Scape Goat I've lost my faith in Ken Hinkley Part 3

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Janus

Dominus Ex Machina
Joined
Sep 9, 2007
Posts
18,463
Likes
46,593
Location
Portland, Oregon
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Dallas Cowboys, Chicago Bulls
- R1 Melbourne (Away) and R2 Carlton (Home) - Both wins against ordinary opposition when positivity was high
- R7 Collingwood (Away) and R8 Adelaide (Home) - Both high energy with many wasted opportunities due to opposition pressure

There's more similarity between these games in terms of performance and energy than between Melb & Coll, or Carlton & Adelaide

Even `its the vibe of the thing' is letting you down, Janus
Against Collingwood, the players let them jump out to a ridiculous margin in the first quarter and managed to peg it back to 18 points by the start of the third quarter, on a ground that is closer to AO than the MCG. We scored 5 unanswered goals in the second quarter.

Against Adelaide, it was just a monotonous grind where the margin was 11 points at quarter time thanks to a gifted goal to Rory Sloane and 20 points halfway through the third and then blew out because the players didn't learn a damned thing from how Collingwood played as to how a team with speed can overcome a team that presses high.

If this team doesn't learn how to play teams that are going to press high in our defensive 50 and then sit back in our attacking 50 because we don't transition the ball fast enough, Geelong will absolutely DESTROY us when we play them after the bye. We should have been taking kick ins straight away against Adelaide, and moving the ball quickly to beat them back into the forward line before they had a chance to organise their press. And I'm quite sure that was the entire reason for playing guys like Farrell and Johnson.

The times when we did that, we caught them out, but our delivery inside 50 was so poor that it didn't matter.

What I'm saying is that there should be MORE energy at home than away. Not the same, and certainly not less. As George Lucas used to say: Faster, and more intense.
 

Magus

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Dec 31, 2013
Posts
12,734
Likes
29,491
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Perhaps using a sponsored post from a first year player who is going to be excited regardless isn't the best way to prove your point :p
The onus is on you to prove your theory, not me to prove you wrong. The mental gymnastics you have to do to remove any and all responsibility from the man in charge and place blame on anyone and everyone else gets more elaborate and ridiculous by the day. No ones buyin what you're sellin.
 

Janus

Dominus Ex Machina
Joined
Sep 9, 2007
Posts
18,463
Likes
46,593
Location
Portland, Oregon
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Dallas Cowboys, Chicago Bulls
The onus is on you to prove your theory, not me to prove you wrong. The mental gymnastics you have to do to remove any and all responsibility from the man in charge and place blame on anyone and everyone else gets more elaborate and ridiculous by the day. No ones buyin what you're sellin.
I'm not removing responsibility from anybody. And I'm certainly not selling anything.

As for 'proving my theory'...compare the West Coast game to the North Melbourne game. After beating the Eagles in Perth, the players would have been up and about...and yet the game against North was just a borefest without any of the energy displayed the previous week.

That's not ridiculous or elaborate, that's just observation.
 

Magus

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Dec 31, 2013
Posts
12,734
Likes
29,491
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
I'm not removing responsibility from anybody. And I'm certainly not selling anything.

As for 'proving my theory'...compare the West Coast game to the North Melbourne game. After beating the Eagles in Perth, the players would have been up and about...and yet the game against North was just a borefest without any of the energy displayed the previous week.

That's not ridiculous or elaborate, that's just observation.
You're always looking for things to support the conclusion that you've already come to. There's as much evidence of the crowd being to blame for poor performance as there is for Adelaide drinking water. None.

Literally a hundred factors that could influence the outcome of football match but you've decided it's because of the crowd, because it couldn't possibly be the guy in charge. Because you don't want to believe that.
 

Janus

Dominus Ex Machina
Joined
Sep 9, 2007
Posts
18,463
Likes
46,593
Location
Portland, Oregon
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Dallas Cowboys, Chicago Bulls
You're always looking for things to support the conclusion that you've already come to. There's as much evidence of the crowd being to blame for poor performance as there is for Adelaide drinking water. None.

Literally a hundred factors that could influence the outcome of football match but you've decided it's because of the crowd, because it couldn't possibly be the guy in charge. Because you don't want to believe that.
The trouble is, I don't actually have to look for things to support my conclusion, because my conclusions are based on things that have already happened. I don't look at success and attribute it to X or Y because that's what people on here have said.

The guy in charge took a team that lost to Richmond over to Perth and completely annihilated the reigning premiers on their own dung heap. Not a scratchy win, a comprehensive shellacking.

The same team came back to Adelaide, and put in exactly the same performance that they did against Richmond against a weaker North Melbourne, which is the only reason they got over the line.

You say 'It's the coach'. If it was the coach, they don't win in Perth with the exact same team plus Marshall (who everyone on this board thought was the difference until he wasn't and there's yet another player who is the difference (Frampton)). So look for something else. The proof is in the performance and the energy with which the team plays the game.

Anyone who has an unbiased eye would say that our performances against Melbourne, Brisbane, West Coast and Collingwood have been superior to our performances against Carlton, Richmond, North Melbourne and Adelaide. It's not about wins and losses, but how the team performs in those wins and losses.

If Ken had stuck with Johnson this week, then I'd be blaming him. He tried something that could have worked but didn't. Now you've got people criticising him for dropping Marshall - supposedly a developing key forward - for Frampton - another developing key forward. Playing them together alongside Ryder/Lycett would be absolutely pointless because they wouldn't learn anything about what it takes to be a key forward. But people don't actually want that, what they want is to play some ridiculously tall forward line that consists of two key forwards that together could barely match what Dixon provides and a resting ruck plus Westhoff floating around as well.

How stupid is that? Two tall forwards, a resting ruck and a wing/forward that floats in. Never mind that in doing so we would completely destroy any chance of playing a forward half game, because three general forwards + 6 midfielders aren't enough to lock the ball in against teams that play team defence (i.e. all of them).

Even when West Coast played Kennedy, Darling and a tandem of Lycett/Naitanui resting in the forward line, one of Kennedy/Darling would always play the roaming centre half role. Which is basically the role that people want Westhoff to do (and the role he is best at).

That's my response to your assertion.
 

GoPorts

All Australian
Joined
Jun 14, 2017
Posts
692
Likes
1,869
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
I've heard the first info about Ken being under pressure, not much info but enough to be pleased about it. Just that the words "well he may not be around for much longer" were bandied about.

Unfortunately the trade off is morale in the playing group is seriously low at the moment.

The selection of Johnson was simply Ken "having his favourites" as well. Exactly what we all suspected.
How could Johnson be any coaches favourite? Never performed in the AFL and generally mediocre in SANFL. If anything you'd think a guy with his pace and physical presence would have frustrated the **** out of coaches for never putting it together
Is it that he is now the closest thing to Neade on the list?

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
 
Joined
Mar 16, 2019
Posts
898
Likes
4,088
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Mostly what I've seen on this board this week has had Westhoff playing wing, not third tall.

Frampton - Kennedy
Marshall - Darling
Lycett/Ryder/Ladhams - Lycett/Naitanui

Seems to match. I'm sure Marshall would love a forward target drawing attention to let him play lead up/roaming forward; a decent role for him as a junior. And sure as **** Westhoff would love to be far enough from goal to avoid taking set shots.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Magus

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Dec 31, 2013
Posts
12,734
Likes
29,491
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
The trouble is, I don't actually have to look for things to support my conclusion, because my conclusions are based on things that have already happened.
That still has nothing to do with blaming home crowds for poor team performances. There's no evidence. Where there is evidence of poor coaching is in our selections, in our inability to get motivated on a consistent basis and our constantly changing gameplan from year to year.

The guy in charge took a team that lost to Richmond over to Perth and completely annihilated the reigning premiers on their own dung heap. Not a scratchy win, a comprehensive shellacking.
And we've had those kinds of wins every year. We used to beat Hawthorn when they were reigning premiers and then went straight back to our old ways. It takes more than one or two good wins a year to be a contender. Delist some players, trade others, get new assistants in and end up looking just as inept. Hmm, what's the common denominator here?

You say 'It's the coach'. If it was the coach, they don't win in Perth with the exact same team plus Marshall (who everyone on this board thought was the difference until he wasn't and there's yet another player who is the difference (Frampton)). So look for something else. The proof is in the performance and the energy with which the team plays the game.
Yeah, I do say it's the coach, just like you say it's Lade, Nicks, Wingard, Bonner, Houston, Choco, the supporters and anyone else I might be forgetting.

If Ken had stuck with Johnson this week, then I'd be blaming him. He tried something that could have worked but didn't.
It was never going to work. It was a dumb selection and everyone knew it.

Now you've got people criticising him for dropping Marshall - supposedly a developing key forward - for Frampton - another developing key forward. Playing them together alongside Ryder/Lycett would be absolutely pointless because they wouldn't learn anything about what it takes to be a key forward.
I disagree. Ryder and Lycett aren't forwards but this is like saying Drew won't learn playing midfield if there are other midfielders. Having players in the area that demand attention away from you will make your job easier.

But people don't actually want that, what they want is to play some ridiculously tall forward line that consists of two key forwards that together could barely match what Dixon provides and a resting ruck plus Westhoff floating around as well.
Two tall forwards isn't ridiculously tall. Westhoff can go off floating anywhere else.

How stupid is that? Two tall forwards, a resting ruck and a wing/forward that floats in.
Not very.

Never mind that in doing so we would completely destroy any chance of playing a forward half game, because three general forwards + 6 midfielders aren't enough to lock the ball in against teams that play team defence (i.e. all of them).
Never mind the fact that we expected our small forwards to tag Crows defenders and it was completely ineffectual. You talk about the importance of locking the ball in as a reason not to play another tall as if being tall means you can't defend and as if those smalls did the job, which they didn't.

Even when West Coast played Kennedy, Darling and a tandem of Lycett/Naitanui resting in the forward line, one of Kennedy/Darling would always play the roaming centre half role. Which is basically the role that people want Westhoff to do (and the role he is best at).
Westhoff can play wing (where he is most effective) and be the spare man in defence. Marshall can play roaming CHF with Frampton playing deep. Easy.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 1, 2014
Posts
8,766
Likes
41,662
Location
Perth
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Moderator #1,813
It doesn't surprise me that morale is low. A core group of 8-10 players are facing their footballing mortality having never experienced any sort of team success. Paddy Ryder is in his 14th year of AFL football and has never played in a finals win. Robbie Gray is in his 13th year and has won more B&Fs than he's won finals. Boak and Westhoff went to the big dance in their first seasons and have been to September only 3 times since. Stories of failure everywhere, and these guys know the clock is rapidly ticking on their careers. You'd be pissed off too.
 

Janus

Dominus Ex Machina
Joined
Sep 9, 2007
Posts
18,463
Likes
46,593
Location
Portland, Oregon
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Dallas Cowboys, Chicago Bulls
That still has nothing to do with blaming home crowds for poor team performances. There's no evidence. Where there is evidence of poor coaching is in our selections, in our inability to get motivated on a consistent basis and our constantly changing gameplan from year to year.
I'm not blaming home crowds for poor team performances. I'm saying that the energy of the team is markedly different when we play away from home vs at home. You'd have to be blind not to see it. I want to know why.

And we've had those kinds of wins every year. We used to beat Hawthorn when they were reigning premiers and then went straight back to our old ways. It takes more than one or two good wins a year to be a contender. Delist some players, trade others, get new assistants in and end up looking just as inept. Hmm, what's the common denominator here?
Unmotivated players?

Yeah, I do say it's the coach, just like you say it's Lade, Nicks, Wingard, Bonner, Houston, Choco, the supporters and anyone else I might be forgetting.
You'll notice I haven't blamed any of the assistants this year. There is a certain effort required from the players to be a premiership team. I saw it vs West Coast, so I know they can do it.

It was never going to work. It was a dumb selection and everyone knew it.
It could have worked if they had moved the ball faster out of defence and played on more. We'll never know, because the team didn't do anything right against Adelaide. Completely went away from the system from defence to midfield - which had limited change and had nothing to do with the forward line.

You might think I'm being unfairly critical of guys like Bonner and Byrne-Jones, but I know that if the way we want to play is to work, these guys need to push up hard into the midfield and act as support. For some reason against Adelaide, Byrne-Jones didn't do that much at all. I saw Houston in the forward line, I saw Broadbent pushing forward into forward 50, but Darcy wasn't doing it at all.

If we don't have our defenders pushing up, the whole thing falls apart and it looks like the static mess we saw last weekend. I'm expecting Garner to kill it, so hopefully when Jonas and Burton are back we'll be playing properly.

I disagree. Ryder and Lycett aren't forwards but this is like saying Drew won't learn playing midfield if there are other midfielders. Having players in the area that demand attention away from you will make your job easier.
It's about the cohesion of the forward line and what happens when the ball hits the ground. It's about thinking about more than just the perfect scenario where every forward 50 entry is clean. Most aren't. If you're playing a two ruck system to get an advantage in centre clearance and stoppages, you have to sacrifice elsewhere. We've decided to go down that path. If we didn't, then sure, you can play a second dedicated forward.

Two tall forwards isn't ridiculously tall. Westhoff can go off floating anywhere else.
It is when you're resting a ruck in the forward line. No one gives a **** if the ruck isn't a dedicated forward. The point is that he is there to clunk marks and kick goals. A key forward isn't supposed to need help to get the job done. That's why they are a key forward.

Not very.
Not when you expect everything to go to plan and don't consider the complications of the presence of an opponent, it isn't.

Never mind the fact that we expected our small forwards to tag Crows defenders and it was completely ineffectual. You talk about the importance of locking the ball in as a reason not to play another tall as if being tall means you can't defend and as if those smalls did the job, which they didn't.
That's because those small forwards continually got sucked toward the contest rather than actually tagging those players. This is why I said the plan went completely out the window. Both Farrell and Johnson just went off doing their own thing and quite frankly I'd drop both of them. It was almost as if they were trying to play for the spot that Butters has in the team rather than executing the job they were asked to do.

Westhoff can play wing (where he is most effective) and be the spare man in defence. Marshall can play roaming CHF with Frampton playing deep. Easy.
LOL Marshall couldn't play roaming anything. When did he ever take a strong mark on the lead against Adelaide? Once, maybe twice if we are lucky? Instead, we found him skirting packs where Johnson (yes, Johnson) was acting as the contested mark on the 50m line and he was sitting outside waiting for the crumbs as if he's a small forward.

That's why he's been dropped. He's learning bad habits if he stays in a team with another guy who is trying to play key forward, because it's not going to encourage him to lead up to the ball and contest. Yeah, he can halve contests, which is why he's not a total bust, but he desperately needs the confidence that comes from being the single focal point in a team the way that Frampton got when he kicked 8 goals in 2 matches.

He's got the tools to be a superstar. I don't want to see him become another version of Westhoff.
 

Magus

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Dec 31, 2013
Posts
12,734
Likes
29,491
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
I'm not blaming home crowds for poor team performances. I'm saying that the energy of the team is markedly different when we play away from home vs at home. You'd have to be blind not to see it. I want to know why.
Maybe I should just not take the stuff you say so literally then. Because that's clearly what you did.

It would be a **** feeling as a player actually preferring to play away from home than play in front of a fan base that doesn’t actually support you.
We don't support the players is such a crock. All the criticism is aimed at Hinkley while you're actively trying to paint Riley Bonner as The Antichrist each week.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Nov 6, 2014
Posts
32,507
Likes
33,222
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
It wasn't a good look, especially since Motlop wasn't exactly setting the world on fire either when he got selected. Rewarding at least one of those guys for busting their arse over either Motlop or Johnson would have set the right example. You know Mayes would have given his all to impress from half forward and delivered the ball better.

Ken worries far too much about Adelaide for my liking. That's the only reason he'd bother to select Farrell and Johnson and play them the way that he did.
For someone so much concerned about showdowns he sure has a poor record, much to my annoyance as we have to play that mob twice every single year
 

Janus

Dominus Ex Machina
Joined
Sep 9, 2007
Posts
18,463
Likes
46,593
Location
Portland, Oregon
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Dallas Cowboys, Chicago Bulls
Maybe I should just not take the stuff you say so literally then. Because that's clearly what you did.



We don't support the players is such a crock. All the criticism is aimed at Hinkley while you're actively trying to paint Riley Bonner as The Antichrist each week.
Here’s a simple question: do you think the energy and enthusiasm from the crowd is high or low at the beginning of home games? NTUA ends, and the crowd sits down...how long does that enthusiasm last? How long does the enthusiasm the players have for the contest last?

If you can’t feel the difference between crowd engagement in 2014 and now, then you’re obviously an emotional leper, because it’s extremely palpable.

And I actually defended Bonner after his game against West Coast because I thought he played well when everyone was saying to drop him. So you’re wrong about that too.
 

Janus

Dominus Ex Machina
Joined
Sep 9, 2007
Posts
18,463
Likes
46,593
Location
Portland, Oregon
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Dallas Cowboys, Chicago Bulls
For someone so much concerned about showdowns he sure has a poor record, much to my annoyance as we have to play that mob twice every single year
I think he’s got a poor record precisely because he cares so much about it. It’s like the days of Nigel Smart telling everyone they had a new method of finally beating Port before inevitably losing - if you build it up so much and go away from the style of game that is your brand (and two forward taggers is nothing like what we should have been playing), then you’re just setting yourself up for failure. It’s the coaching of a loser.
 

GoPorts

All Australian
Joined
Jun 14, 2017
Posts
692
Likes
1,869
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Here’s a simple question: do you think the energy and enthusiasm from the crowd is high or low at the beginning of home games? NTUA ends, and the crowd sits down...how long does that enthusiasm last? How long does the enthusiasm the players have for the contest last?

If you can’t feel the difference between crowd engagement in 2014 and now, then you’re obviously an emotional leper, because it’s extremely palpable.

And I actually defended Bonner after his game against West Coast because I thought he played well when everyone was saying to drop him. So you’re wrong about that too.
Can't blame crowds for team performance. Sport/Football is entertainment and we have failed to play entertaining football for years. The downturn in crowd enthusiasm came after the crap gameplan not the other way around. If winning and losing depended more on the crowd then the club can pay us to show up and charge the players. The club should be thanking everyone who still comes along with the garbage many of us have sat through when we could be doing other things with our free time. If someone puts on a crap show and it gets cancelled you don't blame people for not watching.
We don't want discos and funk squads, if that was my thing I'd go to places that do those things well, not as an add on distraction. I want a team of players that commit every week and a gameplan that allows entertaining football where every goal doesn't seem like some massive grind.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
 
Top Bottom