Training 2022 Training Reports

[masai tu]

Meek was the best of the three of them on the day.

Don’t agree with you on the backline. I thought Chapman and Ryan great, everyone else okay to poor.

Backline ?.

Kennedy & Dixon = 0 goals.

Some players must have been doing something right.

Honestly it is very hard to take a lot out of pre season games, as I wonder how much pressure is applied to opposition players. If 4 points were on the line, I reckon a lot more close checking would be applied to opponents.

 

[theGav56]

Backline ?.

Kennedy & Dixon = 0 goals.

Some players must have been doing something right.

Honestly it is very hard to take a lot out of pre season games, as I wonder how much pressure is applied to opposition players. If 4 points were on the line, I reckon a lot more close checking would be applied to opponents.

My expectations for our backline are for them to be elite,and it looks like that was JLs preferred players. I certainly think they can be. 0 goals is one metric but keeping JK goalless in a pre-season game is meaningless.

Individually and collectively we were better the first game, but it means little until the game is for 4 points.

 

[Ge3ks]

Individually and collectively we were better the first game, but it means little until the game is for 4 points.

Worth noting that West Coast lost their structure in the first quarter last week due to a quick succession of injuries.

Yesterday they were able to play four quarters injury free.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Based on skimming through the game day thread I suspect the negativity was because some expected we'd go through the motions and have a 10+ goal win? Playing against witches hats ahead of Rd 1 would have been the worst outcome for us. I know a lot is made of WC's outs but they still have their best ruck and mid, their best runner, their two best forwards (Kennedy, Ryan), and all their key defenders (Hurn, Gov, Barrass). Their whole spine was out there sans the anti-vax guy. When Chesser keeps getting mentioned as the 4th on their list of outs I think the media might be going a bit overboard about the 'crisis'. Apart from Shuey, Yeo and Sheed they've got a lot of 'meh' players out atm.

There were only four negatives from the game imo...

1. Goal kicking accuracy, especially from set shots. Although the two sets of goal posts must have been ******* annoying for the players.
2. Positioning to crumb in the forward line - we had a heap of snapped goals last week and very few this week. We just weren't getting enough to the contest when we bombed to the top of the square or else we weren't positioning correctly and spoiling each other when we did. We had a massive 21 marks i50 so clearly we didn't rely on bombing deep too often.
3. We didn't defend the ground ball well when they regularly bombed long into their 50. Their mids were left front and square unopposed and that led to most of their goals being easy snaps on goal like we had last week. None of their talls scored (so our KPDs were doing their jobs).
4. We gave away some really dumb free kicks. It doesn't matter that some were weak af, the players just need to not give the umpires a reason to fu** us over.

As for the contested work and clearances, I thought it was a silly comment by whichever commentator was crapping on about how WC won the contested ball by so much. Our focus was clearly on uncontested ball movement which for the most part I thought was excellent. And I thought there were three reasons our stoppage work wasn't as good as it should be...

1. Darcy was blowing out the cobwebs and was patchy - he gave away two frees at the centre bounce from tackling without the ball leading to centre clearances against and then it felt like he stopped following up post tap. A few of his stoppage taps were brilliant, and that snapped goal was excellent but I actually thought our stoppage/clearance work was often better when Meek was rucking.
2. Mundy was a bit of a liability defensively. Was a big part of the reason Kelly dominated, to the point he eventually got moved off of him.
3. WC's sole focus from last week was clearly applying a heap more pressure on the ball so we didn't just waltz out of stoppages like last week. And on the flip side they were very good at throwing the ball around without getting pinged by the umps which bodes well for me throwing something through my TV come the regular season.

If you couldn't see the scoreboard you'd have never even considered us losing that game. The biggest plus from the last two games imo is I don't expect us to fu** it up every time the ball is heading towards our 50 anymore. The forward line definitely looks better coordinated, and the mid connection looks really good. 21 marks i50 is huge and for the most part they were in really kickable locations - which unfortunately also means our goal accuracy was actually worse than normal. At least a lot of our misses only just missed though I suppose.

tldr; stop over-reacting, it is pre-season. Neither the 97 point smashing last week nor the 13 point win this week mean anything. Looks more good than bad if you compare to last year imo - especially the forward line.

All good points, not sure I’m entirely ok with letting them off the hook with the midfield battle, it was bad considering the opposition but yes, Mundy and Darcy will be better off for the run. JL was also not too happy with the midfield battle going from the post match presser.

Speaking of which, I’m growing to love his pressers, just enough honesty to keep interesting while still towing the line. Felt like there was a little kick up Henry’s butt as well with the mention of players that thought this week would be as easy as last.

All in all, as good a pre-season as we could have reasonably hoped for. Close to a full strength best 22 for round 1, with what looks like only a couple of players in the 20-25 range being unavailable. Game plan looks great, young players look better and draftees can destroy Peel before moving up. Bring on Adelaide

 

[Superkoops]

Meek was awesome today. Really want him to work on his forward craft as I think Lobb is a liability.

Meek was solid but he got rag dolled by Naitanui in the second half, especially centre bounces and general ruck duals. Around the ground Meek was good (ie Meek’s far superior fitness left Fatso for dead). Meek really needs to continue to work on his one on one ruck body work. Perhaps Sandilands has some further tips after seeing him play a little more. Naitanui was just shifting him aside and palming the ball to Kelly like pre-season training.

 

[rgauci]

Meek was solid but he got rag dolled by Naitanui in the second half, especially centre bounces and general ruck duals. Around the ground Meek was good (ie Meek’s far superior fitness left Fatso for dead). Meek really needs to continue to work on his one on one ruck body work. Perhaps Sandilands has some further tips after seeing him play a little more. Naitanui was just shifting him aside and palming the ball to Kelly like pre-season training.

Gee I didn’t see it like that at all. Thought Meek was better than Darcy at the centre bounces versus Naitanui, Darcy got toweled up a bit early, once Meek started in the 2nd half we were better around the ball.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Meek was solid but he got rag dolled by Naitanui in the second half, especially centre bounces and general ruck duals. Around the ground Meek was good (ie Meek’s far superior fitness left Fatso for dead). Meek really needs to continue to work on his one on one ruck body work. Perhaps Sandilands has some further tips after seeing him play a little more. Naitanui was just shifting him aside and palming the ball to Kelly like pre-season training.

It’s funny, I think Meek and Darcy are completely opposite in regards to their rucking strengths. Meek is often really good in the centre square where he can run and jump, halve a contest before following up with superior agility. Darcy is a tank who dominates around the ground stoppages because he just takes poll position and is unmoveable, his centre square stuff is average compared to his around the ground stuff though.

I still can’t push Lobb out for Meek either, it’s an unfortunate problem where Lobb is still significantly better then Meek in the forwardline and I doubt that ever changes. Meek is a very very good ruck, just not what the team needs as first choice on balance

 

[Superkoops]

Meek is certainly becoming more and more impressive. If Lobb does leave at the end of the season, I hope that’s the way we go rather than picking up some expensive, underperforming replacement (Jackson would be just expensive).

Fact is though Meek has kicked one goal so far in his AFL career from multiple games as the ruck/forward. Has a bit to work on there. I’m starting to come around to us maybe being able to make it work though - just feel Lobb is still the better option for this season.

Also long term I think we see Henry and NOD on either wing. I actually think Henry is showing a bit but he’s not going to consistent for a while. Acres and Aish seem to lack the magic (for lack of a better term) the really good wingers have. Hoping NOD can be an upgrade.

I think Henry was one of the players JLo referred to in his conference that was coasting a little yesterday. I love Henry but needs to lift his intensity for longer. Watched the game a second time and he got caught with the ball a few times and probably thought things would be a little easier like last week. A good learning opportunity for him heading into round 1. Think quick and dispose of the ball quickly. Little nugget Schultz was another a little too casual.

Whereas Cox looked to be coasting last week but was much improved yesterday. Dixon was ok but Cox had him covered when it mattered.

NOD was awesome last week. His tackling pressure led to a heap of turnovers. He will get a debut injury permitting very soon.

Shame Tucker hasn’t played a game because his pre-season has been great and is very fit.

 

[Scham]

Really interesting and exciting to see who get the nod for round 1.

Providing we don't have any training mishaps, we'll be very strong.

 

[blue shark]

Really agree with this, the team looked better with the change of Meek on.

I get frustrated seeing Lobb give up on contests he could get to.

Plus defenders find it very difficult to knock Meek off his line, and he is better when the ball is in the ground.

Based off the two practice matches, I’d have Meek in for round one over Lobb.

Also have serious concerns with Henry - he just doesn’t go hard at contests when he needs to and it leads to the opposition clearing the ball.

I’d prefer Nod on the wing, at least we get 100% and his ceiling looks comparable to Henry to me.

The wings require an offensive running machine, elite skills. The other is the defensive winger, hard running but can play inside/outside.
Having Acres/Henry isn’t the best combo IMO.
This is because neither are going to worry the stats in tackling.
In time Worner, NOD, Johnson will be available.
Acres is ok, but is never going to be star, has the height, size, but I see him as handy depth, and will always tease us fans.
I still think Henry is the Walters replacement, short stints midfield, maybe rotating with Sonny?

 

[Superkoops]

Gee I didn’t see it like that at all. Thought Meek was better than Darcy at the centre bounces versus Naitanui, Darcy got toweled up a bit early, once Meek started in the 2nd half we were better around the ball.

Maybe it was other ruck contests rather than Centre bounce but I counted quite a few where Naitanui pulled/pushed him aside and palmed the ball to his rovers.

Last week Naitanui was called for a few free kicks against doing the same thing but perhaps there was a technical adjustment.

Anyway I’m not wanting to have a go at Meek just something I noticed where he would need to improve. I agree the contests where he jumped up he did very well. The body wrestling ones Naitanui had him covered. Around the ground he was part of the link up chain. Dropped a couple of marks but butters up well.

Just watched the highlights again and add Crowden to the list of those who cruised a little yesterday. Was one passage on the wing where Henry half jogged after an Eagles player and then decided the player was running the ball too long and then decided to speed up it it was too late and the inside fifty led to a goal.

There was also the nicely weighted kick by Liam Ryan to Jermaine Jones and the player who was manning Jones was Crowden - caught ball watching.

 

[theGav56]

I still think Henry is the Walters replacement, short stints midfield, maybe rotating with Sonny?

My question regarding Henry is about whether he should be being developed at AFL or WAFL level.

At AFL level he doesn't look like a better option than Aish, so play Aish.

Once Tucker becomes available that hurdle becomes more difficult.

And if we are still giving opportunities for development (which should be rare now), Erasmus, O'Driscoll and Walker should all be in contention for the same position.

 

[Dockeroo]

The goal kicking accuracy issue is an interesting one. Ive always felt that in general, inaccurate goalkickers don’t suddenly become dead eye dicks, especially over one preseason.
That’s why I’m keen to get Treacy into the team ASAP.
The quickest way to achieve a long term improvement in our goal kicking accuracy statistics is to have different personnel taking more of the shots, that are just naturally more accurate kickers.
If we can get Treacy, amiss (or never-miss as Jlo called him last week) and Sturt in the team and taking the bulk of the set shots we won’t be bottom of the league for goal kicking accuracy any more.
In the meantime, we will have to rely on some incremental improvements from players like Frederick, Fyfe, Lobb, Colyer and a few others who have demonstrated poor to average accuracy at best in the past few seasons.
Taberner, Walters and Schultz strike me as being around the league average or maybe even slightly better for goal kicking accuracy so they aren’t really the issue I’d guess.

 

[gaskin]

I still can’t push Lobb out for Meek either, it’s an unfortunate problem where Lobb is still significantly better then Meek in the forwardline and I doubt that ever changes. Meek is a very very good ruck, just not what the team needs as first choice on balance

He isn't just better in the forward line. Lobb when he can be bothered is a great get out kick up the line. Meek hasn't shown he can do that yet.

 

[blue shark]

My question regarding Henry is about whether he should be being developed at AFL or WAFL level.

At AFL level he doesn't look like a better option than Aish, so play Aish.

Once Tucker becomes available that hurdle becomes more difficult.

And if we are still giving opportunities for development (which should be rare now), Erasmus, O'Driscoll and Walker should all be in contention for the same position.

I understand what you are saying, but I’m not sold on Henry playing wing full time.
Like Walters who predominantly plays forward with stints in the middle.
I think he plays in both teams, picked on form.
It’s also not just Henry, the small forwards have to play their role, and that is also
being dangerous around goals.

 

[Tony_Clifton]

I would have liked us to try and close down Kelly for a quarter, just for the experience. As you say, Banfield the obvious option. Sometimes it is necessary.

Banfield is simply no good, he tried to tag Steele in the last round of 2021 and Steele got 3 Brownlow votes. You don't need to tag to put some body on an opposition mid.

I agree with dockerfemme here.

It is worth pointing out that we did have a heavy tag on Tim Kelly in last year's derby win. Banfield kept Kelly to 7 touches (3 of which were clangers) and 1 clearence before Kelly came off with injury in the third quarter.

To say Banfield is no good for life after the St Kilda game is silly. If we applied that logic, then everyone who got towelled up in the St Kilda game is simply no good. That's pretty much three quarters of the side.

 

[muzzington]

I feel like Banfield is going to play round 1 and I'm fine with that.

 

[DragoDelph]

Dragging this over from the other thread. Remember we can’t just swap players from the side, we need to trim it.

How many played yesterday? 26?
So Fyfe to come in (27) and 4 to go out.
Outs. Meek, banfield, crowden, Wilson
(Hughes was on the bench and not used, so just slots in for Willo)

Anyone else you want to add, has to displace someone from this side. Who ends up as the sub?

B: Ryan, Cox, Pearce
HB: Young, Logue, Clark
C: Brayshaw, Brodie, Henry
HF: Colyer, Acres, Walters
F: Taberner, Lobb, Schultz
R/Fol: Darcy, Serong, Switkowski
I: Frederick, Mundy, Chapman, Fyfe, Hughes

 

[mattis117]

Really agree with this, the team looked better with the change of Meek on.

I get frustrated seeing Lobb give up on contests he could get to.

Plus defenders find it very difficult to knock Meek off his line, and he is better when the ball is in the ground.

Based off the two practice matches, I’d have Meek in for round one over Lobb.

Also have serious concerns with Henry - he just doesn’t go hard at contests when he needs to and it leads to the opposition clearing the ball.

I’d prefer Nod on the wing, at least we get 100% and his ceiling looks comparable to Henry to me.

Re. Henry, you're showing a bias towards winning contests, Henry isn't in the team to win contests, he's in the team to get handed the ball on a platter for delivery inside 50. Bring in O'Driscoll and yes he'll win more contests, but he's not going to be lacing out every forward 50 entry.

Strange to be judging a players value on his weakest characteristic instead of his strengths. You don't judge a striker on his ability to slide tackle.

I thought Henry was pretty good, West Coast made sure to shut him down this week.

 

[PurpleReign]

I think Henry really creates opportunities with the kicks he chooses. He’s daring and rarely misses a target. The team should be trying to find a way for him to get more of the ball. He’s not a contested player so he needs to be given the ball, so if he drifts out of the play it’s just as much the team’s fault as it is his. When I was fortunate enough to be able to go to training many years ago, Ross would berate less skilled players for kicking instead of handing the ball to S Hill. We’re quite fortunate to have some good kicks in the backline now such as Young and Chapman but these guys need to get the ball to to our most lethal link up player, Henry.

 

[Superkoops]

I feel like Banfield is going to play round 1 and I'm fine with that.

Agreed. He has been more than decent this pre-season. As we speak today he is in the best 22. He will likely be pushed out by others like Sturt, Erasmus etc. but for now he is ahead.

 

[Superkoops]

Re. Henry, you're showing a bias towards winning contests, Henry isn't in the team to win contests, he's in the team to get handed the ball in a platter for delivery inside 50. Bring in O'Driscoll and yes he'll win more contests, but he's not going to be lacing out every forward 50 entry.

Strange to be judging a players value of his weakest characteristic instead of his strengths. You don't judge a striker on his ability to slide tackle.

I thought Henry was pretty good, West Coast made sure to shut him down this week.

Henry was ok but he dropped off his work rate from last week. He was very slow at one point and Brady Hough easily chased him down. I outlined another above and he was caught a couple of times. His ball use is his strength and when he has time and space he makes good decisions and excellent skill execution. Putting it all together for longer is his work in progress.

 

[dont bowl there]

I agree with dockerfemme here.

It is worth pointing out that we did have a heavy tag on Tim Kelly in last year's derby win. Banfield kept Kelly to 7 touches (3 of which were clangers) and 1 clearence before Kelly came off with injury in the third quarter.

To say Banfield is no good for life after the St Kilda game is silly. If we applied that logic, then everyone who got towelled up in the St Kilda game is simply no good. That's pretty much three quarters of the side.

I'm not saying Banfield is no good off that game alone, I just think he's no good in general and shouldn't be anywhere near our best 22.

 

[mattis117]

Henry was ok but he dropped off his work rate from last week. He was very slow at one point and Brady Hough easily chased him down. I outlined another above and he was caught a couple of times. His ball use is his strength and when he has time and space he makes good decisions and excellent skill execution. Putting it all together for longer is his work in progress.

Yes, it happened last week as well when he got caught running too far.

Confident he'll get up to the speed of the game and be our best attacking side winger.

Agree with other posts that it's the combination of Acres and Henry that might not work as they both prefer running forward. O'Driscoll in as a defensive winger to partner Henry might be a good option. Tucker and Aish could do that as well.

 

[theGav56]

I understand what you are saying, but I’m not sold on Henry playing wing full time.
Like Walters who predominantly plays forward with stints in the middle.
I think he plays in both teams, picked on form.
It’s also not just Henry, the small forwards have to play their role, and that is also
being dangerous around goals.

I'm not sold on him in any position right now. Longer term i have faith. Just feel like there are gaps in his intensity and decision making.

My real point is that he doesn't seem to be our current best option for the wing which is where Longmuir seems to want him.