AFL 360

[Vicky Park]

AFL 360 tonight: David King will be analysing what we are doing right, and wrong. Watch this space...

 

[Pendles!]

Who's gonna make the "f*** you David King" thread?

 

[ThisIsJake]

Watch AFL 360 religiously.

But Kingy's 'expert analysis' is just a sea of out of context stats and cherry picked clips that can support any argument he chooses to go with. Which ever sounds the most complex and makes him look the most intelligent usually.

 

[Vicky Park]

Hmmm...@ThisIsJake wasn't wrong.

Was a bit light on, disappointing. Didn't highlight out much we didn't already know.

Although the topic du jour is Pendles going forward. Lots of views on this, could be a great move, if the midfield can cope without him.

Then again there's already a thread on this here.

 

[rustyg70]

Hmmm...@ThisIsJake wasn't wrong.

Was a bit light on, disappointing. Didn't highlight out much we didn't already know.

Although the topic du jour is Pendles going forward. Lots of views on this, could be a great move, if the midfield can cope without him.

Then again there's already a thread on this here.

I was looking forward to it also VP, but it was just another bit of fluff from King to try to make himself seem important and footy savvy.

But, I suppose if he was that smart, and such an amazing footy brain, he would have been head hunted with big dollars by a footy club by now.

 

[TradeDraft]

Watch AFL 360 religiously.

But Kingy's 'expert analysis' is just a sea of out of context stats and cherry picked clips that can support any argument he chooses to go with. Which ever sounds the most complex and makes him look the most intelligent usually.

What I saw has already been Discussed on here before

 

[MagpieBat]

Quite a decent, inoffensive segment.

But others have noted, nothing that we in here haven't gone over before.

In summary...

- The forward line. Some behind-the-goals vision. Last year, we targeted Cloke 1 in every 3 times, this year it's 1 in every 5. When Cloke plays deep, he gets double-teamed (footage of the Gold Coast keeping a spare back in the hotspot to force a 2v1). When Cloke plays higher, he creates 1v1 match-ups behind him and creates space in the forward 50 (footage of the Elliott soccer goal). Notes that White's rate of utilization as a target has gone up "significantly".

- King reckons this is where the move of Pendlebury forward could really pay off, compares it to Nat Fyfe playing forward at Freo. Pendles averaged 11 F50 possies last year, this year it's 13. Pendles has won all of his 1v1 forward contests (4). More comparisons to Fyfe at Freo as a forward and Deledio at Richmond. Maclure takes a shot at White and his work rate, reckons Pendlebury "can play anywhere" (no kidding, Sherlock!) Robinson effectively says that Cloke will be an $800,000 decoy, but King contends that Cloke will still get his chances because of how hard he works to get back into the space he creates and will still get his 1v1 opportunities in finals anyway. Again, nothing we haven't already noted on here.

- On the "total team defence", a note of caution. Behind-the-goals vision from the Geelong game. The Pies always roll up to quickly close down space and guard the mark. Geelong make sure to always keep one spare in behind and, with quick sharp ball movement, it eventually creates one spare in the Cats forward line, which becomes disaster if the Collingwood defenders can't roll one off in time to cover him (in this case, Steve Johnson. Toovey manages to win this particular contest, but King has made his point). King notes that "It's great defence, the plan's terrific (in theory and when it works), but in their losses, that's what's been picked apart". King reckons the Roos can do the same to us on Sunday.

- Maclure reckons we're "middle of the road", that we're a year off contending. Pretty much makes the same points as King, but without the stats, vision or in-depth babble. Forward setup still not right, can't afford to really play Pendles forward when we need him in the middle, defence can be "smacked" if you get the ball in quick enough, not as organized as we should be. Concedes that there is flaws in every side, but when we "play against the big boys, they get belted".

- King rattles off a few more stats. Contested footy has gone from 14th last year to 3rd this year. Inside 50 entries were -1 last year, now +10 this year. "Picked up 3 goals on offence, picked up 2 goals on defence." Maclure asks, with those numbers, "are they going to be a contender?" King says "who knows? Depends on who they play." Again, nothing we haven't really discussed before on here.

And here ends the segment.

 

[tommyv49]

David king loves to talk about the pies. Always enjoy listening to what hes got to say.

 

[Big Bryza]

As stated earlier, King just picks out clips to support his argument. Overall, I don't mind him,

As for that flog McClure, in what universe is he a football 'expert'. He is as dumb as dog shit. Offers absolutely nothing in the way of analysis and find it hilarious how he pots Collingwood without ever justifying why.

 

[TradeDraft]

- Maclure reckons we're "middle of the road", that we're a year off contending. Pretty much makes the same points as King, but without the stats, vision or in-depth babble. Forward setup still not right, can't afford to really play Pendles forward when we need him in the middle, defence can be "smacked" if you get the ball in quick enough, not as organized as we should be. Concedes that there is flaws in every side, but when we "play against the big boys, they get belted".

Him Being a Ex-Scum Player I thought he was quite Nice on us.

 

[TradeDraft]

Quite a decent, inoffensive segment.

But others have noted, nothing that we in here haven't gone over before.

In summary...

- The forward line. Some behind-the-goals vision. Last year, we targeted Cloke 1 in every 5 times, this year it's 1 in every 3. When Cloke plays deep, he gets double-teamed (footage of the Gold Coast keeping spare back in the hotspot to force a 2v1). When Cloke plays higher, he creates 1v1 match-ups behind him and creates space in the forward 50 (footage of the Elliott soccer goal). Notes that White's rate of utilization as a target has gone up "significantly".

- King reckons this is where the move of Pendlebury forward could really pay off, compares it to Nat Fyfe playing forward at Freo. Pendles averaged 11 F50 possies last year, this year it's 13. Pendles has won all of his 1v1 forward contests (4). More comparisons to Fyfe at Freo as a forward and Deledio at Richmond. Maclure takes a shot at White and his work rate, reckons Pendlebury "can play anywhere" (no kidding, Sherlock!) Robinson effectively says that Cloke will be an $800,000 decoy, but King contends that Cloke will still get his chances because of how hard he works to get back into the space he creates and will still get his 1v1 opportunities in finals anyway. Again, nothing we haven't already noted on here.

- On the "total team defence", a note of caution. Behind-the-goals vision from the Geelong game. The Pies always roll up to quickly close down space and guard the mark. Geelong make sure to always keep one spare in behind and, with quick sharp ball movement, it eventually creates one spare in the Cats forward line, which becomes disaster if the Collingwood defenders can't roll one off in time to cover him (in this case, Steve Johnson. Toovey manages to win this particular contest, but King has made his point). King notes that "It's great defence, the plan's terrific (in theory and when it works), but in their losses, that's what's been picked apart". King reckons the Roos can do the same to us on Sunday.

- Maclure reckons we're "middle of the road", that we're a year off contending. Pretty much makes the same points as King, but without the stats, vision or in-depth babble. Forward setup still not right, can't afford to really play Pendles forward when we need him in the middle, defence can be "smacked" if you get the ball in quick enough, not as organized as we should be. Concedes that there is flaws in every side, but when we "play against the big boys, they get belted".

- King rattles off a few more stats. Contested footy has gone from 14th last year to 3rd this year. Inside 50 entries were -1 last year, now +10 this year. "Picked up 3 goals on offence, picked up 2 goals on defence." Maclure asks, with those numbers, "are they going to be a contender?" King says "who knows? Depends on who they play." Again, nothing we haven't really discussed before on here.

And here ends the segment.

So King has been Reading BigFooty

 

[76woodenspooners]

As for that flog McClure, in what universe is he a football 'expert'. He is as dumb as dog shit. Offers absolutely nothing in the way of analysis and find it hilarious how he pots Collingwood without ever justifying why.

Shrug ...

... When McClure is potting Collingwood it's a sign that the earth is spinning properly on its axis.

 

[Ant85]

I did notice that everything Maclure said about us was negative and dismissive.

Probably pains him that Carlton's a shambles while Collingwood's house seems to be in order and improving.

 

[Hardas]

Shrug ...

... When McClure is potting Collingwood it's a sign that the earth is spinning properly on its axis.

Speaking of which: he's really been getting stuck into Carlton this year.

 

[Bard]

Speaking of which: he's really been getting stuck into Carlton this year.

Everyone from Carlton has been pretty much.

 

[didaksrightfoot]

Quite a decent, inoffensive segment.

But others have noted, nothing that we in here haven't gone over before.

In summary...

- The forward line. Some behind-the-goals vision. Last year, we targeted Cloke 1 in every 3 times, this year it's 1 in every 5. When Cloke plays deep, he gets double-teamed (footage of the Gold Coast keeping a spare back in the hotspot to force a 2v1). When Cloke plays higher, he creates 1v1 match-ups behind him and creates space in the forward 50 (footage of the Elliott soccer goal). Notes that White's rate of utilization as a target has gone up "significantly".

- King reckons this is where the move of Pendlebury forward could really pay off, compares it to Nat Fyfe playing forward at Freo. Pendles averaged 11 F50 possies last year, this year it's 13. Pendles has won all of his 1v1 forward contests (4). More comparisons to Fyfe at Freo as a forward and Deledio at Richmond. Maclure takes a shot at White and his work rate, reckons Pendlebury "can play anywhere" (no kidding, Sherlock!) Robinson effectively says that Cloke will be an $800,000 decoy, but King contends that Cloke will still get his chances because of how hard he works to get back into the space he creates and will still get his 1v1 opportunities in finals anyway. Again, nothing we haven't already noted on here.

- On the "total team defence", a note of caution. Behind-the-goals vision from the Geelong game. The Pies always roll up to quickly close down space and guard the mark. Geelong make sure to always keep one spare in behind and, with quick sharp ball movement, it eventually creates one spare in the Cats forward line, which becomes disaster if the Collingwood defenders can't roll one off in time to cover him (in this case, Steve Johnson. Toovey manages to win this particular contest, but King has made his point). King notes that "It's great defence, the plan's terrific (in theory and when it works), but in their losses, that's what's been picked apart". King reckons the Roos can do the same to us on Sunday.

- Maclure reckons we're "middle of the road", that we're a year off contending. Pretty much makes the same points as King, but without the stats, vision or in-depth babble. Forward setup still not right, can't afford to really play Pendles forward when we need him in the middle, defence can be "smacked" if you get the ball in quick enough, not as organized as we should be. Concedes that there is flaws in every side, but when we "play against the big boys, they get belted".

- King rattles off a few more stats. Contested footy has gone from 14th last year to 3rd this year. Inside 50 entries were -1 last year, now +10 this year. "Picked up 3 goals on offence, picked up 2 goals on defence." Maclure asks, with those numbers, "are they going to be a contender?" King says "who knows? Depends on who they play." Again, nothing we haven't really discussed before on here.

And here ends the segment.

thanks for the summary... so basically, the "expert" analysis is everything that most of us have picked out already.

 

[MagpieBat]

So King has been Reading BigFooty

Or BigFooty posters are a bit more switched on than what many give them credit for. Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder...

 

[35Daicos]

Is there anyone at all in the media who is known for being a genuine Collingwood fan (not including those with obvious connections like Michael Christian and Glenn McFarlane)?

 

[Pedro]

- Maclure reckons we're "middle of the road", that we're a year off contending. Pretty much makes the same points as King, but without the stats, vision or in-depth babble. Forward setup still not right, can't afford to really play Pendles forward when we need him in the middle, defence can be "smacked" if you get the ball in quick enough, not as organized as we should be. Concedes that there is flaws in every side, but when we "play against the big boys, they get belted".

People will pot Maclure, but being a filthy Carlton man, I expect him to talk us down. But going by this, he hasn't really said anything that is inaccurate or offensive. We are middle of the road. We will get beaten up by better teams (already have). Don't really need all King's fancy talk, stats and vision to know all that. I actually don't mind listening to Maclure. He usually calls a spade a spade. If you ignore the fact that he's an anti Collingwood, Carlton muppet, he's actually pretty funny. Especially when Carlton are getting belted.

 

[76woodenspooners]

Or BigFooty posters are a bit more switched on than what many give them credit for. Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder...

Or ...

... BigFooty chucked hundreds of darts at the dart board, and some of them actually hit the dartboard

 

[unplugged]

Is there anyone at all in the media who is known for being a genuine Collingwood fan (not including those with obvious connections like Michael Christian and Glenn McFarlane)?

Peter Mitchell?

 

[loki04]

People will pot Maclure, but being a filthy Carlton man, I expect him to talk us down. But going by this, he hasn't really said anything that is inaccurate or offensive. We are middle of the road. We will get beaten up by better teams (already have). Don't really need all King's fancy talk, stats and vision to know all that. I actually don't mind listening to Maclure. He usually calls a spade a spade. If you ignore the fact that he's an anti Collingwood, Carlton muppet, he's actually pretty funny. Especially when Carlton are getting belted.

He pots us on occasion but usually just speaks his mind whether good or bad towards us, he is not always negative about pies.

 

[shizzle]

Is there anyone at all in the media who is known for being a genuine Collingwood fan (not including those with obvious connections like Michael Christian and Glenn McFarlane)?

Tony Jones is, maybe Jake Niall ?

 

[Scottabe_pendles]

Speaking of which: he's really been getting stuck into Carlton this year.

He did last year too at times... hated Malthouse over last 18 months (changed his tune a bit after wins but still...)

 

[golazo]

I did notice that everything Maclure said about us was negative and dismissive.

Probably pains him that Carlton's a shambles while Collingwood's house seems to be in order and improving.

I give him 2-3 years, tops.

#youknowwhatimtalkingabout