Autopsy Port v Essendon review

[PAFC66]

To be fair, you said you wouldn't go to another Port game this year.

After living in Melbs for many years, I've only ever found the cheer squad to be one eyed and parochial, exactly what you want from a cheer squad.

I go every year. I'll go again but won't be sitting with this family friendly garbage they have got going on now.

 

[tribey]

glory be, so what's that make you lot? Pond scum?...

"How many S's in 'innocent?'"

 

[Janus]

I said this in late March:

"They've essentially been gifted a fast-tracked rebuild leaving them with a perfect blend of elite veteran talent (Watson, Goddard, Kelly, Stanton), top mid-career guys (Heppell, Hooker, Zaharakis, Hurley, Daniher), a bunch of very good experienced second and third year players (Merrett, MTW, Parish, Fantasia) and that ridiculous clutch of rookies (led by McGrath) from last year's finish that was in no way reflective of the real strength of their list.

Cheats do prosper."

Compare to our situation in 2011 when we were genuinely basement-fodder.

Pick 6 (Chad Wingard) and

IMO, Essendon needed that fast-tracked rebuild to get out of the rut of bouncing back and forth between 6-8th position and 12-14th position. Fair? * no. But it's economics - Collingwood had their turn at the top (2002/2003 - 2010/2011) and the AFL is looking to get back into the good graces of Essendon fans because that's where the money is.

The sad thing is that they and their club actively celebrate their scumbag nature. You see their banner for the game? Promoting their shitty father/son academy that deifies the guy who cost Ryder and Monfries a year on the sidelines while trying to sway the opinion of Tex Wanganeen to come join them. The stunt they pulled with our banner just puts the icing on the cake.

Worst club in the league. I can see why everyone hates them.

 

[Doctor Feel]

View attachment 380765

"How many S's in 'innocent?'"

Ixnay On The Bombre

 

[Full Credit]

The vibe I am getting from this 'game' is that we got excited about the smell of our farts and rocked up on sat thinking it might be a close game but taking home the points was a mere formality. The vibe I get from essendrug is that they picked up on our vibe and got fired the * up thinking about us thinking of them as easybeats. Really flawed thinking on our part, our downhill skiing has gotten this group thinking we are much better than we actually are, when in fact we are a week by week prospect and nothing more. Press out of the club is a worry too, this was not an 'off-night' IMO but rather symptomatic of where we are truly at. Will be interesting to see how we go from here.

Sent from my ALCATEL ONE TOUCH 4027A using Tapatalk

 

[B0ydmoan]

You lost all credibility there

Well i said i wanted to see it again. remember my wife had left, me, my kids all walked out at half time. i was traumatised okay, yeah, it was like my first sexual adventure. It was dark, i was cold, i was scared, i was alone

wait back up. hang on my friend. are you suggesting I_had_ credibility to start with?

 

[Sewer de Lance]

Great post and effort. But you must be mates with westhoff to give that write up. Junk possessions and when had a chance to kick an important goal....goes to water. We continue to support mediocrity with our senior players.

Tx mate. Haha, I have been scathing of Hoff more often then not. But I can only judge what the selectors put out there. I just thought that on the night he brought more effort and desperation over four qtrs then the rest of his team mates. His goal kicking is what it is, that's one of the main reasons Ive wanted him dropped in the past.

 

[B0ydmoan]

Just got home from camping, didn't see the game and haven't seen any highlights, a) should I bother and b) can someone please sum up this debacle in 2-3 sentences before I go through the thread.

Sent from my ALCATEL ONE TOUCH 4027A using Tapatalk

Dont

Witches hats

Ken bwahahaha

Maggies so good Howard got 8, should be 4 changes

Boak got 3 kicks the whole game

SPP took over from fail captain in H2 on Heppel who was incredible and did a great job

 

[Kingfish73]

Tx mate. Haha, I have been scathing of Hoff more often then not. But I can only judge what the selectors put out there. I just thought that on the night he brought more effort and desperation over four qtrs then the rest of his team mates. His goal kicking is what it is, that's one of the main reasons Ive wanted him dropped in the past.

I should have not singled your thread. I just find it staggering we call his game in best. Essendon supporters I were with laughed at his game and lack of real influence. We are just used to a few ok floating marks and the stat sheet showing 30 touches. He is one of the core reasons we will never be a ruthless winning team...he never steps up when game on line....and we blame the fringe players.

 

[PAFC66]

Dont

Witches hats

Ken bwahahaha

Maggies so good Howard got 8, should be 4 changes

Boak got 3 kicks the whole game

SPP took over from fail captain in H2 on Heppel who was incredible and did a great job

Boak really did get 3 kicks.

Wow, he's our captain.

 

[PAFC66]

I should have not singled your thread. I just find it staggering we call his game in best. Essendon supporters I were with laughed at his game and lack of real influence. We are just used to a few ok floating marks and the stat sheet showing 30 touches. He is one of the core reasons we will never be a ruthless winning team...he never steps up when game on line....and we blame the fringe players.

It was a chad Cornes seagull game

 

[Janus]

The vibe I am getting from this 'game' is that we got excited about the smell of our farts and rocked up on sat thinking it might be a close game but taking home the points was a mere formality. The vibe I get from essendrug is that they picked up on our vibe and got fired the **** up thinking about us thinking of them as easybeats. Really flawed thinking on our part, our downhill skiing has gotten this group thinking we are much better than we actually are, when in fact we are a week by week prospect and nothing more. Press out of the club is a worry too, this was not an 'off-night' IMO but rather symptomatic of where we are truly at. Will be interesting to see how we go from here.

Sent from my ALCATEL ONE TOUCH 4027A using Tapatalk

You got the first two parts right, but the conclusion is wrong IMO. It's because we didn't respect them that they ran over the top of us. If we had played them the way we played Adelaide, GWS, West Coast and Geelong we would have won easily. Instead, we played them like we played Carlton and Brisbane - which is how we played the Hawks in the second half incidentally - and we got whacked over the head with it.

No tracking back, no team defence, everyone just doing their own thing and being lazy for a quarter. By the time we switched on the second quarter, Essendon had enough of a break on us to play pure counter football and for their fans to enjoy that fact, because they knew we had to generate our scores from attack instead of defence.

Essendon aren't a s**t team like Carlton, Brisbane and Hawthorn. They are a finals contender, and as such, we have to play as a top four contender if we want to be viewed as such.

A big ******* wake up call to a bunch of players who once again thought that they had now got to the 'easy' part of the draw because we've played the three best teams in the comp. It's exactly what happened to Adelaide with North Melbourne.

Whether it was an off night or symptomatic will be determined by how we respond against Brisbane and Collingwood.

 

[edgie]

It was a chad Cornes seagull game

You mean Kane?

Sent from mTalk

 

[Lambot]

I was in the row right next to the boys who got kicked out. One girl from our own cheer squad was into them before the ball had even been bounced. She took exception to them yelling at Essendon players in the warm up. the worst they said was 'You'll never win a flag Brendon". I couldn't believe how much of a cow she was being to them for a mild bit of banter.

Then, of course, they told her to not be so precious, and it was all down hill form there.

Anyway, this was probably my only game for the season because of the travel from Tassie. What a waste.


Did meet some good Port people though!

 

[PAFC66]

You mean Kane?

Sent from mTalk

na chad 2007 GF day

 

[PAFC66]

I was in the row right next to the boys who got kicked out. One girl from our own cheer squad was into them before the ball had even been bounced. She took exception to them yelling at Essendon players in the warm up. the worst they said was 'You'll never win a flag Brendon". I couldn't believe how much of a cow she was being to them for a mild bit of banter.

Then, of course, they told her to not be so precious, and it was all down hill form there.

Anyway, this was probably my only game for the season because of the travel from Tassie. What a waste.


Did meet some good Port people though!

i heard that squealing clown from 8 rows back. She was a absolute joke. I would of loved to have seen her kicked out. It wasnt a *en Theatre production.

 

[GremioPower]

I've met those port blokes that got kicked out before. They're there at every Melbourne based game I've been to. Terrific blokes and get up and get the cheer squad involved. In no way are they malicious. It's a shame all these bandwagoner old theatregoers are constantly having a sook about anything remotely antisocial.

PC Police?

 

[GremioPower]

glory be, so what's that make you lot? Pond scum?...

Respect our mourning! Joke is on us. We know it. So, be funny or f**k off! Geez...

 

[Sewer de Lance]

I should have not singled your thread. I just find it staggering we call his game in best. Essendon supporters I were with laughed at his game and lack of real influence. We are just used to a few ok floating marks and the stat sheet showing 30 touches. He is one of the core reasons we will never be a ruthless winning team...he never steps up when game on line....and we blame the fringe players.

I wholeheartedly agree with your sentiment. This once proud club has slowly developed a sub standard culture by its inability to be ruthless in demanding success. Some points to consider:

• We lack the will, desire & belief to get over the line in close games.
• We continually drop games against inferior opposition eg West Coast, Carlton & Brisbane.
• Since Choco, this club has endorsed a gold pass system, where reputation is valued more highly then performance.
• At critical times, our senior coach and leadership group have been found wanting far too often.

 

[Pedro59]

You got the first two parts right, but the conclusion is wrong IMO. It's because we didn't respect them that they ran over the top of us. If we had played them the way we played Adelaide, GWS, West Coast and Geelong we would have won easily. Instead, we played them like we played Carlton and Brisbane - which is how we played the Hawks in the second half incidentally - and we got whacked over the head with it.

No tracking back, no team defence, everyone just doing their own thing and being lazy for a quarter. By the time we switched on the second quarter, Essendon had enough of a break on us to play pure counter football and for their fans to enjoy that fact, because they knew we had to generate our scores from attack instead of defence.

Essendon aren't a s**t team like Carlton, Brisbane and Hawthorn. They are a finals contender, and as such, we have to play as a top four contender if we want to be viewed as such.

A big ******* wake up call to a bunch of players who once again thought that they had now got to the 'easy' part of the draw because we've played the three best teams in the comp. It's exactly what happened to Adelaide with North Melbourne.

Whether it was an off night or symptomatic will be determined by how we respond against Brisbane and Collingwood.

So is it only a matter of us being switched on or not?

Against the Crows did we switch off part way?

From your previous posts Janus I was hoping you could find the tactics played against us
The chess pieces moved that was making us look like that

I didn't worry about the Geelong loss so much because we seemed to be right there in the trenches tackle for tackle all game

Against the bombers they just waltzed through the guts so easy ( late Choco and Primuseque) I felt we had to be witnessing a superior game plan or positionsl changes and structures that were catching us out all the time

I certainly witnessed some bad playing and tackles but I really can't get my head around it is only an effort thing or not being switched on
I wish it was that simple but I again am worrying that whilst our A game is pretty good it only takes a few positional changes to f us up the clacker
I worry even more that these simple changes are not recognised by our coaching staff

I can't believe it is just an effort thing

 

[GremioPower]

View attachment 380765

"How many S's in 'innocent?'"

"Bombers" + "Hombres" = "Bombres"

It was Australia's Spanish Heritage Day, didn't you know? You, silly!

 

[Janus]

So is it only a matter of us being switched on or not?

Against the Crows did we switch off part way?

From your previous posts Janus I was hoping you could find the tactics played against us
The chess pieces moved that was making us look like that

I didn't worry about the Geelong loss so much because we seemed to be right there in the trenches tackle for tackle all game

Against the bombers they just waltzed through the guts so easy ( late Choco and Primuseque) I felt we had to be witnessing a superior game plan or positionsl changes and structures that were catching us out all the time

I certainly witnessed some bad playing and tackles but I really can't get my head around it is only an effort thing or not being switched on
I wish it was that simple but I again am worrying that whilst our A game is pretty good it only takes a few positional changes to f us up the clacker
I worry even more that these simple changes are not recognised by our coaching staff

I can't believe it is just an effort thing

Question: Do you think GWS' speed off of half back is greater or lesser than that of Essendon? Because we didn't have any trouble coping with their transition out of defence until the last quarter when the dam wall broke. And I would say that Cameron/Lobb/Patton/Greene is a more potent forward line than what the Bombers have.

There's effort and then there's applied effort.

Effort is slipped tackles, missed kicks etc. The stuff you expect any footballer to do - the individual game of a player.

Applied effort is adherence to tactics, getting back quickly into defence, aerial support, that kind of thing.

Ask yourself why the Bombers could isolate our defenders and put the ball where they wanted it to be rather than what has happened previously, with our players being able to successfully check a forwards run and allow an intercept mark from another player. It all stems from the lack of team defence.

The difference between the side we played against Adelaide/GWS and the side we played against the Bombers is real simple - we're playing too many of the same type of midfielder at stoppages who are looking to win the ball instead of defending the ball on the outside. And if all of them get sucked toward the ball at a stoppage and it gets flicked to the outside, who do we have? Ebert, Wines and Powell-Pepper taken out of the game, leaving a fleet of runners against a backline that is expecting max protection from the midfield.

When we won the clearances, we scored fairly easily. It was defending the clearances that we had an issue with.

If you want statistical proof that it was effort: in the rankings I do - which are based on points scored per inside 50 both for and against, contested possessions, hitouts and clearances - Essendon, with a 70 point victory, gained +0.061 points overall and +0.064 in combined defence/midfield rating. So yes, they played a little better than they had all year, but not that much better.

Port Adelaide, on the other hand, dropped -0.151 points overall and -0.110 points in combined defence/midfield rating. So if you were to quantify the ratio of how good Essendon was to how bad Port was, it would be something like 29% Essendon and 71% Port Adelaide. They raised their game because they believed they were playing a strong opponent, and we lowered ours because we believed we were playing an easy one. And you could say that 29% was wholly and solely based around them targeting our shorter key backs, since Hooker had 6 contested marks and kicked 5 goals.

Rotate one of Wines/Powell-Pepper through the guts/forward, put Boak back in the midfield where he belongs because he can get back on defence with Ebert and put Atley on the bench. Ah Chee should only ever be back up for Wines/Powell-Pepper - I don't care how good a game he has in the SANFL. We're running a football side, not a finishing school.

Incidentally, their bullshit with the delaying of the banner and our players running out? It's designed to reduce the adrenaline of the players. Imagine you're pumped up for a game, ready to run onto the field...and then you have to stand around and wait for five minutes because your opposition warms up until the very last moment. The heart rate drops, the adrenaline from the excitement and the caffeine tablets fades, and suddenly you're playing s**t.

I'll say it again - biggest club of campaigners in the league.

 

[Pedro59]

Tha

Question: Do you think GWS' speed off of half back is greater or lesser than that of Essendon? Because we didn't have any trouble coping with their transition out of defence until the last quarter when the dam wall broke. And I would say that Cameron/Lobb/Patton/Greene is a more potent forward line than what the Bombers have.

There's effort and then there's applied effort.

Effort is slipped tackles, missed kicks etc. The stuff you expect any footballer to do - the individual game of a player.

Applied effort is adherence to tactics, getting back quickly into defence, aerial support, that kind of thing.

Ask yourself why the Bombers could isolate our defenders and put the ball where they wanted it to be rather than what has happened previously, with our players being able to successfully check a forwards run and allow an intercept mark from another player. It all stems from the lack of team defence.

The difference between the side we played against Adelaide/GWS and the side we played against the Bombers is real simple - I will help with the teeth of defending the ball on the outside. And if all of them get sucked toward the ball at a stoppage and it gets flicked to the outside, who do we have? Ebert, Wines and Powell-Pepper taken out of the game, leaving a fleet of runners against a backline that is expecting max protection from the midfield.

When we won the clearances, we scored fairly easily. It was defending the clearances that we had an issue with.

If you want statistical proof that it was effort: in the rankings I do - which are based on points scored per inside 50 both for and against, contested possessions, hitouts and clearances - Essendon, with a 70 point victory, gained +0.061 points overall and +0.064 in combined defence/midfield rating. So yes, they played a little better than they had all year, but not that much better.

Port Adelaide, on the other hand, dropped -0.151 points overall and -0.110 points in combined defence/midfield rating. So if you were to quantify the ratio of how good Essendon was to how bad Port was, it would be something like 29% Essendon and 71% Port Adelaide. They raised their game because they believed they were playing a strong opponent, and we lowered ours because we believed we were playing an easy one. And you could say that 29% was wholly and solely based around them targeting our shorter key backs, since Hooker had 6 contested marks and kicked 5 goals.

Rotate one of Wines/Powell-Pepper through the guts/forward, put Boak back in the midfield where he belongs because he can get back on defence with Ebert and put Atley on the bench. Ah Chee should only ever be back up for Wines/Powell-Pepper - I don't care how good a game he has in the SANFL. We're running a football side, not a finishing school.

Incidentally, their bullshit with the delaying of the banner and our players running out? It's designed to reduce the adrenaline of the players. Imagine you're pumped up for a game, ready to run onto the field...and then you have to stand around and wait for five minutes because your opposition warms up until the very last moment. The heart rate drops, the adrenaline from the excitement and the caffeine tablets fades, and suddenly you're playing s**t.

I'll say it again - biggest club of campaigners in the league.

thanks
I will digest it
I like the part about our outside guys being sucked in to the inside
thereby leaving the defence exposed

 

[GremioPower]

Incidentally, their bullshit with the delaying of the banner and our players running out? It's designed to reduce the adrenaline of the players. Imagine you're pumped up for a game, ready to run onto the field...and then you have to stand around and wait for five minutes because your opposition warms up until the very last moment. The heart rate drops, the adrenaline from the excitement and the caffeine tablets fades, and suddenly you're playing s**t.

It is still on us. There were some posts here reporting Essendon does this every game. EVERY GAME! We should know better...

 

[Peck]

Question: Do you think GWS' speed off of half back is greater or lesser than that of Essendon? Because we didn't have any trouble coping with their transition out of defence until the last quarter when the dam wall broke. And I would say that Cameron/Lobb/Patton/Greene is a more potent forward line than what the Bombers have.

There's effort and then there's applied effort.

Effort is slipped tackles, missed kicks etc. The stuff you expect any footballer to do - the individual game of a player.

Applied effort is adherence to tactics, getting back quickly into defence, aerial support, that kind of thing.

Ask yourself why the Bombers could isolate our defenders and put the ball where they wanted it to be rather than what has happened previously, with our players being able to successfully check a forwards run and allow an intercept mark from another player. It all stems from the lack of team defence.

The difference between the side we played against Adelaide/GWS and the side we played against the Bombers is real simple - we're playing too many of the same type of midfielder at stoppages who are looking to win the ball instead of defending the ball on the outside. And if all of them get sucked toward the ball at a stoppage and it gets flicked to the outside, who do we have? Ebert, Wines and Powell-Pepper taken out of the game, leaving a fleet of runners against a backline that is expecting max protection from the midfield.

When we won the clearances, we scored fairly easily. It was defending the clearances that we had an issue with.

If you want statistical proof that it was effort: in the rankings I do - which are based on points scored per inside 50 both for and against, contested possessions, hitouts and clearances - Essendon, with a 70 point victory, gained +0.061 points overall and +0.064 in combined defence/midfield rating. So yes, they played a little better than they had all year, but not that much better.

Port Adelaide, on the other hand, dropped -0.151 points overall and -0.110 points in combined defence/midfield rating. So if you were to quantify the ratio of how good Essendon was to how bad Port was, it would be something like 29% Essendon and 71% Port Adelaide. They raised their game because they believed they were playing a strong opponent, and we lowered ours because we believed we were playing an easy one. And you could say that 29% was wholly and solely based around them targeting our shorter key backs, since Hooker had 6 contested marks and kicked 5 goals.

Rotate one of Wines/Powell-Pepper through the guts/forward, put Boak back in the midfield where he belongs because he can get back on defence with Ebert and put Atley on the bench. Ah Chee should only ever be back up for Wines/Powell-Pepper - I don't care how good a game he has in the SANFL. We're running a football side, not a finishing school.

Incidentally, their bullshit with the delaying of the banner and our players running out? It's designed to reduce the adrenaline of the players. Imagine you're pumped up for a game, ready to run onto the field...and then you have to stand around and wait for five minutes because your opposition warms up until the very last moment. The heart rate drops, the adrenaline from the excitement and the caffeine tablets fades, and suddenly you're playing s**t.

I'll say it again - biggest club of campaigners in the league.

Agree with those changes. What was weird about the game was just how slow we looked, as soon as they were past us they were just gone. It was like a video game or something. Absolutely ridiculous!!

We have been exposes a few times this year by teams doing this to us, my best guess is that Etihad Stadium amplified it ten fold. Thankfully we won't play there again this year.

The scary thing is that so many players were just awful, and I'm not sure being slow was the reason. Westhoff and Broadbent aren't exactly super quick, yet they had no trouble making contests and laying tackles. I saw SO many missed tackles and s**t disposals that just gifted Essendon goals, if we got that stuff right we may have beaten them. On the other side they were playing ******* perfectly in the first half, and so many times they had the ball bounce their way.

What an awful game to watch. At least Macca-Tippy was entertaining to watch, he will be a fantastic player IMO.