Surely quick play the balls encourage scooting to gain metres. Slower PTBs encourage better skills in breaking down defences.

I feel that it's a chicken and egg situation - the inventive attacking play is a direct result of a relatively 'slow' game with a lot of bodies in the ruck... you need to be inventive to break down a set defence

Saints have been by some distance the best attacking side in the country for the last decade but that has been based primarily on a fast play the ball and the go forward of Cunningham, Roby et al - just look at Graham, a cracking prop with a big engine but he is playing for a fast play the ball 90% of the time rather than a line break

Hey, I'm not criticising - I think its great that we can have sides playing each other with different tactics and game plans, it makes for a far more entertaining sport

Holding down and niggling is how Leeds and Saints have dominated other teams in the past, its how teams win in Super League and the NRL.

The difference is Saints and Leeds in the past are the only ones to get the timing right (and of course Bradford and Wigan in their day), now it seems Huddersfield have just about got the timing right to avoid the refs whistle.

On the back of that they add a massive work ethic and no small ammount of flair in attack.

That's not true. It was their speed and numbers in defence that made them very difficult to beat, this restricted Saints' play for most of the match. However this didn't make them impossible to beat, the numbers they were committing made them vulnerable out wide. I'm pretty sure it was Long who pointed this out when interviewed during the match saying that Saints needed more depth to get round the Huddersfield defence.

That's only in the last couple of seasons, we used to have pacey, skilful backs who could unlock any defence whether it was set or not. Some of the moves we put together in the Millward era were simply breathtaking. We also sometimes got 70 put on us.

Point taken - maybe should have said last 3 - 4 years

Hudds defended really well. Saints definitely missed Long, as they had few inventive ideas yesterday - Hudss did produce the best attacking moves, too.

That is absolute nonsense. When have Saints ever held down and slowed things down as a tactic? We conceded the least amount of penalties last season I'm sure and if anything at time we were too disciplined under Anderson.

As one of the commentators said in the middle of the game hudds defence was what shut saints down. They quickly got up in the middle of the field limiting Eastmond's options so they did not make much ground. On the occasion that hudds were lazy and gave Eastmond time to pick an option saints were able to get the ball to the wings and they were able to make alot of ground and some resulting in tries.

Judging by the way they've been caned in the penalty counts this season, I would suggest Leeds are no longer "getting it right" under McLennan.

Wasn't the need for a slower play the ball something people were clammering for after the World Cup debacle, where the interpretation of the Aussie refs was hammered by some on here?

Not giving people the opportunity to "pinch" cheap yards from dummy half and encouraging more structured attacking plays was part of the argument.

Leeds have used these tactics for donkeys.
Theres a defensive video on that famous site of them against the storm and most of the things highlighted Hudds have been criticised for this year.

You win NRL titles by holding down and niggling?

You win SL titles doing that?

WTF!


There is no doubt that the last couple of years the most effective teams in the NRL have been able to shut down the ball carrier with effecting tackling and usuing numbers in the tackle, thats a LOOOOONG want from "holding down and niggling"!


As for Super League, since when has effective defense been used at all? This is a competition where the word "Scoot" is a term used to describe a teams entire attacking structure!

Where players like Ali Lauitiiti, Keiron Cunningham, Rob Burrow, and the like punch holes through the line and yet their defensive problems never get tested because in SL defense is an after thought!




Now what you are getting in SL is just a short sighted dumb reaction by the RFL.

They thought they saw something in the NRL. They don't quite know what it was, but it had something to do with the play the ball area.

So now they let players lie in the ruck, hold players on the ground, and then allow the messy Super League play the ball to continue.

That is not an NRL thing. That is just a sign of how out of touch and poor English coaches and officials are at reading the modern day game, at interpreting cause and effect and applying it in the UK game.



Any time a governing body messes with the laws of the game, you have a problem. The game should change organically.

What works one year should be counteracted the next by an opponent and become a weakness. Thats how it works over here in the NRL. Someone comes up with an idea, they perfect it, everyone else tries it, changes it, makes it even better.

Then along comes a new idea to break down the previous idea.....the game in essence grows by its own means.

When the governing body steps in and interferes with this process, you get problems.


I've said for a very long time now, the first SL club that gets a really top class coach, that has players that honestly buy into his ways, his tactics and his methods, they will dominate in a way that will blow the socks off any Leeds or St Helens or Bradford fan.

If you took cutting edge tactics, top class coaching and applied it to one SL club, the rest would simply have to follow or they would fall so far behind it would be embarrassing.


Nathan Brown is a failed NRL coach. Had all the talent you could want at his disposal, had the money, had a huge junior base and was totally out of his depth. He got replaced and hell, his old club has looked like world beaters ever since.

Yet Brown has gone to SL and looks like some guru, as if he has come out of no where with these amazing ideas that no one has ever tried to put into practice

Hell, he's made Huddersfield look good!

This is a guy who was never accused of being a tactical genius, who was never accused of getting the best out of individuals or the team in general. A guy not known for getting the basics right, let alone the things that great coaches break down in their heads ever single day.

And look at the bloke, he is so far ahead of any coach in Super League its completely unfair.

why should referrees stop teams that legally slow down the PTB.

thats just stupid.

legally slowing down the PTB is a very important part of RL.

well to those that actually understand the game that is ....

exactly.

ah you are a saints fan are you?

great win by the giants. saints losing was great for RL.

That was actually a very good and fair assessment freaky.
I agree completely although tbf Brown has been replaced by Wayne Bennet and there were a couple of other factors.
I wasn't keen after the world cup but having seen what T Smith's done with Warrington, i'd say he's as good a coach as Brown among others, there are a few good coaches.

First off my congratulations to the Giants they have progressed into a team instead of individuals as a KR fan I can testify to their strength this year they are really the only side to take the Robins apart this year. While credit must go to Nathan Brown he has built on what John sharp had started. I still think they can go on & win both Super League & challenge cup & if they dont they will have made another team play very well to beat them.

Nathan Brown never got past the problem of being mates with half his team at St George.

SL's obsession with quick PTBs was definitely a problem. As was the very different interpretation of obstruction in SL compared to the NRL. But in the end the most basic problem is far lower quality of players.

No it wasnt, it was his usual complete, bull£$% gibberish trolling with little or no fact in it what soever.

In the past Huddersfield have employed coaches with a massive, massive pedigree and they have failed utterly to get the team even looking like a team

Brown may not have the best record in the NRL, so what, he (and Tony Smith) went through the most rigerous interview process ever used by RL clubs (some very successeful NRL coaches refused to take part) with the single intention of finding a coach with the right attitude, aptidude and ability to take Huddersfield forward.

Tony Smith has since gone on to be one of the best coaches in SL, and Brown is following in his footsteps.

That says to me not so much that the NRL is so much better, but that the right person for the right job is absolutely critical, more than any past record.

John Sharp built on the team and ethos created by Tony Smith and Brown has taken that further, just like all coaches at all clubs (TS would have stayed with th giants if Davy could have given him the budget he wanted)

Huddersfield's defense is all about their line speed, not really their dominance of the ruck.

And they have plenty of attacking flair. On Sunday they scored a try kicking on 1st tackle and by dummying and running on the last tackle. hardly indicative of a boring rigid team?

Agree entirely, they remind me of the 06 Saints when a big pack meant the team never lost the energy battle and could defend with huge intensity.

When we played them at Headingley our fans where whining that they were constantly offside. They weren't. They were just up and in our faces very, very quickly.

There are ways for an attack to combat that and Sean Long highlighted that when questioned from the stands.

There is an awful lot of artificial slowing of the play the ball this year, it's not even good technique.
No I dont want the 'saints scoot' back but teams could do with learning to tackle efficiently.
The amount of flops this year is absolutely ridiculous

I dont think its any worse than usual personally