Review Bad, Ugly, and Horrendous vs Hawks

[Pea Nut]

Keith's defensive work and his intercept marking was good but my good his ball movement was soooo slooow and was a large part of the failure.

He needed runners going past and for him to be dishing off the handball, but we weren't prepared to do that.

 

[Rory Walkerfield]

Here's my full player review.

Sloane - Probably couldn't have done anything more. 36 touches, 11 clearances, 9 tackles, 4 inside 50s. With everyone else not pulling their weight, at least Sloane was in there getting stuff done. Seemed to cope with heavy attention very well. Probably BOG.

M. Crouch - Decent without being his best. Lacked composure with his disposal and relied too much on handballing, needs to get back to that short kicking he was so good at in his All Australian year. 17 contested touches from 40 is a bit low for the role he plays.

B. Crouch - The positive is seeing him play out an entire game, but he looked just a tad off his best. Lacked the explosiveness and clean ball use we've seen from him previously. I hope he can work into it more. Kicked 2 goals which was very good.

Laird - Thought he was terrible despite getting 29 touches. Burned the ball, tried to kick it to the moon, not effective as a defender. 6 turnovers. Contributed to our inability to get the ball cleanly from half back to half forward. Did some dumb stuff. Disappointing.

Atkins - One of the worst 31 disposal games I've ever seen. Terrible disposal, terrible composure, terrible decision making, zero pressure. 7 clangers, 9 turnovers. We probably would have done better had Atkins got the ball less, that's how bad he was. He also had 10 inside 50s, more than double of any other player for the Crows, which is no doubt why we had so many issues. Literally 1/6th of the time, it was Atkins kicking it inside 50. Also had 626 meters gained, which again is an issue because he was so bad yet we used him so often.

Milera - Did some nice things but also struggled at times. Thought he was below his best and again, didn't help us with our issues off half back. The positives are he had 26 touches so he found a lot of it, and managed 4 clearances.

Gibbs - Disgusting effort from a senior player. 16 touches is well below par, he looked lost out there, panicked, rushed every disposal. Finished with just over 60% DE. Seemed to play a bit off half back, but without doing much. Needs to lift massively.

Keath - Excellent. Much better than Hartigan. Can't say a bad word about his game really. Amazingly he only had 50% DE from 20 touches with 7 clangers. Not sure how that happened, he looked like the only player on the ground for us that could actually read the ball in the air.

Smith - Struggled. Looked like he was trying too hard. Disposal off, made some terrible errors in defence like that time he played on out of the goal square and nearly ran into trouble.

Kelly - I don't think he had a bad game, he's just an extremely limited player. He can rack up the ball in defence but he does nothing effective with it, he's too slow to play on smaller players and didn't seem to get in the right spots defensively. Played a lot on Gunston which I felt didn't work. I don't think he's a long term player for us but will no doubt play with Doedee out.

Jacobs - For all the blokes criticizing O'Brien for not doing enough around the ground, Jacobs was smashed around the ground today. McEvoy outmarked him 8 marks to 2, of which 5 were contested, kicking 2 goals. Jacobs only strength right now is his around the ground work because he's a merely average ruckman these days. Why does he ruck deep forward and clog it up in there with Jenkins? Has to be phased out this year.

Knight - I don't rate him. 20 pointless touches for only 129 meters gained playing mostly uncontested footy. Only 3 score involvements. I can't see a position where he plays his best football, he seems to struggle everywhere. I know he's supposed to be this hard, no bullshit player but he just doesn't do enough.

Lynch - I reckon he's our softest player, softer than Atkins. Once again he had massive attention from Hawthorn and he struggled. 103 meters gained for the match, 2 inside 50s and zero scores suggest he wasn't playing his role effectively. 20 touches massively overinflates his contribution, he was bad.

Jenkins - Invisible. Wasn't even playing on good defenders. 1 mark inside 50. No goals, although he did try and failed horribly. Looked confused out there, and was one of the main culprits of our struggles inside 50 because he just wasn't providing anything.

Talia - Meh game from him. Not the root cause of our problems, didn't do anything especially amazing. Played his role and nothing more.

Mackay - This game was typical Dmac. 19 touches at under 70% DE. One score involvement for the match. Like Atkins, he had a lot of meters gained, but that's actually a bad thing because he wasn't using the footy well. Exposed defensively as always. We can't use a panicking Atkins and a mediocre Mackay as our run and carry players and expect to win. Had 7 turnovers as well, some of them direct kicks to Hawthorn under no pressure (not that he was alone). Has no future in the side so get rid of him.

Betts - I felt he tried today and looked better than most of 2018 without getting a big reward. Feels the need to fly for huge mark-of-the-year pack marks because our forward structure is so ineffective and nothing is happening. With better support, eg. genuine crumbing opportunities I felt he could have kicked more.

Douglas - Genuinely awful. Why are we playing him as a deep forward? We have got a plethora of small-medium forward options on the list, so why are we playing a 32-year old midfielder in that position? He's not sharp enough to be playing there, he either plays as a mid/half-forward or preferably, he retires.

Walker - So it's not the injuries, it's just how he is these days. If there's one thing to say about Walker, is that he's been remarkably consistent since the 2017 Grand Final. He can't or doesn't lead, he can't take marks when he does lead, and he is way too easily muscled off the ball. If the opposition is double teaming him it should free up others but for us, that's not how it works. Opposition teams put multiple players on him knowing they can peel off at will after he fails to take a mark. His defensive pressure is awful. The only positive thing I can say about Tex these days is his field disposal is still pretty good and he has great vision. But I don't think we can carry him and Lynch in this role, leaving no one inside 50 who can properly lead and mark. Something has to give and I'm afraid it's the captain.

Jones - I like his intensity around the ground and I'd be disgusted if he was dropped. A lot to work with but didn't get a lot of the ball. Have to persist with him.

Murphy - Invisible and completely ineffective, both offensively and defensively. Can't remain in the team on the back of that effort.

From here I can only recommend a significant number of changes.

Out: Doedee (knee), Douglas (retired*), Jacobs (retired), Walker (omitted), Mackay (omitted), Murphy (omitted)
In: Hartigan, Greenwood, O'Brien, Fogarty, Seedsman, Gallucci

*he is also injured but he should retire because of it

Rocket up the Anus: Atkins, Laird, Gibbs, Jenkins, Lynch, Knight

B Laird - Keath - Hartigan
HB Milera - Talia - Smith
C Seedsman - Sloane - Gibbs
HF Lynch - Jenkins - Greenwood
F Betts - Fogarty - Jones
R O'Brien - M. Crouch - B. Crouch

I Kelly - Atkins - Knight - Gallucci

I feel that Keath would do a pretty good job as an interceptor and Hartigan isn't a bad key defender so he's next man up. Otten also considered but passed over due to speed. Toss up between Gallucci, Davis, Stengle and McHenry for the 22nd spot. I really like Gallucci and want to see more of him at AFL level, so he comes in. McHenry next up if Atkins or Knight stink it up again.

I get people are peeved at walker and Jenkins. Jenkins had one of the stinkiest games of his career which is saying something.

But when you have Atkins, Mackay and Laird continually putting it at your feet, over your head or straight to your opponent, there’s not a lot a big forward can do.

 

[relapse]

This is yet one more example of the club being too soft, it would hurt Jacobs feelings if we traded in another ruckman.

Ffs blind Freedy can see (saw over the last 18 months) how stuffed Sauce is, yet we failed to address it.

Really mind boggling how complacent we are on field (selections) and off field (list management).

Very easy to see why its been 20+ years since our last flag, our Dynasty of Complacency still has many years to go.

Thankyou Mr Chapman and thank you Mr Trigg.

We've often never had the balls to make the hard calls on players, the other issue is that our supporters are full of loyalists that never want to let go.

Going back to 2005, I can still remember when Hudson (got injured?) and we brought back a cooked Matthew Clarke late in 2005.

"Welcome back Clarkey"
"Should never have been dropped"
"We've missed you"

There's too many of our supporters that judge players solely on their reputation rather than their actual output. Even though Sauce has been cooked for 18 months there will be massive melts if we were ever to drop him, "why have they dropped Sauce, he's played his guts out for years and deserves his spot in the side" etc

Unfortunately those of us who want change and can see the writing on the wall are only a fringe group, the majority of our supporters would prefer for Sauce to just keep grinding out mediocre games until he doesn't want to play anymore.

 

[Jeffcrowe]

By that stage I was on my 8th beer and was too numb with disappointment to focus.

Was he on the wing or middle?

Centre square mid and really had some impact

The sting was out of game but still , thought it looked promising just wish we tried it to start the second half

Where is Malcolm blight when you need him

 

[1990crow]

Thought Gibbs was our worst in terms of expected performance vs what he delivered. Pathetic game.
For such a dominant midfield we seemed to do absolutely nothing with it. Fumbled, missed targets, couldn’t control the ball for more than 10 seconds. Never went fast.. which is how we play our best football. If we had we likely would have won, last quarter showed that.
Don Pyke has a lot to answer for, he lost us the game yesterday.

 

[Pea Nut]

Did notice that as well, looked like they were instructed to let the hawk in first and tackle if it is 50/50. The only ones going against this were Crouch x 2 and Sloane, probably went against their DNA.

That certainly wasn't the case either, as we held our space around the contest. If we were doing that you would have extra numbers around the ball.

 

[WetCrow1991]

While there were a few of the usual suspects we needed more running power and speed in that game, not less.

I don't know about that. The side as picked had plenty of running power and speed. We picked a side expecting space to move, wanting space, against a team that never gives us space. It was a selection blunder. The Hawks turned it into a contest, sat outside contests and behind the ball, there was no space to run and speed wouldn't have mattered.

 

[Jeffcrowe]

Thought Gibbs was our worst in terms of expected performance vs what he delivered. Pathetic game.
For such a dominant midfield we seemed to do absolutely nothing with it. Fumbled, missed targets, couldn’t control the ball for more than 10 seconds. Never went fast.. which is how we play our best football. If we had we likely would have won, last quarter showed that.
Don Pyke has a lot to answer for, he lost us the game yesterday.

Agree re Gibbs , I predict he will get dropped within first 5 weeks

 

[MRB37]

“You try telling Sammy he’s not playing this week”

It's a take on an old Sando quote when he was asked why we were still playing Dangerfield while he was clearly hobbling. Basically saying he didn't have the guts to tell Danger to sit out.

 

[CrowBloke]

1) If Keath had an ineffective game there was 21 that had more ineffective games. 2) Trust me Keath is not the problem. 3) He can play and 4) was imho our best or top 3. 5) The problems go deeper than 1 player. 6) Problem start from the top and infiltrate down like a cancer.

Thank you for explaining your opposition , appreciated .

1) No, not 21. Sloane, the Crouches and others were clearly more effective. Keath's 50% DE was in the bottom 2 for the side. Everybody but Douglas had a better DE.
2) I agree. I did not say Keath was "the problem".
3) Yes, I agree. His contested marking especially is very good. 13 contested possessions out of 20 was also very good.
4) OK, well, imho he was not. I repeat, 50% DE (that's 10 INeffective disposals!) and slow to move the ball on.
5) Most definitely. Too many turnovers, dinky shite-kicks that floated or grubbed or hit Hawthorn chests, hospital handballs, poor decision-making etc.
6) Do you mean from Pyke, or Walker? Probably a bit of both?
Walker runs at or handles the ball with his chest puffed out, like an entitled/privileged teenager who thinks he's better than he is actually playing. Pyke looked lost in the Coach's box and I did not see him make any meaningful changes to stop the rot (anybody?). Gibbs playing back didn't work. Short kicks or handballs from kick-ins didn't work and usually put us under pressure, causing cheap turnovers in the F50. Bombing to forwards didn't work.

I think continual selection of non-performers has carried over from last year (eg Mackay , poor Jacobs who looks done and others) and has got to change for the Crows to contend seriously.

 

[Truck25]

True, but our fowards don't win contests also. Not entirely their fault, we pick them, we choose not to draft forwards who love a contest.

I think this change with the Fog, that kid loves the contest and will break some defenders.

 

[1990crow]

Agree re Gibbs , I predict he will get dropped within first 5 weeks

Bloody hope not, if he does may as well kiss our season goodbye.

 

[Elite Crow]

Centre square mid and really had some impact

The sting was out of game but still , thought it looked promising just wish we tried it to start the second half

Where is Malcolm blight when you need him

Wow, we tried Smith in the middle, Ive only been calling for it for 5 years, I had given up on it.

Milera or Smith need to play in the middle, we need someone who can break away with pace and deliver. Plus it gets them closer to scoring, Smith missed one but it breaks up our predictable forward line entries if he’s having shots at goal from 50.

 

[relapse]

no I'm telling you, the bookies have us as slight favorites currently.

WOW, I am honestly shocked at that.

 

[Southerntakeover]

It's a take on an old Sando quote when he was asked why we were still playing Dangerfield while he was clearly hobbling. Basically saying he didn't have the guts to tell Danger to sit out.

Wasn't it about why we wouldnt rest Thommo?

 

[Pea Nut]

I don't know about that. The side as picked had plenty of running power and speed. We picked a side expecting space to move, wanting space, against a team that never gives us space. It was a selection blunder. The Hawks turned it into a contest, sat outside contests and behind the ball, there was no space to run and speed wouldn't have mattered.

You have to create space against the Hawks. We won more than our share at the contest. We just moved the ball backwards and sideways from the contest and then tried to go around Hawthorns zone. We needed to be running in numbers and move through the zone with handball. We did this at times, mostly when it was too late, and Hawthorn can't stop it. They are slow and they panic. So yes, we needed more running power not less.

 

[CrowBloke]

All preseason we train, have match simulations and internal trials against ourselves. The problem is our players aren’t a strong tackling team, they don’t apply the heat so when an opposition brings it they crumble and can’t handle it.

This could be a really good point ... but isn't that a problem for all teams? I mean, do you want seriously hard-tackling training which might cause injuries?
I don't know --- do the teams with mongrel train with mongrel, or are they just better prepared mentally than the Crows on game day?

 

[Pea Nut]

Wow, we tried Smith in the middle, Ive only been calling for it for 5 years, I had given up on it.

Milera or Smith need to play in the middle, we need someone who can break away with pace and deliver. Plus it gets them closer to scoring, Smith missed one but it breaks up our predictable forward line entries if he’s having shots at goal from 50.

Milera also started in at the centre bounce in the last 5 minutes of the last quarter. I hope to see a lot more of it this year.

 

[CrowBloke]

I don't think overusing the ball was the plan going into the game, but it was forced upon us tactically. Hawthorn always had spares sitting about 30 metres off the ball so we were forced into trying to chip the ball through to get some movement rather than going long with our kicks.

Very good point.
Those chip-kicks were especially ineffective --- attempted finesse lacking determined execution-skills.

 

[Footypie32]

Kane had a segment on how Clarkson set up in defence. Basically our players had no where to kick to, they were trying to kick to the right spots but Clarkson had his defenders plugging the holes but we still kept kicking to the same spots.

And because our forwards are poor markers and one on one, we were smashed in there. None of our forwards smash the packs or can take a mark. We need to change the mix.

We would actually be better off kicking worm-burners into the F50 than those loopy sky balls.

 

[Footypie32]

OH AND EDDIE BETTS PLEASE STOP TRYING TO TAKE SCREAMERS AND STAY ON THE ****ING GROUND YOU ARE A CRUMBER!!!

 

[Truck25]

That certainly wasn't the case either, as we held our space around the contest. If we were doing that you would have extra numbers around the ball.

I'm actually OK with that, we used to get opened up because we got too many numbers at the contest. It was more the one on one contests around the ground. Rather than go hard to win the ball more than once there was a half step taken to allow the hawk first possession and then a tackle applied. Of course the flaw in this plan is we can't stick a tackle.

 

[WetCrow1991]

You have to create space against the Hawks. We won more than our share at the contest. We just moved the ball backwards and sideways from the contest and then tried to go around Hawthorns zone. We needed to be running in numbers and move through the zone with handball. We did this at times, mostly when it was too late, and Hawthorn can't stop it. They are slow and they panic. So yes, we needed more running power not less.

My point is that more running power wouldn't have mattered because the willingness wasn't there and often isn't there against Hawthorn, so picking more leg speed would have made it worse yesterday. However, not picking Gibbs and Douglas, and picking Greenwood and CEY instead would have probably seen a better result. What we lacked was aggression and intent mainly.

If by running power you mean we needed are players to run more, then yeah sure, but they weren't doing that, Hawks clogged up space. So with the gift of hindsight, what we should have done is gone more contested.

 

[Truck25]

OH AND EDDIE BETTS PLEASE STOP TRYING TO TAKE SCREAMERS AND STAY ON THE ******* GROUND YOU ARE A CRUMBER!!!

We should also tell the rest of the team to stop putting it on his head against tall defenders with no KPF in the area forcing him to make the contest.

 

[Elite Crow]

This could be a really good point ... but isn't that a problem for all teams? I mean, do you want seriously hard-tackling training which might cause injuries?
I don't know --- do the teams with mongrel train with mongrel, or are they just better prepared mentally than the Crows on game day?

I don’t think you can just flick the switch, it’s got to be in your DNA. If you go through a preseason without training with that mongrel then you play without it. It’s also part of your gameplan to play that way and that’s what the preseason is for, to develop your game plan.

Players also very rarely get injured due to being tackled so that shouldn’t be a concern.