Review R10: The Good, Bad and the Ugly vs. Collingwood

[CrowBloke]

That is unrelated, nothing to do with Collingwood. The fact is that this is Berry's MO. He always thinks the oppo disappear when he is running with the ball.

With respect, that's a bit harsh on Berry, who does not have eyes in the back of his head. Many players get run down from behind when not aware of what's behind them and closing fast, or faster than they think.
That was partly on Berry but also his teammates who should have let him know he was hot.

When Worrell ran down the Carlton player (Northern L pocket) in Round 8 that's just bloody good defence. Great effort.

A bigger problem. Nankervis is much worse because he tries far too often to evade oppo players that he knows are there.

 

[davos44]

Nicks worries, panics and blames.

Do you reckon Nicks is getting over to Rankine and Curtin supporting them after those poor shots, or is he jumping into his press conference and blaming the players for a lack of composure?

The players have the occasion in their mind because they know it's a big moment and they know they'll be blamed personally if they fail. So they shrink and perform worse.

Extra pressure is piled on because Nicks goes around being nervous about these games.

“There are so many hard match-ups, there’s so many things they do well, which is why they are rated as one of the best teams in the competition at the moment,” Nicks said.

“That’s the challenge that faces us this week, and the group is itching to get over there and have a crack at Collingwood and get a win over a team that has had the wood on us for a while.”

Twice in the presser before the match he brings up how tough they are and how poor we are against them. Of course that rubs off on the players.

So when they're taking those shots they're under the pressure of the big game, knowing it's against a tough opponent we have a poor record against, and knowing they will be blamed if they fail. That's the Nicks way

I found your mental image of Matthew Nicks pregame, half time and post game pep talks to superstar players he sucked the life out of:

 

[ftmch]

So you’d expect he’d drop players who continually underperform right?

Would you have gone in with Tex?

Not sure where you're going with this?

Mine wasn't a comment on selection, or even as the overall quality of Nicks as a coach. FWIW, I don't rate him and am squarely in the camp that we need to move on from him if we're going to take the next step.

I was just making the point that sometime players failing in a game is, well, because of the player, and not due to some random words said by their coach at a press confernece they probably didn't even hear. If Tex and Ben Keays can still rock up and kick straight each week, maybe, just maybe, Izak's ability to not finish his set shot goals is more to do with him, than Matthew Nicks. Crazy stuff, I know

 

[Samcro24]

I found your mental image of Matthew Nicks pregame, half time and post game pep talks to superstar players he sucked the life out of:

View attachment 2320028

 

[ftmch]

Interesting, considering that was a direct copy/paste from a sports psychologist.

I mean, if you cant see the broader context, let me spell it out for you.

If you think succeeding in big moments is purely down to skill, you have no idea about sports psychology. Pro Golfers hit a gazillion balls in practice in their careers yet many choke under pressure - thats not a lack of skill, thats mindset. Anecdotally, I myself (a rank B grader) have choked up a 5up at the turn lead in a golf thing all because I started worrying about the "what ifs". As soon as you start worrying about mechanics instead of focussing on a successful outcome, unconscious actions become conscious. If you've ever heard of "getting in the way of yourself" or have any understanding of flow state, you'll understand what I mean.

In team sport, club culture and coaching have a lot to do with setting a players ability to execute in big moments. The difference between seeing a shot to win the match as an opportunity to succeed v an opportunity to fail. You notice it with the way Collingwood and Geelong go about their work. For many years Sydney too. Port Adelaide Magpies in the SANFL heyday.

Imagine hearing Nicks say in his pre match address "now we're up against a good side this week, so we can't afford to make any mistakes" and then lining up for a clutch shot on goal in the heat of battle. And if you think Matty wouldn't say that, he said exactly that in his post match presser. Imagine the alternative - "we have a great opportunity this week and we wont leave anything on the table to achieve that. We're ready to take the next step and look forward to the opportunity". And then getting a set shot and viewing it as an opportunity to succeed instead of fail.

Do yourself a favour and do some reading on the subject.

Lol, give me strength. You really think when Izak is lining up for goal that he's replaying in his head what Matthew Nicks said in his press confernece a few days earlier? Here's a hot take for you - there's a better than average chance he didn't even hear Nick's press conference.

Or is it perhaps just the general 'vibe' the Nicksy exudes, that has this subliminal impact on Izaak, but which players like Tex and Ben Keays are somehow immune to?

Could it possibly be that he missed his set shots on the weekend because he's just not a particularly great set shot on goal, and he needs to work on his technique? I know that doesn't fit the broader narrative around Nicks, but my god you are reaching at this point with this 'systemic psyhcological trauma' copy and paste bollocks.

 

[feenix67]

Lol, give me strength. You really think when Izak is lining up for goal that he's replaying in his head what Matthew Nicks said in his press confernece a few days earlier? Here's a hot take for you - there's a better than average chance he didn't even hear Nick's press conference.

Or is it perhaps just the general 'vibe' the Nicksy exudes, that has this subliminal impact on Izaak, but which players like Tex and Ben Keays are somehow immune to?

Could it possibly be that he missed his set shots on the weekend because he's just not a particularly great set shot on goal, and he needs to work on his technique? I know that doesn't fit the broader narrative around Nicks, but my god you are reaching at this point with this 'systemic psyhcological trauma' copy and paste bollocks.

Sure, lets go with that. The hundreds of studies on this that are available for you to educate yourself with are all there, but if you'd rather just go with "it's a skill issue" then fine.

While you're at it, explain how the same thing often occurs with Tex. Or how Fog misses an easy shot from 15 metres out that he would kick a thousand times at training. Because we all know they are shit kicks, right?

 

[CrowBloke]

This is the is the most 2025 thing ever. The players missing absolutely gimme shots on goals is the fault of the coach for something he said in a press conference before the game!
You talk about blame culture, this is it right here. God forbid the players actually take some accountability. Fmd

I think you and Scorpus are both partially right, in non-contradictory ways.

Scorpus is right: Nicks does panic and makes very few tactically astute Gameday moves (most that he does are far too late).
His MO is that he thinks he's done his job during the week and on Game Day it's up to the players, whom he does regularly blame after a loss for not playing "our way".

You're right: Shots missed by Rankine (ootf twice from 30-35m, very poor), Curtin (30m out, straight in front; he's got to nail those!), Rachele and even Fog (on that super-tight angle, which I can forgive) do reflect upon the players
BUT
executing those shots also says something about their will/determination and gameday ruthlessness.

Think for a moment about Coaches whose teams regularly play Finals and win Flags.
eg Chris Scott, who has resting-angry-face (Beveridge too), Hardwick who was a grub and his teams play grub-footy, Clarko who's as mean and grumpy as all Hell and has produced an amazing breed of Flag-winning Coaches (ex-assistants) himself
They are ruthless Coaches, hard/tough/demanding/uncompromising and tactically sharp Coaches who prepare their players for every eventuality and get the best out of their playing group who play accordingly.

Nicks does not.
Other teams have their Coach stamped upon their culture, their play, their fightback, their ruthlessness.
We have three types of Crows:
--- the good Crows who play fast, attractive, high-scoring football for most of the game (but usually against low-grade opposition) and win usually well.
--- the bad Crows who start poorly and/or allow runs of 4-6 unchallenged goals and lose.
--- the in-between Crows who get well behind, fight back somewhat, and lose anyway.

Looking at our side, I see wasted and/or underdeveloped talent playing out-of-position or in the SANFL and told to back off on game day when Nicks has deemed they have done enough eg vs Port.
(btw, does anyone think that's a part of some "Grand Plan" that Nicks has ie when they are good enough, they'll be able to pace themselves, turn it on when needed etc?
I do not )

Think on this: under Nicks, the Crows have never won a game when they have been 4 or more goals behind.
NEVER.
It speaks poorly of their determination and will-to-win, does it not? That's on the Coach.
Yes, they've come back often, but lose those games. Why is that, when Collingwood in particular regularly win close games from behind, and other teams do overcome a 5 or 6 goal deficit?
How/why is that? It's because we have Nicks.
The only teams the Crows beat up on regularly are bottom-4 sides and Carlton.

Our Crows play as they have been Coached.
They know if they stuff up and lose, they'll be blamed, but most likely not dropped unless they are a sub-30 game player.
I see no ruthlessness to the Crows, no hard edge, no thoroughness nor mental grit (exceptions: Dawson, Keays, Worrell, Michalanney, Soligo, maybe Hinge, Peatling and Keane, that's about it, but the rest are hot and cold and flash in and out of the game).
The mediocrity of their Coach was rewarded with a 2-year extension. What kind of message does that send to the players, whose own mediocrity is often rewarded with future selection regardless of actual impact?

The Crows play like they're as comfortable as their Coach (and content to be comfortable).
Seriously, where's their desperation?
That won't change until the Club sacks Nicks (I'd want VB and Burns sacked as well).

End of rant ; thanks, if you got this far.

 

[CrowBloke]

Ill keep an eye out for that, its an interesting point!

Yes, so will I. I thought it was just a good, desperate run-down tackle with no warning from teammates, but not a pattern (eg Nankervis).
Thanks, BRL121

 

[blighty]

One underrated thing that I think was a big issue for us too was how often we had to drag Thilthorpe out of the F50 line. We just went to bombing it fairly often, which meant we were pulling Thilthorpe trying to get the contested mark. Look at his heat map from the game, it's mostly all red on down the line kicks, either in the back half (long to the right, our favourite) or pulling him up to half forward.

View attachment 2319928

Just not going to get much goal scoring from him when that's where he's getting the ball.

We seem to have no forward plan built around Thilthorpe to be supported one out when leading up to the ball. There does not seem to be a team strategy to isolate him closer to goal. It always amazes me how many times Curnow marks within distance without strong opposition while Thilthorpe has a very congested contest to mark the ball. To get the absolute best out of him we urgently need to develop forward set plays to get him into the most productive areas where he can showcase his skills. We need to recruit a specialist forward coach urgently.

 

[feenix67]

We seem to have no forward plan built around Thilthorpe to be supported one out when leading up to the ball. There does not seem to be a team strategy to isolate him closer to goal. It always amazes me how many times Curnow marks within distance without strong opposition while Thilthorpe has a very congested contest to mark the ball. To get the absolute best out of him we urgently need to develop forward set plays to get him into the most productive areas where he can showcase his skills. We need to recruit a specialist forward coach urgently.

I think it has to do with our slow transition. It allows opp to crowd our F50. I also think that we remain Tex focussed and when he is in, RT basically gets the ball dropped on his head - he becomes the bail out option.

 

[Coopers]

I think it has to do with our slow transition. It allows opp to crowd our F50. I also think that we remain Tex focussed and when he is in, RT basically gets the ball dropped on his head - he becomes the bail out option.

This is what's happening. Every game when we have the "over the shoulder" view from the mid-field camera looking down the wing I catch myself going "don't just bomb it to those 3x free defenders standing there".

"Don't do it".

"Please no, they're right there"

Then we do it and I wonder why the hell I am watching.

 

[CrowBloke]

Honestly, there are so many holes in this theory in the context of this conversation that it's hard to know where to start.

Your skepticism is unwarranted.
Goalkicking yips can often go through a team on a given day or for a series of games.
At one stage, I think it was 2022 and/or 2023, the Crows kicked themselves into losses from more scoring shots but poor finishing.
Some teams have a losing mentality from a poor Club culture and a weak Coach who's often appointed by that losing-mentality Club (which is content with mediocrity and does not demand excellence) because he presents as the kind of Coach who will not rock their boat. Many Club Boards want to be placated, not challenged.
That's Nicks, in a nutshell.

So essentially the reason players like Fog, Keays, Tex etc..

Fog is most definitely a shining outlier, with an excellent, repetitive kicking routine, concentration/focus and resultant accuracy. Check this out:
"The AFL player with the most accurate kicks from goal, as of Zero Hanger's May 20, 2025 report, is Darcy Fogarty, with a goal accuracy of 78.1%. Other highly accurate goalkickers include Jack Higgins (73.7%) and Jesse Hogan (68.4%)".
There's nothing foggy about Fogarty's kicking for goal .
Surprisingly, "Collingwood ace Nick Daicos [is] below the 30% mark, with the Magpies midfielder kicking five goals and nine behinds from 17 shots at goal, an accuracy rating of 29.4%, [and] Adelaide captain Jordan Dawson is going at 31.6% (six goals from 19 shots)"

Tex is similar to Fog --- excellent routine, great concentration/focus plus an almost freakish ability to snag long goals on his L foot.
Until last year, or maybe late 2023, Keays was a dodgey kick for goal, a 50-50 chance at best. He's improved.

have continued to kick accurately this year is not to do with their skills or ability to master their craft,

You're right; it has a lot to do with that, for sure ...

but rather their psychological capacity to overcome the crushing weight all of our players are carrying from 'worrying that people might judge them based on your actions or inclusion in a certain group'.

... however, other players, not all, can be affected by a negative or failing or losing group mentality.

Truly, I've now heard it all.

Please keep an open mind. What feenix67 quoted made good sense and clearly did not apply to all players.

 

[ftmch]

Sure, lets go with that. The hundreds of studies on this that are available for you to educate yourself with are all there, but if you'd rather just go with "it's a skill issue" then fine.

While you're at it, explain how the same thing often occurs with Tex. Or how Fog misses an easy shot from 15 metres out that he would kick a thousand times at training. Because we all know they are shit kicks, right?

I'm not invalidating any of those studies, but without proper analysis how can you possibly say they are reason behind Izak Rankine missing 2 easy set shots on the weekend? You're logic is essentially 'Ranks missed easy set shots on goals on the weekend. I hate Matthew Nicks. There's this thing I read about called 'Stereotype threat'. It's Matthew Nicks' fault'.

Re Tex and Fog, wouldn't this oppresive psychological condition that Nick's has supposedely inflicted on the team create a pattern of behaviour for all of our players? I'm not talking about the odd bad miss, which every player in every team since the beginning of time has been subject to from time to time. If this truly was a significant psycholocial burden which has been placed on our players, we'd see this play out alot more systemically across our team than we are. But we're not

 

[GreyCrow]

One underrated thing that I think was a big issue for us too was how often we had to drag Thilthorpe out of the F50 line. We just went to bombing it fairly often, which meant we were pulling Thilthorpe trying to get the contested mark. Look at his heat map from the game, it's mostly all red on down the line kicks, either in the back half (long to the right, our favourite) or pulling him up to half forward.

View attachment 2319928

Just not going to get much goal scoring from him when that's where he's getting the ball.

Especially when you had him in the goal kicking game

 

[CrowBloke]

I'd ask everyone in here to read this very good, clear, insightful post:

I find myself in half agreement with a lot of this thread. Selection is a mess. The queue at half back is a big list management issue and it’s compounded by shoehorning better/ more damaging players out of position so we can play zero impact players off half back.

This game (really the last month) also shows the importance of proactive management of Tex. Shouldn’t have gone to Gold Coast and/or Freo.

But I don’t agree we lost this game the same way we always lose to Collingwood. Generally they have got out to a match winning lead, taken the foot off the pedal, and we have free wheeled our way back in to give them a big scare.

This time we went toe to toe with them. Q1 was a good game of footy - we were a bit sloppy letting them kick 2 goals late. Q2 they got on top but were wasteful, we hung in by being efficient. Q3 we got on top but were wasteful, they got away from us by being efficient. Q4 we dominated but largely because they let us and could keep us at arm's length - but I suspect if they are honest with themselves they would have been uneasy about the end of that game the same way we were in the showdown.

Ultimately 4 mistakes each compounded by umpiring decisions that were somewhere between questionable and flagrantly wrong took the game away from us.

1. Curtin gets in Rankine’s way, Rankine has to change his mind mid kick and drops the ball. McCreery tackles him well after he has already dropped the ball - should have been a free kick for Rankine for holding on. Certainly was not holding the ball. He didn't have possession when tackled. Wrong decision.

2. Cameron marks (arguably a push out but meh), Fogarty does something stupid by grabbing him. I have not yet seen an angle of this that convinces me Fogarty knocked the ball out of his hands. Questionable decision.

3. Milera clearly gives a clean handball and is called for a throw by an umpire behind the disposal who could only have been guessing. Flagrantly awful decision. We let Elliott take an uncontested chest mark at the top of the square from the resulting kick.

4. Worrell has trouble gathering the ball in the defensive goal square and, the moment he picks it up, is tackled and he tries to sway out of the way of it. He holds his head but I didn't see any high contact. Nor did I see any prior opportunity. Questionable decision.

We largely got the rub of the green with umpires for most of the game - but they had a massive impact on the crucial 15 minutes where we lost the game. But also, it's not like we were blameless for any of those four goals.

The above pinpoints crucial mistakes by players' lack of composure or skill-under-pressure, compounded by poor Umpiring
BUT
the conclusion, below ...

To the eye, we look better than in previous years. To the eye, that was a game where we took it up to Collingwood rather than caught them by surprise. But at some point we just have to start winning these games.

... is spot on.
The Crows have to get better, under pressure, and start winning those games.

The question is, is that going to happen under feel-good-but-mediocre Nicks?
I guess we'll find out.
I don't think so, but I hope I am wrong. A Flag or two, Hell, even three under Nicks (if I am gonna wish, I am gonna wish BIG ) won't undo the misery of 2005-6, 2012, 2017 or 2020 to 2024 inclusive, but it would sure feel good.

 

[GreyCrow]

Why do courts take childhood background into account if the parenting style doesnt reflect on the circumstances?

Sure the person committed the crime - ie not the parents fault on the day - but they sure had an influence

 

[feenix67]

I'm not invalidating any of those studies, but without proper analysis how can you possibly say they are reason behind Izak Rankine missing 2 easy set shots on the weekend? You're logic is essentially 'Ranks missed easy set shots on goals on the weekend. I hate Matthew Nicks. There's this thing I read about called 'Stereotype threat'. It's Matthew Nicks' fault'.

Re Tex and Fog, wouldn't this oppresive psychological condition that Nick's has supposedely inflicted on the team create a pattern of behaviour for all of our players? I'm not talking about the odd bad miss, which every player in every team since the beginning of time has been subject to from time to time. If this truly was a significant psycholocial burden which has been placed on our players, we'd see this play out alot more systemically across our team than we are. But we're not

We're not?

Your analysis is simplistic. Look at Nicks' record in close games. Look at how many times we've overcome a deficit greater than four goals.

It's not just about set shot kicking, it's about taking that risky pass, honouring that 45 degree kick, pushing to create options - all initiative things rather than "playbook" things. Like Collingwood's first kick out of the match - sure, likely a set play they have rehearsed, but the kicker had to pull the trigger. Aggressive, confident, empowered by the coach. Meanwhile we are long to the right or short and hemmed in in the pocket.

It's a pattern of on field behaviour - either play inside the parameters set as being "not mistakes" or play with freedom in the knowledge that you are back in by the coach. It's about executing based on initiative rather than by rote. It's mindset.

Surely you get this?

 

[Mutineer]

How the ump calls that a throw is beggar's belief.

‘Very unusual’ free kick plays pivotal part in AFL thriller

A controversial decision late in the third quarter has proven to be telling.

7news.com.au

 

[davos44]

I'm not invalidating any of those studies, but without proper analysis how can you possibly say they are reason behind Izak Rankine missing 2 easy set shots on the weekend? You're logic is essentially 'Ranks missed easy set shots on goals on the weekend. I hate Matthew Nicks. There's this thing I read about called 'Stereotype threat'. It's Matthew Nicks' fault'.

Re Tex and Fog, wouldn't this oppresive psychological condition that Nick's has supposedely inflicted on the team create a pattern of behaviour for all of our players? I'm not talking about the odd bad miss, which every player in every team since the beginning of time has been subject to from time to time. If this truly was a significant psycholocial burden which has been placed on our players, we'd see this play out alot more systemically across our team than we are. But we're not

Normal people= "the wet weather played a part, its hard to kick the footy right at the MCG at the best of times, even Collingwood players struggled in Q2"

Nicks haters= Nicks used the shining and his knowledge of "The Secret" to convince Rankine he was awful at kicking.

 

[1970crow]

I'm not invalidating any of those studies, but without proper analysis how can you possibly say they are reason behind Izak Rankine missing 2 easy set shots on the weekend? You're logic is essentially 'Ranks missed easy set shots on goals on the weekend. I hate Matthew Nicks. There's this thing I read about called 'Stereotype threat'. It's Matthew Nicks' fault'.

Re Tex and Fog, wouldn't this oppresive psychological condition that Nick's has supposedely inflicted on the team create a pattern of behaviour for all of our players? I'm not talking about the odd bad miss, which every player in every team since the beginning of time has been subject to from time to time. If this truly was a significant psycholocial burden which has been placed on our players, we'd see this play out alot more systemically across our team than we are. But we're not

It’s more than just the weekend. Rankine has a negative set shot rating against expectation but positive overall. There is a fair gap between how accurate he is in general play compared to set shots. That’s mindset.

 

[BRL121]

It’s more than just the weekend. Rankine has a negative set shot rating against expectation but positive overall. There is a fair gap between how accurate he is in general play compared to set shots. That’s mindset.

Also technique and strength. These misses by him were real clangers and I wondered after the second one whether he had a bet on the Pies. However, I didn't expect him to get either shot beforehand. This is because he is Betts like with his set shots from intermediate distances out. He has a low range.

 

[George CantStandYa]

Not sure where you're going with this?

Mine wasn't a comment on selection, or even as the overall quality of Nicks as a coach. FWIW, I don't rate him and am squarely in the camp that we need to move on from him if we're going to take the next step.

I was just making the point that sometime players failing in a game is, well, because of the player, and not due to some random words said by their coach at a press confernece they probably didn't even hear. If Tex and Ben Keays can still rock up and kick straight each week, maybe, just maybe, Izak's ability to not finish his set shot goals is more to do with him, than Matthew Nicks. Crazy stuff, I know

You talk about holding the players accountable, but if the coach doesn’t, doesn’t that make him accountable?

 

[John Who]

Lol, give me strength. You really think when Izak is lining up for goal that he's replaying in his head what Matthew Nicks said in his press confernece a few days earlier? Here's a hot take for you - there's a better than average chance he didn't even hear Nick's press conference.

Or is it perhaps just the general 'vibe' the Nicksy exudes, that has this subliminal impact on Izaak, but which players like Tex and Ben Keays are somehow immune to?

Could it possibly be that he missed his set shots on the weekend because he's just not a particularly great set shot on goal, and he needs to work on his technique? I know that doesn't fit the broader narrative around Nicks, but my god you are reaching at this point with this 'systemic psyhcological trauma' copy and paste bollocks.

Rankine’s last game was likely to do with mindset. Particularly when he was in defence and just dropped the ball while running and then got caught HTB.
Then also the 3 out on the full.

These are often individual issues rather than to do with the coach, but some on here like to maintain the weekly narrative to keep the forum churning.

 

[George CantStandYa]

Normal people= "the wet weather played a part, its hard to kick the footy right at the MCG at the best of times, even Collingwood players struggled in Q2"

Nicks haters= Nicks used the shining and his knowledge of "The Secret" to convince Rankine he was awful at kicking.

Normal people= Port are a shit side, when you get 4 goals up you don’t shut up shot with 13 mins on the clock and we were lucky to hold on

Nicks and you= shut up shot with 13 mins to go was a good move, ignore that played into Ports hands and worked against us, we held on for a win just, woohoo

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Normal people= Port are a shit side, when you get 4 goals up you don’t shut up shot with 13 mins on the clock and we were lucky to hold on

Nicks and you= shut up shot with 13 mins to go was a good move, ignore that played into Ports hands and worked against us, we held on for a win just, woohoo

Any win over a red hot Port Adelaide is nothing to be sneezed at