View Full Version : What needs to change for round 2?
Ok, lets turn the question around. Although it's enjoyable in a perverse self-torturing kind of way, moving beyond analysising round 1's result, what needs to change for round 2? This encompasses everything, from players selected to play, to positions they line up in, to the entire gameplan.
For me - in order of importance, two stand out the most.
1) The gameplan - most specifically the handball/short kicking from defense through to half-forward. It continues to give the opposition time to get back in numbers, then when one of the ten short options, inevitably turns it over, we lack numbers behind the ball and see fast and direct movement from the other side. No one's advocating a 'just bomb it long' gameplan, but we MUST be quicker to dispose of it, and not be afraid to kick it quickly to a 1 on 1 if no short option is available, instead of holding it for 15 seconds waiting for one.
2) Selections - Thomson out for Symes. I'll bore people ********less by seasons end, but I fail to see how having Junior B. in defense trying to recover from our lack of a midfield, is better then having him in the midfield helping fix the cause, not the effect, of most of our woes. Symes coming in, to play down back, gives us the chance to push Shaun further up the ground.
Cannot believe we reverted to that chippy chippy thing after we played so well the first half of the first quarter.
How about Symes in for Wanganeen, and keep Thomson. Thomson did some good things, but I'm not sure he played much as the game wore on. He just needs more game time. Wanganeen doesn't need to play regularly anymore, we can keep him ready to go in emergencies.
Ok, lets turn the question around. Although it's enjoyable in a perverse self-torturing kind of way, moving beyond analysising round 1's result, what needs to change for round 2? This encompasses everything, from players selected to play, to positions they line up in, to the entire gameplan.
For me - in order of importance, two stand out the most.
1) The gameplan - most specifically the handball/short kicking from defense through to half-forward. It continues to give the opposition time to get back in numbers, then when one of the ten short options, inevitably turns it over, we lack numbers behind the ball and see fast and direct movement from the other side. No one's advocating a 'just bomb it long' gameplan, but we MUST be quicker to dispose of it, and not be afraid to kick it quickly to a 1 on 1 if no short option is available, instead of holding it for 15 seconds waiting for one.
2) Selections - Thomson out for Symes. I'll bore people ********less by seasons end, but I fail to see how having Junior B. in defense trying to recover from our lack of a midfield, is better then having him in the midfield helping fix the cause, not the effect, of most of our woes. Symes coming in, to play down back, gives us the chance to push Shaun further up the ground.
1) The game plan was fine for most of the first quarter when the players are switched on, fit and confident and don't make errors. Things obviously changed when the opposition make changes to counter what we were doing. We just weren't up to countering the flooding and one or one stuff - errors were the main problem and a lot of them came from the experienced players.
2) Lonie and Symes must be considered - I believe they played well today. If Tredders is available we must give serious consideration to playing him at CHB - otherwise it will stuff up White's development. Chaplin is likely to be out anyway.
1) The game plan was fine for most of the first quarter when the players are switched on, fit and confident and don't make errors. Things obviously changed when the opposition make changes to counter what we were doing. We just weren't up to countering the flooding and one or one stuff - errors were the main problem and a lot of them came from the experienced players.
Unfortunately that's where we'll have to agree to disagree - I think the problem is the gameplan itself. No gameplan is perfect, but this one seems to be MUCH easier to 'break'. So far we've had 5 matches of it. The two sides with good midfields (Crows/Dockers) smashed it. The Roos, once they figured one on one caused problems with it, smashed it. It's only worked against Carlton and the Lions - one the spoon favourite, the other a bottom 8 side this year. And you can bet even they will be tighter checking in the real matches against us. :(
*PAFC*13
1 Apr 2006, 22:42
Thomson was good but his kicking was shocking.
The Burgoyne’s tried to do too much at times.
Motlop's hit on Archer was a ripper in the forward line.
Malibu#27
1 Apr 2006, 22:54
2) Selections - Thomson out for Symes. I'll bore people ********less by seasons end, but I fail to see how having Junior B. in defense trying to recover from our lack of a midfield, is better then having him in the midfield helping fix the cause, not the effect, of most of our woes. Symes coming in, to play down back, gives us the chance to push Shaun further up the ground.
Surely your joking, he played OK for a third game up and can play the packs. Symes in is fine but pick one of the senior guys that didnt perform.
Unfortunately that's where we'll have to agree to disagree - I think the problem is the gameplan itself. No gameplan is perfect, but this one seems to be MUCH easier to 'break'. So far we've had 5 matches of it. The two sides with good midfields (Crows/Dockers) smashed it. The Roos, once they figured one on one caused problems with it, smashed it. It's only worked against Carlton and the Lions - one the spoon favourite, the other a bottom 8 side this year. And you can bet even they will be tighter checking in the real matches against us. :(
OK - game plan or no game plan - we are in transition replacing the hard and grunt players we have lost from the midfield - and that is precisely where, as you rightly pointed out, where we are shut down. The players currently in there are not clean and are subject to errors which makes the game plan fail - as it would with any game plan. The most critical part of all teams these days is clearly the midfield and that is where we have lost the bulk of our players.
Any criticism of the game plan and coach is unfounded (by all of us experts with our years of lounge footy experience) and too easy to do - and is frankly getting boring.
Pinepower
1 Apr 2006, 23:16
We the Port supporters have to realise in the AFL the way the rules are we have to have down years.
I do not like it but the way the AFL runs we cannot be up there all the time.
Plenty would give a heck of a lot for 6 trophies in 9 years, and we have
2 Pre season cups
3 Minor Premiers
1 Premiership
Some would argue that we should have had more premierships but I am off the opinion that if we had won in2002 we would not have any more.
What I want to see is the young ones more game time and go along for the ride and then have another 5 years of giving the opposition hell.
If we make the finals give it a shake but the next generation of players must now play a game.
PJ Power
1 Apr 2006, 23:30
First up, the call to bring Symes in was fair, but not at Thomson's expense.
We are pathetic at clearances. If we keep Thomson warming himself in the SANFL he will be no closer to being a better AFL midfielder by round 22. It is crucial that he as much as any kid improves this year.
I agree with Sandola's observation of Wangas. After tonight, it would not be unreasonable to give Gavin a fortnight to a month of regaining some fitness before he plays for the Power again.
Last year we watched in frustration as Primus and Francou wasted away our season by regaining form and fitness at senior level. Let's not repeat the same mistake. Gav and Dew were not in it tonight - Symes and if people want Lonie could come in for those two to find themselves again. They were uninfluential today.
I really think Shaun Burgoyne must be made into a midfielder as a fulltime thing. More so than Chad after tonight. He and Pearce were the only two players capable of running the ball out of the midfield for us in the last quarter.
Develop Symes in defence to let JB play in the middle.
Give Pearce and Ebert more game time - both looked lively, although Brett has to move the ball on faster when he gets it.
Cut out the crap handball please - especially to players with their backs to our goal who are standing still!
Be decisive and instinctive with ball movement.
Honour the leading player (ie Damon) - he dropped one mark late in the game, but by then you could excuse him, because he would have died of frustration from leading incessantly only to watch his teammates procrastinate before passing the footy off to the boundary line thiry metre away from him.
Most of all, we have to learn to Run, Run, Run!
Not so much with the footy - but when we don't have it.
Run to create space, support teammates, pressure the opposition.
It was non-existent tonight.
There is only one change that needs to be made for Round 2, and it is entirely within the hands of Choco and the rest of the coaching staff to solve, and that is motivation.
At half-time, I heard Russell writing off our poor performance to playing a bunch of young blokes, but that is just bull********. The young blokes stuffed up a bit, and did some good things, and that is what you expect from them...but our senior players had the same pattern of performance, and that is just not on.
Kangaroos senior players are carrying a lot of young blokes in their side, and they do it well. Ours do not, and they have not for quite some time.
Why are our senior players not lifting to help the young blokes in the side? Why do other clubs' senior players do what needs to be done and ours do not? Is it that our personnel are all fundamentally flawed, or that Choco does not expect it of them?
Its embarrassing to look at how big our leadership group is and to see how little leadership is typically offered on the ground.
When a kid like Danyle Pearce can come out and do more inspiring things than any given senior player has, something is wrong.
Ford Fairlane
2 Apr 2006, 00:01
Russell is so hard to fathom sometimes. In 1983, in his first year coaching Port, he was burnt by a number of ageing players whose best was well behind them. From 1984 he pushed young kids thru the system and set the groundwork for Port's 1988-99 dynasty. He seems to have forgotten his own lessons.
PJ Power
2 Apr 2006, 00:15
Have just seen on the AFL website where Damon has dislocated his thumb.
I recall that normally being a month long injury - has anyone else heard any more about it. Came back on late and went hard at least one contest after that.
Would be a setback to his development after showing some consistency in recent weeks.
Eddie Woloschek
2 Apr 2006, 07:24
Any criticism of the game plan and coach is unfounded (by all of us experts with our years of lounge footy experience) and too easy to do - and is frankly getting boring.
Correct. The gameplan is non-existent and the coach is non-existent. Wrong to criticise then.
The really big joke is that Mark Williams honestly thinks he could replace Malthouse at Collingwood and met with Greg Swann last year to enquire about doing so.
The guy is a joke.
Correct. The gameplan is non-existent and the coach is non-existent. Wrong to criticise then.
The really big joke is that Mark Williams honestly thinks he could replace Malthouse at Collingwood and met with Greg Swann last year to enquire about doing so.
The guy is a joke.
You sir, are the joke - from what I have seen of your contributions as a so called supporter.
Ford Fairlane
2 Apr 2006, 10:36
The first thing I would do - and this will sound odd - is bring Deluca in. How many people have said how good Lade looked early? Her looked good until the workload of hauling his ass up and down the F50 then up and down the ruck wore him out. OK, then let's accept Lade is one of our best 2 forward options (assuming no Tredrea). Play him there and leave him there, just like Choco was going to do with Primus last year. I don't know if we'd need another tall at the SCG, but obviously if Tredrea is fit he comes in. Maybe then Lade and Brogan could ruck and swap off the bench. I'd like to see Willits play - but again the SCG doesn't need too many talls. If Chaplin or White don't come up, he'd be in my side.
Seriously analyse the performance of the below top tier players - the top tier deserve some leeway, but be serious about who is really a top tier player. I raised this in another thread - we're not as good as we like to think we are - last year proved that. It's easy to lambast the old gold card order, but how many of them played last night? Have a look a bit deeper. Everyone should be scrutinised.
Pick players based on what we need, not trying to get the best 22 players into the side. This isn't the AA side. And see who the midfielders were who were smashed at the clearances. More work and thought needed there.
Symes (or yes even Lonie) should have played last night, not the plethora of on ballers. Salopek on a HBF is a testament to that.
Get Shaun Burgoyne on the ball and leave him there. A couple of other players could do with being left in one position also ... eg Pettigrew.
As has been pointed out by others, we lack midfielders with hurt factor. We have accumulators. And enough of pinch hitting midfielders. OK Wilson can do it, but it's time to settle down an actual midfield. The one exception to that is Motlop. Run him up on a wing as long as you can, and then send him up forward. Unlike the tall forwards, he doesn't need to move around much if he's forward, just lurk around the goal square.
And does Wangas need to play this game?
As for the comments on coaches. Well, a few of us have said before this does not look or play like Port sides we have grown up with. And it never has under Williams. The Port Magpies under Cahill and now Ginever look much more like that. But that won't change by rd 2 and is a discussion for another place.
Magpiespower
2 Apr 2006, 10:45
Talk about panic stations!
Hate to see the reaction when we go down to the Swans next week.
Russell is so hard to fathom sometimes. In 1983, in his first year coaching Port, he was burnt by a number of ageing players whose best was well behind them.
Also, a horrific injury toll.
Ford Fairlane
2 Apr 2006, 10:47
You sir, are the joke - from what I have seen of your contributions as a so called supporter.
No he's not. He's a long time supporter who I'm sure is as passionate about his club as you are or I am. He doesn't like Williams and in his case he calls a spade a bloody shovel. As he is entitled to do. And I would suspect he is not an orphan in his views.
Ford Fairlane
2 Apr 2006, 10:52
Talk about panic stations!
Hate to see the reaction when we go down to the Swans next week.
Depends how we go down. I've had this one marked in the 'L' column for a while ... altho Sydney apparently struggled last night. I doubt they'll get a dud umpiring performance in Sydney tho.
Not so much panic stations as discussion about what went wrong and how to make it better. It's cathartic.
Also, a horrific injury toll.
Like Williams, that pretty much haunted him thru his coaching career. Not necessarily horrific always, but key players at critical times. I still remember watching training at the end of 85 season where we finished equal 9th and David Hynes tearing a hamstring and being stretchered off ... at training FFS!
SpringChoke
2 Apr 2006, 11:07
You sir, are the joke - from what I have seen of your contributions as a so called supporter.
It was Matty Primus last year, it looks like its Choccos turn this year. Unfortunately for Port suppoerters, wishing a career ending knee injury on one of your own want solve the problem this time.
BTW If you want to borrow a midfielder, yell out, we have plenty. Skipworth is wasting away in the SANFL.
It was Matty Primus last year, it looks like its Choccos turn this year. Unfortunately for Port suppoerters, wishing a career ending knee injury on one of your own want solve the problem this time.
...
Apart from what essentially was a joke gone wrong, or a bad joke in the first place depending on ones views and as you know we all do those at times Springy, there was no question Primus was being played when he shouldn't have been last year. Same goes for quite a few more.
If a player doesn't deserve a game, he doesn't deserve a game if that makes sense.
... BTW If you want to borrow a midfielder, yell out, we have plenty. Skipworth is wasting away in the SANFL.
No thanks, apart from your ageing top tier you also have no-one atm. Remove the top tier and as Ayres found out you'll end up at the back of the class again.
johnnypanther
2 Apr 2006, 11:22
just a few brief opinions as an outsider (who enjoyed watching you lose last night):
- the final result flattered the Kangaroos and Port could still have won the game in the last 15 minutes
- Symes would have been in my side with S Burgoyne playing midfield/forward
- Thomson would stay as he's an inside m/f
- it would be a real shame for Wangas to finish his career similar to the way Smart did with us
- i thought Chad Cornes showed a real lack of leadership and should have been dragged for the example he set to the younger blokes
- given the number of running players in your side, I cannot understand the stop-start nature of the way Port bring the ball out from defence - it just allows the opposition to organise themselves etc
- i thought your "leadership" players particularly let your side down
just a few brief opinions as an outsider (who enjoyed watching you lose last night):
- the final result flattered the Kangaroos and Port could still have won the game in the last 15 minutes
- Symes would have been in my side with S Burgoyne playing midfield/forward
- Thomson would stay as he's an inside m/f
- it would be a real shame for Wangas to finish his career similar to the way Smart did with us
- i thought Chad Cornes showed a real lack of leadership and should have been dragged for the example he set to the younger blokes
- given the number of running players in your side, I cannot understand the stop-start nature of the way Port bring the ball out from defence - it just allows the opposition to organise themselves etc
- i thought your "leadership" players particularly let your side down
Good observations. :thumbsu:
One minor point re Chad Cornes. He has had a limited pre season and played accordingly.
No he's not. He's a long time supporter who I'm sure is as passionate about his club as you are or I am. He doesn't like Williams and in his case he calls a spade a bloody shovel. As he is entitled to do. And I would suspect he is not an orphan in his views.
Passion is one thing, but uninformed, biased comments and personal dislikes do not contribute to any meaningful analysis or discussion.
PJ Power
2 Apr 2006, 11:32
Good post Johnny Panther - agree with everything you said.
Chad's effort was poor especially considering his leadership post - however, the comments about the preseason preparation are valid. On those grounds he should be better next week, as a number of his better performed teammates only had 2-3 matches leading up to last night's game as well (Wakelin, Walsh, Wilson).
Passion is one thing, but uninformed, biased comments and personal dislikes do not contribute to any meaningful analysis or discussion.
Whilst I too think that his comments are a bit ... shall we say ... premature, he has every right to express them on here without being called a bad supporter.
He isn't and his comments are more than welcome regardless of agreeing or disagreeing with them.
SpringChoke
2 Apr 2006, 11:41
Apart from what essentially was a joke gone wrong, or a bad joke in the first place depending on ones views and as you know we all do those at times Springy, there was no question Primus was being played when he shouldn't have been last year. Same goes for quite a few more.
If a player doesn't deserve a game, he doesn't deserve a game if that makes sense.
True PAF.
No thanks, apart from your ageing top tier you also have no-one atm. Remove the top tier and as Ayres found out you'll end up at the back of the class again.
I see Port and the Crows in the same position. We both have 2-3 years to have another crack at a premiership. However, at the moment we are in a much better position then you are. In 2008 Tredders will be 29, Lade 32, Cornes 28 and P Burgoyne 31. Wanganeen, Wilson, Bishop, Wakelin, Francou and Kinglsey will all be in retirement. You better get a move on in rebuilding your midfiled becuase, despite what many poeple think, your time is also running out.
BTW It's only round 1 bit early for all the doom and gloom I would have thought.
Whilst I too think that his comments are a bit ... shall we say ... premature, he has every right to express them on here without being called a bad supporter.
He isn't and his comments are more than welcome regardless of agreeing or disagreeing with them.
This is the wrong thread to discuss this point, but what is being said by some is exactly what 'bad supporter' is.
A lot of PAFC people say that we have good loyal supporters who are different to most others and support in the true meaning according to the dictionary. Perhaps that perception is wrong and really a lot of our supporters can't handle losing and expect what has happened in the past in the good ol' SANFL days.
Some of the things being said do not support the club and that attitude really disappoints me - it makes us look the same as others.
I see Port and the Crows in the same position. We both have 2-3 years to have another crack at a premiership. However, at the moment we are in a much better position then you are. In 2008 Tredders will be 29, Lade 32, Cornes 28 and P Burgoyne 31. Wanganeen, Wilson, Bishop, Wakelin, Francou and Kinglsey will all be in retirement. You better get a move on in rebuilding your midfiled becuase, despite what many poeple think, your time is also running out.
I do not disagree with what you imply about us up there, and have posted a number of times that we have a better chance at winning a premiership this year than in the next couple for similar reasons.
wrt rebuilding midfields we are in much the same boat, the big difference being that you have your top midfielders still there for another year or two at "near their peak" and we only have Peter Burgoyne in that category atm (Francou??? who knows).
wrt next level midfielders we are in front at this stage with Kane, Dom and Shaun edging towards that magical 100 game mark whereas you have no-one. Unfortunately they ended up as our top liners a bit sooner than they should have.
As far as real youngsters go, it is easy to look good when you have champions around you so beware false dawns. Reality is that both your real youngsters and ours have only shown bits here and there with some mostly in the SANFL and are thus still big unknowns.
This is the wrong thread to discuss this point, but what is being said by some is exactly what 'bad supporter' is.
A lot of PAFC people say that we have good loyal supporters who are different to most others and support in the true meaning according to the dictionary. Perhaps that perception is wrong and really a lot of our supporters can't handle losing and expect what has happened in the past in the good ol' SANFL days.
Some of the things being said do not support the club and that attitude really disappoints me - it makes us look the same as others.
Depends on how one views it.
Mediocrity and gold passes being no good sounds fair to me. If that makes me a bad supporter as well then so be it.
Stiffy_18
2 Apr 2006, 12:03
wrt next level midfielders we are in front at this stage with Kane, Dom and Shaun edging towards that magical 100 game mark whereas you have no-one. Unfortunately they ended up as our top liners a bit sooner than they should have.
Firstly lets play Shaun in the midfield before you consider him a midfielder. This argument for Shaun has as much credibility as that of some crows supporters putting Johncock down as a midfielder. Fact is, they hardly play there.
Secondly Kane Cornes is a gun and Dom is not overly flash but a workhorse that does his bit and one of those players that hold more value to the side he plays for than he does for the opposition sides.
Now we have Scott Thompson who is past the 50 game mark and he is our best young midfield prospect and only 23. After that there is a lot of subectivity. Reilly hasn't come on as well as many hoped but if his pre-season from to date is any indication then this will be his break out year. He said himslef the other day on 5AA that he never really played in the midfield until last year and it was all new to him.
After that we are in pretty similar boat wrt young midfielder. You have Thomson, we have Knight. You have Symes we have Van Berlo. You have Ebert we have Porplyzia (unproven at AFL level but a class act in SANFL)
I don't think you are ahead in your development of midfielders at all. Apart from Kane Cornes and to lesser extent Dom, you are pretty much pinning your hopes on players you hope come good.
pafc4life
2 Apr 2006, 12:04
Losing to a team we beat by 15 goals 6 months ago in Melbourne simple isn't reality.
Ins: Tredrea, Symes, Shattock
Outs: Walsh, Bishop, Thomson
No thanks, apart from your ageing top tier you also have no-one atm. Remove the top tier and as Ayres found out you'll end up at the back of the class again.
The difference being Craigy will rotates his older and younger midfielders thereby exposing the younger ones. Its called player management.
The other point is hoepfully we won't lose our prime midfielders to other teams (McLeod, Goodwin, Roo and Edwards will finish their careers ar AFC unlike Stevens, Carr and Schofield).
PS : Craig is not anything like Ayers but you can wish all you like. Surely you jest when you state we have no-one else but the fab four.
Like several posters here, it was mentioned half way through last year.....remove the gold passes and blood the youth at all cost. All we have done is delay game development by some 10 games.
This is not a round 2 changes note, rather a mindset change which I fear will never be enacted.
Realities are;
. we embarassed our champ Wangers last night by playing him just to achieve a milestone in round 1. Effectively bench was down to 23 from the start
. Bish has lost 2 metres of speed (IMO only there due to height) Try Toby.
. Dew is unconditioned, lazy and unaccountable (replacement Eckermann)
. Junior cannot defend. Surjan in to release Junior to be "creative"
. Chad needs to lose the attitude cos he's not all things to football
. Walsh good, Wakes serviceable (not sure if Pettigrew can replace Wakes)
. Symes must come in NOW even at expense of wilbur
. forget francou, kingers, blood ezard (not sure about Lonie)
Lets take the hit and move on....
Depends on how one views it.
Mediocrity and gold passes being no good sounds fair to me. If that makes me a bad supporter as well then so be it.
I respect your views and like you do not accept mediocrity and poor performances. What has to be realised that it is not simple just to drop anyone who plays a bad game. The long term philososphy of the PAFC is to reward long term players and admitedly it takes a long tome to drop them - there are other agendas also going on - demands of the board, match committee, sponsors, marketing - unfortunately the $ speak louder than the crowd and us on BF.
Firstly lets play Shaun in the midfield before you consider him a midfielder. This argument for Shaun has as much credibility as that of some crows supporters putting Johncock down as a midfielder. Fact is, they hardly play there.
...
I do not entirely disagree. IMO we need Shaun running out of backlines more than we do in the midfield at the moment, however when he has been there he has shown much more than Johncock has.
... Secondly Kane Cornes is a gun and Dom is not overly flash but a workhorse that does his bit and one of those players that hold more value to the side he plays for than he does for the opposition sides.
...
That's right, however they are still short of 100 games and unfortunately they have become our top liners one or two years prematurely.
... Now we have Scott Thompson who is past the 50 game mark and he is our best young midfield prospect and only 23. ...
Must admit, my bad. Forgot about him and yeah he too is in that 50-100 game bracket.
... After that there is a lot of subectivity. ...
That was my point, go find your own. :p
... I don't think you are ahead in your development of midfielders at all. Apart from Kane Cornes and to lesser extent Dom, you are pretty much pinning your hopes on players you hope come good.
We have more "proven" players in that 50-100 games bracket than you do.
Not pinning my hopes on anything, just stating some facts about where abouts our midfielders are wrt development, both yours and ours, said nothing about where I think they will end up.
You have 4 top shelf players we have one and with a bit of luck (make that a lot more than a bit) one more in Francou coming through.
50-100 game proven midfielders we have more than you. (3-1 our way or if you really want 2-1 but still our way)
Are now in that bracket to show what they have _Reilly this year, Ebert this year and Salopek this and next year. (2-1 our way again)
Youngsters _ who knows, but like all teams we both have some we hope will come through.
PJ Power
2 Apr 2006, 12:30
You can't compare our midfield with the Crows.
They have a top notch front four, then a decent tagger in Shirley, a good backup midfielder/HFF in Thompson, true wingmen in Mattner and Burton and four young midfielders who have either showed the goods or were rated very highly when drafted (Douglas, Knights, Pfeiffer, Van Berlo). In all likelihood they also get Gibbs next year.
We barely have one player capable of generating a clean clearance.
Cassisi who is probably Thompson's standard overall (with some different attributes) is our third midfielder rather than our fifth - therein lies a big problem. We are James and Carr short of being competitive in that area and we are trying to desperately patch things with Chad and JB who were pivotal for us in defence when we won our flag.
All we can do is accept teething problems for the next two years and work really hard to expose Thomson, Pearce, Ebert, Salopek and soon Eckerman and Ezard to get them up to speed.
SpringChoke
2 Apr 2006, 13:01
wrt rebuilding midfields we are in much the same boat, the big difference being that you have your top midfielders still there for another year or two at "near their peak" and we only have Peter Burgoyne in that category atm (Francou??? who knows).
Agree.
wrt next level midfielders we are in front at this stage with Kane, Dom and Shaun edging towards that magical 100 game mark whereas you have no-one. Unfortunately they ended up as our top liners a bit sooner than they should have.
I would say we on par here. Both teams are extremely thin in the under 28's quality midfielder department. I would say you could just about say like for like with regard to Thompson and K Cornes. S Burgoyne, like Johnock, looks more comfortable as a quality rebounding half back flanker. Cassisi looks a handy second tier but no more. ie Bode, Shirley. Also, Marty Mattners impact across the centre line caanot be underestimated.
As far as real youngsters go, it is easy to look good when you have champions around you so beware false dawns. Reality is that both your real youngsters and ours have only shown bits here and there with some mostly in the SANFL and are thus still big unknowns.
Spot on.
SpringChoke
2 Apr 2006, 13:09
You can't compare our midfield with the Crows.
They have a top notch front four, then a decent tagger in Shirley, a good backup midfielder/HFF in Thompson, true wingmen in Mattner and Burton and four young midfielders who have either showed the goods or were rated very highly when drafted (Douglas, Knights, Pfeiffer, Van Berlo). In all likelihood they also get Gibbs next year.
We barely have one player capable of generating a clean clearance.
Cassisi who is probably Thompson's standard overall (with some different attributes) is our third midfielder rather than our fifth - therein lies a big problem. We are James and Carr short of being competitive in that area and we are trying to desperately patch things with Chad and JB who were pivotal for us in defence when we won our flag.
All we can do is accept teething problems for the next two years and work really hard to expose Thomson, Pearce, Ebert, Salopek and soon Eckerman and Ezard to get them up to speed.
But how many of those can be classed as true in and under midfilders? Probably only Thomson.
Just on Thomson I reckon he is going to be a quality player but i'm surprised how small he looks out on the field. His body is 2-3 years awy from being able to macth it with the physicality of the other in and under players in the comp like Thompson, Ball, Hodge, Mitchell etc.
Symes has to come in. Not for Thomson though. THomson needs to get up to pace at AFL level. This will only happen if he plays at AFL level. At the moment he is about a second too slow giving off his handballs. He needs to learn at AFL level to get a bit quicker.
Id bring Symes in for Dew. Or maybe Pettigrew. Pettigrew did nothing and Symes is a better back flank option. I said during the week that Dew did enough last year to give him self a temporary gold card for the first month of the season. I think he may have used that up all last night. Id drop him only to see if he can kick himself up the arse and get back to playing decent footy again.
Id like to see DeLuca play...and if we are only using one key forward in White then he probably does need to play so Lade can be up forward full time. I dont know if the SCG is the right place for this to happen though.
Lonie picked up 30 disposals yesterday. Should really be given a go.
Id probably go:
IN: Lonie, Symes
OUT: Dew, Pettigrew
Mr Magoo
2 Apr 2006, 19:06
Ok, lets turn the question around. Although it's enjoyable in a perverse self-torturing kind of way, moving beyond analysising round 1's result, what needs to change for round 2? This encompasses everything, from players selected to play, to positions they line up in, to the entire gameplan.
For me - in order of importance, two stand out the most.
1) The gameplan - most specifically the handball/short kicking from defense through to half-forward. It continues to give the opposition time to get back in numbers, then when one of the ten short options, inevitably turns it over, we lack numbers behind the ball and see fast and direct movement from the other side. No one's advocating a 'just bomb it long' gameplan, but we MUST be quicker to dispose of it, and not be afraid to kick it quickly to a 1 on 1 if no short option is available, instead of holding it for 15 seconds waiting for one.
2) Selections - Thomson out for Symes. I'll bore people ********less by seasons end, but I fail to see how having Junior B. in defense trying to recover from our lack of a midfield, is better then having him in the midfield helping fix the cause, not the effect, of most of our woes. Symes coming in, to play down back, gives us the chance to push Shaun further up the ground.
I really respect your views on footy but i'm going to strongly disagree with you on dropping Thomson for Symes especially when there were players who played last night who didn't even raise a yelp. Thomson is definately one of our future midfielders but he just needs to get as many games under his belt as possible this year because at least he'll go in & try to win the hard ball unlike many of the recievers we had playing for us last night. Sure i'm agreeing with you that Symes needs to be played as he has done more than enough in the pre season to earn a spot but not at the expense of Thomson, Ebert or Salopek.
I really don't know how some of the players could look Gav in the eye after the effort they gave last night, sure Gav didn't play very well himself but he's still regaining match fitness.
What needs to be changed is some of the players mentality of being recievers only & not going in & getting the hard ball themselves which was evident last night re the clearances around the ground. Also a much stronger emphasis of playing man on man around the ground which was also evident when the roos midfielders were taking potshots at goals from 40-50 metres out with minimum to very little pressure applied to them.
blackdiamond
2 Apr 2006, 20:06
It was Matty Primus last year, it looks like its Choccos turn this year. Unfortunately for Port suppoerters, wishing a career ending knee injury on one of your own want solve the problem this time.
You are a little bit s l o w when it comes to reading things in the right context.
SpringChoke
2 Apr 2006, 21:32
You are a little bit s l o w when it comes to reading things in the right context.
Sorry BlackD I had to do a double take. I see you're a Mod now. It looks like your Matty Primus comments of last year were quite popular with your fellow posters. Does that make you the pick of the crop on the Port board - hmmmmm says alot.
blackdiamond
2 Apr 2006, 21:55
Sorry BlackD I had to do a double take. I see you're a Mod now. It looks like your Matty Primus comments of last year were quite popular with your fellow posters. Does that make you the pick of the crop on the Port board - hmmmmm says alot.
Only if you think so, don't let me cloud your judgement.
You're being like a dog with a bone Springy. Ease it up a bit.
portentous
2 Apr 2006, 22:34
Tredders won't play next week, I'd revert Chad back to CHB, assuming that Chappy is an "out" Walsh MUST retain his spot. I'd bring in both Symes and Lonie, probably for Dew and Pettigrew at this stage. (on a "like for like" basis as plenty of players deserve to be dropped on that effort)
PJ Power
2 Apr 2006, 23:41
Tredders won't play next week, I'd revert Chad back to CHB, assuming that Chappy is an "out" Walsh MUST retain his spot. I'd bring in both Symes and Lonie, probably for Dew and Pettigrew at this stage. (on a "like for like" basis as plenty of players deserve to be dropped on that effort)
Portentous, are you basing your prediction of Tredders' availability on what you have (or haven't) seen at training in the last week or Choco's comments post-match?
Also, I thought Chappy might be a goer this week. If he does play, what would you be inclined to do with Chad?
Porthos is so right. (i enjoy reading your threads).
There is a core group of senior players (not all) that are a real problem in our side. These players show no real leadership and merely go with the flow if things are going well they chip in and if things go bad they show no sort commitment towards turning things around.
They've had gold passes for 5-6 years and make no mistake they are as big a reason as anthything as to why we only won 1 flag and failed in several final series.
During that period they were able to bludge off the back of our real players such as james, carr,wanageneen,hardwick chad and tredrea(this list isn't complete, there were other honest senior players).
These senior players are now being exposed and will continue to turn in performances like the debacle we saw last night against the roos and last years humiliating final against u know who.
I understand we are rebuilding and no longer top 4 material.But sometimes there are games that are won because of an unusual or unforssen cicumstance such as a death close to the club or when a man like gav who has done so much for this club plays his 300th.At such time every player goes in that bit harder to honour the occasion BUT ITS THE SENIOR PLAYERS WHO LEAD THE WAY AND SET THE EXAMPLE.
the senior players who are excused are tredrea,wanganeen,wilson,chad,kane,wakelin,walsh,brogan,fran cou,s burgoyne
I'll take a wild guess at the selection this week and predict that choco will punish the kids for what happend ie ebert,thomson, pettigrew and leave our gold pass boys free to put in another ordinary effort against sydney.
PJ Power
3 Apr 2006, 00:13
You're absolutely right ctpower. It's those passengers who hardly ever stand up when the going is tough. That is what has made supporting us frustrating the last couple of years. We are very predictable.
I'll take a wild guess at the selection this week and predict that choco will punish the kids for what happend ie ebert,thomson, pettigrew and leave our gold pass boys free to put in another ordinary effort against sydney.
This is exactly what Williams did all the way through last year. If he does it this week, we all might as well go into hibernation until September. (When is that contract up for renewal?) But I think there's a real chance that he'll surprise us this time, which would give us at least some hope that if this is a rebuilding year, we at least will do some actual rebuilding.
Pettigrew had a cow of a game, but we're going to need him, so he should stay in the side. As others have said, Thomson needs the game time in the ones, not in the SANFL. Ebert's looking more confident the longer he gets to play in the middle.
But I would like to see a list of these seniors who are letting the side down. For example, Lade isn't in your list of those who should be excused, but C. Cornes is. I don't understand the reasoning there.
portentous
3 Apr 2006, 09:05
Portentous, are you basing your prediction of Tredders' availability on what you have (or haven't) seen at training in the last week or Choco's comments post-match?
Also, I thought Chappy might be a goer this week. If he does play, what would you be inclined to do with Chad?
1. My view on Tredders is based on footage I saw of him on the News taken yesterday at Alberton. He still can't walk properly so can't imagine him coming up for this week's game.
2. I would still play Chad in the backline somewhere, either CHB or HBF with Chappy filling the other role-but it would depend on match ups. I thought I heard though that Chappy has a fractured thumb and will miss several matches-don't remember where I heard it though.
I really respect your views on footy but i'm going to strongly disagree with you on dropping Thomson for Symes especially when there were players who played last night who didn't even raise a yelp.
After cooling down somewhat, I'm going to have to agree with yourself and everyone else who wants to keep Thomson. I still think we need Symes in though. On form and team balance Wanganeen or Dew would be one of the ones to go. Making a youngster the scapegoat will not appease us (not that it ever did) or improve the side.
Short term dropping Dew may give him the rocket he needs. Last year was his break through year. If he can get back to that form he's a valuable starting 18 player. Long term if Dew gets back to form, then it becomes harder to find a place for Wanganeen. A sad day, but one we'll have to face sometime soon anyway.
Bishop should go though. He's continued this year through the pre-season and round 1, being too slow for small players and too easily pushed aside by larger ones. We'd be better off playing Thurstans as the third tall and seeing if he can cut it, or even, since Bishop is now a gaping liability, playing the likes of Pettigrew or Carlile down there.
Round 2 changes :
Out : Dew, Bishop
In : Symes, Thurstans
Thurstans was apparently ******** for Sturt on the weekend. Bring in Willits.
*PAFC*13
3 Apr 2006, 13:14
I'd keep Pettigrew so he could play on O'Keffe and Chad to play on Goodes. Wakelin to take Hall, I'm not sure who will take O'Loughlin?
Mitch Power
3 Apr 2006, 13:33
Ok, lets turn the question around. Although it's enjoyable in a perverse self-torturing kind of way, moving beyond analysising round 1's result, what needs to change for round 2? This encompasses everything, from players selected to play, to positions they line up in, to the entire gameplan.
For me - in order of importance, two stand out the most.
1) The gameplan - most specifically the handball/short kicking from defense through to half-forward. It continues to give the opposition time to get back in numbers, then when one of the ten short options, inevitably turns it over, we lack numbers behind the ball and see fast and direct movement from the other side. No one's advocating a 'just bomb it long' gameplan, but we MUST be quicker to dispose of it, and not be afraid to kick it quickly to a 1 on 1 if no short option is available, instead of holding it for 15 seconds waiting for one.
2) Selections - Thomson out for Symes. I'll bore people ********less by seasons end, but I fail to see how having Junior B. in defense trying to recover from our lack of a midfield, is better then having him in the midfield helping fix the cause, not the effect, of most of our woes. Symes coming in, to play down back, gives us the chance to push Shaun further up the ground.
The "new" game plan was designed to counter opposition flooding but it certainly didn't work Saturday night. Corney's was quoted in the paper this morning "players went against game plan rules" and that it was "an aberration". I would like to see a few more games before I comment further on it.
Late last week, we were all praising Choco (well the greater majority of us) on how he picked a good side. However after watching the game, a couple of changes I think are needed to be made for the game against Sydney. The Kangas were successful because they had more run and won the centre clearances, despite Ladey and Brogan winning the majority of taps (I don't think the umps did us any favours either). I would like to see Lonie in for Dew and Symes in for Bishop (Pettigrew to move to Bishop's pocket, Symes in Junior B's position and Junior on the ball). Lonie and Symes would give good run through the midfield. I would persist with Thomson (sure he made errors but he had a go), Wilson and Chad in the midfield mix.
So assuming Tredders doesn't come up, 2 changes for me
In: Symes, Lonie
Out: Bishop, Dew
Ford Fairlane
3 Apr 2006, 14:10
The side looked good on paper in terms of young players picked. But as the game unfolded (unravelled?) it was unbalanced. It was interesting to see Lade mark the ball 70m out from goal and then stop as he realised with him out there, the remaining tall marking target was swamped. And Salopek having to go to a HBF suggests there were too many on ballers.
Oh and please don't let me hear one more player say "That's not how we play" or I'll throw up. Yes that is how we play and have for some time. Like the 'burning in the guts' quote did, that needs to change.
Deluca has to come in to partner Brogan in the ruck so Lade can play as a dedicated tall forward. Willits would be good too, maybe not at the SCG tho - or he plays instead of Deluca, Lade rucks and swaps with Willits forward to give Lade a breather on the bench. But if Chaplin doesn't come up, I'd definitely bring Willits in.
Malibu#27
3 Apr 2006, 14:12
Symes has to come in. Not for Thomson though. THomson needs to get up to pace at AFL level. This will only happen if he plays at AFL level. At the moment he is about a second too slow giving off his handballs. He needs to learn at AFL level to get a bit quicker.
I didn't notice any major speed problems in terms of getting the handball off once he had the pill (I may have missed some from where I was sitting) .... to me he was holding it deliberately until the man became free (a classic example at the southern end when he held it - and took the tackle because he was waiting for burgoyne (I think) to get free.
But I think most agree that he has to get gametime and get the speed of the game.
Id bring Symes in for Dew. Or maybe Pettigrew. Pettigrew did nothing and Symes is a better back flank option. I said during the week that Dew did enough last year to give him self a temporary gold card for the first month of the season. I think he may have used that up all last night. Id drop him only to see if he can kick himself up the arse and get back to playing decent footy again.
Cant drop Dew - hes part of the Port marketing campaign at games :) .... Personally I'd give him a rev this week and a week or so to perform. Pettigrew isnt a defender in my books given the weekends game.... or maybe we have just over-rated him.
Id like to see DeLuca play...and if we are only using one key forward in White then he probably does need to play so Lade can be up forward full time. I dont know if the SCG is the right place for this to happen though.
Its not the right venue to do this as you say .... also when Tredreas back I suspect its going to be hard to bringhim in given our troube with three rucks last year.
Overall I was not that unhappy with the teams performance, I thought we were a chance to win right up to the end although we did not take our opportunities. The scoreline was definately not a true indication of where we are at (I hope percentage does not become and issue after those stupid free kicks and 50m penalties at the end).
I am not ready to slam the game plan yet until they learn how to use it better. Handballing to a player who is flat footed or under pressure is something the coach tells you off for in under 12 football, just shouldnt happen at AFL level.
I think that our loss can really be put down to our players not being as ready for round 1 as the kangaroos in terms of fitness, ability to understand and carry out gameplan, skill level and being used to the footy and what is needed to win it.
1%ers and desperation need to improve significantly when ball is in dispute or opposition has the ball. Tackling simply must improve, Ebert especially if he wants to play midfield.
Winning the ball in the midfield and being and in and under type player is going to be a problem this year. I dont know if we have the personel to do it but we need to find a player out of Thomson, Logan, Thomas, Francou, Shattock. I don't know if any are up to standard but im hoping one or two are. Losing James and Carr as well as Francou coming towards the end of his career has hurt us. We simply need some tough nuts and the midfielders we do have are more outside players or are not good at reading the ruckman in order to get the clearances.
Finally, another observation is that our game plan looks terrible but only when we lose the ball out of the midfield and when our players make poor decisions and overuse the handball. This is not soley the fault of M.Williams it is the lack of personel and the players getting used to the gameplan.
The sooner you realise Pettigrew cannot play as a defender, the better off you will be.
The only thing I'd like to see change next week is the kicking. On Saturday night it was ********house to say the least and probably the only reason we lost.
I did not mind what I saw until our kicking turned the tide for them.
Oh, and for Dewy to turn up in mind as well as body.
IOh, and for Dewy to turn up in mind as well as body.
Perhaps he could leave a little of his body elsewhere....looks to be carrying a bit extra this year
The sooner you realise Pettigrew cannot play as a defender, the better off you will be.
Agreed, Grew has been good up forward, may have provided another mobile target on Saturday night. Can't remember him being tried at the Northern End.
I didn't notice any major speed problems in terms of getting the handball off once he had the pill (I may have missed some from where I was sitting) .... to me he was holding it deliberately until the man became free (a classic example at the southern end when he held it - and took the tackle because he was waiting for burgoyne (I think) to get free.
But I think most agree that he has to get gametime and get the speed of the game.
Its something I noticed in the Adelaide game as well. He tends to hold onto the ball a second too long and a large percentage of his handballs end up half smothered or not going exactly where they should as he is being tackled at the time. Just has to get that up to AFL speed and he should be right.
Malibu#27
3 Apr 2006, 18:33
Its something I noticed in the Adelaide game as well. He tends to hold onto the ball a second too long and a large percentage of his handballs end up half smothered or not going exactly where they should as he is being tackled at the time. Just has to get that up to AFL speed and he should be right.
Yeah maybe we saw different thing I didnt see too many watching live that didnt go to hand, but havent watched the replay as yet. I actually think its a great ability to have - being able to hold the ball and deliver while being tackled and being able to give teammates that extra fraction of time to get clear.
But do agree that finding the tempo of the game is his next step.
PowerKat
3 Apr 2006, 18:42
Changes for R2:-
- Whether Tredders is there or not, we need more 'voice' / on field leadership.
- Need to play more as a team - more hard running to back each other up; shepherding etc. Looked too much like a bunch of individuals - bound to happen with a few new faces around, but still.
- Move the ball on more quickly - when we stop we are stagnant and cough it up. Sometimes looks like a lack of confidence in team mates?
- Realise that kicking 3 goals in the first few minutes doesn't win the game.
Eddie Woloschek
3 Apr 2006, 19:01
Thurstans was apparently ******** for Sturt on the weekend. Bring in Willits.
That doesn't mean he won't be named.
Eddie Woloschek
3 Apr 2006, 19:02
Perhaps he could leave a little of his body elsewhere....looks to be carrying a bit extra this year
I blame the broken heart from the Nikki Visser breakup. It was a match made in heaven. Her brains, his brawn. Aaaah, what might have been . . .
I blame the broken heart from the Nikki Visser breakup. It was a match made in heaven. Her brains, his brawn. Aaaah, what might have been . . .
Wasn't he having groin injury problems while he was going out with her? :D
Agreed, Grew has been good up forward, may have provided another mobile target on Saturday night. Can't remember him being tried at the Northern End.
Also agree. When I've noticed that Pettigrew's having a good game, he's always been forward.
Ford Fairlane
3 Apr 2006, 20:14
I blame the broken heart from the Nikki Visser breakup. It was a match made in heaven. Her brains, his brawn. Aaaah, what might have been . . .
The perfect union of recessive genes ... ;)
Mr Magoo
5 Apr 2006, 04:41
After watching the game again on foxtel, i would like to see -
The interchange bench used a lot better so that we can keep our running players a little fresher in the last quarter.
When a player has the ball instead of trying to kick the perfect pass, how about kicking into space for the oncoming player to lead into.
Tackling needs to be improved by everybody.
A couple of positional changes such as Gav in the forward pocket or used as sweeper in the back lines.