Preview R2: Changes v Port

[Rory Walkerfield]

Mackay will not be dropped. The pressure acts stat released by the club (see posts above) confirms this.

VB, McGovern, Milera are the 3 in the gun. Cheney is safe.

Knight will absolutely come in for one of the 3 above. Lock it in.

Hartigan / Cameron may come in for another.

Lyons / CEY are both an outside chance if we feel we need an extra mid, or if there's a secret injury.

Nobody else is even remotely in the frame. Not Beech, not Henderson, not Menzel. Nobody.

Gut feel is 1-2 changes, with the only in or out I'm certain about being Knight in.

Brown talking gov's pressure in the forward line up in today's pressed. Clearly has been highlighted in the team meeting. Doubt he goes (unless CC comes in which would be doubtful this week).

 

[Rory Walkerfield]

Short. I'd have my cash on Knight in and one of those out as the only change.

Agree. It is likely knight in for Milera.

 

[Jeffcrowe]

from what i can gather a pressure act is almost getting in the way of the opposition...
the stat is a load of shit...

let's imagine the scenario - you get the pill and look up you see Dmac, Thommo, and Dougie - which way do you go?

you choose the path of least resistance without hesitation... DMac invites pressure acts...

this is the sort of stat that goes into the player ratings system... so no wonder it's a load of crapola too

I'm no Mackay fan but a pressure act is a key indicator in a game . The teams that apply the most pressure acts generally win

We need Cameron in ASAP for his pressure acts to take the heat off our defenders

 

[Elite Crow]

No I am not. I was at the SANFL game on the weekend, looking forward to seeing Knight and Cameron really pressing their claim as I would prefer them in the team, but they were not quite up to the standard we require. You said you wanted Mackay out for either Knight or Cameron and I'm saying, on what I saw, Cameron is not ready and Knight maybe if you only looked at the half a game he did.

I would put Seedsman in the 6/10 mark as well on the weekend, so why is no one calling for his head? Sloane was bad. Why no one calling for him to be dropped? Crouch and Atkins both thought they were playing SANFL. No calling for them to be dropped. Why do those players get a leeway? Because the group think is that Mackay is bad and can't improve on that 6/10. He has played well above that before but hasn't reached those heights in a while, I agree, but there is the possibility there and I'm willing to wait a little longer than one game in the proper season to hang him out to dry. He isn't John Butcher.

We allow the others more leeway because we trust that they can get to the higher level again, except that Sloane has been poor all pre-season, well below his standard that I expect to see from him. Mackay has performed okay, and done some good things.

I found it interesting that he was equal first (with the poor Sloane) for pressure acts, which implies hardness at the ball carrier, which is something people say he doesn't do well. Those stats seem to say otherwise.

Firstly are you saying Knight only played one good half, the first or 2nd? Going by the stats he seemed to get a lot more of the ball in the second which means after a quiet first half he worked his way into it.

Now on to the rest of your post, Sloane was bad? That's because being a quality player we have high expectations, but 19 posessions and 7 tackles is a hell of a lot better than MacKays 13 and 3 tackles, but expectations are lower for Mackay because we are so used to this type of game from him. It's become his norm with the odd very good game and by odd I mean 2-3 a season.

Sloane has been a consistent performer over his career and it's only understandable he receives more slack. For you to even bring that comparison up is weird.

As for Seedsman, being a new recruit again he receives a bit of slack to see if he works his way into form and his ceiling is higher. However if after 4 weeks of 11 possession games the heat will be on him.

Nothing Mackay has done in his career warrants receiving the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Rory Walkerfield]

from what i can gather a pressure act is almost getting in the way of the opposition...
the stat is a load of shit...

let's imagine the scenario - you get the pill and look up you see Dmac, Thommo, and Dougie - which way do you go?

you choose the path of least resistance without hesitation... DMac invites pressure acts...

this is the sort of stat that goes into the player ratings system... so no wonder it's a load of crapola too

Mackay bounced off atley at one stage. ****ing atley! The guy is a twig (atley that is)!

 

[Stiffy_18]

The example which counters what you've just posted is the justification of Wrights and MacKays selections because of non-statistical roles. A couple of weeks later and with no change in performance they are dropped and with Wright he's delisted.

Then we go out and recruit a heap of players to fill DMacks role.

Also if you don't think a club will give a player with another 3 years on his contact more opportunities than a player with 1 year left you're the deluded one.

Like Pyke said himself on the season launch best 22 in term of talent is not necessarily the best 22 week in week out because you pick players to perform certain roles in the side and player's form flactuates.

You keep thinking that clubs will gift games to players on the long term contract even if they are not performing. I can guarantee you that contract length or terms don't even get a mention during the match committee.

As for the club recruiting players to fill Mackay's role, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. We had absolutely no depth in outside players with a bit of pace who can run and carry. It was Dmac and no one else. Hell we even tried to get more of that with Richard Tambling. If Seedsman and Hampton were recruited to fill Mackay's role then why did Mackay and Seedsman play in the same team in round 1? Maybe the club thought we needed more of those types of players and no necessarily to replace anyone. Competition for spots is not a bad thing. It's good as it puts players on notice. The problem we have from round 1 is that neither Mackay or Seedsman cemented their spot in the side. If anything, Mackay had a slightly better game than Seedsman.

 

[Jeffcrowe]

Ins - knight
Outs - VB

Following week Cameron to come in ( most likely for Mackay )

Have watched the game again and can live with our defensive set up after initially being upset re Hartigan not playing

B Crouch - can't believe how critical people are of his game . Par score for first game back and he will get better

Milera and McGovern - par for debuts as well and will get better . Give them another chance this week

Brown and lynch are two guys that can play better .

Sloane not far off and not worried about him

Some slight concern re tex and his form/ body language / injury

 

[Danger in Texas]

Honestly, Mackay surprised me on Sat night. Did some good stuff.

VB needs to go, though.

Out: VB
In: Knight

I would put Hartigan in too, but I can't see for who...

 

[VSTone]

I'm no Mackay fan but a pressure act is a key indicator in a game . The teams that apply the most pressure acts generally win

We need Cameron in ASAP for his pressure acts to take the heat off our defenders

we need Cameron in ASAP because the lad can play ball and is so far ahead of Mackay as a footballer it's not funny... the number one pressure act in football is dobbing one through the big sticks...

 

[Jeffcrowe]

we need Cameron in ASAP because the lad can play ball and is so far ahead of Mackay as a footballer it's not funny... the number one pressure act in football is dobbing one through the big sticks...

Mate you are not on the right page

Pressure acts in the forward half are CRUCIAL in modern day footy with the press and ability to take heat off the defence

Listen to what the players are saying about McGovern and his pressure acts .... Goals will come if there are pressure acts

Elite pressure skills are the reason Charlie Cameron doesn't get dropped when he has
5-10 possessions in a game . The goals are important too but that's not his main job

 

[Stiffy_18]

we need Cameron in ASAP because the lad can play ball and is so far ahead of Mackay as a footballer it's not funny... the number one pressure act in football is dobbing one through the big sticks...

Which Mackay did on the weekend!

 

[VSTone]

Mackay bounced off atley at one stage. ******* atley! The guy is a twig (atley that is)!

pressured the f*** out of him though, lol...+1 for pressure acts...

 

[Elite Crow]

Like Pyke said himself on the season launch best 22 in term of talent is not necessarily the best 22 week in week out because you pick players to perform certain roles in the side and player's form flactuates.

You keep thinking that clubs will gift games to players on the long term contract even if they are not performing. I can guarantee you that contract length or terms don't even get a mention during the match committee.

As for the club recruiting players to fill Mackay's role, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. We had absolutely no depth in outside players with a bit of pace who can run and carry. It was Dmac and no one else. Hell we even tried to get more of that with Richard Tambling. If Seedsman and Hampton were recruited to fill Mackay's role then why did Mackay and Seedsman play in the same team in round 1? Maybe the club thought we needed more of those types of players and no necessarily to replace anyone. Competition for spots is not a bad thing. It's good as it puts players on notice. The problem we have from round 1 is that neither Mackay or Seedsman cemented their spot in the side. If anything, Mackay had a slightly better game than Seedsman.

Can you explain how the selections of Wright and DMack were defended last year with a non-statistical role we had never heard of before and a couple of weeks later with no change of output they were dropped? Did all of a sudden they stopped playing the non-statistical role well?

I'm not saying gifting guys games on long term contracts, I'm saying giving them more opportunities to find form than someone who is on a shorter term contract. Just look at VB, DMack and Reilly. They kept being shuffled in the side trying to find a position that suits. DMack in the last year has been wing, half back and up forward and he hasn't nailed any of those positions. Why was he given so many opportunities when he's already failed?

 

[VSTone]

Mate you are not on the right page

Pressure acts in the forward half are CRUCIAL in modern day footy with the press and ability to take heat off the defence

Listen to what the players are saying about McGovern and his pressure acts .... Goals will come if there are pressure acts

Elite pressure skills are the reason Charlie Cameron doesn't get dropped when he has
5-10 possessions in a game . The goals are important too but that's not his main job

ease up... i totally agree - what i am taking to task is what a pressure act actually is... some are incredibly important
and some are completely irrelevant in the context of the game.

i'd love to see the compilation of pressure acts... a quality of pressure act rating may help justify

Which Mackay did on the weekend!

straight from McGoverns deft work at the coal face... great piece of play

 

[Scorpus]

Fact remains that every coach to date has picked Mackay in his team. Craig, Bickley, Sanderson, Walsh, Campo, Pyke. They all picked him in their best 22. They can't all be wrong. They all must see something in him and are happy enough with the role he is playing. Like with every player, his form flactuates but bottom line is that all 6 coaches have picked him in in their side and don't bring up this speculative bullshit that Walsh was about to drop him when he was clearly named for the game against Geelong that we never played due to tragic circumstances. Didn't Walsh also praise him for his courage and effort in his game against Melbourne at Adelaide Oval last year when Bernie took Dangerfield to the cleaners?

Now we as fans might not like certain players for whatever reasons BUT that doesn't mean that those players are useless or can't play or don't have the talent to have a decent AFL career.

Saying that six coaches picked Mackay is honestly one of the worst reasons to justify his spot in the team.

Craig and Bickley: Under these coaches Mackay was an emerging player with decent form. No reason to drop him.
Sanderson: One good season then two without a gameplan. Clearly didn't have what it takes to be a premiership coach.
Walsh: Murdered. Didn't see out his plan.
Camporeale: Interim coach who didn't get hired
Pyke: Selected Mackay for one AFL game so far.

Mackay's form under Craig and Bickley five seasons ago is, quite frankly, completely irrelevant. Of the other four coaches, two have been interim positions, promoted from within the club. One coached half a season and experimented with a number of players. The other is our current coach who has coached one game.

I'm more than willing to cut Pyke some slack if he selects the best team based on what he saw through the pre-season and who is available. That's fine. Mackay and VB deserved their Round 1 spot based on these metrics.

What I won't tolerate is Pyke continuing to select mediocre plodders in future games if they're clearly underperforming now, and have a history of underperforming as well. This week I expect him to drop VB if he's interested in developing an environment of high performance and a winning culture. If he's willing to back VB in for a second game - and I wouldn't necessarily blame him considering he's a new coach with a 'clean slate' - then I expect the same affordances will be given to our younger players. In other words: if Pyke doesn't drop VB he shouldn't drop anyone.

As far as Mackay is concerned, many posters here are right: he was far from the worst player on the ground. If Pyke decides to back him in for another game, that's perfectly fine. But if he starts to underperform across the next one to three games I expect him to get dropped promptly, because he has a history of underperforming across entire seasons. This should absolutely come into account when he gets selected. And again, the same standards that apply to Mackay must apply to younger players: if Mackay is backed in, so should guys like Milera.

In my eyes the test begins at the selection table this week. I don't want to see young players like Milera and McGovern make way ahead of VB because to me that suggests a selection double standard has been established.

In the future, I want to see underperforming senior players with poor histories and poor form over a number of games relegated to the SANFL promptly. Mackay doesn't need to be dropped this week, but if he delivers the same form across a number of weeks and doesn't get dropped this will be a selection fail

 

[TheLeftFist8]

TheLeftFist8 you liked this?

So Am i correct that all those players Except Van Berlo have to lift this week?

Should've checked the fine print!!

I'm hoping we won't have to worry about his performance at AFL level this week!

 

[Jeffcrowe]

ease up... i totally agree - what i am taking to task is what a pressure act actually is... some are incredibly important
and some are completely irrelevant in the context of the game.

i'd love to see the compilation of pressure acts...



straight from McGoverns deft work at the coal face... great piece of play

I can tell you now that all pressure acts are important - ... The 2 measurements champion data use are implied pressure and physical pressure and you'd be surprised how much coaches and statisticians value both of these

Prime example of implied pressure is a defender running it out from D50 ... The forward chases him the crowd roars for him to kick it and his teammates tell him he's hot and he bombs it out to a pack on the wing and the opposition marks it . Result = a repeat F50 entry

The guy chasing never actually lays a hand on him but if he didn't create an implied pressure act the ball could easily have got over the line and into the oppositions F50 for a score . A ' potential' 2 goal turn around

Implied pressure acts help you win games of football and the coaches value them highly ..... Charlie Cameron is elite at them and McGovern was really good on sat night also

As I said I'm no Mackay fan but we have to concede he created some pressure on sat night , not saying that should save him because we have others that do it better and with more physicality as well and on top of that more offence than he provides

 

[ad victoriam]

Honestly, Mackay surprised me on Sat night. Did some good stuff.

VB needs to go, though.

Out: VB
In: Knight

I would put Hartigan in too, but I can't see for who...

Would go with Hendo before Knight,
On Sat SANFL Hendo play well when the game was alive, while Knights play well after the game was won. And Hendo can defend better, Also some of his run and bounces were very good on sat.
Hartigan/Shaw in for Cheney unlucky yes. Reason on the Hartigan /Shaw, again Shaw play well when the game was alive and Hartigan improved the longer the game went. Most likely Hartigan.
Cameron look rusty at first but got to the fall of the ball. started to get good touches later in the game fitness did not seem to be an issue touch was.
I think no more than 2-3 changes, and it should be like for like.
Several Emergency as the SANFL games on Sunday.

 

[Jeffcrowe]

Saying that six coaches picked Mackay is honestly one of the worst reasons to justify his spot in the team.

Craig and Bickley: Under these coaches Mackay was an emerging player with decent form. No reason to drop him.
Sanderson: One good season then two without a gameplan. Clearly didn't have what it takes to be a premiership coach.
Walsh: Murdered. Didn't see out his plan.
Camporeale: Interim coach who didn't get hired
Pyke: Selected Mackay for one AFL game so far.

Mackay's form under Craig and Bickley five seasons ago is, quite frankly, completely irrelevant. Of the other four coaches, two have been interim positions, promoted from within the club. One coached half a season and experimented with a number of players. The other is our current coach who has coached one game.

I'm more than willing to cut Pyke some slack if he selects the best team based on what he saw through the pre-season and who is available. That's fine. Mackay and VB deserved their Round 1 spot based on these metrics.

What I won't tolerate is Pyke continuing to select mediocre plodders in future games if they're clearly underperforming now, and have a history of underperforming as well. This week I expect him to drop VB if he's interested in developing an environment of high performance and a winning culture. If he's willing to back VB in for a second game - and I wouldn't necessarily blame him considering he's a new coach with a 'clean slate' - then I expect the same affordances will be given to our younger players. In other words: if Pyke doesn't drop VB he shouldn't drop anyone.

As far as Mackay is concerned, many posters here are right: he was far from the worst player on the ground. If Pyke decides to back him in for another game, that's perfectly fine. But if he starts to underperform across the next one to three games I expect him to get dropped promptly, because he has a history of underperforming across entire seasons. This should absolutely come into account when he gets selected. And again, the same standards that apply to Mackay must apply to younger players: if Mackay is backed in, so should guys like Milera.

In my eyes the test begins at the selection table this week. I don't want to see young players like Milera and McGovern make way ahead of VB because to me that suggests a selection double standard has been established.

In the future, I want to see underperforming senior players with poor histories and poor form over a number of games relegated to the SANFL promptly. Mackay doesn't need to be dropped this week, but if he delivers the same form across a number of weeks and doesn't get dropped this will be a selection fail

Beautifully said

 

[VSTone]

I can tell you now that all pressure acts are important - ... The 2 measurements champion data use are implied pressure and physical pressure and you'd be surprised how much coaches and statisticians value both of these

Prime example of implied pressure is a defender running it out from D50 ... The forward chases him the crowd roars for him to kick it and his teammates tell him he's hot and he bombs it out to a pack on the wing and the opposition marks it . Result = a repeat F50 entry

The guy chasing never actually lays a hand on him but if he didn't create an implied pressure act the ball could easily have got over the line and into the oppositions F50 for a score . A ' potential' 2 goal turn around

Implied pressure acts help you win games of football and the coaches value them highly ..... Charlie Cameron is elite at them and McGovern was really good on sat night also

As I said I'm no Mackay fan but we have to concede he created some pressure on sat night , not saying that should save him because we have others that do it better and with more physicality as well and on top of that more offence than he provides

chasing a player used to be called a non-negotiable..now it's a stat... what next - turned up on time? time with socks up? chase hard or play in the two's no if's no but's ... lets move on

 

[Jeffcrowe]

Watching the last qtr again - all our players were running on fumes

We may need slow some tempo at some point this week but should be better for the run

 

[Jeffcrowe]

chasing a player used to be called a non-negotiable..now it's a stat... what next - turned up on time? time with socks up? chase hard or play in the two's no if's no but's ... lets move on

You'd be surprised at the stark difference between how some players do it compared to others . Team defence doesn't exist without out

It's the only way you can afford to push your defenders up to the middle in a press and not play man on man

Or go into a game with Cheney v 196+cm forwards

 

[VSTone]

You'd be surprised at the stark difference between how some players do it compared to others . Team defence doesn't exist without out

It's the only way you can afford to push your defenders up to the middle in a press and not play man on man

Or go into a game with Cheney v 196+cm forwards

yes indeed a stark difference between how some players do it and exactly why it's a stupid blanket stat...

 

[footy4ever]

OK that settles it. G Cornes just said we went in one tall defender short - K Hartigan.


So I still don't know who wins the argument yet.

 

[Deaneus!]

I know everyone's been waiting for my insight but I've been busy. So, here it is:

Did going in a KPD short kill us? No.
Mackay? Not as terrible as usual. Positive reinforcement, he stays in this week while the SANFL players get up to speed
VB? Holy Lord no. Good bye. Knight, Inanimate Carbon Rod, anyone. Was disgraceful.
Should we bring Henderson in as a replacement? Hmmm... no. Those with longer memories will recall that any time he comes straight into the team after a layoff, he stinks it up for a month. Give him a month of SANFL to find touch.
Cameron? another week in the SANFL for match fitness thanks
Lyons? Grigg? do we need one of them?
Brad Couch? Rusty... is putting it mildly. After 25 games he's considered the backbone of the side already, so like a family where the father went to the store for cigarettes and never came back, he's the man of the house at age 10. Yikes.
Matt Couch? Good stuff mate.
Douglas? Did he play? I only saw him in the second half, and his last quarter sucked.
Atkins? did alright for his ninth game.
Milera and McGovern? didn't do much but will be eons better for the exposure.
Jacobs? you're good mate but you're not the best.
Lynchy? that's what getting tagged is like mate, work it out, you're a veteran in this side.
Jenkins? is it a contract year mate? just kidding, keep it up

I think the best response the coach could have had after Saturday night's game was

"500 push-ups everyone, get to it - except for you Leroy"

All the senior players stunk, all our disposal stunk, we stunk - and yet we nearly won.

So, unchanged, or VB gone; Mackay on last chance.