Quote ="Him"It depends what type of attack you've gone for. It also depends on other factors such as the players at your disposal, your teams momentum and where you start and how you end your sets. Attack isn't just something you can practice in isolation and you'll suddenly start scoring tries. It's dependent on a lot of the other parts of your game working.
As for Leeds, they've gone for an attacking approach of trying to isolate specific defenders and beat them either with short passes or footwork. Wigan have gone for a far more structured 3rd man approach on virtually every single play. It's a play that is effective but can be neutralised when defences adapt, as they did to the Saints version of it a few years back. It's also a play that worked better when combined with a player like Tomkins on the end of it to add some unpredictability.
Our attack, in my opinion, suffers not from a lack of attacking players or practice but from our forwards inability to wear down a defence and to provide sufficient support runs.'"
Fair points - the second man play with decoy runners does seem to open up most defences - still works today yet its a move that has been used for years.
If you look at teams like Melbourne who perfected the in and out play with Smith, Cronk and Slater these moves work if they can be executed with precision. A great attacking play is almost undefendable if properly executed.
The problem with Leeds is they don't have the skill level nor the speed to execute these plays - hence why they struggle to score inside the opponents 20. They depend on attacking from deep and individual one on one wins, this is easily nullified as we have seen in recent years.
