"Chooks failing pressure test"

[Spirit of 66]

Interesting title for this NRL site article:

http://www.nrl.com/roosters-failing-...3/default.aspx

While I acknowledge that we don't get many repeat sets, the objective of the game is not to get line drop outs, but to score as many points as you can and to concede as few as you can. We are second in points scored and second in points conceded (actually, first as Manly are only one point better, but have played one less game).

Hardly "failing the pressure test".

[Guest]

failing pressure tests tell the idiot to go and watch the manly game from last week when they had 8 consecutive sets on our line and could not score. or the amout of times we have held teams to nil for the whole game

[stephenj]

do we look worried about another statistic, look at the other stats, the for and against, the points table, those are our priorities, not anal stat gains!

[Guest]

Just a few thoughts to consider:

Maybe our drop outs conceded stat is a result that teams cannot score through the hands against us, so are forced to kick to kick more often on the fifth, hence more drop-outs

Maybe the quaility of our attack has the inverse effect for us, ie: we score tries so don't need as many line dropouts

Maybe we also have a strategy of high kicks, and big pressure on the fullback - focussing on pinning our oponents on their line and trusting our defence

(also maybe, our halves don't have great short kicking games so the coach has a gameplan that plays to our strengths?)

The article shows very little correlation between line-drop outs given or conceded and a teams place on the ladder.

Perhaps it is a one-dimensional view that, taken out of context, is meaningless.

A pretty poorly considered piece of writing IMO.

[Guest]

....and as for what this means for Origin??

Who give a fark?

[Guest]

....and as for what this means for Origin??

Who give a fark?

Gould bought it up during the origin 2 game, yet what he failed to mention was that the roosters held the highest points for (till souths only recently took over)

[Parkway_Drive]

Yawn... If the media and the critics don't rate us then it is all good. Let them bag us, we are coming second have the second best attack in the league and probably the best defence (conceded 197 and played 15). Manly has one more game in hand (conceded 196 and played 14) than us so unless they get a shutout when we we have our next bye we will be the best against in the comp again.

Plus we have more improvement in us than the other contenders, Manly are going backwards, Melbourne will struggle to keep their intensity of previous seasons come September and I think we could have their measure now, their big 3 are a year older and a bit slower than previous seasons...also losing Widdop is a blow to their chances. Souffs are close to the top of their game and I dont think they will improve too much....the question is can we get to Souffs level in September.

Robbo coaches the team to its strengths so he gets the best possible result out of Pearce's non-existant short kicking game by instructing him to bomb away from 35-45m out for field position so we can pin the opposition in their half...well until until the ref blows his obligatory piggy-back penalty against us.

[Guest]

far be it for anyone to suggest the Roosters still have areas to work on and room for improvement

the article is spot on, and I'd wager Coach Robinson would agree with it 100%

[Guest]

You would wager would you.

What is a copy boys wage these days?

[Guest]

far be it for anyone to suggest the Roosters still have areas to work on and room for improvement

the article is spot on, and I'd wager Coach Robinson would agree with it 100%

I agree - while I don't think we're "failing a pressure test", the general theory behind the article is correct. At times we would undoubtedly benefit from forcing more repeat sets.

The best thing about this team is that there is so much room for improvement in it. The way we use Sonny Bill, Pearce and Maloney's kicking game, SKD's form, involving RTS more in attack, etc. - there are so many areas to build on.

Sure our defence is top notch at the moment, but that doesn't mean we should approach Souffs, Melbourne and the finals series with a "we're already good enough" approach.

[Guest]

The major flaw in the argument about repeat sets due to line drop outs is that North Queensland (13th) and St George (15th) are leading the NRL competition for forcing repeat sets with 34 and 33 respectively - as the article in question points out - however they are 11th and 14th respectively for points scored this season and in fact we have scored well over 100 points more than St George who have forced more than double the amount of repeat sets than we have.

For some reason people have identified repeat sets as something that is critically lacking from our game this season however we have scored the second most points with 342 and we have won 11 matches which is exactly the same as both North Queensland and St George have won when combining their wins.

Repeat sets are a trivial stat that do not require much study or attention. We are a team that looks to score tries when in attacking areas however we use our defense to apply pressure on the opposition rather than continually attacking the opposition. A team with a very strong defense is much more powerful than a team with a very strong attack and fortunately we have both.

[Guest]

The major flaw in the argument about repeat sets due to line drop outs is that North Queensland (13th) and St George (15th) are leading the NRL competition for forcing repeat sets with 34 and 33 respectively - as the article in question points out - however they are 11th and 14th respectively for points scored this season and in fact we have scored well over 100 points more than St George who have forced more than double the amount of repeat sets than we have.

For some reason people have identified repeat sets as something that is critically lacking from our game this season however we have scored the second most points with 342 and we have won 11 matches which is exactly the same as both North Queensland and St George have won when combining their wins.

Repeat sets are a trivial stat that do not require much study or attention. We are a team that looks to score tries when in attacking areas however we use our defense to apply pressure on the opposition rather than continually attacking the opposition. A team with a very strong defense is much more powerful than a team with a very strong attack and fortunately we have both.

Exactly. The article fails to draw any correlation between the stat and success.

[stsae]

Our best game in forcing repeats in years, vs TheBros the second time, and we lose.

Stats can be misleading and almost irrelevant.

This repeat set one is exactly that.

I reckon it's great, people bang on about repeat sets using stats but it's truly irrelevant to us this season. Ironically the stats actually show this.

But many of the same people won't even consider MLKs stats for metres, tackles, missed tackles, penalties, dropped pill etc cos it doesn't suit their argument.

Stats don't lie. People just like to manipulate their use to support their argument.

[ism22]

"However, it is most surprising to see Johnathan Thurston has been unable to turn his forced pressure into more victories for his team."

JT's apparently the world's best halfback (or 5/8... or whatever they reckon he plays.) Has never really converted the fact that QLD is invincible into his club being invincible.

Gronk... doesn't even get a mention, but he's not really known for creating pressure. QLD and Australia just keep winning so neither are looking around for a new HB.

---

My scare is that Pearce and Maloney both have a habit of kicking to the FB or winger's hands rather than space.

Particularly when it's GI or Slater they're kicking to (which to be fair are our likely GF fullbacks if we make it that far), it's really bad. Give GI/Slater ball + space and they'll very quickly eat up the space (and more.)

That said, in my view:
- Pearce is fast and has a habit of being in the roght place at the right time. I rate a try off a slippery pass/good positioning much higher than forcing a repeat set. I still remember when RTS made his debut... he stepped Morris then passed to Pearce (who kept up with him and left some fast Dragons chasers for dead.) Gronk doesn't have that... if QLD/Australia/Melbourne were losing then his head would be 1st on my chopping block. (Well not QLD/Melbourne... I'd make sure they signed him on $900k a year.)
- Maloney creates pressure through his kicks. Maybe his problem is that Tupou and Jennings are scoring lots of tries rather than coming in, letting the opposition get the ball and forcing repeat sets? Tries > repeat sets ALWAYS and that's what Jennings/Tupou/RTS...etc are getting!!
- Stopping repeat sets is my only concern. Yes we have a habit of defending 10+ repeat sets in our half without conceding tries, but why do we need to defend so many repeat sets? I could blame SKD/Mini (and probably get away with it) but to me is's a deeper question that involves team tactics.

Who knows... maybe it's our plan? For example I notice us kicking to the FB rather than space. BIG risk if that's GI or Slater (not if it's fat/balt Bowen)... but does that give us structure and let us control how they use the ball? (I.e. At least we know GI/Slater will run the ball hard, so there's no option of the winger running then offloading to them during broken play.) I dunno... just a thought.

[Johnny.]

I blamed SKD and Mini for our having to defend repeat sets. And I would have got away with it if not for those meddling kids.