Review Good bad ugly vs Port Adelaide R8 2024

[Samcro24]

So I got it right then?

I'd probably write my own code to do it. Because I'm that kind of insufferable nerd.

Just finish the tex goals compilation

 

[CrowBloke]

I liked your (Crows I Am) comments on Rachele and I'm glad he's ours.
Plenty of upside and could be elite in 3-4 years when he matures.

You have mentioned a few times that he is slow to dispose of the ball and often gets caught holding the ball. I would much rather he takes a bit longer to find a good option than just throwing it on to the boot without looking and turning it over.

I gotta disagree.
Htb is a 100% turnover.
Fast kick and hope is a 50-50 chance, since we might retain possession.
Sometimes, speedy moving the ball on is preferable to getting caught htb.
I'm pretty sure WaynesWorld19 had a good theory on why he seems unaware --- soccer background, is used to looking ahead, not around.

 

[SugarShane]

I love how posters on here are still milking this win all the way into Monday arvo especially more so given it was Thursday
game.

Every other win lasts a week. Wins against Port last 3-9 months.

 

[Dirty Bird]

10 Soligo
6 Butters
5 Keane
4 Crouch
3 Rankine
2 Fogarty


As far as I can tell there are three ways to arrive at those votes:

OPTION 1
5 Soligo
4 Butters
3 Crouch
2 Fogarty
1 Keane

5 Soligo
4 Keane
3 Rankine
2 Butters
1 Crouch


OPTION 2
5 Soligo
4 Butters
3 Rankine
2 Keane
1 Fogarty

5 Soligo
4 Crouch
3 Keane
2 Butters
1 Fogarty


OPTION 3
5 Soligo
4 Keane
3 Butters
2 Fogarty
1 Rankine

5 Soligo
4 Crouch
3 Butters
2 Rankine
1 Keane

Ill go with Option 3.

I don't think it's 2 because I dont think Fogarty would make top 5 for both.

I do believe Nicks would've gone Fog though, but I dont believe he would've had Butters as 2nd best afield.

So Option 3 with the top being Nicks and the bottm being Ken.

 

[Dirty Bird]

Just finish the tex goals compilation

At the very least create a youtube short of Tex's left footer goal in Showdown LIV

 

[CrowBloke]

Nicks has his own issues, but by god he’s not anywhere near as bad as Hinkley. (Yet, at least).

I'm not sure what you mean by "bad" there, jenny.

For affability/geniality/ nice-bloke-ness/good company I think I'd prefer to have a bbq and a few drinks with Nicks. Hinkley's a bit dour for me; needs a personality transfusion.

For selections policy and win-loss record, Hinkley 59.5%, Nicks 35.2% (and with Sam Mitchell) NO Finals' appearances. Nicks would have to take the Crows to two 73% win rates over the next two years to match Hinkley's record. Not gonna happen.
I wish Nicks was 'as bad as Hinkley' in win-loss terms.

 

[skam85]

Wait Fog got coaches votes? Where's Ratugolea's? Didn't he pants him?

 

[CrowBloke]

It wasn’t exactly a commanding win, we were beaten in most aspects of the game. We basically turned about 5 turnovers into entries and goals in the first quarter against the tide. And they basically kicked themselves out of it for the remaining 3 quarters. Sometimes now try and stay with me here, the total score isn’t the entire story.

Award-winning sarcasm; gold .

I thought there were two main factors that yielded the win:
--- our young-but-keen defence pushed Port wide and under pressure, forcing several errors that they made.
--- Worrell/Butts/Michalanney/Keane were all prepared to leave their man to intercept/spoil, which requires anticipation and great timing. In the early stages of the first quarter, Keane (who's developing into a defensive beast) had three intercepts to blunt PA I50 in a row. For both of those factors Hombsch gets credit, not Nicks. The Crows defence is bloody solid and will be even stingier when Murray returns.
--- PA's kicking efficiency, both in finding teammates and goalkicking was woeful (2023-Crows-like). Again, nothing to do with Nicks.

Okay, three. THREE main factors .
Whenever the Crows reverted to Nicks' slow, chip-chip defensive schtick, they looked terrible (reminiscent of the 04 start) and PA dominated for long periods without converting.

(Afterthought: the first 2 Fogarty goals + the Cook goal came from kicks deep to their marking advantage, even if the first was a Tex miskick. The new-look mids [especially Soligo, Rankine and Rachele] are lowering their eyes and kicking deeper when our forwards are deeper and behind.
OK, OK, four. FOUR main factors and an almost fanatical devotion ... etc.
I'll start again.

Amongst the main factors were such diverse elements as ... )

 

[Crows I Am]

I liked your (Crows I Am) comments on Rachele and I'm glad he's ours.
Plenty of upside and could be elite in 3-4 years when he matures.

I gotta disagree.
Htb is a 100% turnover.
Fast kick and hope is a 50-50 chance, since we might retain possession.
Sometimes, speedy moving the ball on is preferable to getting caught htb.
I'm pretty sure WaynesWorld19 had a good theory on why he seems unaware --- soccer background, is used to looking ahead, not around.

I would always want our players to look up and find a good target rather than a quick hack kick forward without looking. Obviously he needs to keep working to improve his decision making if he continues to get caught but at least his first instinct is to look up and look for the best option.

 

[OccamsRazorRay]

It wasn’t exactly a commanding win, we were beaten in most aspects of the game. We basically turned about 5 turnovers into entries and goals in the first quarter against the tide. And they basically kicked themselves out of it for the remaining 3 quarters. Sometimes now try and stay with me here, the total score isn’t the entire story.

Wow incredible analysis. But let's break it down a little further..

Beat us with Inside 50's by 10, but even Hinkley conceded that the quality and locality of those I50's weren't great (anything we did give up was out towards the boundary, or reasonably far out). You'll also notice that our Defensive half pressure acts and tackles were through the roof, so even on occasions where Port were taking a snap shot on goal, or were on the run, they were under pressure, not just in our forward half but all over the ground.

You seem to ignore the fact that good teams generate turnovers, but you have attributed this fault 100% to Port...

I also love the fact people say 'Port kicked themselves out of the game', well yeah, they've been kicking themselves out of games for years. They've invested heavily in their midfield and defence, and not much up forward. Poor kicking is poor footy...

This is really endemic of what's going on this board......glass half empty mentality.

 

[kirky]

Wow incredible analysis. But let's break it down a little further..

Beat us with Inside 50's by 10, but even Hinkley conceded that the quality and locality of those I50's weren't great (anything we did give up was out towards the boundary, or reasonably far out). You'll also notice that our Defensive half pressure acts and tackles were through the roof, so even on occasions where Port were taking a snap shot on goal, or were on the run, they were under pressure, not just in our forward half but all over the ground.

You seem to ignore the fact that good teams generate turnovers, but you have attributed this fault 100% to Port...

I also love the fact people say 'Port kicked themselves out of the game', well yeah, they've been kicking themselves out of games for years. They've invested heavily in their midfield and defence, and not much up forward. Poor kicking is poor footy...

This is really endemic of what's going on this board......glass half empty mentality.

What seemed obvious was the Power just seemed to bomb it into their forward line hoping Dixon would clunk it.

I asked a couple of Port people at the game was this normal and against the better teams, it was.

 

[beartoo]

Award-winning sarcasm; gold .

I thought there were two main factors that yielded the win:
--- our young-but-keen defence pushed Port wide and under pressure, forcing several errors that they made.
--- Worrell/Butts/Michalanney/Keane were all prepared to leave their man to intercept/spoil, which requires anticipation and great timing. In the early stages of the first quarter, Keane (who's developing into a defensive beast) had three intercepts to blunt PA I50 in a row. For both of those factors Hombsch gets credit, not Nicks. The Crows defence is bloody solid and will be even stingier when Murray returns.
--- PA's kicking efficiency, both in finding teammates and goalkicking was woeful (2023-Crows-like). Again, nothing to do with Nicks.

Okay, three. THREE main factors .
Whenever the Crows reverted to Nicks' slow, chip-chip defensive schtick, they looked terrible (reminiscent of the 04 start) and PA dominated for long periods without converting.

(Afterthought: the first 2 Fogarty goals + the Cook goal came from kicks deep to their marking advantage, even if the first was a Tex miskick. The new-look mids [especially Soligo, Rankine and Rachele] are lowering their eyes and kicking deeper when our forwards are deeper and behind.
OK, OK, four. FOUR main factors and an almost fanatical devotion ... etc.
I'll start again.

Amongst the main factors were such diverse elements as ... )

The AFL said this morning that from next season the side with the highest score on the board will no longer necessarily be the winner. 'We're going to judge it on the stats alone' the AFL spokesman said. 'Look at the Crows on the weekend. Won by a piddling 5 goals, yet behind in the majority of stats. Look a bit further at their 2nds. Only won by just fewer than 7 goals while Port Power had more inside 50s. It's obvious that the better team lost.'
The AFC said that seemed fair and were happy to relinquish the premiersip points in both grades to their superior opponents. The spokesman for the Crows went on to lament the much greater depth the Power had. 'If only we could swap a champion like Rioli for our spud Rankin. How much better would we have been all these years with Charlie Dixon instead of Tex. The list goes on.'

On SM-A115F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[CrowBloke]

Rozee is a new captain - a young captain - and so full credit to Ken to grab the blame and own it himself rather than blame his player

Would Nicks have done that? Not sure, maybe

Yeah, I thought Hinkley's guilty plea was to deflect criticism from his young Captain, too.

(Tbh, I don't give a rat's about Hinkley or Rozee and am still on a high from the very good Crows win )

 

[moogerfooger]

Award-winning sarcasm; gold .

I thought there were two main factors that yielded the win:
--- our young-but-keen defence pushed Port wide and under pressure, forcing several errors that they made.
--- Worrell/Butts/Michalanney/Keane were all prepared to leave their man to intercept/spoil, which requires anticipation and great timing. In the early stages of the first quarter, Keane (who's developing into a defensive beast) had three intercepts to blunt PA I50 in a row. For both of those factors Hombsch gets credit, not Nicks. The Crows defence is bloody solid and will be even stingier when Murray returns.
--- PA's kicking efficiency, both in finding teammates and goalkicking was woeful (2023-Crows-like). Again, nothing to do with Nicks.

Okay, three. THREE main factors .
Whenever the Crows reverted to Nicks' slow, chip-chip defensive schtick, they looked terrible (reminiscent of the 04 start) and PA dominated for long periods without converting.

(Afterthought: the first 2 Fogarty goals + the Cook goal came from kicks deep to their marking advantage, even if the first was a Tex miskick. The new-look mids [especially Soligo, Rankine and Rachele] are lowering their eyes and kicking deeper when our forwards are deeper and behind.
OK, OK, four. FOUR main factors and an almost fanatical devotion ... etc.
I'll start again.

Amongst the main factors were such diverse elements as ... )

Quality

 

[Coopers]

Wow incredible analysis. But let's break it down a little further..

Beat us with Inside 50's by 10, but even Hinkley conceded that the quality and locality of those I50's weren't great (anything we did give up was out towards the boundary, or reasonably far out). You'll also notice that our Defensive half pressure acts and tackles were through the roof, so even on occasions where Port were taking a snap shot on goal, or were on the run, they were under pressure, not just in our forward half but all over the ground.

You seem to ignore the fact that good teams generate turnovers, but you have attributed this fault 100% to Port...

I also love the fact people say 'Port kicked themselves out of the game', well yeah, they've been kicking themselves out of games for years. They've invested heavily in their midfield and defence, and not much up forward. Poor kicking is poor footy...

This is really endemic of what's going on this board......glass half empty mentality.

Dunno... we were really efficient (didn't miss) and Port missed a lot (suck it port).

On balance, I reckon if both teams kick to normal standards, we lose that game.

We did do a good job of making Ports I50 entries wide and shallow, that's true. Still, Boak hit the post, Dixon missed a sitter from the one handed mark, Marshall missed an easy one. Port in General missed 10 low % chances or snaps... if they just get 2 or 3 of those and don't stuff up easy things then we lose.

It's not glass half empty, we kicked bloody well and Port shat their bed.

 

[CrowBloke]

Quality

Noooobody expects The Spanish Inquisition in BF ...

 

[BACCS]

As much as I absolutely LOVE beating Poort, I still want to be realistic.

We fluked that win over CarLOLton, beat one of the worst teams since Fitzroy in Norf and then beat up on an injury riddled Poort with the emotional help of Sloaney retiring.

Even this week, Brisbane battered up and injured off a 6 day break versus our 9 day break...

Any way... Point is, form can sometimes be seducing.

By that metric regarding the Carlton win, Collingwood sure 'fluked' a lot of wins in 2023... A win is a win, nobody (including the ladder) gives a **** if you didn't play your best in the history books, just like nobody cares if you were the better team and couldn't kick straight etc.

Nobody awarded us the 2017 flag because we were in better form than our opponent but had an off day; nobody can take the Bulldogs flag away just because they had a bit of luck in 2016. Carlton were 4-7 last year and playing some awful footy, but went within an inch of a GF.

There are a lot of key stats with our ball movement (scoring from turnover, transition from D50 etc) that are top 4/6 in the league after the Freo game, that's a team in decent form. I have no idea whether we make finals from here, but if our form over the last 5 weeks continues, then we are a far better chance than what I thought after the Freo game.

 

[BACCS]

Dunno... we were really efficient (didn't miss) and Port missed a lot (suck it port).

On balance, I reckon if both teams kick to normal standards, we lose that game.

We did do a good job of making Ports I50 entries wide and shallow, that's true. Still, Boak hit the post, Dixon missed a sitter from the one handed mark, Marshall missed an easy one. Port in General missed 10 low % chances or snaps... if they just get 2 or 3 of those and don't stuff up easy things then we lose.

It's not glass half empty, we kicked bloody well and Port shat their bed.

Port very rarely ever kick for goal to their normal standards in high pressure games though, it's been their problem for years under Ken. Making some easy mistakes is a byproduct of good pressure by the opposition too. The Crows had a pressure rating around 200 for the entire game (which is in the off the charts territory) and Port just couldn't handle that heat and made mistakes as a result.

 

[FullyBigKPro]

By that metric regarding the Carlton win, Collingwood sure 'fluked' a lot of wins in 2023... A win is a win, nobody (including the ladder) gives a * if you didn't play your best in the history books, just like nobody cares if you were the better team and couldn't kick straight etc.

Nobody awarded us the 2017 flag because we were in better form than our opponent but had an off day; nobody can take the Bulldogs flag away just because they had a bit of luck in 2016. Carlton were 4-7 last year and playing some awful footy, but went within an inch of a GF.

There are a lot of key stats with our ball movement (scoring from turnover, transition from D50 etc) that are top 4/6 in the league after the Freo game, that's a team in decent form. I have no idea whether we make finals from here, but if our form over the last 5 weeks continues, then we are a far better chance than what I thought after the Freo game.

Fair - but my point was, i want to see us back it up and beat a top 8 team or two if we are fair dinkum about turning this year around.

Lucky/Fluke wins are fools gold for us at the moment and will only serve to continue to give the likes of McHenry, Murphy etc more games and wall paper over cracks.

Beat Brisbane, beat Pies away and then win all the 'expected' games against Hawks, Richmond and Weagles then we can work out if we have any chance against Sydney in round 14.

 

[Ciao Giacomo]

We have moved from ugly losses to ugly wins.

Sounds like progress to me

 

[Sanders]

This is really endemic of what's going on this board......glass half empty mentality.

Endemic?

Did you mean emblematic

 

[George Kramer]

Wow incredible analysis. But let's break it down a little further..

Beat us with Inside 50's by 10, but even Hinkley conceded that the quality and locality of those I50's weren't great (anything we did give up was out towards the boundary, or reasonably far out). You'll also notice that our Defensive half pressure acts and tackles were through the roof, so even on occasions where Port were taking a snap shot on goal, or were on the run, they were under pressure, not just in our forward half but all over the ground.

You seem to ignore the fact that good teams generate turnovers, but you have attributed this fault 100% to Port...

I also love the fact people say 'Port kicked themselves out of the game', well yeah, they've been kicking themselves out of games for years. They've invested heavily in their midfield and defence, and not much up forward. Poor kicking is poor footy...

This is really endemic of what's going on this board......glass half empty mentality.

Calamity after calamity, 7 years without finals, 26 without a flag, a coach that changes your gameplan to weaken your strengths and blows up your season will do that to you.

On what basis should we take a glass half full approach? Because we are Crows supporters? See the opening paragraph.

 

[BACCS]

Fair - but my point was, i want to see us back it up and beat a top 8 team or two if we are fair dinkum about turning this year around.

Lucky/Fluke wins are fools gold for us at the moment and will only serve to continue to give the likes of McHenry, Murphy etc more games and wall paper over cracks.

Beat Brisbane, beat Pies away and then win all the 'expected' games against Hawks, Richmond and Weagles then we can work out if we have any chance against Sydney in round 14.

We have beaten two top 8 teams already…

I also don’t see our wins as a fluke or luck, the stats show we have been in good form these last 5 weeks and the 3-2 win/loss over that period reflects it. Still 15 rounds to go, so if we continue that form then finals will take care of itself.

 

[NSolis]

In terms of overall positivity, if our season had started against Melbourne I'd be pretty happy. Played some good sides (plus North) for 3-2, two wins away from home, less reliant on a couple of star players than we were last year, emergence of Soligo and some new defenders, a debut of a promising player, improved defensive numbers which was a weak spot at times last year and we even won a close one.

Unfortunately the first three weeks still happened and definitely taint things. Given how our opposition played we should have won at least one of those.

 

[rabidcrow]

Ken gets zero credit. It was obviously a mistake, it was ******* stupid.

I'd be pissed if we did that and would give no credit for owning it.

Owning it was his only option and just more bullshit PR.

Ken protecting Rozee (selfish decision to put his hand up to play) and the Doctors (their doctors have had more than enough scrutiny over the last 12 months)

Only choice he had - because in reality he was the last person to blame out of those above


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com