Review R6: Port v Richmond Review

Remove this Banner Ad

My take was that it was a massively improved effort, particularly from the lower tier of players that lifted, such as Stewart, O'Shiz.

Thought Hammer was better. But he and Boak are still a long way off their best.

I thought Howard tried manfully. I'd love for him to get an extended run in the team but not sure exactly how. We are lucky they didn't take advantage of his inexperience. But I feel like the output from a second game player was no worse than what we'd get from Lobbe. Look forward to watching him develop.

I nearly threw my remote with some of Westhoff's brain fades. FMD....

Dixon looked like the player we want him to be.

DBJ just has "Port Adelaide" written all over him. I had him pegged as a definite delist, now he's making himself one of the first picked. So many attributes that supporters and coaches absolutely love. Aggression, skills, poise and composure.

Better game from the Arch today, not great but moving in the right direction. Just not getting enough touches for my liking but when he did last night, something usually happened. Thought his disposal by foot was better.

All up, I expected to get rolled, but the boys put in a tough, honest performance and thats all I want to see, win, lose or draw.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Two strong observations with DBJ his straight line will to get to the contest and impact the contest with reckless abandon. Like a you Wilbur Wilson was mentoring him. Strong

The other was Dixon taking marks from our kick ins. We finals worked out the target to get that next possession so that helped us get it out.

This is one of the main areas where having Lobbe in the ruck works to our disadvantage. He is the target of those kick-outs too often, never marks them and often either is outmarked or flat hands the ball into the forward-facing path of the opposition's half forwards and midfielders.

Dougal contested aerially pretty well and will grow in confidence.

Dixon's contested marking was a thing of beauty.

The other improvement from kick-outs was that we used the short option on a few occasions and Krakouer took some of the kick-ins. He is one player who has the courage and confidence to execute kicks to free players at CHB rather than just going to the pack situation near the boundary side.

The bravery and execution of Krak and Polec's kicking is crucial to our chances for the rest of the year. By my reckoning we have had them in the same team on only 3 occasions for 3 wins before last night (Kangas rd 3, Hawks rd 4, Crows rd 5 last year). Darcy adds further to their line breaking play, while Pittard in the form he is in, and Broadbent into the middle gives us much stronger ability to transition the ball quickly and directly from the backline to half forward. What we need now is Wingard and Gray back into ripping form, Boaky building on his improved showing from the past 2 weeks, Hartlett finding the amount of ball he got last night - especially some of that contested HB stuff, Ebert getting more of the footy and the returns of White (to really break the lines) and Schulz to give us that shorter, lead up option.

The ingredients are there. We have to weather the storm until we have Gray, Wingard, White and Schulz back in the team and a number of those and other players back to their best form.
 
Hehehehehe

13090479_985518594897012_325028358_n.jpg
 
Was Howard any less of a liability around the ground?
Howard can take a mark, has reasonable skills, and has only played 2 AFL games. If he is dropped for Lobbe on exposed form we've lost the plot. We'll end up repeating last year where it took most of the season to work out we were a better team without Lobbe as our #1 ruckman.
 
I've been critical of OShea and I agree with you. When he stuffed it up at the start I thought here we go. But I'm hoping that stuff up was at the direction of the coaches being - don't just bomb it out of the back line, you have good movement and you need to get better and more confident for taking the game on. If no one is presenting, then force them to.

Thing about O'Shea, and Neade for that matter, is that both are confidence players and will get better once they've put some solid showings together.
O'Shea at his best makes us a much better team. It's no coincidence that when he's been up and firing in 2013 and 2014 finals campaigns, we've produced some of our best defensive and rebounding team performances.

We have to use the next 2 weeks to build consistency and confidence in the team as a whole and in a lot of our important individuals. Two really good games out of Boak, Hartlett, Wines, Wingard, Jonas, O'Shea, Neade puts us in a completely different space going into the tougher matches from mid May onwards.
 
Jared Polec had an instrumental return with eight score involvements, nine handball receives and 357 metres gained with 61 per cent of his disposals being retained.
It's also that ability to criss-cross through and around traffic to switch the play. He did it superbly in the first half and a number of best scoring shots came as a result of him taking matters into his own hands across half-back to change direction, carry the footy and then hit up an uncontested teammate. We completely lacked that ability without him.

Krakouer and Pittard do it to a smaller extent, but Polec has ridiculous vision and evasiveness to pull it off.
 
The only sad thing I can think of about this is that I genuinely didn't miss Wingard tonight. Have not been impressed with his season at all, even though a lot of it isn't his fault. But still. Really happy Young and Impey got 5 goals between them.
So important for Youngy to keep this rich vein of goal scoring form going.
Impey grew into the game last night very well. He found great space goal-side of opponents, dare I say it, but like Eddie Betts.
 
Yep - I heard the goal umpire say "okay - I'll go with you" - and then when the review was requested, they said that the Umpires call was "touched".

** Edit - snap Garibaldi Red :)

Surely, the goal umpire should make an independant decision on what he believes the score to be and then they refer...unless the field umpire has called "touched" within the normal sequence of play i.e "touched, play on"? It is my view that the field umpire said nawt during play, then told the goal umpire he thought it was touched virtually privately...and influenced the goal umpires decision and changed the result. If he did call "touched, play on" off Ollies boot, well I'll shut up. :p
The field umpire, not the goal umpire, is the controlling umpire in terms of what score to register at all times. It may not seem like it, but the goal umpire never actually makes the final decision, they indicate to the field umpire who then signals back to them.

In this case the field umpire immediately approached the goal umpire, stated that he thought it may have been touched and asked for the goal umpires view. The goal umpire was not able to advise him that he was certain that it was not touched. Therefore the field umpire correctly went with his own impression - review, touched behind. I didn't see a touch, but from the vision it was impossible to tell. Therefore umpires call. I didn't see a touch, but in terms of the field umpires view and the processes they follow the correct decision was made.

Bad luck for Ollie, it was inspirational play.
 
It's also that ability to criss-cross through and around traffic to switch the play. He did it superbly in the first half and a number of best scoring shots came as a result of him taking matters into his own hands across half-back to change direction, carry the footy and then hit up an uncontested teammate. We completely lacked that ability without him.

Krakouer and Pittard do it to a smaller extent, but Polec has ridiculous vision and evasiveness to pull it off.
Kudos to Polec - great game. Would like him to develop a right foot rather than always relying on his evasiveness.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

The field umpire, not the goal umpire, is the controlling umpire in terms of what score to register at all times. It may not seem like it, but the goal umpire never actually makes the final decision, they indicate to the field umpire who then signals back to them.

In this case the field umpire immediately approached the goal umpire, stated that he thought it may have been touched and asked for the goal umpires view. The goal umpire was not able to advise him that he was certain that it was not touched. Therefore the field umpire correctly went with his own impression - review, touched behind. I didn't see a touch, but from the vision it was impossible to tell. Therefore umpires call. I didn't see a touch, but in terms of the field umpires view and the processes they follow the correct decision was made.

Bad luck for Ollie, it was inspirational play.

Thanks for the education - as promised, I will shut up (about this). :D:beercheers:
 
Thing about O'Shea, and Neade for that matter, is that both are confidence players and will get better once they've put some solid showings together.
O'Shea at his best makes us a much better team. It's no coincidence that when he's been up and firing in 2013 and 2014 finals campaigns, we've produced some of our best defensive and rebounding team performances.

We have to use the next 2 weeks to build consistency and confidence in the team as a whole and in a lot of our important individuals. Two really good games out of Boak, Hartlett, Wines, Wingard, Jonas, O'Shea, Neade puts us in a completely different space going into the tougher matches from mid May onwards.

O'Shea's game is peculiar. He's played better in more afl games than sanfl games. You're right about his good afl performances tending to coincide with our finals campaigns.
 
I liked Neade's set shot. He ran hard up and kicked through the ball. None of this couple of awkward steps and poke at it nonsense that usually plagues his short range set shots.
 
I think if nothing else, we definitely proved that Trengrove and Carlisle should never play in the same senior team again.
Cannot afford to cover two slow tall timbers in defense.
 
Prelim against Hawthorn was an afternoon/twilight game.

Semi final against Geelong was Friday night.

Correct you are.

Well...um...errr...looking at it optimistically, I was half right for half of a game haha. And the Geelong game felt like a Saturday :)

I better shut up about this one too and shut down for the day! I guess I will come back tomorrow and try again ;)
 
I didn't mind Eddies commentary actually. He did go off over a few of our goals too. I like him because he sounds involved in the game at the very least.

Yeah exactly. In the media he can be a bit of a pain due to the incessant banging on about whatever his agenda is at the time, but as a play by play commentator he's excellent. The genuine enthusiasm and love of the game really shines through, doesn't bring spite or snark into the box. You'll get the usual amoebae bitching and moaning about his ties to Collingwood, but he only does neutral games so I see no issue whatsoever.
 
Watching the game on replay

Richmond are really s**t, we still need to fix up our clearances, skills and transition

Desperately need another tall somewhere at CHF
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top