Adel v Port review

[snakebite01]

Adelaide 1.10.9 (78)
Port Adel 0.11.11 (77)

Well we beat Port for the first time in five matches albeit in a pre-season match. Ladhams kicked checkside from 5 metres inside the boundary with about 5 seconds to go to win the match.

Just a few things I wanted to point out.

New Recruits
There were some positive signs throughout the match. I thought Torney played a good game and looks like he will be a rock in defence. A bit disappointed with the usage of Burns. I'd prefer to see him crumbing in the forward line rather than playing in the midfield as there were a number of times when we looked like there was no one to crumb at the spill of the ball.


Forward Line
I thought we competed reasonably well considering they were dropping a couple of men back in the hole and we were also missing arguably our 3 best forwards in Carey, Stevens and Welsh. Perrie really provided a contest when he went there in the second half and his kicking has improved dramatically.

Defence
There were times when we let them get a bit free in there forward 50 but overall it was an ok display. Smart was getting towelled up by Cornes but he fought back well in the last one and a half quarters. Hart was good again while McGregor looks like he has become stronger and looks primed for a big year.

Midfield
We started brilliantly in the first quarter with Clarker dominating in the ruck over Lade but when Brogan went there we lost our edge. Goodwin looks primed for a stellar year. If there is one person who I'd put money on for the Brownlow at this stage of the year it would definitely be him. Doughty started well and Ladhams continued his good form of last season with a strong performance. McLeod showed glimpses of brilliance but was reasonably well tagged by Cornes - but had a brilliant last quarter. Reilly showed a bit when he came on after half time aswell. Bode stepped up in the last quarter and I think with the inclusion of Riccuito and Bickley to further strengthen the midfield we will once again have a top-line engine room.

Rookies
Reilly showed something when he came on, had a bit of poise for a youngster. Rutten was competitive in the 1st quarter but drfited away a little bit. Bock was lively when he came on in the last quarter and showed he can compete well in the forward line. I was most impressed though with Reilly.

New rules
It is interesting that all the talk was about Dew being the 9-point specialist, saying he could win matches just with this rule but it was Goodwin who did it and if the rule wasn't in place we wouldn't have won the match. The backwards kicking rule was good, in the dying seconds Cornes may have gone backwards if it wasn't for the rule. The rush point rule kept the ball in play but I'd keep it the way it is. I don't think we should tamper with the scoring.

Overall
A decent hit-out to get the season off and running against good opposition. The teams were evenly depleted so the squads playing were pretty much fair. We showed good intensity but got distracted by Port's pressure in the 2nd quarter & got sucked in as we started going for the man and not the ball. The umpiring was pretty poor all up. We got a very good run in the first quarter, Port got a good run in the 2/3 quarters and we probably got it again in the last quarter. Quite pleased with the performance as we still have Riccuito, Carey, Stevens, Bickley and Weslh to come back in as well as Massie, Marsh and Begley to compete for positions.

 

[macca23]

Excellent summary snakebite.

I nearly vomited when I saw Bassett line up at FF. He doesn't mark many if any in the backlines when he is the spoiler, and was totally innefectual up forward. Never looked like successfully contesting the long bombs. I thought that move weakened the backlines and the forward lines at the same time.

Much as we all get stuck into him, Perrie was always the better bet because although he has bugger all skill, his efforts can't be questioned and he created a genuine contest.

Rutten does okay in a crowded contest, but looked very slow when the game was played in an open fashion.

As you said, given that our best 3 forwards were all missing, it was a great result, because Port are going to be right up there as well.

 

[crowsfan]

Nice rundown there sb, pretty much agree with you there on all your points there.

Yeah, its a bit weird there with what they are doing with Burns. He's best at crumbing so why try to slot him more into a midfield role esp when there are others who would do as good a job as him in midfield.

Forwards did OK I thought, esp as mentioned with Carey, Stevo and Welsh not in it tonight. Rutten did a pretty good job, as did Bassett and Perrie (one nice pass from Reilly) at times. Perrie looked real nervous at times. Goody did very well in the forwards in the first qrt. The long bomb by him was awesome. Love it when have passages of play like that, we leave the opposition with no chance.

There were so many frees too in this match (as mentioned by the commentators), and worked a lot to our favour.

As for the 9er, well I guess in the final score, only looking at the final score we wouldn't have won. But its tough to say that during the game. Changing one little aspect can change the whole thing in the end. Tough call there. But who cares really? We won!

 

[Macca19]

Originally posted by snakebite01
New rules
It is interesting that all the talk was about Dew being the 9-point specialist, saying he could win matches just with this rule but it was Goodwin who did it and if the rule wasn't in place we wouldn't have won the match. The backwards kicking rule was good, in the dying seconds Cornes may have gone backwards if it wasn't for the rule. The rush point rule kept the ball in play but I'd keep it the way it is. I don't think we should tamper with the scoring.

Backwards kicking rule was good. I dont agree with the 9 point goal rule - i think its stupid. But what got up my nose was the implementation of the 3 point behind rule. When we were kicking to the Southern end there was a contest in our goalsquare...the ball was nearly marked by Lade, then Smart punched the ball over the line. Why was this not counted as rushed?? It was the only time that rushed should of been called all night, and the umpires missed it. Poor i thought - cost us the game.

Overall
The umpiring was pretty poor all up. We got a very good run in the first quarter, Port got a good run in the 2/3 quarters and we probably got it again in the last quarter. [/B][/QUOTE]

Agreed. The match seemed to turn with the umpiring decisions. Some of the free kicks they pulled out tonight were laughable.

Was a good win by the Crows and a great match for this time of the year

 

[snakebite01]

Re: Re: Adel v Port review

Originally posted by Macca19
Backwards kicking rule was good. I dont agree with the 9 point goal rule - i think its stupid. But what got up my nose was the implementation of the 3 point behind rule. When we were kicking to the Southern end there was a contest in our goalsquare...the ball was nearly marked by Lade, then Smart punched the ball over the line. Why was this not counted as rushed?? It was the only time that rushed should of been called all night, and the umpires missed it. Poor i thought - cost us the game.

Overall
The umpiring was pretty poor all up. We got a very good run in the first quarter, Port got a good run in the 2/3 quarters and we probably got it again in the last quarter.

Agreed. The match seemed to turn with the umpiring decisions. Some of the free kicks they pulled out tonight were laughable.

Was a good win by the Crows and a great match for this time of the year [/B][/QUOTE]

Yeah I see no future for the 9-pointer. It gets the crowd excited but why reward a goal from 50m out directly infront over a goal from 49m out on the boundary line.

Also agree that there is no future for the 3-pointer. The rule is too ambiguous. For instance in the Kang-Ess game today McPhee walked over the line after thinking he had taken a mark and it was rushed but then JJ ran 10m to the line while intercepting the ball yet it was not rushed.

Umpires, for this time of season were paying way too many 'soft' free kicks. When the game was as intense as it was they should have let the play go. If I was umpiring, I wouldn't have payed a third of the frees they payed.

 

[Macca19]

Re: Re: Re: Adel v Port review

Originally posted by snakebite01


Yeah I see no future for the 9-pointer. It gets the crowd excited but why reward a goal from 50m out directly infront over a goal from 49m out on the boundary line.

Yeah, its a stupid rule. The 50 metre line should not be part of hte football oval like the boundary line or goal square is. Its just a guide. Just a 'Pop' like rule to attract a whole bunch of screaming kids to the game.

Also agree that there is no future for the 3-pointer. The rule is too ambiguous. For instance in the Kang-Ess game today McPhee walked over the line after thinking he had taken a mark and it was rushed but then JJ ran 10m to the line while intercepting the ball yet it was not rushed.

Agreed again. There seems to be no definitive rule on what is actually a 3-pointer.

Umpires, for this time of season were paying way too many 'soft' free kicks. When the game was as intense as it was they should have let the play go. If I was umpiring, I wouldn't have payed a third of the frees they payed.

The last 10 minutes was extremely poor umpiring was. It seemed that every single contest in the last 10 minutes ended up with a free kick. When the game is that close the umpires should of let the players play out the game instead of blowing their whistles every 5 seconds.

 

[crowsfan]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Adel v Port review

Originally posted by Macca19
Agreed again. There seems to be no definitive rule on what is actually a 3-pointer.

It seems like the rule is perhaps too subjective, and in crowded packs contesting for a mark etc, it can be too tough for the umps to tell what happened.

 

[DaveW]

I thought deliberate rushed is the same as deliberate out of bounds. (In both cases 'deliberate' should probably be replaced with 'blatant'.) If the ball is punched out of bounds it usually won't be penalised for deliberate.

 

[Port01]

Originally posted by DaveW
I thought deliberate rushed is the same as deliberate out of bounds. (In both cases 'deliberate' should probably be replaced with 'blatant'.) If the ball is punched out of bounds it usually won't be penalised for deliberate.

the umpires don't even know.

I've seen two of those 3 pointers, one against Embley who did the exact thing Bode did tonight, and one against McPhee who thought he marked it and went back to take his kick.

Both times it was probably a ridicolous decision from orange maggots with no common sense.

Why when the umpires are incredibly inconsistent and clueless with one deliberate rule, do you bring in another.

Demetriouball sucks.