Preview Changes V Hawks

[Vader]

A competitive environment would be great, but that's not what we saw tonight.

I'm not sure that I want Vince or Reilly passing on any of their football "knowledge" to our younger players. Actually I think the less our youngsters listen to those two the better.

We won the last 3 quarters of the game. How was that not competitive?

Losing by 100+ is non-competitive. Getting blown away in the first quarter, then fighting back to under 3-goals in the last, only to be robbed by the maggots - that's competitive.

 

[tropicaltiger]

SURELY Tambling comes in. sando was pumping him up all pre-season and he's being playing very solid footy in the sanfl with 3 blokes hanging off him. crows small running defenders have shown stuff all, so come on down 'the tambling man'.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

I didn't draw too many (if any) conclusions. I just pointed out something which is statistically significant. I can't help but wonder if an older and more experienced Adelaide team might have done better.

Looking at our total disposals today, there's a strong correlation between games played and disposals earned.

At the top of the tree we have Thompson, Douglas, Vince, Dangerfield and Reilly - all of whom have 90+ games under their belt. At the other end of the table we have Kerridge (3 disposals), followed by the injured pair (Walker & Brown), followed by Jacobs, Henderson, Petrenko and Talia. Laird & Lynch, with 17 & 16 disposals both managed to buck the trend.

Depends on what the priorities are right now. If it's player development, or maximising our chances of winning. The two are not in direct conflict, but they're not necessarily the same thing either.

Our priority 5 games into a season is to win football games and play in the finals ....end of story

 

[Cap]

I didn't draw too many (if any) conclusions. I just pointed out something which is statistically significant. I can't help but wonder if an older and more experienced Adelaide team might have done better.

Looking at our total disposals today, there's a strong correlation between games played and disposals earned.

At the top of the tree we have Thompson, Douglas, Vince, Dangerfield and Reilly - all of whom have 90+ games under their belt. At the other end of the table we have Kerridge (3 disposals), followed by the injured pair (Walker & Brown), followed by Jacobs, Henderson, Petrenko and Talia. Laird & Lynch, with 17 & 16 disposals both managed to buck the trend.

Depends on what the priorities are right now. If it's player development, or maximising our chances of winning. The two are not in direct conflict, but they're not necessarily the same thing either.

do you think that correlation exists because of the role they are playing or the experience they have?

i.e Rutten is experienced but didn't touch it that much.

you have pick out an out of form ruckman, a 2nd gamer and a guy who neither of us rate (Pets) to support your argument that inexperience also means lack of output.

Personally, I don't believe expereince is that important in picking up touches, nor their efficiency.

 

[glengowan]

F: Otten Johnston Riley
HF: Jaensch Lynch Douglas
C: Smith S.Thompson Vince
HB: Henderson Talia Tambling
B: Reilly Rutten Kerridge
R: Jacobs Dangerfield Sloane
I: Wright Jenkins Lyons
Sub: Laird

Out: Walker (inj), Brown (inj), Petrenko, Mackay
In: Johnston, Riley, Tambling, Lyons

 

[Cap]

Our priority 5 games into a season is to win football games and play in the finals ....end of story

It has to be

we have not benefit of coming anything lower that 4th.

 

[Elite Crow]

I didn't draw too many (if any) conclusions. I just pointed out something which is statistically significant. I can't help but wonder if an older and more experienced Adelaide team might have done better.

Looking at our total disposals today, there's a strong correlation between games played and disposals earned.

At the top of the tree we have Thompson, Douglas, Vince, Dangerfield and Reilly - all of whom have 90+ games under their belt. At the other end of the table we have Kerridge (3 disposals), followed by the injured pair (Walker & Brown), followed by Jacobs, Henderson, Petrenko and Talia. Laird & Lynch, with 17 & 16 disposals both managed to buck the trend.

Depends on what the priorities are right now. If it's player development, or maximising our chances of winning. The two are not in direct conflict, but they're not necessarily the same thing either.

What exactly is your point? Laird in 3/4s of his second game had 3 less possessions than Reilly and Danger, 4 less than Vince and 5 less than Dougie. Lynch playing forward only had a few possessions less than our midfielders. The only correlation is your age bias and your incorrect assumptions.

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

You do realise we had 11 players with < 50 games playing tonight, including 5 with less than 20 games? It's not as if the youngsters aren't being given opportunities. What you're suggesting is akin to turning Adelaide into Melbourne. No thanks.

What exactly am I suggesting?

please tell me, that way we will both understand am be on the same page. You're putting words into my mouth and insinuating something that only pushing your agenda.

Go and check my ins and outs and a kid (lyons) will replace a kid (brown), a forward (johnson) will replace Tex and Grigg will replace the under performing MacKay. Playing against the Hawks is going to be hard but if you're going to suggest having Porps, Stiffy, Callihan or Tambling in the side will change the result from a 150 loss and make it a victory, you have rocks in your head.

 

[Jetwa5h]

My 2c worth
Out: dis-organised Setups
In: Structure

So at this point I believe we are getting smashed in the middle and around the ground at stoppages as Sauce struggles to get to them(I counted 4 or so that warnock went to on his own), To me instead of Tex (or replacement) playing up the field offering the option out of defence it has to be Jenkins play him from the HBF/centre and tell him to take take some stoppages from centre and into the forwards allowing Sauce to almost play a kick behind and have a breather at this point also. Then I would play Tex (or replacement) deep one out or at least isolated in space to either lead or attempt the contested mark with crumbers coming in with the ball. My thoughts i think at present half our issues are not all player problems but structure issues.

 

[Elite Crow]

EC we're a slow football team .....we can't keep taking more pace out of the side

We have to add pace !

I agree but DMack is not playing like a quick decent player, he is offering us nothing

 

[Vader]

do you think that correlation exists because of the role they are playing or the experience they have?

i.e Rutten is experienced but didn't touch it that much.

you have pick out an out of form ruckman, a 2nd gamer and a guy who neither of us rate (Pets) to support your argument that inexperience also means lack of output.

Personally, I don't believe expereince is that important in picking up touches, nor their efficiency.

Actually, Rutten had quite a bit of it - 16 disposals in a game where only 3 crows had more than 20 (Thompson the most with 24).

Yes, part of it is role.. but inexperience also has it's part to play. Kerridge played the entire game (almost) in the guts, on Murphy and Judd - he had just 3 disposals. That's due to inexperience.

At the other end of the field, 63 game player Petrenko had just 8 disposals. That's due to incompetence.

 

[Vader]

What exactly am I suggesting?

please tell me, that way we will both understand am be on the same page. You're putting words into my mouth and insinuating something that only pushing your agenda.

Go and check my ins and outs and a kid (lyons) will replace a kid (brown), a forward (johnson) will replace Tex and Grigg will replace the under performing MacKay. Playing against the Hawks is going to be hard but if you're going to suggest having Porps, Stiffy, Callihan or Tambling in the side will change the result from a 150 loss and make it a victory, you have rocks in your head.

IN:
Lyons - 3 games
Johnston - 3 games
Grigg - 0 games

OUT:
Brown - 7 games
Walker - 68 games (*** injured -> forced omission)
Mackay - 90 games

Net change - 159 games loss (from a team that was already one of the least experienced in the league)

Not only that, but we rise from 5 to 8 players with < 20 games experience. That's more than 1/3 of the team - and well into GC/GWS territory.

I don't think any of the players you named would turn a 150+pt loss into a win. I do think that playing them would limit the damage and allow those youngsters around them to actually learn something from the defeat, other than having them walk off the field with their souls destroyed thanks to negligent decisions made at the selection table.

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

We won't lose by 150 points, if the senior players playing did something.

 

[Elite Crow]

We won't lose by 150 points, if the senior players playing did something.

Where is this 150 point loss coming from? Is this another Vader fact that never happened?

 

[Vader]

We won't lose by 150 points, if the senior players playing did something.

We may well if we adopted your suggestions.

That said, I do agree that it's our senior players who most need to extract their digits ASAP.

 

[Cap]

Actually, Rutten had quite a bit of it - 16 disposals in a game where only 3 crows had more than 20 (Thompson the most with 24).

Yes, part of it is role.. but inexperience also has it's part to play. Kerridge played the entire game (almost) in the guts, on Murphy and Judd - he had just 3 disposals. That's due to inexperience.

At the other end of the field, 63 game player Petrenko had just 8 disposals. That's due to incompetence.

he was tagging, so it isn't unheard of for a Tagger to get SFA.

Pets, well yeah, Pets

The problem is, at what point at you happy to live with experienced players at the expensive of developing youth?

changing VB for Kerridge really make up the goal difference given the circumstances?

I'll back the club to make the conservative approach and come away with a Honorable loss, not just because that is in our DNA but because we have to, we can now risk playing youth in case it does go pear shape and we lose a top 10 draft pick.....

THANKS TRIGGY!!

 

[Elite Crow]

We may well if we adopted your suggestions.

That said, I do agree that it's our senior players who most need to extract their digits ASAP.

That's bullshit and you know it

 

[BigLefty]

We lost this game first and foremost in the middle, so what can we do to fix that? Can we afford to persevere with Jacobs in his current form?

LJ for Tex is obvious. The biggest problem I have is that I can't see any players outside the team who would make it stronger.

We saw the downside of youth tonight, with our young small defenders being carved up by Carlton's small forwards. Kerridge was given a masterclass by Judd. The absence of VB really hurt us.

Lyons continues to demand selection, but who drops out and why? I see his selection as reward for good form, but not materially improving the team.

Jacobs is an interesting and difficult decision. i think we need to drop him. either a week or 2 rest is he's carrying an injury, then a week or 2 in the SANFL to regain some confidence. if he's not carrying an injury (i'd be staggered if he's not) then back to SANFL for a couple.

LJ for Tex is obvious. i wonder though if we'll bring in Graham to help Sauce and just play Jenkins forward more. (*edit. Graham didnt play so maybe Smack, he played a good game tonight as a forward, but IMO that means he's due for a poor one) (**double edit. he did play so maybe he will come in)

Kerridge was given a masterclass tonight, but IMO he should keep his spot next week. it's completely expected that the young ones will be up and down. Last week he was up, this week he was down. Huis good form in the SANFL earnt his spot, that should carry over still after 1 bad game.

Lyons in for Mackay, or Vince (stats show he was OK but i thought he was poor again) or Brown if he doesnt come up. or Kerridge if they're ureasonable.

 

[Vader]

I didn't expect Kerridge to rack up 30 disposals while playing a tagging role. That's just unrealistic. However, his total of 3 disposals is well below my lowest expectations - particularly given that he played almost the entire game in the midfield.

Would VB have made all the difference? Probably not, but it's an interesting hypothetical. He certainly would have done more to curb Judd's influence in the first quarter, when all the damage was done. If they weren't getting the ball so easily out of the centre then they may not have racked up such a big lead so quickly. He also would have given us a damn sight more going the other way - only once in the last 3 years has he finished a game with single digit disposals, averaging around 20 per game during that period. It's all very hypothetical and we'll never have any way of knowing what might (or might not) have happened.

 

[ManInTheArena]

We're going to get pumped.

 

[Elite Crow]

I didn't expect Kerridge to rack up 30 disposals while playing a tagging role. That's just unrealistic. However, his total of 3 disposals is well below my lowest expectations - particularly given that he played almost the entire game in the midfield.

Would VB have made all the difference? Probably not, but it's an interesting hypothetical. He certainly would have done more to curb Judd's influence in the first quarter, when all the damage was done. If they weren't getting the ball so easily out of the centre then they may not have racked up such a big lead so quickly. He also would have given us a damn sight more going the other way - only once in the last 3 years has he finished a game with single digit disposals, averaging around 20 per game during that period. It's all very hypothetical and we'll never have any way of knowing what might (or might not) have happened.

So Kerridge not tagging Judd in the first half therefore allowing Judd to run amok and set up the game is the fault of playing youth or the fault of the coach for not tagging Judd from the get go? Kerridge did well on Judd in the second half which once again blows your argument to apart.

 

[Schulzycrow]

Natural forward ....no brainer

EXACTAMUNDO!! Just like Pets is a defender or out of the team.

 

[Geoffa32]

SURELY Tambling comes in. sando was pumping him up all pre-season and he's being playing very solid footy in the sanfl with 3 blokes hanging off him. crows small running defenders have shown stuff all, so come on down 'the tambling man'.

Jeanch up forward and Tambo down back IMO.

Mackay out.

 

[robboaustralia]

In: Graham , Lyons , Johnston

Out: Jacobs , Kerridge , Walker (inj)

 

[Lawrst]

On paper or on the ground. That said, it depends who he replaces. Replacing Mackay or Reilly is silly. Petrenko on the other hand gave us nothing tonight - and anything Lyons gives us has to be better than that.

Because those 2 were soooo good tonight.