right side defence

[Titanic]

Ok lads ... we have a lot of opinions on here and much of it is pointed at our right side defence. Let's have some answers, in fact let's follow the old rule of no problem to be highlighted without a solution, no matter how outrageous it might seem. Here we go:

1. This has been a symptom in our team for a long time.
2. With so many personnel changes it is unlikely that every combination has had the same fault, therefore
3. The fault must be in the structure of the defensive strategy.

If so then what can be done about it:

1. Sliding defence (up and out)
2. Up and in
3. Umbrella
4. Up and hold
5. Up and decide

For what it's worth I prefer:

The Up & Decide style which incorporates the advantages of both Up & In as well as Up & Out.

With this type of defence the first four defenders either side of the ruck (A, B, C, D defenders) use a zone style Up & In combined with a slight umbrella formation with the "D" defender.

This is done to force the close ruck plays back in to a "hitting zone" & dictating where you want the ruck to be. If the ball should get outside the "D" defender then the other players will play an Up & Out (Slide) style of defence - pushing them to the sideline. And there are added extras:

Due to the defenders racing up off their line at such a great speed time is needed to re-set in defence; so numbers are needed in the tackle to give the defenders re-set & refresh time.

But attacking plays are aimed at getting on their fronts (elbows & knees) as soon as they get touched to gain the upper hand in the battle for the ground (the speed of the play-the-ball). So the defenders must rush into the attacker with the purpose of getting under his upper body using his armpits as levers to keep him upright (remembering also that the tackle is made ineffective if the ball is allowed to be promoted).

Once this is achieved then the attacker is turned side-on so that assistant defenders can "dance" with the attacker for a short time (a second or two), is put to ground with all tacklers present, then a peeling motion is undertaken to secure more time for the defensive line to re-set.

Under this system seven-second play-the-ball times from initial contact are not unrealistic but in the end it all comes down to the ability of the players to follow their structure and execute the tackles ... our choices always seem to to be the wrong ones which could mean (1) poor execution, (2) lack of practice or (3) lack of direction from behind ... I'd bet on (3).

C'mon guys ... there's a start, now debate it.

[DavidBouveng]

I agree with ur choice of up and decide, mainly due to Jamal's good decision making when he has been fit this year. He is very good and his brutal defence masks how astute he is.

With some others, mainly rookies and second rowers, I would opt for a more rigid 'rule based' structure that they just need to learn and apply.

Great thread, hope we get some detailed reies.

[Hail Sezer]

Loved reading that. I honestly couldn't contribute much because I'm from a union background, but I enjoy learning about stuff like this.

More responses and more threads like this please. What sort of defensive structure do Manly use?

[Titanic Believer]

Having never played the game I'd love to see some schematics on these patterns so I better understand what I'm watching at the games. I do recognise the run backwards with them until they fall over the line defence and the stand still until they run to you defence. Neither seems too effective however.

[Titanic]

The purists will argue that I haven't mentioned reading the play, tackling technique, line speed, positioning or player selection but I will come to that in the next installment ... no jumping ahead until we have exhausted what type of defence we want and when we seem to have a consensus we can debate how best to deploy it.

C'mon the rest of you, get into it!

[Toads]

Hmm, also undecided at this stage. I'm going to have to give it some thought before I could give you a definite answer, considering how quick the modern game has become.

Pretty well been keen on the Sliding Defense for many years. But now you mention the 'Up and decide', that's something that should be given some serious thought as well, Titanic.

[Coaster]

I think every team is employing the same tactics in defense and attack atm, its what is making the game so boring atm.

The issue i see with the Titans outside men, is that we have too many forwards shoulder to shoulder in the middle, and they condense leaving a quick ball to the center a very quick way of leaving us short.

It comes back to what i keep banging on about, which is "mind coaching"
The ability to trust another player to do his job, without over doing yours.

This way players keep there man on the correct side, and do not do silly things like rushing to the inside.
Back to the question i think all of those defensive tactics should be used, depending on position on the field. I personally think the "Dancer" is used way to often, and way to close to the line, leaving players coming in too slow a play the ball while leaving outside men vulnerable.

Inside 20 i love the Dogs of wars old tactic, of up and in, hit and stick

[Mr Stupid]

Titanic, when you talk about "zone style" are talking about man on man counting numbers from the winger in so that every defender is marking an attacker opposit to him?

[C-Whiz]

I don't know much about different defensive styles, names, zones etc, but what I do see is a lot of indecision in defence which is putting us on the back foot, allowing their attackers more time and generally forcing ourselves to over-commit, especially in our own red zone. That's a confidence and a trust thing.

Classic example was Titans vs Warriors (last night), letting them run 10M before anyone even thought about tackling someone, and by the time someone even tried they were across our line.

I know you asked for solutions, and all I could suggest is, is there enough experience at the back to read the plays and call the right defence? I don't know. As soon as you take out a machine like Jamma you can't replace that amount of muscle and ability to read the play with just anyone else, and while Meady is a machine in attack and defence, can he direct from the back? That's an experience thing, but he can only get that from spending more time as our FB.

Also, every time Carty shuffles the backline, which is every week, usually a few times during the week, and not even deciding on the line up until the day before the game, i would suggest and expect that no one is really certain on their role and probably don't spend much time actually training in the position they are playing that week.

Does any other team shuffle players around like they do at the Titans, moving 3 players because 1 player is injured? Thats gotta take a toll. How much time are these guys actually training in the position that they are actually playing on the day?

So, to answer your question, I would stick with the simplest defence, because up and decide sounds like it requires an understanding, and that comes with combinations over time. I don't know if our right side defence has played more than 2 games together in the same positions for the past few months.

Just my 2cents of spectator gibberish.

[C-Whiz]

OK, that was a lot of words ^^^

Basically, I think they are getting around us, not going through us.

Slide better.

[DavidBouveng]

OK, that was a lot of words ^^^

Basically, I think they are getting around us, not going through us.

Slide better.

I had a point similar to this that might fit in with what us saying...

And that is that we have struggles a bit defending out side. No secret there.

So what is important is combos and continuity. Sometimes injuries can make that hard, but if changing from week to week hurts...naming a team with a centre on the bench and willfully changing this combo mid game is crazy.

Just as you begin to form an understanding between u and your inside/outside player on what the opposition tendencies are...one of them pisses of to the second row and you have to start again.

This needs to stop. Give the guys a chance ffs.

[Titanic]

Sorry guys I have left this alone for a while so that it can gather momentum during the off-season which is approaching just a little too quickly for some and not quick enough for others, allowing for in-depth solutions over those lonely summer months.

Titanic, when you talk about "zone style" are talking about man on man counting numbers from the winger in so that every defender is marking an attacker opposit to him?

No but that is an admirable strategy. Over 100 years ago I was taught to build defence from the outside in too. Wingers were dropped if they ever, and I mean ever, defended inside their man. The strategy being to shorten the width of the field to lessen the impact on your inside defenders. The field is 68m wide and by keeping the outside as yours then you only have to defend about 60m across 8 men (plus 2 sweepers + the fullback).

Great tacticians like Lewis will tell you that the game is simple, count the numbers and run where you have superiority, is that still applicable? If not, why not?

In answer to your question though, I meant that the field can be divided into zones laterally across the field starting from the ruck in the example I was using.

[DavidBouveng]

Sorry guys I have left this alone for a while so that it can gather momentum during the off-season which is approaching just a little too quickly for some and not quick enough for others, allowing for in-depth solutions over those lonely summer months.


No but that is an admirable strategy. Over 100 years ago I was taught to build defence from the outside in too. Wingers were dropped if they ever, and I mean ever, defended inside their man. The strategy being to shorten the width of the field to lessen the impact on your inside defenders. The field is 68m wide and by keeping the outside as yours then you only have to defend about 60m across 8 men (plus 2 sweepers + the fullback).

Great tacticians like Lewis will tell you that the game is simple, count the numbers and run where you have superiority, is that still applicable? If not, why not?

In answer to your question though, I meant that the field can be divided into zones laterally across the field starting from the ruck in the example I was using.

I not saying it is correct, but you would know a lot of defences are very compressed these days. I guess it is to compensate for bigger more damaging runners who need more defenders without leaving gaps inside, which in turn leaves huge gaps on the outside. The the battle is to get it out there before the team can re adjust back out.

It Is why cronk can chip to corners and it be totally free of any defender.

Only positive I can see is that if you are wide and have to chase in to cover, it is hard to then chase back out and you get turned about and you are basically effed. If you start in, you can slowly move out and maybe really gas out quickly if they spread, but it can often be communicated better.

Ably often stays in too close, and it was giving Jamma huge problems going in then coming out, and don stays too far in, but I think that is the coaches wishes.

[Titanic]

True enough and for what it's worth we are still a long way in this thread from coming up with a solution, yet I add that unless the players are prepared to take that one half step closer to the attacker and get some shoulder on them, as I am sure they have been taught, then we will always have the Sezer/Taylor slap-a-thon ... shocker.

[DavidBouveng]

True enough and for what it's worth we are still a long way in this thread from coming up with a solution, yet I add that unless the players are prepared to take that one half step closer to the attacker and get some shoulder on them, as I am sure they have been taught, then we will always have the Sezer/Taylor slap-a-thon ... shocker.

Yeah, if we are on our line, we need to move up first then slide wherever we gonna slide too. Sliding across eye line 1 metre out is just mental.

We scrambled well last night, but you can't scramble for a season, need some structure to base it on.