.theroar.com.au/2013/08/26...tans-so-inept/



This guy gets it

[C-Whiz]

John Cartwright is to blame: either he hasn’t coached his unit to be more creative in their challenge or the players aren’t listening.

Not a bad post, and I have been wondering for quite some time now if Carty coaches guys NOT TO RUN OFF THE BALL CARRIER, just to minimise mistakes and to get the completion stats to look better.

But when you watch Meady and Flash running off each other and linking up, it begs the question why more aren't looking for this type of play. Alby is another who can find a gap, and I don't know how many times Birdy has stood in a tackle with 3 defenders hanging off him, both arms free, and no one to pass it to.

Z-man is constantly being credited with line breaks, apparently leads the comp, but I can't even remember the last time he offloaded to someone in clear space to turn it into points.

So, with all this talent busting through the line, standing in tackles, looking for runners and finding no one, is it being coached out of them in favour of better completion rates that have little return in the form of points but look good on the coaches KPI's?

[DavidBouveng]

Not a bad post, and I have been wondering for quite some time now if Carty coaches guys NOT TO RUN OFF THE BALL CARRIER, just to minimise mistakes and to get the completion stats to look better.

But when you watch Meady and Flash running off each other and linking up, it begs the question why more aren't looking for this type of play. Alby is another who can find a gap, and I don't know how many times Birdy has stood in a tackle with 3 defenders hanging off him, both arms free, and no one to pass it to.

Z-man is constantly being credited with line breaks, apparently leads the comp, but I can't even remember the last time he offloaded to someone in clear space to turn it into points.

So, with all this talent busting through the line, standing in tackles, looking for runners and finding no one, is it being coached out of them in favour of better completion rates that have little return in the form of points but look good on the coaches KPI's?

[Titanic]

Look at the stats for offloads and see if Myles, Harrison, Ridge, James or Douglas are anywhere near the average performances of an NRL forward. You can then add Bailey, Minichiello, Bird and Taylor's erratic passing game and this all coached by a ball-playing "legend" ... well fmd something is wrong with all that.

[titanfan1980]

Look at the stats for offloads and see if Myles, Harrison, Ridge, James or Douglas are anywhere near the average performances of an NRL forward. You can then add Bailey, Minichiello, Bird and Taylor's erratic passing game and this all coached by a ball-playing "legend" ... well fmd something is wrong with all that.

Your right our offloads are down.. But it's not the forwards I seem Taylor James and Bird looking for support all the time, it was still an never being there.. You have to look at slater barba inglis.. Offloads are only possible when someone is calling your name. The longer mead plays there the more he will get it.. Cause zillman has been woeful at it for a long time

[DavidBouveng]

Part of albys brilliance was his support play.

He was almost leading try scorer at halfway point of season and most of the breaks came from backing up.

No co incidence that for the first time in a few years we had a threat backing our forwards up and we started scoring some points and got well entrench in the top 8.

[karnage]

Great post Griffo!!

[a_guest]

At this point we'll have to wait for him to get old and grey before we get a real coach.

[C-Whiz]

I've got a question for all you guys and girls, not about Carty specifically, but about coaching in general.

We've all heard the mantra that defence wins games.
We all look at the stats at the end of the game and rue our incomplete sets, and how many penalties we gave away.

So, what are your thoughts on the "modern game" tactics and coaching?

For me, I would rather play attacking football where the goal is to outscore your opponent, rather than focus on trying to hold them under your score.

Would you rather see our team hold onto the ball for each set of 6, playing error free and having good stats after 80 minutes, or would you rather see them chancing their hand with sneaky off-loads, chip/chase, grubbers, 4th, even 3rd play kicking options etc and turning the ball over early every now and again?

And then we can talk about discipline. Are penalties really "coach killers" that need to be trained out of our game, or are they a display of a team that is aggressive and ready to walk the tightrope of pushing themselves and the game to it's limits? Does trying to play penalty free mean you have to play well within your ability, to stifle your natural aggression and give the opposition less to worry about?

I'm not interested in stats as much as I am interested in results.

I care about the quality of football we play, but not at the expense of dumbing down our game to play error/penalty free. And I certainly don't want to watch our team keep dying with the ball in their hands, or putting in a nothing bomb on the 5th to stick with the "game plan", or not contesting a high ball because it might cause an error.

I want to see the quality payers we have go out and play to the best of their natural ability, to take quality chances when they see them, to use their skill sets to create something out of the ordinary, to keep the opposition guessing, and to play hard and tough and put it all on the line.

Thoughts?

[DavidBouveng]

I'm on my phone c whiz and might give a longer response later, but a few thoughts on top of my head...

*completion rates and expansive play - coaches want good completion rates because a stat somewhere says that the team with better CR wins x% of games. That's all well and good until the pursuit of completion rates expunges any form of attack. we can be a good example of this.

The thing is to find the threshold where there is enough risk taken to create some attack but not destroy the teams possession or continue to lose ball on own try line.

This is ideally at around 80%. 90 -100% is usually boring and risk free, except for the great teams in a hot patch or an origin game. Much Less than 70, and most of the time you are on a suicide mission giving up good ball.

The biggest thing is... What constitutes risk? You would think that anything other than a basic hit up is brain surgery sometimes, so reluctant are some teams (and us) to move the ball at all. But these are highly paid players and simple catching and passing should not be considered a risk. Moving the ball two passes wider to Taylor or bird early in the tackle count or even the centre should be a pretty easy exercise and often teams are compressed early and there will be room.

If it is greasy, dewy, or u are under fire from opposition and need to consolidate, then lock it up for a bit and go straight, but to go wide and use the ball shouldn't be a mortal sin for any team. The best teams use it to great effect.

I could go on all day, but my point is chasing completion rates for completions rates same can be a false economy ( almost as much as the tackles in pop 20, which just tells me how poor teams are at attack, not how they have dominated possession), and teams should strive for a balance that delivers points as well good stat %.

[Titanic]

Completion rates should feature at certain positions on the field or as an integral part of strategy within a game plan against a particular opponent or when the weather is against you ... they are not the centre of the coaching philosophy ever.

[Steve]

For me, I would rather play attacking football where the goal is to outscore your opponent, rather than focus on trying to hold them under your score.

That was Penrith in 2003. Weren't worried what the opposition scored, just aimed to score more, and you got some great games out of that.

Look at the minor premiers this year, and they have the best defensive record by far. 325 against. (Okay, Manly is a close second, 328).
But they also lead in points for, 640, closest rival there is the bunnies on 588.

As far as i'm concerned, scoring points is always the most important part, not holding out the other team, but really you should be doing both.

What's the point of keeping the other team to zero if you can't cross the line either?