Review R1: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly vs. Collingwood

[George CantStandYa]

You don’t think any team would have a better chance of scoring with a direct clearance each time rather than risking it being cleared by the opposition?
Theres obviously clearances and there’s clearances but give me winning the clearance each time than losing it.

Yep, Worrell basically said that this week. Instead of the ball being pumped at them, it’s being pumped at opposition defenders. How is that not a good thing?

Worrell was asked something like “when was the last time we won centre clearances like that” he responded with “I don’t think we’ve ever won them”.

Even on the weekend, we might not have directly scored off a clearance, but the pressure put on Collingwood defenders saw us attack again after they initially cleared it. Pedlar, Ah Chee and I think Rachelle all missed gettable goals from clearances.

 

[AFC979810]

Problem is, Lynch wasted the equivalent of 16.5 points that game compared to what he was expected to score from the opportunities he generated. In a game as defined by momentum (and one where there are only a finite amount of chances), that is back breaking. This type of poor skill-execution costs game, as it did on the weekend.

Murray just wasn't there and those ratings reflect that. One or two poor bits of skill execution (and the rating system wouldn't punished the dropped mark too heavily as it is in the forward 50, i.e. Adelaide should have been able to defend that), a couple of hitouts/tackles to counteract it and that's about it. Can't be that much of negative if you don't get involved because reality is, if it's not you, someone else will pick up that slack (and worth noting, Adelaide had the 4th highest disposal count in the round and beat Collingwood by 20).

It's a tough situation. But I fundamentally disagree with a system that says a player that scores 25% of their teams points is the worst player out of 431 players and the player that sits his ass on the bench all game is better.

 

[AFC979810]

Yep, Worrell basically said that this week. Instead of the ball being pumped at them, it’s being pumped at opposition defenders. How is that not a good thing?

Worrell was asked something like “when was the last time we won centre clearances like that” he responded with “I don’t think we’ve ever won them”.

Look at Worrell making all the sense. The brilliant tactician!

Made all the difference. Instead of 49 inside 50's he had to defend in the final against Collingwood last year he only had to defend against 59 inside 50's this year. Makes sense.

But you are right - we won the centre clearances 16 - 9. What a win. What do you think we scored from that dominance? 1.2 is what we scored from those 16 centre clearances.

What a massive difference that was compared to the final we lost against Collingwood. I mean in that final we lost the center clearances 12-10 and scored 1.1 from the centre clearances.

Jeez - you know your footy George. That dominance this round of those extra 6 centre clearances that translated to one extra point really made the difference. Call the press - the game was won and lost right there.

Even on the weekend, we might not have directly scored off a clearance, but the pressure put on Collingwood defenders saw us attack again after they initially cleared it. Pedlar, Ah Chee and I think Rachelle all missed gettable goals from clearances.

I am so surprised that instead of running away from you - Marco didn't offer you a position as head of strategy at West Coast.

 

[Vader]

The fact that Sydney let McAndrew walk means nothing. I said in previous posts (that old mate Bicks wont respond to) that they chose to keep Callum Sinclair as their number one ruck and trade Darcy Cameron for a pick in the 50's. Ruckman take time to develop (which is why it makes sense to poach them rather than draft em).

When you say "they let him walk", that's a massive re-writing of history. They delisted him with the expectation that no other club would be interested in signing him. When Adelaide signed him it was originally to the SANFL side, but he impressed so much over the pre-season that they opted to sign him in the PSSP (after Strachan got injured).

His situation was completely different to that of Keays, where the decision to delist him was deliberately done to facilitate his transfer to Adelaide. That was a case of "letting him walk".

 

[Vader]

Except that McAndrew may have still been developing as a ruckman. I accept that the new rules favour McA, but maybe there's more to it than that.

There really isn't any more to it than that.

 

[George CantStandYa]

Look at Worrell making all the sense. The brilliant tactician!

Made all the difference. Instead of 49 inside 50's he had to defend in the final against Collingwood last year he only had to defend against 59 inside 50's this year. Makes sense.

But you are right - we won the centre clearances 16 - 9. What a win. What do you think we scored from that dominance? 1.2 is what we scored from those 16 centre clearances.

What a massive difference that was compared to the final we lost against Collingwood. I mean in that final we lost the center clearances 12-10 and scored 1.1 from the centre clearances.

Jeez - you know your footy George. That dominance this round of those extra 6 centre clearances that translated to one extra point really made the difference. Call the press - the game was won and lost right there.




I am so surprised that instead of running away from you - Marco didn't offer you a position as head of strategy at West Coast.

Big big difference between inside 50s from field play when you’ve had time to set up your defence versus a centre clearance inside 50 with 6-6-6. Surprised you didn’t know that and that’s what Worrell was referring to. You know the defender who actually is on the receiving end of quick inside 50s and has to defend them.

 

[George CantStandYa]

When you say "they let him walk", that's a massive re-writing of history. They delisted him with the expectation that no other club would be interested in signing him. When Adelaide signed him it was originally to the SANFL side, but he impressed so much over the pre-season that they opted to sign him in the PSSP (after Strachan got injured).

His situation was completely different to that of Keays, where the decision to delist him was deliberately done to facilitate his transfer to Adelaide. That was a case of "letting him walk".

They had no choice the sign him as a PSSP, they had ROB and an injured Strachan as rucks.

 

[AFC979810]

You don’t think any team would have a better chance of scoring with a direct clearance each time rather than risking it being cleared by the opposition?
Theres obviously clearances and there’s clearances but give me winning the clearance each time than losing it.

Thats not the game anymore. You Boomers need to get with the times.

It used to be - win the contested ball, control the footy, dominate possession, other team can't score if you have the ball, push it forward and hope to score - then rinse and repeat.

Its 2026. Its all about the setup, momentum and structures.

Look at our close games. As a reasonable man - you will understand this. Games decided within 20 points for this example (Games we win or lose by more than 20 points aren't close and stats are skewed IMO)

Rd 5 - Lose by 19 - Lose clearances by 3
Rd 6 - Win by 18 - Dominate clearances by 13.
Rd 7 - Lose by 19 - Lose clearances by 8.
Rd 9 - Win by 5 - LOSE CLEARANCES BY 17 (Power)
Rd 10 - Lose by 10 - Win Clearances by 10 - (Cwood)
Rd 13 - Win by 5 - LOSE CLEARANCES BY 19 - (Lions).
Rd 14 - Lose by 3 - Win clearances by 5 (hawks).
Rd 17 - Win by 13 - Win clearances by 6 (dees).
Rd 18 - Win by 11 - Lose clearances by 8 (dogs).
Rd 21 - Win by 14 - Lose Clearances by 9 (hawks).
Rd 22 - Win by 9 - Win Clearances by 11 (Eagles).
Rd 23 - Win by 3 - Lose Clearances by 14 (Pies).
Rd 24 - Win by 13 - Lose clearances by 21 (North).

Final 1 - Lose by 24 - Win Clearances by 2 (Pies)


Games we win clearances we are 3-3.
Games we lose clearances we are 6-2

Tell me how much better off we are worrying about winning the clearances? Our team, gameplan is built around scoring off turnovers.

 

[Mutineer]

When you say "they let him walk", that's a massive re-writing of history. They delisted him with the expectation that no other club would be interested in signing him. When Adelaide signed him it was originally to the SANFL side, but he impressed so much over the pre-season that they opted to sign him in the PSSP (after Strachan got injured).

His situation was completely different to that of Keays, where the decision to delist him was deliberately done to facilitate his transfer to Adelaide. That was a case of "letting him walk".

Think you have Keays mixed up with the Mitch Hinge situation.

We threw Keays a lifeline after Brisbane had delisted him, Brisbane had a 1 year deal on the table for Hinge but didn't stand in his way when Adelaide offered him a better deal and guaranteed him AFL games something Brisbane weren't prepared to do.

McAndrew was always going to be signed for the AFL unless he stunk it up big time against ROB during the preseason training, no ifs buts or maybes after Strachan went down. No way were they going into an AFL season without a back up ruckman even if he only played SANFL.

 

[AFC979810]

When you say "they let him walk", that's a massive re-writing of history. They delisted him with the expectation that no other club would be interested in signing him. When Adelaide signed him it was originally to the SANFL side, but he impressed so much over the pre-season that they opted to sign him in the PSSP (after Strachan got injured).

His situation was completely different to that of Keays, where the decision to delist him was deliberately done to facilitate his transfer to Adelaide. That was a case of "letting him walk".

Wut? Jeez you say a lot of bullshit as fact.

Brisbane didn't want Keays. They delisted him. Sydney didn't want McAndrew - they delisted him.

Both players were unwanted by their clubs and picked up as rejects by the Adelaide Football Club.

You honestly think that Brisbane let Keays go for nothing knowing Adelaide wanted him? Then the Crows were content to wait (and risk losing access to him) before they swooped at pick 7 in the rookie draft? You dont think if the Crows were really interested they would throw in a shitty draft pick for him?

Why were Brisbane happy to let Keays walk out to Adelaide for nothing in return?

 

[AFC979810]

Big big difference between inside 50s from field play when you’ve had time to set up your defence versus a centre clearance inside 50 with 6-6-6. Surprised you didn’t know that and that’s what Worrell was referring to. You know the defender who actually is on the receiving end of quick inside 50s and has to defend them.

Massive difference you are right.

Collingwood final - Collingwood won 12 Centre clearances

RD 1 2026 - Collingwood won 9 Centre Clearances

Those 3 centre clearances were clearly the difference between a 20 point loss and a 14 point win!

 

[AFC979810]

McAndrew was always going to be signed for the AFL unless he stunk it up big time against ROB during the preseason training, no ifs buts or maybes after Strachan went down. No way were they going into an AFL season without a back up ruckman even if he only played SANFL.

Unless we signed Harry Boyd first? Weren't we an embarrassment for not signing him because St Kilda did.

Where is Harry now? Can we still get him? Might be a valuable pickup - although I bet he is on a long term deal somewhere.

 

[George CantStandYa]

Massive difference you are right.

Collingwood final - Collingwood won 12 Centre clearances

RD 1 2026 - Collingwood won 9 Centre Clearances

Those 3 centre clearances were clearly the difference between a 20 point loss and a 14 point win!

And once again you’re looking at one stat in isolation as if that’s the sole reason for a win or loss, but when you’re a troll….

By the way, in the final we won 10 centre clearances in the final compared to 16 rd 1. Seeing maths isn’t your strong suit, that’s a combined 9 clearance differential between the 2 games.

 

[Mutineer]

Unless we signed Harry Boyd first? Weren't we an embarrassment for not signing him because St Kilda did.

Where is Harry now? Can we still get him? Might be a valuable pickup - although I bet he is on a long term deal somewhere.

You've tried this one on before and you know it's a complete fabrication on your part.

 

[George CantStandYa]

You've tried this one on before and you know it's a complete fabrication on your part.

Yep, pretty sure he acknowledged it too, clear troll

 

[FR0GGY]

Thats not the game anymore. You Boomers need to get with the times.

It used to be - win the contested ball, control the footy, dominate possession, other team can't score if you have the ball, push it forward and hope to score - then rinse and repeat.

Its 2026. Its all about the setup, momentum and structures.

Look at our close games. As a reasonable man - you will understand this. Games decided within 20 points for this example (Games we win or lose by more than 20 points aren't close and stats are skewed IMO)

Rd 5 - Lose by 19 - Lose clearances by 3
Rd 6 - Win by 18 - Dominate clearances by 13.
Rd 7 - Lose by 19 - Lose clearances by 8.
Rd 9 - Win by 5 - LOSE CLEARANCES BY 17 (Power)
Rd 10 - Lose by 10 - Win Clearances by 10 - (Cwood)
Rd 13 - Win by 5 - LOSE CLEARANCES BY 19 - (Lions).
Rd 14 - Lose by 3 - Win clearances by 5 (hawks).
Rd 17 - Win by 13 - Win clearances by 6 (dees).
Rd 18 - Win by 11 - Lose clearances by 8 (dogs).
Rd 21 - Win by 14 - Lose Clearances by 9 (hawks).
Rd 22 - Win by 9 - Win Clearances by 11 (Eagles).
Rd 23 - Win by 3 - Lose Clearances by 14 (Pies).
Rd 24 - Win by 13 - Lose clearances by 21 (North).

Final 1 - Lose by 24 - Win Clearances by 2 (Pies)


Games we win clearances we are 3-3.
Games we lose clearances we are 6-2

Tell me how much better off we are worrying about winning the clearances? Our team, gameplan is built around scoring off turnovers.

My parents might be boomers but not me.
What were the teams we played, where did we play them?
It’s pretty simplistic to just correlate wins or losses with clearances.
I reckon you’ll find every coach would want to win the clearances.

 

[Huntercrow]

McAndrew was always marginally better than ROB at centre clearances and worse than ROB at other stoppages. He was always better with his skills but worse in terms of endurance. All of those are the same now except for centre clearances where, under the new rules, McAndrew is light years ahead of ROB.

I'm sure McAndrew has improved marginally since last year, but it's fair to say that the rule changes are the primary reason why McAndrew was not considered a superior option to ROB last year, but is now.

I guess a lot depends on how McAndrew handles English tomorrow night. ROB, with all his deficiencies is a handy backup. but I think he became too comfortable after his contract extension. Maybe the kick he needed.

 

[Cromulant]

I guess a lot depends on how McAndrew handles English tomorrow night. ROB, with all his deficiencies is a handy backup. but I think he became too comfortable after his contract extension. Maybe the kick he needed.

He ran out of legs at tbe end of the season, simple as that.

And now he has to learn how to jump again.

 

[Vader]

I guess a lot depends on how McAndrew handles English tomorrow night. ROB, with all his deficiencies is a handy backup. but I think he became too comfortable after his contract extension. Maybe the kick he needed.

ROB's absence has nothing to do with him becoming too comfortable. ROB's ruck game was based on strength & wrestling, which has effectively been banned by the AFL (at centre throw-ups). Now height & leap are of primary importance, and we all know ROB struggles to leap over a sheet of tissue paper.

Sadly, complacency is not the issue, and no amount of kicking is going to help. Effectively, you'd be flogging a dead horse.

ROB's absence has everything to do with the AFL's ruck rule changes. These changes have simultaneously made McAndrew's career, while also destroying ROB's. The AFL giveth, and the AFL taketh away.

 

[Southerntakeover]

Thats not the game anymore. You Boomers need to get with the times.

It used to be - win the contested ball, control the footy, dominate possession, other team can't score if you have the ball, push it forward and hope to score - then rinse and repeat.

Its 2026. Its all about the setup, momentum and structures.

Look at our close games. As a reasonable man - you will understand this. Games decided within 20 points for this example (Games we win or lose by more than 20 points aren't close and stats are skewed IMO)

Rd 5 - Lose by 19 - Lose clearances by 3
Rd 6 - Win by 18 - Dominate clearances by 13.
Rd 7 - Lose by 19 - Lose clearances by 8.
Rd 9 - Win by 5 - LOSE CLEARANCES BY 17 (Power)
Rd 10 - Lose by 10 - Win Clearances by 10 - (Cwood)
Rd 13 - Win by 5 - LOSE CLEARANCES BY 19 - (Lions).
Rd 14 - Lose by 3 - Win clearances by 5 (hawks).
Rd 17 - Win by 13 - Win clearances by 6 (dees).
Rd 18 - Win by 11 - Lose clearances by 8 (dogs).
Rd 21 - Win by 14 - Lose Clearances by 9 (hawks).
Rd 22 - Win by 9 - Win Clearances by 11 (Eagles).
Rd 23 - Win by 3 - Lose Clearances by 14 (Pies).
Rd 24 - Win by 13 - Lose clearances by 21 (North).

Final 1 - Lose by 24 - Win Clearances by 2 (Pies)


Games we win clearances we are 3-3.
Games we lose clearances we are 6-2

Tell me how much better off we are worrying about winning the clearances? Our team, gameplan is built around scoring off turnovers.

I don't want to end up getting immersed in whatever this whole thing is, but I think it would be pretty hard to view both of the games you capitalised as demonstrations of reliable winning methods.

We were extremely lucky to hang on in both games having been dominated at the death.

 

[AFC979810]

You've tried this one on before and you know it's a complete fabrication on your part.

100% incorrect.

Me thinks someone deleted it.

But here is one less aggressive talking up how with sound list management we could have Harry Boyd (and for cheap too!).

What could have been with sound list management....and cheap too

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/news/st-kilda-track-watch-mattaes-phillipou-and-ssp-recruit-harry-boyd-star-in-match-sim/news-story/c5ce020e3a1ed4ab612b23c9942584c0

St Kilda track watch: Mattaes Phillipou and SSP recruit Harry Boyd star in match sim​

Rowan Marshall sat out St Kilda’s match-simulation session on Friday, leaving Harry Boyd to make his mark – and his brilliant work with a young midfielder could be a sign of things to com

Harry Boyd and Max Heath go head-to-head at St Kilda training. Picture: Andrew Henshaw

RUCK AROUND​

With Rowan Marshall unsighted during training, the newest Saint duelled with a rotating cast of rucks.

Boyd performed strongly against Alex Dodson, Max Heath and Cooper Sharman, who all spent time grappling with the SSP signing.

Boyd is tipped for major ruck duties from the start of the season, with a growing expectation that Marshall will play major minutes forward of the ball.

 

[Mutineer]

100% incorrect.

Me thinks someone deleted it.

But here is one less aggressive talking up how with sound list management we could have Harry Boyd (and for cheap too!).

Keep trying bud, I really don't get why you just seem to come on here trying to piss people off, pretty sad really. Whatever gets your rocks off I guess.

And once again so it sinks in for you I only ever put Boyd forward as a back up option in place of Strachan after it became obvious Strachan wasn't up to AFL level.

 

[AFC979810]

Keep trying bud, I really don't get why you just seem to come on here trying to piss people off, pretty sad really. Whatever gets your rocks off I guess.

And once again so it sinks in for you I only ever put Boyd forward as a back up option in place of Strachan after it became obvious Strachan wasn't up to AFL level.

I talk plenty of footy too!

 

[Cromulant]

My parents might be boomers but not me.
What were the teams we played, where did we play them?
It’s pretty simplistic to just correlate wins or losses with clearances.
I reckon you’ll find every coach would want to win the clearances.

This year its been very much a clearance game. It would be ridiculous to suggest a coach wouldn't want to win them.

Doesn't mean you cant win if you dont, but its much harder.

 

[Golumless]

This year its been very much a clearance game. It would be ridiculous to suggest a coach wouldn't want to win them.

Doesn't mean you cant win if you dont, but its much harder.

Has it?

If we're talking about where scoring originates from, even with the small sample size, it's really no different from last year. The average AFL scoring from plays originating as a stoppage has gone up from 33.8 to 34.9 (with center bounces going from 11.4 to 12.7) compared to turnovers increasing from 46.8 points a game to 55.2 this year. I'd expect these numbers go down as we begin to enter the colder months, sample sizes increase, and teams begin to tighten up.

No doubt you'd rather win clearances, but the evidence so far is the game really hasn't shifted for most teams. The one team who you could argue these changes were a godsend for is, uhh, our opponent tonight.