Preview R2: Changes v Port

[adelaidecrows]

Umpiring seems to get worse every year. This round has been full of absolute shockers

I think its because in game and after match commentary have been banned from putting bad umpiring to the sword. If clubs and the media could critique openly about the performances of umpires I believe the standard would be a lot better. The AFL aren't doing them any favours.

 

[Deaneus!]

We are one of those clubs that isn't built for premierships. We are not ruthless enough on the field, off the field and in the stands

OMG... we're St Kilda

Dixon was hopeless and only beat a tired opponent.

Hearing a lot about his three goals in the media, good old "Junk Time" Charlie

 

[GreyCrow]

So you're saying that if a team carries a player to a 100 point win, you are forced to continue to play him and leave a better footballer in the 2's? You should always be looking to improve your side if it's possible and you need to keep an eye on players that only play their best footy against poor sides.

You are not forced to play them and I never said that. I don't see the need for change just for change sake. That is how I see the world and nothing anyone can say will change that.

Depends on who the player is of course. I would think with a 100 point win you wouldn't have too many passengers. But I would more so carry the younger kids ie if a Milera or a McGovern have a bad one in a 100 point win I wont be calling for them to be dropped. If you mean a VB or a Mackay ( which seems to be standard here) then I would once again look at their role in the team and ask if they performed it. If you mean a Tex or a Sloane it is the same - their role and performance.

I don't think you would make changes just to make changes. There are different scenarios for different players. Sloane doesn't play those 2 100 point wins and he is available of course he comes in. I don't think a J Lyons would be afforded the same benefit.

 

[GreyCrow]

So it's our outside players who will magically get to them in the contest. Our inside players, standing shoulder to shoulder, can't get them, but our flankers will. Leaving their own man free no less. It's up to Thommo, Crouch's etc to win their fair share of the ball at stoppages. Trying to work some system where flankers ignore their surroundings and other tasks to concentrate on getting to Ports inside midfielders is fantasy.

It was in response to a question that already conceded our midfield were getting beaten. Is this you Neil , no Plan B?

 

[adelaidecrows]

OMG... we're St Kilda



View attachment 229357

Hearing a lot about his three goals in the media, good old "Junk Time" Charlie

Beat a tired opponent. I rank it in the same boat as giving Robbie Gray credit for camping like a loser in the forward line looking for cheap ball. Lucky to get it on this occasion but his attitude of running forward all the time will prove a liability against better teams who can easily counter ports lack of run.

 

[GreyCrow]

At the game one thing i noticed is Mcgovern absolutely decked any player that had just disposed of the ball with a big bump. I wish Walker and Jenkins did this.

That was evident at the start of last year by all the players. Its why we beat Port in the NAB 2015 and why we beat NM , Collingwood . What this does is stop that player from being the ball receiver. Great tactic and one I wish we did more of

 

[Elite Crow]

Beat a tired opponent. I rank it in the same boat as giving Robbie Gray credit for camping like a loser in the forward line looking for cheap ball. Lucky to get it on this occasion but his attitude of running forward all the time will prove a liability against better teams who can easily counter ports lack of run.

That has to be one of the dumbest posts ever.

It's fair enough to be anti-Port but you lack all credibility when you are dumb about it.

Gray is a star and if he rests up forward and kicks goals how can you criticise that?

 

[Archie87]

Hearing a lot about his three goals in the media, good old "Junk Time" Charlie

He got smashed by Fisher for 80% of the game. Tals should be able to cover him if he brings his A-game.

Although he's a bit more physical, he's no better than JJ who I'd take over him .

 

[Vader]

Should not have even been a free kick. Umpire blatantly guessed which is a disappointing. I hate it when they assume something happened but are out of position to call it and they are proved wrong. Umpires should be forced to review the reported incident after the game and decide whether its worth taking it to the next stage or withdrawing it. Its just wasting everyone's time making clubs wait until Tuesday to see if there is a case to answer. The Crows need to take a stand and send in a letter of please explain as to how the umpire came to the conclusion he did when the replays clearly showed it didn't occur. Just bad umpiring.

Sorry, but this is just plain bollocks. To the naked eye, in real time, it appeared to be illegal contact and definitely reportable. The umpires did the right thing and whinging about it is just plain silly.

I don't care what a slow motion replay shows. That's useful for the MRP review, it does nothing at all for a field umpire who has to make instant decisions based on what they see with their own two eyes.

There's plenty of other things we could be asking the umpires to review, such as North's propensity for throwing the ball and diving at the first sign of contact with another human being, but the reporting of Matt Crouch is not one of them.

 

[GrommoT]

same goes with Eddie 2 chances he'd normally eat up the one that hit the post on half time siren and the left foot scrubber in the last, 90% of the time eddie kicks those the one at halftime would have really hurt north going into the break

I wonder if spending more time in the midfield caused this. Did he in the past usually have a few scrubbers at goal before getting his range and kick some awesome goals but by spending more time in the midfield, he's not getting as many chances at goal to get his range in (plus having less in his tank vs being mostly in the forward area and having more energy to be electrifying)?

 

[Elite Crow]

Watched the replay from the Bounce, Crouch's hip it's Waites shoulder but his elbow hits his head. That's a worry. But it was pretty soft.

 

[Rory Walkerfield]

Surely anyone with a pair of eyes will be able to see the truth in the vid, but the AFL being the VFL as we very well know, will probably twist it to suit whatever agenda they have.

Thankfully we're playing a non-vic team next week so they might care less

The vision clearly, clearly shows that contact was made in the allowable area.

View attachment 229325

Pav in trouble based on that schematic.

 

[adelaidecrows]

That has to be one of the dumbest posts ever.

It's fair enough to be anti-Port but you lack all credibility when you are dumb about it.

Gray is a star and if he rests up forward and kicks goals how can you criticise that?

funny, I was at the game. I watched him just run forward in the midfield, didn't defend at all leaving it up to his team mates to pick up his opponent. Ports lack of run hardly suggests he is doing a great job. I never said he wasn't a good player, I just suggest he will never go down as one of the greats with the way he currently plays.

 

[Rory Walkerfield]

At the game one thing i noticed is Mcgovern absolutely decked any player that had just disposed of the ball with a big bump. I wish Walker and Jenkins did this.

Such smart play. If they've just handball end it removes them from any follow up.

 

[adelaidecrows]

Sorry, but this is just plain bollocks. To the naked eye, in real time, it appeared to be illegal contact and definitely reportable. The umpires did the right thing and whinging about it is just plain silly.

I don't care what a slow motion replay shows. That's useful for the MRP review, it does nothing at all for a field umpire who has to make instant decisions based on what they see with their own two eyes.

There's plenty of other things we could be asking the umpires to review, such as North's propensity for throwing the ball and diving at the first sign of contact with another human being, but the reporting of Matt Crouch is not one of them.

It didn't look like he hit him in the head at all. The umpire was a good 30 metres away and saw a bump through a crowd of players and waite go down and guessed. In fact the contact was actually really soft and just collected him in the soft spot under the armpit. It wasn't even worthy of a free kick. Yes the Crows should be asking for a please explain for the free awarded to Thomas as well. but the report is crap and unwarranted if the umpire is guessing.

 

[Southerntakeover]

OMG... we're St Kilda

Nah, St Kilda have made a grand final in a year that starts with the numbers '20..'.

But as my friends keep reminding me, it's only one game. Losing doesn't matter. It's realistically not a premiership year anyway. We'll develop.

Rinse and repeat.

 

[GROTTO]

How likely is crouch to be suspended?

If there is no medical report from the Roos on Waite, then it will further help him. From the replay it appeared he didnt even hit him in the head.

Should get off.

 

[VSTone]

At the game one thing i noticed is Mcgovern absolutely decked any player that had just disposed of the ball with a big bump. I wish Walker and Jenkins did this.

hes a Gem...cant wait to see him paired up with Charlie

 

[GROTTO]

Nah, St Kilda have made a grand final in a year that starts with the numbers '20..'.

But as my friends keep reminding me, it's only one game. Losing doesn't matter. It's realistically not a premiership year anyway. We'll develop.

Rinse and repeat.

From R1 2015, two of the losers were

Roos (lost to us, we didnt even make the 8 the year before) - Made Prelims
Eagles (again lost to a team ie Dogs, that didnt even make the 8 the year before)- Made GF

 

[1990crow]

From R1 2015, two of the losers were

Roos (lost to us, we didnt even make the 8 the year before) - Made Prelims
Eagles (again lost to a team ie Dogs, that didnt even make the 8 the year before)- Made GF

Need a win this week however!

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Seriously there's a zero percent chance of Cheney being dropped so all the people suggesting it is pretty strange to me. He was arguably our best defender on the weekend. He thoroughly outperformed Smith and Brown (both were puke), and I personally thought he was better than both of the golden children in Talia and Lever. People are dropping him because they wanted Hartigan to play Round 1, and ignoring the fact that Cheney was excellent.

Your opponent having 20 possessions, 8 contested, 7 marks & 3 goals does not mean you had an excellent game.

It means the opposition identified you as the weak link & played through you.

Waite was damaging for the roos.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

From R1 2015, two of the losers were

Roos (lost to us, we didnt even make the 8 the year before) - Made Prelims
Eagles (again lost to a team ie Dogs, that didnt even make the 8 the year before)- Made GF

Who were the other teams that lost Round 1?

 

[TheLeftFist8]

I've been trying to think of the best way to restructure to get bad players out of the side and talented players in despite us having more forwards than defenders.

VB must go, so who plays in defence?

Hampton unavailable, Henderson I rate a very good wingman but a poor defender, Wigg too small.

There's 3 realistic options imo…

1) Seedsman to defence
2) A midfielder recast back into defence (CEY would be the best option)

Both good options but here's the best one (and it wasn't my original idea but when i heard it the penny dropped)

3) MILERA to defence. Has the size, tenacity, skill, decision making, run…he has it all!! The comparisons to McLeod have been made previously. He isn't ready for full time midfield (in time he will be an AA mid) and he's wasted getting low possession numbers forward when we have other good options in that half of the ground. Seriously, when I think of Milera running off the half back line I imagine serious damage to the opposition inflicted from the scoring chain created

Leaving the Hartigan debate aside for a moment the obvious 2 changes then become:

OUT: VB, Mackay
IN: Knight, Cameron

 

[huludicidal]

Your opponent having 20 possessions, 8 contested, 7 marks & 3 goals does not mean you had an excellent game.

It means the opposition identified you as the weak link & played through you.

Waite was damaging for the roos.

Cheney was barely on Waite mate - maybe for 1/3 of the game (and Waite kicked 1 maximum on him). Rewatch the game. The defenders rotated throughout.

 

[1990crow]

Ive been thinking and Im a bit pessimistic about this year tbh. Would rather just dispose with guys we know arent good enough and give extended runs to guys we know will be.