Petrenko's Game?

[Vader]

What do we make of Petrenko's game yesterday?

On the one hand, he kicked 2.2, going a long way towards answering the criticism about his lack of offensive output. 4 scoring shots is not bad in anyone's language. Even better, two of those scoring shots were the last of the game, taking us from 6pts down to 1pt ahead, in the process providing Crows fans with one of their best moments in years.

On the other hand, he only had 1 tackle and 15 disposals for the game (in what was a high disposal game. If he was brought into the side to play a defensive forward then it's hard to say that he succeeded.

His scoring was important, but dodgy as hell. He looked to be in a mad panic before settling and kicking his first goal - but most importantly, he kicked the goal. I think most of the credit for the goal which sealed the match should go to Rutten & Kerridge, with Petrenko being the beneficiary of their hard work.

To be honest, I can't recall him making any major mistakes. I can't recall him doing much of anything, other than kicking those vital scores.

So, how do we rate his game? Is it good enough for him to retain his position, now that his token has expired? He definitely did some good things, but for my money just didn't have enough involvement with the game.

 

[StonesThrow]

He was okay.

He was actually good with ball in hand and didn't waste any disposals. was cleaner than he had been all year. But like you said, his tackling was non existent, which is what he is meant to be in the side for. I, dunno, I think he did enough to earn another game. But only just.

 

[Thylacinus]

What do we make of Petrenko's game yesterday?

On the one hand, he kicked 2.2, going a long way towards answering the criticism about his lack of offensive output. 4 scoring shots is not bad in anyone's language. Even better, two of those scoring shots were the last of the game, taking us from 6pts down to 1pt ahead, in the process providing Crows fans with one of their best moments in years.

On the other hand, he only had 1 tackle and 15 disposals for the game (in what was a high disposal game. If he was brought into the side to play a defensive forward then it's hard to say that he succeeded.

His scoring was important, but dodgy as hell. He looked to be in a mad panic before settling and kicking his first goal - but most importantly, he kicked the goal. I think most of the credit for the goal which sealed the match should go to Rutten & Kerridge, with Petrenko being the beneficiary of their hard work.

To be honest, I can't recall him making any major mistakes. I can't recall him doing much of anything, other than kicking those vital scores.

So, how do we rate his game? Is it good enough for him to retain his position, now that his token has expired? He definitely did some good things, but for my money just didn't have enough involvement with the game.

Fair assessment IMHO, regardless of what flax you cop for posting it. I hope I am proved wrong, but I don't ever seeing Pet's developing into a Douglas. Mind you, a smallish forward is one of the hardest positions to play (what positions did he play yesterday...he seemed to roam a fair way back at times IIRR)? His poise may continue to improve a bit over more time if he plays permanently, but I think he will always play some handy games, some average games, and some where he appears to go AWOL. If he fulfills ALL of his potential, he could be a handy player at best, but most likely scenario is at some stage someone (maybe not on our list yet) will come in/rise up to overtake him. Pet's strength...he has very little competition for his role a the Crows at the moment. Bottom line...hung jury still weighing the evidence in a comlicated case.

 

[jenny61_99]

I see that he was brought into the side because it was indigenous round. (Cynical, I know, but there it is). I see now, that it will be impossible for Sando to drop him after that performance - because, while it wasn't brilliant, it wasn't bad (and how bad would it look if he did!).

 

[Mattrox]

We know his tackling and pressure acts are valuable. I can excuse 1 tackle when he gets 15 touches because he will get tackles.


He should have had 3 goals and needs to really improve his set shots. I thought he did more than enough to retain his spot... last Friday goal aside.

 

[King Elvis]

I'd rather he kicked goals and got touches than getting 4 touches and 6 tackles.

Not a great game, but pretty decent.

He actually showed some composure and poise to kick his first girl, instead of just freaking out.

Lack of left foot almost killed us as well.

Good roleplayer, when he's fit and IN FORM, match-ups allowing, then he has a spot in the side.

If he isn't in form, he's not good enough to carry.

 

[Glenno23]

15 touches and 2 goals. You'd take that

If he could get those figures AND lay 5-6 tackles, then we're talking

 

[iamcorky]

Yeh bloke needed to kick a few. Should be working on his goal kicking as that will improve his value

 

[cmndstab]

I thought he was pretty average, but definitely ahead of his output from earlier in the year. I'd keep him in this week.

His last 90 seconds were gold

 

[Freddy Bassett]

Vader, when Petrenko kicked that goal all I thought was how disgraceful your comments were last week saying he only got picked because he was an Aboriginal. Not a real lot of difference compared to the Collingwood fan who said Goodes/Jetta were getting frees also because of the colour of their skin..( but without the foul language attached)...

Dangerfield on 5aa this morning spoke of how important Petrenko was and how in previous weeks the ball got out the forward half too easily..
Petrenko kicked 2 including the matchwinner, and he also kicked the last point we needed to get us 5 points down... So no matter which stat you try defending yourself with, he played a very very important part in the victory...

 

[OzSparrow]

Despite his match-winner I was disappointed with his game.

For a guy who was supposedly brought in to add forward tackling pressure to us he was nowhere to be seen when Norf were waltzing it out of their back half.

His decision making is suspect under pressure and his lack of positional awareness in attack as a small crumbing forward is worrying but he was serviceable yesterday IMO.

I feel he is struggling with the confidence to know that he truly deserves his spot in the side. Perhaps a few weeks of Sando giving him trust in his ability to fill his role will suit him.

I hope he stays in until the bye.

 

[SydCrow]

I thought he was very good. Hard at it, broke tackles and kicked goals.

 

[jenny61_99]

Vader, when Petrenko kicked that goal all I thought was how disgraceful your comments were last week saying he only got picked because he was an Aboriginal. Not a real lot of difference compared to the Collingwood fan who said Goodes/Jetta were getting frees also because of the colour of their skin..( but without the foul language attached)...

Dangerfield on 5aa this morning spoke of how important Petrenko was and how in previous weeks the ball got out the forward half too easily..
Petrenko kicked 2 including the matchwinner, and he also kicked the last point we needed to get us 5 points down... So no matter which stat you try defending yourself with, he played a very very important part in the victory...

You don't think there is a slight possibility that he was brought into the side because he's indigenous? How does it look - Adelaide celebrating indigenous round: changed our guernsey to represent Aboriginal flag but not ONE indigenous person in the team? Not a good look. Was Pup brought in - and Wright kicked out, based on his outstanding form in the SANFL?

 

[SydCrow]

yes, and the boys arranged for him to kick the winning goal

 

[Bob Neil]

Didn't like his lack of left foot - hate when he tries those check side kicks

One of the things I think he really lacks is the ability to read the play so the fact that the only time I can remember him crumbing the pack (like a small forward should) came with 20 seconds to go is a minor miracle and worth celebrating. That said I shuddered when he kicked it out of the air rather than grab the 'aggot...still I'm not going to tarnish a win like that by quibbling too much by analysing the shit out of it!

 

[Freddy Bassett]

You don't think there is a slight possibility that he was brought into the side because he's indigenous? How does it look - Adelaide celebrating indigenous round: changed our guernsey to represent Aboriginal flag but not ONE indigenous person in the team? Not a good look. Was Pup brought in - and Wright kicked out, based on his outstanding form in the SANFL?

I can not stand Indigenous round. I think it is degrading. I felt bloody sorry for Petrenko that these questions were raised.

 

[Deaneus!]

In all honesty I hope he is spoken to about kicking the ball out of mid-air that far from the goal line. would only have taken a half-second to grab the ball and direct the kick.

Otherwise serviceable game, the kind you want each week - mid-teen possessions, couple of goals, five or six tackles. Would be in again based on that as the second small forward; Kerridge has overtaken him clearly.

But, did the good stuff when it counted, stays in.

 

[jenny61_99]

I can not stand Indigenous round. I think it is degrading. I felt bloody sorry for Petrenko that these questions were raised.

Agreed. But they were obvious questions to ask, and really, only Sando can answer them.

 

[Heafy83]

I highly doubt he was brought in because he was Indigenous. Sando isn't about token games. I think because of his previous weeks performances some people are a bit harsh on him. 15 touches and 2 goals a very solid game for a small forward. Milne had avg something like 12d and 2g per game for his career and I rate him as the best small forward of our time. If this was Cyril Rioli or Lewis Jetta everyone would be creaming their pants right about now. Whilst only 1 tackle wasn't ideal I saw him do several 'pressure acts' that lead to us getting the ball back. He was also very clean below his knees, cleanest I've ever seen him. You have to look at who he came in for too. He probably gave use more than wright has any game this season bar the GWS game. Its about consistency now for pup. Backing that up and giving a similar performance against Freo is crucial.

 

[Mad Fan of AFL]

Fair points. I look at it this way, who has the pace of Petrenko and can lay good tackles? Petrenko is the only one that can for me. However, he needs to work on his consistency and his goal kicking does not seem to come naturally. I wonder where his preferred position is though? To me that game should be some sort of standard for him. I think we need to target/recruit someone like a Garlett, who would add great defensive pressure but a regular goal contributor. Happy to have Pets in the side as he adds a point of difference that Callinan or any other midfield we rotate through there can offer

 

[Tex Support]

I thought he was ok. Standard Petrenko. I also think he was brought back in because of Indigenous Round. Spin it how ever you want, but I reckon thats the case. I dont really mind having said that, and was happy he contributed - kind of ironic at the end to have him kick the match winner.

One side thing that really sh-ts me about Petrenko... his compulsive need to twist and turn as soon as he touches the footy in traffic. Always looks to get himself clear first before dishing off, and in the process often burns teammates on the outside. More than once he did it yesterday when there was no need. I saw Thommo actually bake him for not first-giving.

He also found himself across half back in the third quarter and looked good from what I saw. *hint hint Sando

 

[Vader]

I can not stand Indigenous round. I think it is degrading. I felt bloody sorry for Petrenko that these questions were raised.

Indeed it's not Petrenko's fault that those questions were raised. Petrenko is, if anything, the victim here - the victim of the AFL's stupidity, combined with the AFC's need to make a politically correct selection in order to be seen to be going along with the theme of the round.

I question the AFL's motivation and the AFC's. I feel sorry for Petrenko being the meat in the sandwich.

 

[jackster83]

He sucked in the first quarter but was quite good after that.

He seems to be a confidence player so hopefully he can put his earlier poor form behind him and give us a passable small forward option.

 

[Tex Support]

Petrenko is, if anything, the victim here - the victim of the AFL's stupidity, combined with the AFC's need to make a politically correct selection in order to be seen to be going along with the theme of the round.

I question the AFL's motivation and the AFC's. I feel sorry for Petrenko being the meat in the sandwich.

Turn it up mate.

Petrenko is a victim and you feel sorry for him? Pretty sure the lad is floating on air at the moment...

 

[Elder van Berlo]

I was critical of Petrenko's inclusion but happy with his performance. 2.2 (including a poster) is certainly a pass mark for any forward, regardless of what else they do. The kick after the HT siren was encouraging - ok it missed but that sort of shot, particularly with the pressure of kicking after the siren, is one that I would expect him to ping out on the full. That he made good contact with a somewhat unlucky result was a good sign IMO.

So from an offensive point of view, he was more than satisfactory.

I'm not sure that criticisms of his defensive games are really warranted. Admittedly he did very little from a defensive point of view, but was there really that much to do? Every time we went in we scored. I can't really remember a lot of coast to coast action from North. Sure they moved the ball far too easily, but my impression was that most of that was generated from stoppages and turnovers in midfield, not so much with run from defence. So even though I'd like to see more from Pets defensively, to criticise him for that aspect in this particular game might be harsh.