Review Good Bad and Ugly vs GWS - Rd 7 2021

[BACCS]

The issue is where is the next Rory Sloane (or someone even better) coming from?

We can't just rely on him carrying our midfield forever. Keays is good, but badly needs support.

Why can’t it be Berry? He shows the same attack on the ball and pressure that an early Sloane did, who then developed the ball winning ability over time.

 

[BACCS]

Midfield badly struggling. Last year we drafted a midfielder with pick 28, he's playing today in the team. Name is Sam Berry.

Let's just check in to see where he played. Plenty of small forwards in the team, no need for him up there...

View attachment 1116550

Yep. That's the Crows

Has to be due to fatigue, because he was getting a fair bit of midfield time early in the season.

 

[Jirkago75]

One thing I was adamant about before the game is that the way we selected our defense (replacing Hamill with Mackay, and to a lesser extent bringing in Murray for a small) would destroy our transition from defense because we left it all up to Brodie Smith - a guy who GWS could then just sit on. So let's see how that played out

Brodie Smith - 1 score involvement, 0 score launches. Averages over his career 4.6 score involvements and 1.4 score launches (elite). He was well down.

He ended up with 440 meters gained for 1 score involvement. Had no impact.

Our thinking of course was that David Mackay could replace Hamill for the rest of our drive. How did that play out?

David Mackay - 2 score involvements, the equal 3rd lowest of any Crow player (only just above Smith and Hately). 1 score launch.

Again, David did all the usual stuff he does. Got the stats, the disposal count, the meters gained. Were GWS happy to let him get 23 disposals? Of course, because he had limited impact on the game. Actually he had about half his usual score involvements. Stopping Brodie was the goal and they did it.

Now of course you might be wondering, surely you can't criticize our half backs. Midfield smashed, defense under siege, blah blah. But let's see how these two players compared to every other defender we were playing

Butts - 3 score involvements, 1 score launch
Doedee - 3 score involvements, 3 score launches
Kelly - 3 score involvements, 1 score launch
McPherson - 3 score involvements, 1 score launch
Murray - 3 score involvements

So combined our half backs had the same number of score involvements as key position defender Jordon Butts. Or take your pick of any other defender.

Ah yes but surely our running half backs who had no influence on the game stopped a bunch of goals? Right? Like, tackles and pressure acts and all that? Spoils?

Brodie Smith - 13 pressure acts, 4 tackles, 3 spoils, 5 intercepts. All things considered, an average game

David Mackay - 5 pressure acts, 3 tackles, 0 spoils, 4 intercepts. I'll let you decide

Oh and just as a reference

Jordon Butts - 7 pressure acts, 3 tackles, 5 spoils, 9 intercepts

----

Now there's a lot of takeaways here. You might be wondering why our replacement half back had fewer score involvements and did less defensive work than our key position defender. Pretty valid. But let's ignore that for a second.

GWS executed their plan perfectly. We got absolutely nothing in this game from our half backs, because at selection we left it all up to one player, and that player was sh*t.

We had plenty of opportunities to rebound from defense. GWS smashed us in clearances and had 58 inside 50s. Plenty of chances to get them on the counter. So how did we play? Exactly like a team that didn't select players capable of cutting them up on the counter.

So I have to ask this question. Knowing we were likely to lose the midfield battle with 2 of our 4 best mids injured, why when copping injuries did we decide to select a team with 5 defensive-first players and only 1 guy capable of getting the ball out of our defensive 50? Knowing in all likelihood the game would be played in our defensive half?

Hey scorpus
Did you watch the game?? Or did you see it completely different??

the reason Butts and the others mentioned have less score involvements was because they attacked 30 meters from goal. The ball was parked inside that area. They had plenty of 1 on 1s, did there best. Won some and lost some.

Smith was always outside the 50 running back into it, that was GWS plan to pull him away. With out midfield being s**t, every other area looks diabolical.
I’d be so angry if we don’t pick only midfielders in this draft, nothing else!!

 

[BACCS]

One thing I was adamant about before the game is that the way we selected our defense (replacing Hamill with Mackay, and to a lesser extent bringing in Murray for a small) would destroy our transition from defense because we left it all up to Brodie Smith - a guy who GWS could then just sit on. So let's see how that played out

Brodie Smith - 1 score involvement, 0 score launches. Averages over his career 4.6 score involvements and 1.4 score launches (elite). He was well down.

He ended up with 440 meters gained for 1 score involvement. Had no impact.

Our thinking of course was that David Mackay could replace Hamill for the rest of our drive. How did that play out?

David Mackay - 2 score involvements, the equal 3rd lowest of any Crow player (only just above Smith and Hately). 1 score launch.

Again, David did all the usual stuff he does. Got the stats, the disposal count, the meters gained. Were GWS happy to let him get 23 disposals? Of course, because he had limited impact on the game. Actually he had about half his usual score involvements. Stopping Brodie was the goal and they did it.

Now of course you might be wondering, surely you can't criticize our half backs. Midfield smashed, defense under siege, blah blah. But let's see how these two players compared to every other defender we were playing

Butts - 3 score involvements, 1 score launch
Doedee - 3 score involvements, 3 score launches
Kelly - 3 score involvements, 1 score launch
McPherson - 3 score involvements, 1 score launch
Murray - 3 score involvements

So combined our half backs had the same number of score involvements as key position defender Jordon Butts. Or take your pick of any other defender.

Ah yes but surely our running half backs who had no influence on the game stopped a bunch of goals? Right? Like, tackles and pressure acts and all that? Spoils?

Brodie Smith - 13 pressure acts, 4 tackles, 3 spoils, 5 intercepts. All things considered, an average game

David Mackay - 5 pressure acts, 3 tackles, 0 spoils, 4 intercepts. I'll let you decide

Oh and just as a reference

Jordon Butts - 7 pressure acts, 3 tackles, 5 spoils, 9 intercepts

----

Now there's a lot of takeaways here. You might be wondering why our replacement half back had fewer score involvements and did less defensive work than our key position defender. Pretty valid. But let's ignore that for a second.

GWS executed their plan perfectly. We got absolutely nothing in this game from our half backs, because at selection we left it all up to one player, and that player was sh*t.

We had plenty of opportunities to rebound from defense. GWS smashed us in clearances and had 58 inside 50s. Plenty of chances to get them on the counter. So how did we play? Exactly like a team that didn't select players capable of cutting them up on the counter.

So I have to ask this question. Knowing we were likely to lose the midfield battle with 2 of our 4 best mids injured, why when copping injuries did we decide to select a team with 5 defensive-first players and only 1 guy capable of getting the ball out of our defensive 50? Knowing in all likelihood the game would be played in our defensive half?

Only the posters with clear hatred on Mackay and his selection could micro analyse his game like that yesterday and say he had no impact on the game. I didn’t want him selected but I can also acknowledge when he plays well and the selectors get it right. What about the beautiful kick to someone like MacAdam I50, who then proceeds to not make the distance? Stuff like that doesn’t pop up in your stats for score involvements. Anyone that watched the game could clearly see he was the only guy from D50 providing any sort of run and carry; Seed was ok at this forward of centre. McPherson was a turnover merchant and Brodie had a down day.

Since when was Mackay in the side as an intercept marker? 3 tackles is fine for someone performing his role yesterday. He managed to get on the outside of a contest on several occasions and help us move forward.

I also had a chuckle at saying he did all his usual things (like disposal count), not being able to rack up over 20 touches has been one of the biggest criticisms of him on this board!

 

[Jirkago75]

Don’t know if it deserves a threat or not but if we win to many games this year, will it set us back in the rebuild. Our midfielders are just terrible and we have no one to come in that will help long term. Sloane and Matt will help but that will only cover cracks in the short term. We desperately need quality midfielders with class and skills.

I think we need to really look at our list and decide who has value and get as many top 20 picks as possible. By the end of year we need to trade in at least 2 more Picks. After seeing our season so far, I think it’s Fog and Matt Crouch. They are both good players now and in the future but we need quality midfielders instead of them 2. If we don’t, It will be 7 to 12 finishes again without a flag

 

[Mutineer]

Don’t know if it deserves a threat or not but if we win to many games this year, will it set us back in the rebuild. Our midfielders are just terrible and we have no one to come in that will help long term. Sloane and Matt will help but that will only cover cracks in the short term. We desperately need quality midfielders with class and skills.

I think we need to really look at our list and decide who has value and get as many top 20 picks as possible. By the end of year we need to trade in at least 2 more Picks. After seeing our season so far, I think it’s Fog and Matt Crouch. They are both good players now and in the future but we need quality midfielders instead of them 2. If we don’t, It will be 7 to 12 finishes again without a flag

Crouch is a RFA for starters and you're whistling in the wind if you think Fogarty will attract a pick that lands one of the top mids in this draft.

 

[Mismatched]

TBF Rookies and young players traditionally have felt the pinch at 5-7 game mark of a season (depending on how many games they've played) .......rookies from all clubs have suffered this week

BTW if you're trying to get team connect ....cycling thru your list is the last thing you do, we've been managing debut's very well this year

I agree with this and the results of the last 3 weeks have not been a surprise. Being 3 and 1 was never an accurate reflection of where we were at, it was the reflection of one insanely good 1st half against Geelong, knocking off the likely wooden spooner and the perenially inconsistent GC at home.

Many here seemed happy to call for a rebuild, but don't seem to truely understand the dire circumstances that actually lead to this rebuild being required and the time it will actually take to work through it.

We've had a strong start to the year, in part due to a soft draw early, which is reassuring that we're likely heading in the right direction, however this is where things get tough. Whilst there still needs to be some standards on performance and yesterday they weren't there, the realities are, this is a young group and performances will fluctuate.

Needs another PS to add some zip to his game .....looks half a mtr off currently

Another that spends so much time tackling, he drains his Rookie energy and doesn't find enough free ball .....so it's a transition year next for Berry

Agreed. Personally I was a bit surprised we rushed him straight back in, I would have thought a couple of weeks playing genuine midfield minutes in the SANFL would have been good for him. His defensive/tackling game is good, but lets give him a chance to work on his offensive, ball finding game.

 

[Jirkago75]

Crouch is a RFA for starters and you're whistling in the wind if you think Fogarty will attract a pick that lands one of the top mids in this draft.

I know with Fog but no one else on the list will get us that.

 

[Mutineer]

I know with Fog but no one else on the list will get us that.

There is no way with Crouch being a RFA and Fogarty's lack of development/form 4 year's into his AFL career we are getting a pick that puts us in the discussion for this year's top midfield prospects it's that simple really.

 

[ftmch]

Having Tex performing is not good for a rebuild? Weird logic. He’s not just in ok form compared to previous seasons, it was statistically the best start to a season from any key forward since Carey in 94 (from both a goal and general impact POV). Tex in good form is critical to the development of guys like RT, Fog and Berg.

Surely it's a reasonable question as to whether our forward structures in a rebuilding phase should be built around a 30+ year old key forward?

I get there's definite benefit to his good form, but that's offset by the opportunity it costs ones of emerging forwards who need to pick up the reigns in his absence (potentially as early next year).

I was at the game yesterday and lost count of how many times our mids kicked the ball to to Tex, who was often double teamed, despite our young 200cm marking beast being one out with his defender.

Same applies to Fog, who becomes a bit player in our forward line when Tex is around. He's shown what he can do with some decent delivery - what if we're made him the primary lead up target for a while?

I'm not suggesting we take Tex out of circulation for the rest of the year. But maybe it's time we start using him strategically to augment and complement a primary strategy of building a forward line that can take us to the finals again, rather than making him the centrepoint of our attack in the name of eeking out a few more wins in a rebuild year.

 

[Mismatched]

Surely it's a reasonable question as to whether our forward structures in a rebuilding phase should be built around a 30+ year old key forward?

I get there's definite benefit to his good form, but that's offset by the opportunity it costs ones of emerging forwards who need to pick up the reigns in his absence (potentially as early next year).

I was at the game yesterday and lost count of how many times our mids kicked the ball to to Tex, who was often double teamed, despite our young 200cm marking beast being one out with his defender.

Same applies to Fog, who becomes a bit player in our forward line when Tex is around. He's shown what he can do with some decent delivery - what if we're made him the primary lead up target for a while?

I'm not suggesting we take Tex out of circulation for the rest of the year. But maybe it's time we start using him strategically to augment and complement a primary strategy of building a forward line that can take us to the finals again, instead of trying to win a handful more games in a rebuild year.

I think its a difficult one re Tex and an argument could probably be made either way.
1) Whilst he's there does he attract too much footy, restricting opportunities for others and ultimately prevent another young player from having a spot in the side.
or
2) Does his presence take pressure off of young developing key talls both mentally and physically. Gives them the 2nd/3rd KPD, means the balls not consistently being lobbed on their heads, allowing them to develop at their own pace to an extent.

Ultimately, I'm happy with Walker being around this year if he's there to support Thilthorpe early. The trouble we have is Walker's presence is making it hard to get Fogarty into the side, whom also simply needs games.

 

[Scorpus]

Elliott Himmelberg isn't up to the level and judging by how the coaches experimented with Thilthorpe in the final quarter, I think the coaches know it too

 

[1970crow]

Bad: 2020 Tex seems to be back. Constantly playing behind his man and wanting the easy ball over the back. One handed marking attempts. That comical advantage he took after McAdams free. We must wait til the end of the season before making any decision about a contract for next year.

He was good in the first quarter but putrid as the game wears on. I'd say the body is struggling again. Had 3 touches the last 3 quarters yesterday. Similar drop off previous 2-3 weeks from memory. Him going public with his desire for a new contract soon shows the cultural problems we have at the club. Senior players are all about themselves. He'd have known his body was deteriorating and wanted to pressure the club while his form was still holding.

 

[ftmch]

I think its a difficult one re Tex and an argument could probably be made either way.
1) Whilst he's there does he attract too much footy, restricting opportunities for others and ultimately prevent another young player from having a spot in the side.
or
2) Does his presence take pressure off of young developing key talls both mentally and physically. Gives them the 2nd/3rd KPD, means the balls not consistently being lobbed on their heads, allowing them to develop at their own pace to an extent.

Ultimately, I'm happy with Walker being around this year if he's there to support Thilthorpe early. The trouble we have is Walker's presence is making it hard to get Fogarty into the side, whom also simply needs games.

It's not just about him taking up a spot in the 22. Our structure and forward 50 entries our are built around him at the moment.

Maybe it's time we think about the strengths of our emerging young forwards and developing and practicing a game plan that works to those.

 

[craig crowing]

Was Ogilvie a tough, nuggety midfielder with average skills?

This is the thread of the month .
Classic question.
Looks like the kid from Tassie we might take in mid draft of same elk.

 

[Burtonsgottago]

Nothing good about today. Some players had their moments but there was lack of energy and effort. It reminded me of some of the game last year.

Port were outplayed tonight but they will thrash us next week if we play the same. Guys like Motlop, Fantasia and Gray will kick a bag against us.

Motlop is getting his skis ready

 

[Truck25]

Not even boing to bother with GBU, It is what it is. It wont be our last pantsing for the next couple of years.
Hard to watch but makes those few wins on the journey that much sweeter.
We are the youngest team, most inexperienced team. This s**t was always going to happen.
Coach's now need to earn their money and teach.

 

[feenix67]

The ugly, realizing the reason why wayne's posts are suddenly visible to me is because some crazy person made him a mod. That's DMac levels of selection right there.

 

[1970crow]

This board is hilarious sometimes. He was basically last man standing as someone who can provide drive from D50 and he did exactly that. 23 touches and was the only one to actually hit targets consistently. Unbelievable that it goes straight to a negative of his selection when he actually justified his selection well and truly today.

23 touches, remove the kick ins and turning one into two 3 or 4 times and he's closer to his usual dozen touch impact. Was good early, all but unsighted in field play the last half. How as his selection justified? We got done by 10 goals and we wasted a game on a lifetime plodder who has no value going forward at all. If we were heading towards finals and he was the difference between 4 points and not, then it would be justified. Total waste, no justification at all.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

One thing I was adamant about before the game is that the way we selected our defense (replacing Hamill with Mackay, and to a lesser extent bringing in Murray for a small) would destroy our transition from defense because we left it all up to Brodie Smith - a guy who GWS could then just sit on. So let's see how that played out

Brodie Smith - 1 score involvement, 0 score launches. Averages over his career 4.6 score involvements and 1.4 score launches (elite). He was well down.

He ended up with 440 meters gained for 1 score involvement. Had no impact.

Our thinking of course was that David Mackay could replace Hamill for the rest of our drive. How did that play out?

David Mackay - 2 score involvements, the equal 3rd lowest of any Crow player (only just above Smith and Hately). 1 score launch.

Again, David did all the usual stuff he does. Got the stats, the disposal count, the meters gained. Were GWS happy to let him get 23 disposals? Of course, because he had limited impact on the game. Actually he had about half his usual score involvements. Stopping Brodie was the goal and they did it.

Now of course you might be wondering, surely you can't criticize our half backs. Midfield smashed, defense under siege, blah blah. But let's see how these two players compared to every other defender we were playing

Butts - 3 score involvements, 1 score launch
Doedee - 3 score involvements, 3 score launches
Kelly - 3 score involvements, 1 score launch
McPherson - 3 score involvements, 1 score launch
Murray - 3 score involvements

So combined our half backs had the same number of score involvements as key position defender Jordon Butts. Or take your pick of any other defender.

Ah yes but surely our running half backs who had no influence on the game stopped a bunch of goals? Right? Like, tackles and pressure acts and all that? Spoils?

Brodie Smith - 13 pressure acts, 4 tackles, 3 spoils, 5 intercepts. All things considered, an average game

David Mackay - 5 pressure acts, 3 tackles, 0 spoils, 4 intercepts. I'll let you decide

Oh and just as a reference

Jordon Butts - 7 pressure acts, 3 tackles, 5 spoils, 9 intercepts

----

Now there's a lot of takeaways here. You might be wondering why our replacement half back had fewer score involvements and did less defensive work than our key position defender. Pretty valid. But let's ignore that for a second.

GWS executed their plan perfectly. We got absolutely nothing in this game from our half backs, because at selection we left it all up to one player, and that player was sh*t.

We had plenty of opportunities to rebound from defense. GWS smashed us in clearances and had 58 inside 50s. Plenty of chances to get them on the counter. So how did we play? Exactly like a team that didn't select players capable of cutting them up on the counter.

So I have to ask this question. Knowing we were likely to lose the midfield battle with 2 of our 4 best mids injured, why when copping injuries did we decide to select a team with 5 defensive-first players and only 1 guy capable of getting the ball out of our defensive 50? Knowing in all likelihood the game would be played in our defensive half?

Before the 1st bounce, initially Kelly went to pick up Greene who was at CHF, but Smith insisted as wanted to play around CHB.

Worked ok for our 1st goal as Smith passed to Tex... but really we should be using a lockdown type like Kelly on someone like Greene, freeing Smith to play on a lesser player to give him more freedom.

 

[Burtonsgottago]

Only the posters with clear hatred on Mackay and his selection could micro analyse his game like that yesterday and say he had no impact on the game. I didn’t want him selected but I can also acknowledge when he plays well and the selectors get it right. What about the beautiful kick to someone like MacAdam I50, who then proceeds to not make the distance? Stuff like that doesn’t pop up in your stats for score involvements. Anyone that watched the game could clearly see he was the only guy from D50 providing any sort of run and carry; Seed was ok at this forward of centre. McPherson was a turnover merchant and Brodie had a down day.

Since when was Mackay in the side as an intercept marker? 3 tackles is fine for someone performing his role yesterday. He managed to get on the outside of a contest on several occasions and help us move forward.

I also had a chuckle at saying he did all his usual things (like disposal count), not being able to rack up over 20 touches has been one of the biggest criticisms of him on this board!

We simply don’t need Mackay in any role other than medi sub while we are rebuilding

 

[Southerntakeover]

Only the posters with clear hatred on Mackay and his selection could micro analyse his game like that yesterday and say he had no impact on the game. I didn’t want him selected but I can also acknowledge when he plays well and the selectors get it right. What about the beautiful kick to someone like MacAdam I50, who then proceeds to not make the distance? Stuff like that doesn’t pop up in your stats for score involvements. Anyone that watched the game could clearly see he was the only guy from D50 providing any sort of run and carry; Seed was ok at this forward of centre. McPherson was a turnover merchant and Brodie had a down day.

Since when was Mackay in the side as an intercept marker? 3 tackles is fine for someone performing his role yesterday. He managed to get on the outside of a contest on several occasions and help us move forward.

I also had a chuckle at saying he did all his usual things (like disposal count), not being able to rack up over 20 touches has been one of the biggest criticisms of him on this board!

What impact are you claiming he had? What benefits do you think we receive at this point by playing him in massive losses, and what conclusions are you advocating?

If he had an ok game, so what?

 

[CrowBloke]

I thought early days under clarkson hawthorn got smashed.

Yes. Only 5 wins in 2005, 9 in 2006; they made Finals in 2007 with 14 wins, went top in 2008.
Premiership hangover in 2009, then re-set strongly competitive 2010-11-12 before their three-peat.
Similarly, Richmond hung tough with Hardwick (a Clarkson ex-assistant) who was appointed in 2009 then re-appointed in 2 year extensions until their 2017 Flag. Took him 8 years to Coach them to win a Flag, and the rest is history.
Clarkson has mentored several very good assistants into Head Coach positions at other Clubs.

1) Can you/anyone see the Crows having the same faith in Nicks?
2) Can you/anyone see Nicks taking the Crows to even ONE Flag, let alone 2 or more, in a 6-10 year period?
3) Can you/anyone see Nicks influencing assistants so strongly that they go on to win Flags with other Clubs?
I cannot, but I'd love to be wrong.

 

[Rory Walkerfield]

I am sick and farken tired of people sticking the boot into Himmelberg and Fog after each game. Here’s a comparison for you all. Everyone is fapping over Oscar Allen - here are his career stats vs Bergs. There is one massive difference between the two sets of stats where Allen is more than double Berg...

I always remember Phil Walsh saying we needed to get Hartigan to 50 games ASAP. Well s**t, Berg and Fog have 10 times the talent of Hartigan. How about we invest games in them instead of a washed up Lynch and Mackay, particularly during a rebuild.

 

[1970crow]

Tex today looked like he has for the past couple seasons when our delivery to him has been sh*te

Creates a huge issue because he gets beaten outright and is easy to run off. Will we rest him and try to get him right again or will we play him into the ground. Pretty confident it'll be the latter.