Tactic number 1 - push the ball away from Tom Briscoes side by pushing that defensive line higher, everyone knows Hull play the ball through the middle, if i were dummy half, looked left and saw KR higher than they were on the right, i'd pass it right (and away from Tom Briscoe).

You have Willie Manu, Kirk Yeamen and Tom B on 1 wing - thats an imposing 3, so push the ball the other way. We havent got a Darren Lockyer type to kick a shallow ball over an advancing line into wingspace - so no problems stepping high.

Wow. Impressive. It seems as though none of the other SL coaches share your tactical genius seeing as we attack down our left hand side more than we do our right. Perhaps you should give them a ring and let them in on your secret?

Remind me how Berrigan's try was set up last night?

Can you explain how the defensive line can be higher up the field on our left, when the dummy half gets the ball, without being offside?

Just remind me how we scored our final try last night again please.

Thats a tactic i'd adopt - but then again im not a Super League coach - so mocking me is pretty pathetic.

I think i clearly stated 'whatever tactic Morgan would employ'. That goes for any other SL coach.
But if Hull attack down their left more than they do the right.......isnt that just making it easy for other coaches to read Hull's tactics - hence my initial point of having a 2nd top-class winger, to split the attention of the defence.

Or is that clever logic simply too much to absorb you simpleton?

You can crucify me as much as you want - but im not a SL coach, i dont claim to have anywhere near the tactical capacity - but i do know basic logic that if the oppo have a top player, you utilise a tactic to snuff out that threat.

Thats just simple stuff, which im sure isnt ignored at any level.

Shhh its a secret so dont tell everyone but......pretty much every team attacks more down their left than the right.

and......your point is?

Clearly.



If you're going to leave yourself so hopelessly exposed...



But just saying 'whatever tactic they would employ' without suggesting a workable tactic just makes you look faintly ridiculous.




It's called playing to your strengths. If you have three potent attacking players on the left, of course you are going to use them more. Also, most players pass more naturally from right to left, which improves crispness and accuracy.

Add to that the fact that most teams play a sliding defence. This means that the defence will drift across to whichever wing the ball is moving towards - it won't be any more 'stretched' at all.



No. It's just bol[il[/io[ic[/iks.

Do I really have to explain?

If you did explain, I suspect you'd be wasting your time anyway.

OK - so its .
Im prepared to take that on the chin.

So now youve slated my idea...........and appear to be some sort of Yoda-esque tactician..............what tactics would you use to neatralise Tom Briscoe.......come one......enlighten me!

Im waiting

But the particular tactic being used is crucial to your claim that having 2 top class wingers will mean we will throw the ball about a lot more. If your going to claim that those tactics support your theory then you really need to specify what those tactics are.

as someone stated before - its called playing to your strengths - if youev 2 top class wingers, you'll get the ball to them more. Am i not right?

Im prepared to admit that maybe its not a tactic people would advocate. Thats fine by me. Im no master tactician - but as im being slated by yourself - i can only assume you know better..........so educate me.
What tactic would you use to neatralise a threat like Tom Briscoe.

This is the 2nd time ive asked - dont tell me im wrong - if you dont know whats right!
Cos thats hypocrtitical.

Er, you were the one who suggested that tactics could be employed to neutralise Briscoe's attacking threat. It's not incumbent upon anyone else to say what those tactics might be.

I think I would prioritise stopping Houghton running riot around the ruck first. The fact we dont tend to get the ball wide on a regular basis means that any gameplan would have other priorities. If you really want to concentrate on stopping the winger getting the ball you need to cut off the supply and move up quickly but then this leaves you exposed in other ways.

Well shirked young man - the spotlight was glaring in the eyes and you had a chance to shine - but bitched out. Bravo!

I agree - but did i not suggest moving up quickly.
How would you cut off the supply?

What the hell are you talking about? Show me where I have suggested that coaches should neutralise Briscoe and I'll happily suggest some tactics.

[iYou[/i said that such tactics could be employed, it's up to [iyou[/i to say how.

You need to have the players capable of getting the ball to them in the first place.

Lets get this straight, YOU stated its basic strategy to stop Briscoe which is why we dont get the ball outwide. The whole basis of your theory is that its easy to stop the ball getting to Briscoe so we dont bother. Its therefore upto you to back this up, I'm not going to try and help prove your point for you.

I didnt suggest its easy to stop the ball getting to Brsicoe - all i said was it would a be a major area of focus by oppo coaches to snuff out the biggest threat.

The flip side being - if i was Agar - and i knew oppo coaches wanted to keep the ball away from Brsicoe - id be an idiot if i did employed a tactic fully in the knowledge it was going to be snuffed out. You try and work your way around the oppo plans.

I said i didnt know what tactic they'd employ, i offered one myself, and between the two of you, you have suggested its horsesh*t - im man enough to take that on the chin.

If i havent proved it - then so be it. Im not gonna lose any sleep over it, or let my blood boil. Its a discussion, sometimes youre right, sometimes your wrong.

In theory yes.

In reality not necessarily.

We've had top class wingers before who've hardly ever had a decent pass.

It depends upon the make up of the rest of the team, which style of play suits it best and most importantly having centres who can give good ball to your wingers.

You'd be a fool to use one of your main attacking weapons because you know the opposition coach would be trying to defend against it? Really?

That must be why Lesley Vainakolo never scored any trys....oh wait.

Just so we are all clear.

Your theory is that the reason we dont get the ball wide is that other teams have recognised our big threat comes down the wings (s) so have set up a gameplan to stop that happening. This in turn has been noticed by Agar so he in turn has come up with a gameplan of simply not bothering trying to get it wide. Your answer to this problem is to bring in another top class winger to replace the England International winger we have on the right so that we have a dual threat and will therefore allow Agar to go back to the free-flowing rugby he is famous for and get the ball wide as often as poosible.

Is that right?