Not happy Jan - still too wide.

[ok.crows]

If the Crows say "we are working on it still" - then OK.

If the Crows manufacture other excuses or deem it a satisfactory effort - then that is the portent of yet another poor season ahead.

 

[crazy_big_al]

It is your first year with a new game plan it is going to take time to get it to work.

 

[ok.crows]

It is your first year with a new game plan it is going to take time to get it to work.

Agreed. My point is that the coaching staff needs to acknowledge this.

 

[Watzsup]

Pretty hard to go long into the forward line with no real key forwards. Plus we were up against one of the best defensive teams in the AFL.

 

[maccas_no1]

Yes agree we get to the centre of the ground then look for players either running down the wing or leading out wide need to get away from that long and direct is the only way.

 

[maccas_no1]

Pretty hard to go long into the forward line with no real key forwards. Plus we were up against one of the best defensive teams in the AFL.

Port got numbers back in defence and clogged our forwardline everytime hard to play against that sort of plan.

 

[Watzsup]

Port got numbers back in defence and clogged our forwardline everytime hard to play against that sort of plan.

Thats true and only because we are not confident with the players up forward. Driving the ball long to a contest inside the 50 means you back the players up there to position themselves and take a 60/40 or better mark. I'm just saying we don't have that yet. But saying that that was just one game and we played against one of the best defences in the AFL

 

[Stiffy_18]

Too ********ing wide in the first half. We were a bit more direct in the second half and as a result we converted better. Still a LOT of work to do and we really need to develop a strong marking forward who can control the forward line.

 

[Blue Red and Gold]

I was more disappointed with the constant bombing away into our forward 50.
I thought the plan this year was to play possesion football and wait for a viable option up forward, I did not see this at all.

Oh well its something we can work on and hopefully have all the kinks ironed out by round 1.

 

[Arsene Wenger]

I wouldnt stress too much
U had a lot of players out there tonight in unfamiliar / relatively unfamiliar roles - Game plan will come wen u get ur Full strength team together. I can see how it woulda been frustrating coz u did go wide alot

time is all u need - good first up hitout u couldnt be too disheartened

 

[Jerome]

I wouldnt stress too much
U had a lot of players out there tonight in unfamiliar / relatively unfamiliar roles -

Sorry mate, but IMO that was close to our best line up.

Most of the guys that played last night have been on the list for years and knew what to expect. The one exception would be Van Berlo.

When are we going to stop going wide? I thought we were meant to be playing a smarter more effective brand of footy?

 

[Bockchoy67]

One of the main things I was also frustrated about is our constant long kicking into the forward line.

Sure, if you have strong marking forward this can be effective, but with none of these and no genuine crumbers the ball just kept coming back.

Port have got a strong marking forward in Tredrea, but they still kicked to leads from the forwards.

I really want to see us kick to more leads because the likes of Hentschel and Perrie are good marks on the lead. If we constantly bomb it into the 50, very rarely we will score.

 

[Powerstufff]

.....I really want to see us kick to more leads because the likes of Hentschel and Perrie are good marks on the lead. If we constantly bomb it into the 50, very rarely we will score.

You are damned if you do and damned if you don't at the moment. You can't just say don't go wide, the game doesn't always allow a run down the guts. But your old problem with coming in wide nearly every time was terribly obvious for much of last night, I mean right hugging the boundary.
That sort of worked as Perrie killed Chaplin and often was reliably marking in the forward pocket. However clearly he was instructed not to take the shot but to further centre it, where we would drop back and more often than not regain the ball.
Had your game plan involved you trying to come down the guts in the first place, which I think we were all expecting, you'd have snagged a few more by law of averages. But you are right, long bombing against a good opposition just isn't sophisticated enough. In general a more tactical approach is needed to develop an effective and direct attack.
Superficially it seems simple. Drop some talls in; have Riccuito, McLeod, Johncock, Bode run in and crumb. Your pencil should be going blunt filling in the goals in the Record. But for some reason few of us can understand the bulk of the Crows players shy away from doing this in actual games.
Hopefully it all comes together by Round 4.

 

[Cap]

did anyone else notice the way Port flooded the crows forward line and then ran forward (this sometimes caused them to burn the ball though)

we played into this on so many occasions it was funny - next time they need to have a think about whats happening and then use the ball !

 

[crows dude]

If Ian Perrie keeps on leading wide then we will keep on kicking it wide.

For some reason we always go to him even if we had Stevo and Potential in the hot spot.

They made a good point on 5AA saying that when Tredrea leads wide Port dont pass it to him they will instead go to White or Thurstans in the Hot spot.

Thats what we need to do. If Perrie leads wide then dont kick it to him. Go to Stevens or Welshy instead.

 

[mymansyd]

Sorry mate, but IMO that was close to our best line up.

Most of the guys that played last night have been on the list for years and knew what to expect. The one exception would be Van Berlo.

When are we going to stop going wide? I thought we were meant to be playing a smarter more effective brand of footy?

Jerome, steady on mate. If that in your opinion is close to our best line-up, then I'm glad you're not a selector. Phew. That was nowhere near our best line-up. Welsh, Thompson, Clarke, Hart, Bassett, Edwards, Goodwin and Ladhams (when fit/and both sides of his brain functioning) were all out.

Port were of course missing a few as well, but still had nearly 500 games more experience than us last night.

I agree with you, however, with respects to going wide. Not good.

 

[portentous]

Port got numbers back in defence and clogged our forwardline everytime hard to play against that sort of plan.

If you want to play finals in 2005, you're going to have to find a solution. You won't win too many games playing that style of footy IMO. I couldn't see any indicator of a new game plan last night.

Why are you still perservering with Bode? I honestly don't think he's up to it....

 

[Stiffy_18]

If Ian Perrie keeps on leading wide then we will keep on kicking it wide.

For some reason we always go to him even if we had Stevo and Potential in the hot spot.

They made a good point on 5AA saying that when Tredrea leads wide Port dont pass it to him they will instead go to White or Thurstans in the Hot spot.

Thats what we need to do. If Perrie leads wide then dont kick it to him. Go to Stevens or Welshy instead.

I think you need to consider the role Perrie is playing. He was instructed to lead wide last night because the tactic was to move Chad away from the CHB to the flanks where he can't use his marking power and rebounding ability to hurt us. I think the problem was with the rest of the forwards not using the space Sarge created properly and of course our midfielders honouring every one of Perrie's leads.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

If Ian Perrie keeps on leading wide then we will keep on kicking it wide.

For some reason we always go to him even if we had Stevo and Potential in the hot spot.

They made a good point on 5AA saying that when Tredrea leads wide Port dont pass it to him they will instead go to White or Thurstans in the Hot spot.

Thats what we need to do. If Perrie leads wide then dont kick it to him. Go to Stevens or Welshy instead.

The idea of leading wide is to create space behind him for others to lead into.

I agree Perrie is the defensive option, the attacking option is to ignore him and use the back space.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Jerome, steady on mate. If that in your opinion is close to our best line-up, then I'm glad you're not a selector. Phew. That was nowhere near our best line-up. Welsh, Thompson, Clarke, Hart, Bassett, Edwards, Goodwin and Ladhams (when fit/and both sides of his brain functioning) were all out.

Port were of course missing a few as well, but still had nearly 500 games more experience than us last night.

I agree with you, however, with respects to going wide. Not good.

Definitely not near our best side, but neither was Port's - & the were trialing younger guys in the 2nd half. Not really too many positives from our forward play except Stevo, but early days yet.

 

[Jerome]

Jerome, steady on mate. If that in your opinion is close to our best line-up, then I'm glad you're not a selector. Phew. That was nowhere near our best line-up. Welsh, Thompson, Clarke, Hart, Bassett, Edwards, Goodwin and Ladhams (when fit/and both sides of his brain functioning) were all out.
QUOTE]

Fair call, but mate, if I was a selector the likes of Bock, Shirley, Skipworth and Bode would not be on the list.

I take your point that we had a few of our best injured (Welsh, Bassett, Clarke, Edwards, Goodwin, Thompson), but as I looked at last week’s squad, the following would make my Round One line up if fit:

1. Ben Hudson 2. Jason Torney 3. Ken McGregor 4. Graham Johncock 5. Mark Stevens 6. Ian Perrie 7. Andrew McLeod 8. Brett Burton 9. Ben Rutten 10. James Begley 11.Luke Jericho 12. Mark Ricciuto 13. Brent Reilly 14.Rhett Biglands 15. Trent Hentschel

That’s a reasonable line up. A good base to build on. Plenty of experience there with a few blokes still learning the ropes – Rutten, Jericho, Reilly, Hudson and Van Berlo. I don’t expect too much of those 5 – except Reilly as he’s been around longer.

Which brings me to my next point and it’s the same as my original post. I disgareed with Arsene Wenger’s comment that we “had a lot of players out there tonight in unfamiliar / relatively unfamiliar roles”

“Most of the guys that played last night have been on the list for years and knew what to expect.”

This comment is mainly directed at some of the second stringers or other “young” players. The following fellas also played last weekend:


Michael Doughty Drafted in 2000, played 53 games and still referred to as a “young player” despite being in his mid 20’s.
Scott Stevens Drafted in 1999, played 38 games.
Martin Mattner Drafted in 2002, played 33 games.

(I thought the three above played alright on the weekend.)

Matthew Bode Been in the AFL since 1998 and is on his last chance
Robert Shirley Drafted in 1999, played 51 games
Hayden Skipworth Drafted in 2000, played 17 games
Nathan Bock., Drafted in 2002, debut 2004

I know its only Wiz Cup and the team will be rusty and needs some work.

However on an individual basis, the 7 guys listed above around for a while now (and with perhaps the exception of Bock and Skippy) should know what to expect.

Their age, lack of experince or playing in an unfamiliar role can’t be used as excuses anymore. They have to take their chances this year.

Personally, if they play well in 2005 good luck to em, if not...I 'm not gonna have much sympathy for them.There are'nt too many excuses left.