The Cumberland Throw

From The Stands – The Attacking Blues

 

Watching from the stands was not a pleasant experience on Friday night.

Like most fans I can accept a poor performance or a loss – if we learn from it.  BA said after the game that it was a lost opportunity, and while I acknowledge that he was talking about the result and 2 points, this game cannot be allowed to become a lost opportunity.

Normally I can work out and understand the attacking game plan, even when it is poorly executed, especially as we sit behind the goalpost. But I struggled this game. Not so much because I could not see what they were doing, the problem I had is I could not understand why they were doing it and what they were hoping to achieve.

Let’s start with our tries to explain my confusion with our attack.

Our tries were well constructed plays that suited the conditions and punished the defensive structures the Dragons employed.

King Gutho

Our first try was simple. Short crisp passes on the ad line with Matterson running an inside line, resulted in Waqa Blake receiving the ball 20 in from touch on the outside of his man, he straightened and passed inside to Gutho backing up who scored under the posts.

Our second try came from a repeat set. The first set was 5 forward runs, every one behind the ruck, making 60 easy metres allowing a beautiful 40 metre kick from Reed with a good chase to trap the  Dragons in goal. From the drop out we keep the ball in close, 10 metres either side of the post, used our forwards and engaged the Dragons forwards. They cracked and Evans scored. Simple footy really.

So why did we not continue with this structure?

Why did we continually put the bomb up to snag the try instead of putting it in goal for a repeat set?

Why did we continually throw 20 metres slow loopy passes from dummy half with our playmakers, edge forwards and centres all running sideways and cramping each other for room?

The amount of times we ended up with our playmaker, edge forward, centre and winger all within arms length of each other 15 metres in or less from the sideline with Dragons defenders in front of them  was ridiculous.

For all those who watched from behind the posts like I did, you would agree with my frustration. The gaps in the Dragons defensive line was in the middle. You could see what the Dragons did defensively. They spread their defence and decided to take away the opportunities out wide for Parra to score.

Their mentality was obvious – if you want to score it won’t be on the outside. In response, Parra played dumb attacking footy. Our play makers and edge forwards did not straighten the attack. There was almost an arrogance to it. Parra decided how they wanted to score and that was it. 

We cannot let this game remain a lost opportunity. If the game plan employed on Friday night genuinely was our game plan we need to throw it out. It was frustratingly predictable and we will not score one try that way against a top team. 

Conversely, if our spine did not execute the correct game plan they need to learn from it and make sure that does not happen again. Our pack had the ability to dominate the Dragons , to make easy metres and wear them down. This in turn would have created opportunities out wide later in the game as it would have forced the Dragons to condense their defence. Instead, we decided not to use them, we looked for the easy tries.

Brad Arthur

As Arthur stated, the Dragons players wanted to work a little harder to win the game and they deserved their victory. Our team can not look for excuses. You can find them, short turn around, wet conditions, mind boggling refereeing decisions and a small ten metres. All those excuses are there and you could make them, but even with my blue and gold eyes we must accept that we lost because we played dumb footy, with less effort and diligence. We attacked in an frustrating dumb, predictable way and apart from Nathan Brown, who tried his guts out as he does every week, we had no intensity in defence. That is why we lost and from the stands there is a huge opportunity that can come from this game, if the team really wants it.

I have been negative but don’t mistake that for doubt. I have faith and belief in this team. They must learn from this game and make it a line in the sand moment. They need to go back to using their forwards as the spring board for their attack.

Need to use the platform laid by the likes of Junior

In the past 5-6 games the Eels have forgotten what makes them a good, a very good team. They have a very good pack, and need to use them. And from there it falls into place – consistently bend the defence line back, use the offloading ability to create a staggered line, shift the ball this is what will then bring results.

Shifting the ball without utilising the forwards is pointless. It won’t result in tries and will only lead to a growing frustration on the field. You could see the frustration on the field, you could feel it in the stands.

I genuinely look forward to Thursday night against the Storm. It’s been a long time since we’ve played the Storm at Parramatta. I hope for dry conditions and for our boys to lift. I firmly believe this team can win the premiership, but they won’t do so playing the style of footy they have the last five to six games. Can they get back to the form and attacking balance between the backs and forwards they had earlier in the year? Of course they can and my family and I will be in the stands on Thursday night cheering them on.

Shelley

If you liked this article, you might consider supporting The Cumberland Throw.

13 thoughts on “From The Stands – The Attacking Blues

  1. Big Derek

    The frustration of watching the same issues over again each season is head scratching, the roster has changed but the habits of not doing what worked before is still there.
    Continually told that at training the team prepares well but then throws that out of the window against teams they supposed to beat. Is it the message, how it’s delivered , whatever it is something has to change or we probably will see it again and again.
    Does our dummy half need to change to a style like Api for instance, don’t think there are too many of those, or do we need to think structures need tweaking, anyway Shelley points well made and hopefully they get addressed so we don’t continue to struggle against committed and fast defensive lines as it looks currently.

    1. Shelley

      I think you nailed it when talking about fast up and in defensive lines but on Friday the Dragons just spread and slid. But the point is the same, we have not punished the defence of late. If we want to attack out wide and the defensive set up is aligned to stop that you have to take them out of it before you attack wide. If they rush up, kick in behind, punish that defence. If they slide have runners coming back inside or your forwards playing in an around the ruck. Nathan Brown and Marata were the only ones who recognised it on Friday, consistently went behind the ruck, made ground and bent the line back. But there was no follow up we then just passed 20 metres back to a set move which was so predictable. Stay in the middle, engage and tire the forwards and you will either score or get repeat set and eventually they will crack.

      I was concerned when I heard Moses after the Dogs game talking about trying to get Fergo a try by continually going back to him. The Dogs knew it, they covered it and we played into their hands, as we did on Friday. Our three tries in that game against the Dogs came early when we pushed up to support offloads and or passed back inside punishing up and in defence. We then spent the rest of the game trying to get Fergo his try all to no avail and it almost cost us.

      In the first 10 weeks we played heads up footy. That is why we out scored teams in the second half. We kept going to the line with multiple options, eventually the opposition tired and the gaps opened. We went to the line with lots of options and now we are going with a set plan and not looking up.

      I get that it is a hard time of the year and the boys are waiting out time before the finals start but they need to be careful that they don’t get themselves into such a rut that they find it impossible to get out or that they get themselves into a fight for the top four. If we don’t finish top four we have no chance.

      1. Big Derek

        Shelley, watching the games yesterday the dominant half was standing much closer to the play the ball in all games. They still had time to survey the field and set up, and this did not allow the swift off the line play given time to get to Mitch as the passed travel longer in the air.
        its all up for discussion, but if our 9 is not a known runner like Api and others, then it’s easier to stifle a longer pass.
        interesting to see if we change some tactics, probably not a good idea against the Storm, but we need a circuit broker of some sort in these games.

        1. Shelley

          Agree – the pass 20 metres back was so frustrating. When we bend the line back Reeds pass is 20 metres across to put Moses on the outside. In the last few weeks we have been throwing long passes just to throw them. Agree short passes in and around the ruck is needed to open up space on the outside.

  2. Gustarny

    Excellent Shelley I agree we need to win the middle by running hard and attracting 3 defenders like Browny Junior RCG Marata and co are doing for longer not continually just put in 2nd man plays out the back.I have noticed plenty of gaps up the middle but we are always looking to offload on the outside why can’t we have some outside inside plays up the middle and make the opposition compress their D then go wide.

  3. BDon

    Great analysis Shelley. You could sense we were losing our way as the first half went on. I couldn’t quite fathom why the Dragons, mostly, were numbering up like they had 14 on the park. Suddenly we had a clear 4 on 2, it should have been a stroll over but Dylan and Lane got their timing wrong…I thought, where did that come from, because it looked so simple, after we lost I couldn’t bear the pain of watching replays, but reading your summary I get it now…i bet the preceding play worked to compress their defence.

    1. Shelley

      They did not have much energy and urgency and by the time they became urgent they tried to fix it by themselves

  4. Milo

    Interesting read, and well done. Our flat footed passing and receiving has been concerning for a while, and it has only been highlighted more. The Storm will sort us out I feel as the conditions will be greasy and Dewey (library system) like which is not great for us, and lets be honest the surface at Parra at night winter is terrible for expansive football.
    Sorry but i think we will struggle again, and need that Guns n Roses Patience!

  5. Rowdy

    Shelley, an astute explanation of what unfolded on the field mate. Normally I sit either side of the ground but had the op to sit behind the goal posts lately. I can see where your end on perspective gives a clear view of the invisible grids and demarcations middles, edges and flanks across the field in both D and attack.

    Your constructive criticism and dialogue with Big Derek has made some very serious flaws evident. Where responsibility lies is up for discussion/debate, but clearly we have a defensive coach in Kidders doing a great job that appears to be set in stone for the first year in a long time. On the other hand we have an attacking coach in “Murph” who looked to have finally got the personnel to execute his tactics up-to 4/5 weeks ago, since then our attack goes from great to ridiculous in the course of each game.

    A sore point for Sivo lovers is the fact that one man can’t win a game but he can make the winning margin greater when things are going his and the teams way. Sadly though, one man can lose you a game as continued bad reads in D and or stupid decisions with the ball when put in the open makes his teammates lose confidence in his ability to do his job. Sivo needs a rest on the sidelines for a while to watch how it’s done and stop listening to whoever has been in his ear to “expand his game” it clearly hasn’t worked. If it ain’t broken Maika, don’t fix it!

  6. kjkila

    We stood too deep in attack considering the conditions…
    It’s been said alot but Our edges are now being targeted because instead of sliding, we’re getting lazy inside and our edges are rushing in gifting yardage and tries ..

    And one last thing, can Sivo use a step instead of trying to run over everyone and his dog?

    1. Shelley

      Agree- our depth in attack has been a big problem. I know the wet conditions impacted this but it was the same against the Dogs

  7. The rev aka Snedden

    Shelley I’ve said that In another post about if it works the 1st Time why didn’t we continue down that side of the field with that same Play. I got shot down but that’s fine.

    You are right … why through those crazy 20 metre long passes. N why are we standing so deep in attack.
    Why are we not finishing of our set’s with a repeat set of 6.
    Why are we not handling the ball much better then a under 6’s side.

    Shelley there’s so much questions that need answers to. We won’t find them this week or next but we need to find them Fast otherwise we will end up like last year. Just fade out in the big Games.

    I love my Eels but I still think we will lose to the Storm. Even with out Smith , Munster, vanivali, fianican, Hughes even with out bromich if he goes to the panel n losses.

    Eels 6 storm 38

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

%d bloggers like this: