Synbad wrote:
How did Rats assess himself?
Don't think he mentioned anything about tactics/gameplan.
He mentioned in the post match press conference that when we move the ball slowly in defence the opposition have manned up all our free men!
So he is basically conceeding that if we don't move the ball quickly from defence we're [REDACTED]!
You'd think there would be some sort of plan in place to move the ball when the opposition have zoned up from our kickouts or from a general kick in defence.
However the tactic is to bomb it long to Kreuzer of Hampson and hope they mark it. Real one dimensional and lacking in imagination.
I see teams who have been held up in defence still able to move it inside 50 and give themselves scoring opportunities.
Surely you would plan to create space to combat the zone. Or even take a risk. Instead its safe stuff bomb down the line and hope.
The scum at every opportunity will kick the ball into the defensive region of the centre square. It's a risky kick but their skill level is good enough to do it.
Is Ratten conceeding our skill level isn't good enough or that he doesn't have a plan?
If he doesn't like our skill level, why would we draft someone with such obvious kicking deficiencies as Armfield.
There was a clear example of this late in the second quarter. I think it was Scotland who had the ball in the back pocket. He had nothing to kick to so bombed it down the line, even though Houlihan was outnumbered - he had Dempsey and I think Hooker with him. Hooker blocked while Dempsey took an uncontested mark and they pumped it back inside 50 which resulted in a goal.
Why so often do we have nothing to kick to?
And yet when the opposition bring it out of defence so often they have loose men everywhere. Where is our zone? Why aren't we forcing them to take more risks or forcing them to bomb it down the line?