Review Port V Melb: Review

[Byrons Firen]

There was one where Hartlett on the Members' wing was trying to centre the ball to about 3 Port players running forward and it curved behind them to pinpoint a trailing Melbourne player. It defined the game for me. I'd so love to believe it was the ball that caused that.

and nerves
are we
the crowd
the reason ?

that chant
powww waaa
goosebumps stuff

 

[1954]

Why did Margetts only pay the free once Dunn doubled over in pain? He saw the incident as it happened but only blew his whistle a few seconds later once Dunn staged for the free kick. Terrible umpiring!

Unbelievable that Schulz could be cited for a love tap that wouldn't have broken a sparrow's egg, plus Dunn's delayed reaction was worthy of an oscar nomination.
Benny Hill music will live on forever with the help of these ridiculous mrp turkeys, and what is worse all of its members actually played the game.

edit - I just noticed a few posts below that says the dees have informed the mrp Einsteins that their player suffered no injury, resulting in no case to answer, geez who would have thought?

 

[Byrons Firen]

Oh, and Newt's boots...!

boots newton ?
i like it
well done Ant Bear

 

[Powerstufff]

.... Let me guess, did we play that empty forward line thing again, with Schultz 80 metres from goal and with 2 on him.. .and played the fast break from defense but they blocked us and cramped us and forced us to switch across half back .....

Yep.

 

[Duck Farmer]

God the bleating about that Watts/Wingard decision is ******* me off.

It's a free kick every day of the week and has been for years. If you're running back with the flight to a player waiting to mark you have to keep your eyes on the ball the whole time and not make heavy contact.

Watts is guilty on both counts. Plus he got Wingard high. Melbourne supporters can blame the umps all they want but that sort of incident is always a free.

All true, but on the other hand admitting it wasn't a free kick makes the tears much sweeter.

 

[Ford Fairlane]

We conceded 10 goals against Melbourne and 8 against Essendon. It's not like our defence has been smashed especially with the pressure our midfield turnovers have put on them. Richmond was a shoot out but football is different under the dome.

Melbourne played three tall forwards in good conditions, had nearly as many inside 50s as us and lost with less scoring shots. Mind you Frawley spends more time on the half back flank than anywhere else on the ground.

Winter footy is a tough grind. Grab the wins where you can and prepare for spring and the finals.

 

[b0ydman]

Hartlett I think is playing the most injured out of the players on our list. I know the old adage that once you cross the line, you're 100% fit, but he hasn't been poor enough to be concerned about maybe dropping him for another player. It wouldn't surprise me to hear he's gone in for surgery after the season is finished.

Always injured.

Hes a 10% better version of Steve Salopek. He plays 1 good game in 4, and one blinder in 10.

Trade now while he still has value IMO

 

[b0ydman]

We conceded 10 goals against Melbourne and 8 against Essendon. It's not like our defence has been smashed especially with the pressure our midfield turnovers have put on them. Richmond was a shoot out but football is different under the dome.

Melbourne played three tall forwards in good conditions, had nearly as many inside 50s as us and lost with less scoring shots. Mind you Frawley spends more time on the half back flank than anywhere else on the ground.

Winter footy is a tough grind. Grab the wins where you can and prepare for spring and the finals.

Nothing to do with winter footy Ford, absolutely nothing at all.

This is a lot simpler than most here seem to think.

When you don't play anyone in the forward 80metres (ie never mind forward "50") , you typically struggle to kick big scores

 

[Honeyboy Wilson]

Always injured.

Hes a 10% better version of Steve Salopek. He plays 1 good game in 4, and one blinder in 10.

Trade now while he still has value IMO

Good to have you back with your beautiful negativity while we're not travelling too well b0ydy

 

[Ford Fairlane]

Nothing to do with winter footy Ford, absolutely nothing at all.

This is a lot simpler than most here seem to think.

When you don't play anyone in the forward 80metres (ie never mind forward "50") , you typically struggle to kick big scores

Against Richmond under the dome we kicked 16 and had we taken our chances for walk in goals could easily have won.

We're missing Carlile, Trengove, Monfries, Meanwhile, Hartlett and Polec are struggling, Lobbe has toiled manfully all year and must be tired, Jonas isn't 100% and we don't have a third tall forward option who has put his hand up for selection.

It's winter football under tough circumstances and Ken is coaching to win with what resources he has at his disposal. Late in every game, we've been within a couple of goals of every one of those losses even in those circumstances.

Anyway my response was to posts that indicate our defence is struggling and it should be with our outs, but thanks to Ken we are keeping opposition teams down to minimal scores and giving ourselves every chance to win.

 

[b0ydman]

Then I am disappointed this thread has such little analysis of tactical strategy.

It used to be here

 

[b0ydman]

Against Richmond under the dome we kicked 16 and had we taken our chances for walk in goals could easily have won.

We're missing Carlile, Trengove, Monfries, Meanwhile, Hartlett and Polec are struggling, Lobbe has toiled manfully all year and must be tired, Jonas isn't 100% and we don't have a third tall forward option who has put his hand up for selection.

It's winter football under tough circumstances and Ken is coaching to win with what resources he has at his disposal. Late in every game, we've been within a couple of goals of every one of those losses even in those circumstances.

Anyway my response was to posts that indicate who think our defence is struggling and it should be with our outs, but thanks to Ken we are keeping opposition teams down to minimal scores and giving ourselves every chance to win.

Richmond game I was there.

We lost because of poor defense brought on by pressure caused by our pushing back too deep.

It was a beautiful day as was yesterday

 

[Byrons Firen]

We conceded 10 goals against Melbourne and 8 against Essendon. It's not like our defence has been smashed especially with the pressure our midfield turnovers have put on them. Richmond was a shoot out but football is different under the dome.

Melbourne played three tall forwards in good conditions, had nearly as many inside 50s as us and lost with less scoring shots. Mind you Frawley spends more time on the half back flank than anywhere else on the ground.

Winter footy is a tough grind. Grab the wins where you can and prepare for spring and the finals.

well said ford

 

[Portology]

Always injured.

Hes a 10% better version of Steve Salopek. He plays 1 good game in 4, and one blinder in 10.

Trade now while he still has value IMO

Very harsh (unless you were being sarcastic).

Hartlett can actually kick 50 meters, and more often than not hits a target. He's a fair bit faster than poor old Sal as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Duck Farmer]

Then I am disappointed this thread has such little analysis of tactical strategy.

It used to be here

This thread is 24 hours old. You might be lost.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Hamish Hartlett has been quiet for a while now. Would telling Hamish to be a bit more selfish be good advice?

Is his ankle 100% right? i have my doubts given how much some of his kicking has dropped off.

 

[Janus]

Richmond game I was there.

We lost because of poor defense brought on by pressure caused by our pushing back too deep.

It was a beautiful day as was yesterday

You want tactical discussion?

The reason why the defense is pushing back too deep is because we don't have the key position players that act as anchors from which the other players can work off. Players like O'Shea, Broadbent and Pittard are interceptors, ready to run the ball out of defense after taking a mark. The problem with the Richmond game was that because we have literally zero key defenders (Clurey is in a similar mold to the three mentioned), our players were being pressed further and further back with every sortie into goal. You see it all the time with soccer - players defend closer and closer to the goal line the more the other team is dominating possession until finally they concede. It's a sub-conscious action that is rectified by having key position players who, surprise surprise, provide structure to the defense because everyone knows that if you've got a good KPD (or goalkeeper in soccer), it's easier to push forward knowing that you've got that support behind you.

What Ford is saying is 100% accurate. With the resources we have at our disposal, Hinkley is doing a stellar job. It's not his fault that he was left with a s**t sandwich of undeveloped key forwards and defenders. We'll get Carlile and Trengove back, and everything will be right again. What you'd LIKE to see happen is for our midfield to push back to cover the holes left by our defenders. But the problem is that we're in a hard training phase at the moment, and our mids simply don't have the legs to do that sort of thing. The injuries to Trengove and Carlile (along with Redden and Renouf) came at the worst possible time and was a perfect storm. The fact that we've been in games as long as we have been and actually won against Melbourne while coping with that s**t is a miracle in itself.

 

[ploppy]

The pushing everyone back and forth up and down the ground has to stop its self defeating. We would have won by 10 goals if we just left Schulz in the goal square. When our forwards push up the ground outside 50 when we win the ball back there is no one to kick too. This causes our players to kick short or wait which causes more congestion and stops our run. Our run and free flowing attacking is how we win..if we stop that we lose. If the opposition wants to do it let them. Im happy with Schulz standing by himself 60 metres clear in the goal square...which would force the opposition to go stand near him further easing congestion around the ball so we can get our running game going. Is so obvious i cant believe the crap way we push our forwards up the ground just stop now.

 

[PortMacPower]

The pushing everyone back and forth up and down the ground has to stop its self defeating. We would have won by 10 goals if we just left Schulz in the goal square. When our forwards push up the ground outside 50 when we win the ball back there is no one to kick too. This causes our players to kick short or wait which causes more congestion and stops our run. Our run and free flowing attacking is how we win..if we stop that we lose. If the opposition wants to do it let them. Im happy with Schulz standing by himself 60 metres clear in the goal square...which would force the opposition to go stand near him further easing congestion around the ball so we can get our running game going. Is so obvious i cant believe the crap way we push our forwards up the ground just stop now.

I totally agree we need to leave one or two players forward and having no one there is clearly costing us goals. The problem is Schulz seems to be one of the only players who creates movement and makes a strong lead when coming out of defence, so is crucial in that part of the ground at the moment. With the midfield being so static at the moment we have lost that run, and group run in particular, out of defence, forcing us to rely on contested marks down the wings to move forward. So I sure hope our run and dash improves after the bye/warmer weather/back to normal training. But in the meantime I think we need to play at least one player forward at all times, a long kick behind play or at true CHF who is capable of winning a one on one marking contest or with our current 22 someone like Matt White, Wingard or Impey who can rely on their speed or footy smarts to win the ball kicked into space and kick a goal. Or bring Butch/Shaw in and keep them as a true full forward.

To make it less predictable and to stop double teaming you could rotate the forward player every few minutes in a game like yesterday's.

 

[Ford Fairlane]

Richmond game I was there.

We lost because of poor defense brought on by pressure caused by our pushing back too deep.

It was a beautiful day as was yesterday

As I said, football under the dome is different. We still kicked 16 goals - if we we lost because we pushed too deep, how do we lose not because we kick what is usually a winning score but because we couldn't restrict our opposition to less than 16 goals? We lost for a myriad of reasons and what you say was one of those reasons, but not the only one. You complain about analysis then apply the massive reductionist argument that we lost because of one reason.

When I talk about winter football I take into account that it has rained day after day in Adelaide over the past couple of months. It may not be raining on the day/night we play (although it did against Essendon) but the grounds are heavy underfoot, the soil is damp and the run is taken out of your legs. Everybody looks for heavy training regimes as an issue but heavy grounds are just as likely a reason.

 

[Zakk Wylde]

Is his ankle 100% right? i have my doubts given how much some of his kicking has dropped off.

Had a jab during the game REH

 

[1954]

Always injured.

Hes a 10% better version of Steve Salopek. He plays 1 good game in 4, and one blinder in 10.

Trade now while he still has value IMO

We are often on the same page boydster, but I can't recall Salopek playing any blinders in his time on the Power list, but I could have missed one of his break out games for the gay bay magoos.

 

[mic59]

We are often on the same page boydster, but I can't recall Salopek playing any blinders in his time on the Power list, but I could have missed one of his break out games for the gay bay magoos.

Salopek never really managed to rise to the height that I felt he could. Initially he faced injuries and then even in his best years of 2008 and 2009 he only managed 15 and 16 games due to injury. He picked up 9 Brownlow votes in 2009. His last two years he was played out of position with Choco's mania for making defensive players out of attacking wingmen.

 

[El_Scorcho]

Salopek never really managed to rise to the height that I felt he could. Initially he faced injuries and then even in his best years of 2008 and 2009 he only managed 15 and 16 games due to injury. He picked up 9 Brownlow votes in 2009. His last two years he was played out of position with Choco's mania for making defensive players out of attacking wingmen.

Yep, Salopek finally got over his injury issues and really started to hit his straps in 2008 and 2009 as a blue chip midfield prospect.

So Choco turned him into a half back flanker. Which worked for about 3 weeks until teams figured out you could just man him up with a negating small forward and cut him out of the game. Choco didn't give up on the experiment

If Salopek had been left in the middle and played as the genuine centre square mid that he was, I have no doubt he'd still be playing good football for us. Choco has a lot to answer for, but he wrecked Salopek's career.

 

[Garibaldi Red]

All true, but on the other hand admitting it wasn't a free kick makes the tears much sweeter.

Anyone catch Roosy on 360 last night? They were talking about the Wingard free and his initial response was that he had only seen it from the camera angle in the coaches box (I think he referred to camera 3). Robbo and Huddo then said that the AFL had said it was a free kick to which Roos responded if that was a free kick then what about the Lobbe on Jamar incident why wasn't that paid.

I thought you didn't see the Wingard one Roosy, if you hadn't then how can you compare it with other incidents.