@Crucial said in QF Brumbies vs Hurricanes:
@NZbloke said in QF Brumbies vs Hurricanes:
@Crucial said in QF Brumbies vs Hurricanes:
@NZbloke said in QF Brumbies vs Hurricanes:
@Crucial said in QF Brumbies vs Hurricanes:
@NZbloke said in QF Brumbies vs Hurricanes:
@Crucial said in QF Brumbies vs Hurricanes:
@NZbloke said in QF Brumbies vs Hurricanes:
@Crucial said in QF Brumbies vs Hurricanes:
@NZbloke said in QF Brumbies vs Hurricanes:
Didn't say it was all about a long punt, of course it has to be accurate, but if you can get good distance it's clearly better for your team if your 10 can exit really well... what I see too much of which is bloody pointless is when a player punts it long 60 odd metres downfield & it just goes over the side line, it allows the other side to have a quick throw, takes all your advantage away, better to sacrifice a few meters & kick the ball well out so they can't attack from broken play.
Stating the bleeding obvious (again). Still not listing those 10s with huge punts I notice (there a difference between adequate and big - your missus can probably let you know about that one).
@NZbloke said in QF Brumbies vs Hurricanes:
I know how to kick a ball mate, use to play plenty of rugby & soccer/football... you're overcomplicating things, as long as you have a comfortable well balanced stance & come around the ball in a smooth arc the rest takes care of it's self.
Teams must be wasting a lot of money on skills coaches and kicking specialists then if it is all that easy. The golf analogy was to point out that minor adjustments can make big differences. The golfers here will attest to that and even top pros get coaches in for adjustments even though they already have a well balanced stance and smooth swing.
Then you have to take into account various ball positioning options, tee heights and types, striking targets etc etc.
So why is it that some players with good stances and smooth swings struggle from 40m plus even though they can reach the distance? All those little things affect the travel of the ball. Some have a good natural technique, some need tweaking.
Doesn't need to be huge punts, not asking them to kick massive distances like Don Clarke did, just a very good distance to exit well... reckon whenever a team is inside their own 22 the best option is for the 1st-five to kick the ball out about the halfway mark, that way you can set your defence through a lineout.
At this level players shouldn't need skill coaches, they should be able to execute all the basic skill sets well in their position, if a player is struggling a bit with their technique in an area of their position they only have to make small adjustments to get it right.
That’s hilarious. So we should only select finished products? You do realize that it is skill coaches that provide those minor adjustments through analysis? Our kicking has certainly gone downhill since Mick Byrne departed
The only way to become good at executing any skill is to practice it a ton of times at training, until it becomes second nature... BB is a top athlete & has very good hand-eye coordination, his timing issues in kicking a ball shouldn't be so bloody poor at times though.
…..and back to square one. You can practice a flaw over and over and you will still have a flaw
Mate, if they can't do the basics well at this level they shouldn't be playing the game, you do realize you can only become better at anything by practicing it heaps, that includes any ones job as well.
Naturally when player is practicing a skill they are always looking to improve... so of course they would be focusing on the right way to do it, be idiotic to keep repeating the same mistakes.
But we aren't talking basics we are talking about getting better. Of course you need to practice improvements but you seem to think that you can practice away the small technique flaws that will make incremental improvements.
Sport isn't rocket science though... players should have the good sense to analsye themselves through video footage etc to work out what they're doing wrong, then make that small adjustment to execute that skill well.
Tell that to the world's best golfers, runners, skiers, tennis players etc etc all use specialist coaches to find improvements and correct faults. I think you may be well out of touch with the modern professional sporting world.
Sports people are often too busy on all the other aspects of performance to coach themselves even if they were bio-mechanical and technique experts.
Disagree, yeah things have changed a fair bit in the professional era... but the same principal still applies, the players are the ones that are out there playing no matter what the sport is, not their coaches... it's up to them to put the real hard yakka in to get their technique right to execute well, sure you can get good ideas from coaches & other players too, then use the best parts from them that suit you.
All the top sportsmen should be always looking to improve, which makes them focus in keeping up their high standards.
I'm really not sure what you are trying to say.
Seems to be that hard yakka alone will improve technique (which is incorrect)
I've had enough of banging my head against this wall.
Of course it's more than just about hard yakka, it's obviously a combo of things... if a player has a poor habit or technique the problem has to be identified first, then the player has to have the mindset to want to change to a technique that works for a certain skill.
Coaches can also stuff up a players natural game, which is why you want to get info from other players too & use the best parts for yourself - you were talking about other sports, one of the most unusual techniques I've seen in sport would be Andrew Jones in cricket hitting 4's while both his feet were off the ground, you wouldn't recommend it, but it worked great for him... the first time Jones went to Aussie their media were taking the piss out of him in the buildup matches, but he had the last laugh scoring a hundred in the 1st test.
Yeah, this debate is just going around in circles, no point debating it anymore.
