: Mon Apr 06, 2009 11:25 am  

hullbg wrote:

Which shows we can do it. However since we played Cas and Moa has been put in at the expense of another forward who can do 2 x 20 minute spells we have not been able to lay a platform for the backs.

Moa played against Hudds and Braford.

: Mon Apr 06, 2009 11:34 am  

He did, but we had Thackary as a second prop on the bench for those two games and the Cas game, we have since reverted to King on the bench. Thacks is a better impact player than king in my book, we have also missed out because Manu is playing 80 minutes now instead of coming on as an impact player where he produces his best performances.

: Mon Apr 06, 2009 11:51 am  

Another thing that is annoying me about our play is our lack of backing up the man with the ball, a couple of times our forwards had been partially tackled and looking to offload the ball and there was nobody in sight.
Also helping the man in defence is something we only do out of neccesity, a couple of times yesterday we got the ball from a kick for the player to be tackled and pushed back, it is only when they have gone back 5m or so that the players look to help out.

I know they are just silly things but these little things are sometimes the difference between winning and losing.

: Mon Apr 06, 2009 12:03 pm  

[quote="hullbg"]Another thing that is annoying me about our play is our lack of backing up the man with the ball,

This is something Shaun Briscoe was aprticularly good at. Motu is fairly good at it too. Neither is available at the moment. You have to ask though, where is the encouragement to take risk and look at wider options from time to time. OK, in the early part of games we need to set up play in a controlled way. But as we get into games there a4re times when it cries out for a bit of vision and speculation to widen play out. To me, at the moment, its boring to watch.

: Mon Apr 06, 2009 12:04 pm  

Surprisingly we are missing Mike Burnett because he was a forward Agar would use to start leaving Manu as an impact player. We are short of numbers but Agars refusal to play players from the bench until the second half and to use Moa for 10 minutes is difficult to Fathom. Thacks in the reserves to get more game time? But Dowes and Cusack and Tickle are getting too much. Surely more rotation of our fit players would ultimately keep them fresher? having two hookers or three on occasions just takes up the bench esp when we had an underdone King coming back. Dowes as good as made a plea for a change from the coach when he said he wasn't sure that he could continue playing the long minutes with the short turnarounds coming up. Things would look different if we had Crocker and Lauacki and Raynor and Tony but we haven't and it's the coaches job to do the best with what he has. I get the feeling the players don't like the regime and that unhappiness is coming through on the pitch.
We've had a "dynasty" of failed coaches. Each has had a part to play in the previous management team. Either they had some input and should pay the price or they weren't contributing so why were they there? If you're going to change something change the whole thing. We need new blood and new ideas only then will you get a new style.
And McRae's flowing rugby days? He was the man that said we don't need a 7 and thought Wilkin was no good!

Re: Style of Play : Mon Apr 06, 2009 12:13 pm  

Linebreaker wrote:

It seems the gripe with most is our style of play and I think warrants a thread on that alone.

I have to say the in recent seasons with defences becoming dominant, there have been a few games on tv and other places that have failed to set the world alight when it comes to excitement. RL seems to be becoming stifled by dominant defences.

However, in the case of Hull FC this is compounded by the fact we seem incapable or willing to even try anything a little more risque. Its been mentioned on other threads that we appear to have one game plan which is basically 5 drives and 1 kick. This is becoming very tedious as a spectacle. I was bored half to death yesterday. Its not what I pay money for. I want to be entertained. I wouldnt mind quite so much if the tactic was proving too much for other teams to handle and we were winning games but its not.

For example how many times recently have we tried an attacking option from our own half? I really cant think it happens much at all. The days of Shaun McCrea seem a distance away. In those days we looked capable of scoring from anywhere on the pitch. So much so that I looked at highlights from those years to see if it was just me or looked like a reasonable comprehension.

Besty scoring from our own half, Prescott the same. Line breaks aplenty. You can move it on somewhat to the days of Briscoe and all under John Kear. Not in the same abundance but still there to see. It WAS better as a spectacle in those not so long ago days. Steady decline from then on it seems to me.

We see very little of that now. I tend to watch a fair bit of the Academy and reserves and believe it or not, they all play with the same type of mentality. A safety first approach. Watch the Saints Academy play and its just like watching their first grade. Players backing up, short balls to the support player, supporting the ball carrier, offloads etc.

It seems to me it has to be a coaching decision. I have my doubts about our ability or willingness to take chances. I would rather we went down playing some good "Rugby League Football" than playing tactics a simpleton could read.

Risk taking needs to be calculated. Unfortunately when your scrum half decides to kick on teh first tackle having just been given 6 more, on their line with a minute to go and youy are trailing by 4, there is not a great deal you can do!

: Mon Apr 06, 2009 12:14 pm  

It's not our style of play that's the problem.

It's the lack of commitment and enthusiasm shown by the players.

IF we had dummy runners, players backing up and players running with such force they could try and offload then the style of play wouldn't be an issue

: Mon Apr 06, 2009 12:16 pm  

The one way we could change is to get our forwards to offload the ball a lot more and the backs too.

Leeds are not the best attacking side around but they continually offload the ball until that 2nd/3rd phase of possession results in enough space to work out a try.

Simply offloading the football would make a huge difference to us aswell as supporting the man with the ball everytime! Using some angled runs now and again would be a good idea too, one man rugby can be effective if the ball is timed right and the angle is good.

: Mon Apr 06, 2009 12:41 pm  

PAUL M wrote:

The one way we could change is to get our forwards to offload the ball a lot more and the backs too.

Leeds are not the best attacking side around but they continually offload the ball until that 2nd/3rd phase of possession results in enough space to work out a try.

Simply offloading the football would make a huge difference to us aswell as supporting the man with the ball everytime! Using some angled runs now and again would be a good idea too, one man rugby can be effective if the ball is timed right and the angle is good.

Surely all of this is a coaching style of play issue? I agree with it btw but why cant dont the coaches encourage it. It cant be that we have bad players who are incapable of doing it. To the poster that said about S Mcrae not playing expansive rugby and us not needing a 7. If thats case give me his team over the expanded version we currently have!

: Mon Apr 06, 2009 12:48 pm  

All of our forwards never look to offload because they know instinctively that there will be no support following them!!
King used to offload every tackle, now he is a shire horse trundling into tackles and dying!
No kick chase what so ever, absolutely no scramble defence at all
all basic rugby league to me
whole thing is a shambles !!