Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
- 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
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
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?
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.
It was never going to work. It was a dumb selection and everyone knew it.
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.
Two tall forwards isn't ridiculously tall. Westhoff can go off floating anywhere else.
Not very.
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.
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.
This thread has certainly jumped the shark. Using Chinese astrology to explain why Hinkley can't coach and mind reading to explain why the players aren't performing for Hinkley.
Metal Monkey/ScorpioI am a Wood Dragon. A Gemini Wood Dragon. Don't know if it helps me or hinders me.
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.
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.
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 yearIt 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.
an embarrassing record, hang your head in shame recordFor 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
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.
Yeh but that was like tickling his balls after you had lopped his head off.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.
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
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.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.
Yeh but that was like tickling his balls after you had lopped his head off.