Review Good/Bad vs Geelong

[Kane McGoodwin]

Taken from a fox footy article on this page...

‘Won’t treat them like kids’: Party Pies in the spotlight; bold one-for-one trade idea — AFL Talking Pts

‘Won’t treat them like kids’: Party Pies in the spotlight; bold one-for-one trade idea — AFL Talking Pts

www.foxsports.com.au

Often a clean and brutal user of the ball going forward, Adelaide captain Dawson was guilty of uncharacteristically ‘dump kicking’ against the Cats, going at 55 per cent efficiency from his 18 kicks.

Laird was in a similar boat, going at 54 per cent from his 11 disposals by foot.

Crouch was easily the best from Adelaide’s first-choice midfield, kicking at 76 per cent with an overall disposal efficiency of 89.2 per cent for the match – a seriously impressive stat line given the 28-year-old had a match-high 37 disposals.

They put both captains stats up at half time. Similar possessions, Danger had a poor disposal efficiency of mid 40%, whilst Dawson even worse... I think 33%.

Has now had 2 ineffective games. Doesn't appear to be moving well. If he's not 100%, play him on the outside & give moat of his inside minutes to Soligo & others.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

And almost no overlap running when our player has the pill....look at Sydney this year, their game is almost built off it now.

Yep, as I said before, we were not working hard enough.

 

[cleanhands]

And almost no overlap running when our player has the pill....look at Sydney this year, their game is almost built off it now.

And I love it

 

[FR0GGY]

And Dawson probably found Stewart more than any other player given he had a mamoth 769 metres gained and 11 i50's with his long bombs to nobody in particular?

5 turnovers

 

[BigBoSS_Riot]

Great, we were the only side expected to win that lost... makes me feel so much better...

From what I've heard, expected score isn't a particularly reliable metric. It's based on shots from that spot taken by every player in the league (and also possibly past players), so it kind of decontextualises things.

 

[Scorpus]

From what I've heard, expected score isn't a particularly reliable metric. It's based on shots from that spot taken by every player in the league (and also possibly past players), so it kind of decontextualises things.

Yeah, it's saying "the average AFL player would score from this spot X% of the time"

 

[Interloperer]

From what I've heard, expected score isn't a particularly reliable metric. It's based on shots from that spot taken by every player in the league (and also possibly past players), so it kind of decontextualises things.

It's a way of separating the quality of the chances created from the quality of the goalkicking. It's not actually a predictive tool.

 

[SellarStardom]

When you have two players that both had bad/nothing games in a similar position , get rid of the less talented one first.
Murphy over pedlar out.

Don't disagree , Smith, Murphy, Laird and Pedlar in the cross hairs.

People forget everyone was fine with Crouch, a club champion and AA being relegated to SANFL but oppose Laird being treated the same way. Laird needs to go and learn how to be penwtrating and damaging, Crouch did, now it's Lairds turn

 

[King Elvis]

View attachment 1936665

This says everything you need to know

Pathetic.

King on First Bounce (First Crack? Whatever it is), said it - our midfield is so vanilla and one paced, lacks any kind of creative threat.

Why did we pay so much for Rankine to sit him in the forward line?

Why dont we trust Rachelle to play in the middle?

What are we doing.

 

[King Elvis]

Really felt like a regression last night

It was back to old Crows. Win lots of ball, bomb it long and high, get smashed in the air.

Last year we'd got better at lifting the eyes, hitting up short passes, running it through the middle. Much harder to defend and played to the strengths of our forwards who are clever players. Even our talls are largely leading players, not pack-busters.

The ball movement was blinkered and predictable last night.

Need a complete reset during the week. The personnel are capable

Agree with this.

We've played abysmal footy for 90% of the first two weeks, and we probably should've won at least one, if not both, of them.

If we persist with this, it'll be a disaster - BUT, if we actually adjust our selections and play attacking footy, we can have a good year.

 

[Danger in Texas]

Agree with this.

We've played abysmal footy for 90% of the first two weeks, and we probably should've won at least one, if not both, of them.

If we persist with this, it'll be a disaster - BUT, if we actually adjust our selections and play attacking footy, we can have a good year.

Great post. We have the personnel to play attacking footy, particularly through the middle, it’s mainly up to Nicks as to whether he wants to keep working with what we showed last year, or… adopt the dross of the past fortnight

I can’t say I’m confident we’ll do the former

 

[Rory Walkerfield]

Great post. We have the personnel to play attacking footy, particularly through the middle, it’s mainly up to Nicks as to whether he wants to keep working with what we showed last year, or… adopt the dross of the past fortnight

I can’t say I’m confident we’ll do the former

Amazing how almost everyone on this board is sheeting the last two weeks at Nicks feet - and rightly so.

Sure, there have been some horrible performances by Murphy and Smith. Peds, Dawson and Laird need a kick up the arse.

But I don’t even want to talk about personnel changes - the heat needs to be squarely on Nicks and the s**t game plan he’s rolling out

 

[King Elvis]

I felt we were in trouble once we announced the leadership team

you can’t have elite performance when your leadership team smells of mediocracy, this is on the players as well for voting in the likes of Murphy and Smith


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

And then the explanation that Murphy's inclusion was based on more than just game day.

How many ******* times will we put people in the leadership group based upon this crap?

 

[George Kramer]

Yep, as I said before, we were not working hard enough.

Are we coached to though? It seems they’ve been instructed to keep possession by foot rather than overlapping run. Players just don’t provide run if that’s what they are instructed to do.

Mark, stop, go back, look for a pass. Too many of them doing it for it not to be instruction. If it isn’t instruction the players aren’t clearly listening to Nicks, but it’s clearly the former. We’ve said we were going to be more defensive and that’s exactly what we are doing, to the detriment of our strength.

 

[Danger in Texas]

Are we coached to though? It seems they’ve been instructed to keep possession by foot rather than overlapping run. Players just don’t provide run if that’s what they are instructed to do.

Mark, stop, go back, look for a pass. Too many of them doing it for it not to be instruction. If it isn’t instruction the players aren’t clearly listening to Nicks, but it’s clearly the former. We’ve said we were going to be more defensive and that’s exactly what we are doing, to the detriment of our strength.

Really wish there was a ‘play on from mark’ stat. Feel like it would damningly (is that a word?) expose us

 

[BigBoSS_Riot]

Really wish there was a ‘play on from mark’ stat. Feel like it would damningly (is that a word?) expose us

That stat almost certainly does exist (I think I've heard David King mention it before), but it'd be locked in the Champion Data dungeon unfortunately.

 

[BunjiMac]

Just feels like the necessary changes are always forced on this coaching group as a last resort.

 

[Samcro24]

Great post. We have the personnel to play attacking footy, particularly through the middle, it’s mainly up to Nicks as to whether he wants to keep working with what we showed last year, or… adopt the dross of the past fortnight

I can’t say I’m confident we’ll do the former

It’s almost as if we’re cherry ripe for a new coach to come in and release the shackles.

Lucky we didn’t re-sign the current coach.

 

[Interloperer]

Nobody has really mentioned here how Dawson's poor game was in large part due to the fact he, and the team as a whole, were trying to engineer the Dangerfield vs Dawson matchup. Which not only affected Dawson's game, but was a horrible net-negative for Adelaide when the tactic came off.

 

[King Elvis]

Nobody has really mentioned here how Dawson's poor game was in large part due to the he, and the team as a whole, trying to engineer the Dangerfield vs Dawson matchup. Which not only affected Dawson's game, but was a horrible net-negative for Adelaide when the tactic came off.

Feel like Pedlar would be a decent match up for Danger.

Definitely don't think sacrificing our only quality mid was a good idea.

 

[Sanders]

Nobody has really mentioned here how Dawson's poor game was in large part due to the fact he, and the team as a whole, were trying to engineer the Dangerfield vs Dawson matchup. Which not only affected Dawson's game, but was a horrible net-negative for Adelaide when the tactic came off.

Dawson got 3 coaches votes in a losing side, against Dangerfield’s 1 vote in a winning side

I don’t see it myself, but someone thought that matchup went well for us

 

[FR0GGY]

Dawson got 3 coaches votes in a losing side, against Dangerfield’s 1 vote in a winning side

I don’t see it myself, but someone thought that matchup went well for us

Someone looked at the stats sheet.

 

[Interloperer]

Feel like Pedlar would be a decent match up for Danger.

Definitely don't think sacrificing our only quality mid was a good idea.

In a fight fire with fire battle maybe. I don't know if I'd have him in a negating role.

Dawson got 3 coaches votes in a losing side, against Dangerfield’s 1 vote in a winning side

I don’t see it myself, but someone thought that matchup went well for us

The other coach gave Crouch 2 votes.

I guess we'll find out who it was if either player gets an adjusted role this week.

 

[George Kramer]

Exactly

 

[Danger in Texas]

Exactly

Luke Ryan licking his lips as we speak