Repeat sets- what's the obsession?

[The Brain]

Im gonna clobber any one that repeats STSAE quote.
Bansai and chooks are thinking out side the box.
In case no one has noticed the coach has sections of their games been worked on wait till the end of season barring injuries.

The Roosters team can win the comp if it turns out to be Souffs vs Easts then we actually may have them for experience we have a few guys here that have felt the pain and have the hunger all we need is a fair go from the whistle.

[Guest]

lol

more 6 nonsense - selectively picking out one stat in an attempt to make his idiotic case that repeat sets and a quality attacking kick game that builds pressure aren't important

[melon....]

So, you'd prefer to kick it dead?

Because the suggestion that we score every time we're on the opposition line is preposterous.

We lack that dimension to our game. The grinding game. The blow torch. The make them tackle themselves stupid dimension.

If you don't think we need it, then that's probably the same part of your brain that didn't rate Maloney or SBW.

We won a comp by kicking it dead in 2002. For me, Its about D. D that scares the shit out of the opposition to the point they dont want to come out again and face another 40 of that. Were not 2002 but were getting close. I recall we deliberately turned ball over on the last or even 4th....in 2002. Fittler kicked long and dead on purpose. We hammered teams in their own 20, theyd cough up wed score.

When your best attacking weapon is your D, you dont need repeat sets.

For most a good short kicking game and repeat sets is mandatory. For someone with superior D, and a cracking attack in open play, not so much.

We are the exception that can get away with it.

[Guest]

We won a comp by kicking it dead in 2002. For me, Its about D. D that scares the shit out of the opposition to the point they dont want to come out again and face another 40 of that. Were not 2002 but were getting close. I recall we deliberately turned ball over on the last or even 4th....in 2002. Fittler kicked long and dead on purpose. We hammered teams in their own 20, theyd cough up wed score.

When your best attacking weapon is your D, you dont need repeat sets.

For most a good short kicking game and repeat sets is mandatory. For someone with superior D, and a cracking attack in open play, not so much.

We are the exception that can get away with it.

lol

Melon - even stupider than 6

your gibberish suggests that we'd rather the opposition have the ball than have it ourselves, just so we can use our great "D" to make them lose the ball, so we can get it and score. That's moronic thinking. A much better option would be to have the ball ourselves in the first place, by forcing goal line dropouts.

Any area that the Roosters could improve in, we have delusional posters (like you Melon), who'll convince themselves that whatever that area is, it's not important.

Go back to the other site and sit there by yourself please

actually, take 6 with you

[Jacks Fur Coat]

Nothing like wearing the opposition down if we could do it we would be blowing every team off the park

exactly. Possession and field position is everything in Rugby League.

It's one thing to have great attack and great defence, but when great attack still doesn't produce a try after one set in the opp 20m what should a team do? If your answer is f**k the repeat sets, we should be all flash, show no patience and try to score off every play.. then that doesn't show much footy knowledge to me

We can't forever rely on magically procuring points on every set

As i said in other posts before, the Penrith game at the SFS (especially the first half) is a prime example of what happens due to impatience and trying to score off every set. Watch it again folks

Yep...T and P we call it...territory and possession... the two biggies.

He who dominates those usually wins.

[elo]

If he could buy a ****ing penalty maybe we'd get more chances to put in attacking kicks close to the line.

Like I said the last time this topic was brought up a few weeks ago, we have the highest % chance of turning possession inside the opposition 20 into a try.....that's a far more dangerous stat than repeat sets.

[stsae]

We won a comp by kicking it dead in 2002. For me, Its about D. D that scares the shit out of the opposition to the point they dont want to come out again and face another 40 of that. Were not 2002 but were getting close. I recall we deliberately turned ball over on the last or even 4th....in 2002. Fittler kicked long and dead on purpose. We hammered teams in their own 20, theyd cough up wed score.

When your best attacking weapon is your D, you dont need repeat sets.

For most a good short kicking game and repeat sets is mandatory. For someone with superior D, and a cracking attack in open play, not so much.

We are the exception that can get away with it.

lol

Melon - even stupider than 6

your gibberish suggests that we'd rather the opposition have the ball than have it ourselves, just so we can use our great "D" to make them lose the ball, so we can get it and score. That's moronic thinking. A much better option would be to have the ball ourselves in the first place, by forcing goal line dropouts.

Any area that the Roosters could improve in, we have delusional posters (like you Melon), who'll convince themselves that whatever that area is, it's not important.

Go back to the other site and sit there by yourself please

actually, take 6 with you

Explain why what Melon says, especially the bolded section, can't be or isn't true.

You dick.

What is more important, scoring tries or getting repeat sets???

I know what I'd rather a side concentrate on.

[stsae]

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

Imghey

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I dont

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I cant

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

I want

A repeat set.

You do? But why? :/

Cos Brian told me, Brian told me, Brian told me so, I know everything I need to know, cos Brian told me so.

I want a repeat set.

[melon....]

lol

Melon - even stupider than 6

your gibberish suggests that we'd rather the opposition have the ball than have it ourselves, just so we can use our great "D" to make them lose the ball, so we can get it and score. That's moronic thinking. A much better option would be to have the ball ourselves in the first place, by forcing goal line dropouts.

Any area that the Roosters could improve in, we have delusional posters (like you Melon), who'll convince themselves that whatever that area is, it's not important.

Go back to the other site and sit there by yourself please

actually, take 6 with you

We are second and baring down on your team. Dont take it from me....look at the scoreboard and the table. We are there without a focus on repeat sets because we apply pressure through our Defense. When you realise that even with refs caning us so your Souffs can get a leg up, we are still holding teams out when they have ALL the ball, you realise we are the exception. When Manly had 8 sets on our line they applied the blow torch. But our Defense was better. You beat the repeat sets phenominum with better D. Easts are teh few that can do this.

Your team Souffs doesnt have this D. Thats why I maintain they will not win the comp, no matter how hard the Pink Shirts try to get them over the line.

[melon....]

lol

Melon - even stupider than 6

your gibberish suggests that we'd rather the opposition have the ball than have it ourselves, just so we can use our great "D" to make them lose the ball, so we can get it and score. That's moronic thinking. A much better option would be to have the ball ourselves in the first place, by forcing goal line dropouts.

Any area that the Roosters could improve in, we have delusional posters (like you Melon), who'll convince themselves that whatever that area is, it's not important.

Go back to the other site and sit there by yourself please

actually, take 6 with you

Oh and another thing dickface, your Souffs depend heavily on repeat sets. Good luck getting through.

[Danish]

Anyone who dismisses the value of repeat sets is kidding themselves.

YES St George rank first in repeat sets, but their attack is absolutely DISMAL. So using the example of one club to dismiss the importance of repeat sets is confounding. You cannot simply use a sample size of one club to draw a correlation like that

However, the fact that the bunnies and the storm rank in the top 4 in repeat sets should be enough encouragement that we should look more towards them

The problem is earning repeat sets requires a deft touch with the boot. Pearce simply does not, and will not ever, possess this.

Its not like he doesn't try to earn them now. He tries most games.... problem is when he tries, it results in the ball slamming into the advertising and a cheap handover as he cannot grubber kick for shit.

I'd much rather we use every tackle we get inside the opposition 20 trying to build to a try in THAT set than hoping to force Pearce into doing something he has proven over his 6 years in first grade that he cannot do.

Where we might have some more success if by teaching Friend how to do it. He has been able to put in the odd decent grubber here and there, and rolling one into the ingoal from dummy half is quite simple (at least when Smith and farah do it!). If we could teach Friend to identify when a set is not building the way we'd like and to roll it in, we'd have a decent shot at repeat sets.

Expecting to earn them off Pearce's boot however is a fool's errand

[Guest]

Explain why what Melon says, especially the bolded section, can't be or isn't true.

You dick.

What is more important, scoring tries or getting repeat sets???

I know what I'd rather a side concentrate on.

well for starters, the fact that you agree with it



but really backwards, if you honestly think that just because we're going well without being able to build pressure via repeat sets, and that in some way means that repeat sets aren't important, and if your justification for that is as oversimplified as "I'd rather score tries than force repeat sets" then you are kidding yourself mate

[Guest]

We are second and baring down on your team. Dont take it from me....look at the scoreboard and the table. We are there without a focus on repeat sets because we apply pressure through our Defense. When you realise that even with refs caning us so your Souffs can get a leg up, we are still holding teams out when they have ALL the ball, you realise we are the exception. When Manly had 8 sets on our line they applied the blow torch. But our Defense was better. You beat the repeat sets phenominum with better D. Easts are teh few that can do this.

Your team Souffs doesnt have this D. Thats why I maintain they will not win the comp, no matter how hard the Pink Shirts try to get them over the line.

yawn

the standard moron melon defence

"You're a souths supporter and the refs are against us!!"

[stsae]

well for starters, the fact that you agree with it



but really backwards, if you honestly think that just because we're going well without being able to build pressure via repeat sets, and that in some way means that repeat sets aren't important, and if your justification for that is as oversimplified as "I'd rather score tries than force repeat sets" then you are kidding yourself mate

As I've said previously I see the value especially against the better sides of building pressure by using the repeat set.

But it's working for us scoring more often than not when we get in the oppositions 20.

And the fact is the repeat set is 2nd on the scale, 1st being a try of course.

And we have improved in the area and continue to.

And when we played TheBros recently and lost we forced at least 5 drop outs, most I can remember in years, and lost. We actually looked like we were frustrated and couldn't score.

I reckon there is a lot of merit in what Melon said. It works for Souffs and Melba, they play that style, build pressure, boring style but effective.

We do it a little differently, and it seems to be working.

Repeat sets is a cliche. It's a good gameplan sure but maybe it doesn't suit our style.

I'm happy to score over getting a repeat set.

Square peg round hole.

[Guest]

The problem is earning repeat sets requires a deft touch with the boot. Pearce simply does not, and will not ever, possess this.

Its not like he doesn't try to earn them now. He tries most games.... problem is when he tries, it results in the ball slamming into the advertising and a cheap handover as he cannot grubber kick for shit.

I'd much rather we use every tackle we get inside the opposition 20 trying to build to a try in THAT set than hoping to force Pearce into doing something he has proven over his 6 years in first grade that he cannot do.

Where we might have some more success if by teaching Friend how to do it. He has been able to put in the odd decent grubber here and there, and rolling one into the ingoal from dummy half is quite simple (at least when Smith and farah do it!). If we could teach Friend to identify when a set is not building the way we'd like and to roll it in, we'd have a decent shot at repeat sets.

Expecting to earn them off Pearce's boot however is a fool's errand

I'd prefer we ran it on the last more often than we do. We have lethal strike weapons across the park in Jennings, SBW and RTS, with a 2nd tier or brilliant line runners in Maubs and Cordner. Toss in some hard hitting forwards like JWH, FPN, and Guerra and honestly we would be a great chance of going over if we chanced our arm more.

The additional benefit of such a strategy as well means even if we get stopped we'll simply be giving the ball over 1 or 2 metres out from the try line, instead of more often than not gifting them an easy 20m. Even if we wind up bundled into touch we still save 10m.

So, which is it? Running on the last, or forcing repeat sets? Or does Pearce just cop it both ways?

Also, while I agree Pearce could work on forcing repeat sets, the idea that he cannons grubbers into the advertising bilboards is just plain false - firstly, as has been well established, he rarely kicks grubbers, and secondly, when he does, they generally pull up short of the line or are stopped short of the line (resulting in the opposition starting their set 1-2m out, an outcome you said you were content with). I'm not saying this is a good thing, but suggesting he overkicks all of his grubbers is just wrong.