Review R3: Port v North Melbourne Review

[proman_x]

We didn't even 'go missing'. It was a massive seesaw struggle with momentum shifts between two closely matched teams - it was there to be won for either team. Even when we we needed 2 goals to win, Impey converts the set shot and we have enough time to win it.

There's no doubt there are lessons to be learned from the loss as there always are, but it was a closely fought loss, no more no less.

We stopped running, Ford, from what I could see on the TV. That to me, means we went missing. Had that game been at Adelaide oval I think we would have won buy 14 to 20 points. Fitness is not just about physical aspects it is also mental. Yes we played our guts out, it was a seesaw as you said and in some ways a good game to watch. I'm not putting any crap on players or our club, they gave it a red hot go. It was a good leveller and we will learn from it, just apart of our journey to the top 4

On another subject. How crap is that ground? Roof closed, it looked like we were watching wet weather footy. Surely all the fumbles and dropped marks are not all nerves. On a good oval the excess moisture in the grass and top soil would have drained off by the time they played. The AFL have a serious issue with that oval, it is an injury graveyard for the want of a better word.

 

[Ford Fairlane]

We stopped running, Ford, from what I could see on the TV. That to me, means we went missing. Had that game been at Adelaide oval I think we would have won buy 14 to 20 points. Fitness is not just about physical aspects it is also mental. Yes we played our guts out, it was a seesaw as you said and in some ways a good game to watch. I'm not putting any crap on players or our club, they gave it a red hot go. It was a good leveller and we will learn from it, just apart of our journey to the top 4

On another subject. How crap is that ground? Roof closed, it looked like we were watching wet weather footy. Surely all the fumbles and dropped marks are not all nerves. On a good oval the excess moisture in the grass and top soil would have drained off by the time they played. The AFL have a serious issue with that oval, it is an injury graveyard for the want of a better word.

We can to and fro all day on this I guess. We still had two shots on goal after Boomer Harvey's goal and missed both. Kick either of them and we can still win. Hamish Hartlett's clearing kick doesn't go straight to Boomer in the first place we can still win. We didn't stop running we didn't go missing, in a game of momentum shifts (as Kenny acknowledged in his presser) North just took their chances and we didn't. At least you've come around from your starting position.

Playing at that ground is like watching a fly running across a Venus Fly Trap. You're just waiting for the jaws to close.

 

[proman_x]

We can to and fro all day on this I guess. We still had two shots on goal after Boomer Harvey's goal and missed both. Kick either of them and we can still win. Hamish Hartlett's clearing kick doesn't go straight to Boomer in the first place we can still win. We didn't stop running we didn't go missing, in a game of momentum shifts (as Kenny acknowledged in his presser) North just took their chances and we didn't. At least you've come around from your starting position.

Playing at that ground is like watching a fly running across a Venus Fly Trap. You're just waiting for the jaws to close.

Yeah we could go back and forth all day. On to next week and the Lions I would expect us to come out firing after the loss.

 

[Andre]

We stopped running, Ford, from what I could see on the TV. That to me, means we went missing.

I wouldn't say we went missing, as so much if your game plan has as a key component being able to run both ways for four quarters then losing rotations (Monfries, Wingard, Gray) is going to significantly affect that.

From a live and learn perspective I think it highlights that the sub needs to be someone who can come on and play a significant role in the midfield for a half or more if required. Which makes the likes of Broady, White, Moore, Young as decent sub options, but not Pittard (this is not an attack on Pittard before FishingRick04 appears ). Secondly that with smalls being the keys to keeping running more than bigs, the interchange cap slightly (only slightly) closes the gap in value between a good small and a good tall. List wise we still need to draft tall, tall, tall, but the changes make the lose of smalls hurt more than they did when rotations could go nuts IMO.

 

[FishingRick04]

No Pittard isn't a good sub. We also missed Pittards run from defense, Jasper not there for 4 quarters is the main reason we lost

 

[tribey]

Then Boomer Harvey with a mountain of pressure and two minutes to go in a hard-running game nails a set shot from outside 50. Sure it's a brutal gig but a specialist small forward taking a set shot from 30m out should nail them. Angus misses those again and again.

I love almost everything Gus brings to our forward line, he is lung-burstingly hard working, courageous and more talented than he gets credit for ... but those missed set shots are heartbreakers.

I don't disagree, but everyone knows Boomer periodically makes his way out of this chick whenever Port's on the fixture.

 

[franjon]

We should have won this game and quite comfortably

Pardon my intrusion but based on what?

 

[FishingRick04]

Pardon my intrusion but based on what?

Our form compared to your form, quite simple really. I guess previous history should have closed it a little.

 

[tribey]

Pardon my intrusion but based on what?

Lairising, overpossessing and blowing a gilt-edged chance or two to be even further in front at 3.2 (20) to 0.0 (0), I imagine.

North manufactured a couple of goals in quick succession against the run of play and all of a sudden it was an attritional arm-wrestle we were completely ill at ease with.

 

[Macca19]

Some serious underrating of North went on during the week and still after the game.

 

[manureid]

I don't disagree, but everyone knows Boomer periodically makes his way out of this chick whenever Port's on the fixture.

I would run that risk also having seen her sans clothing in GOT....

Would use a raincoat mind you.

 

[Chrizzt]

I really love Polec and he is so damn effective with his kicks. Nothing is beyond him when he has the ball in hand. However, I watched him in the last. After every goal, he jogged slowly back to the wing line, looking exhausted and without that steeliness in his eyes that says he wants to be the one to get the boys going again. This was in stark contrast to his direct opponent who would already be there waiting on the line and ready to go again. As much as I love him, he has a bit of maturing to do and I dare say it, he strikes me as a bit of a front runner. I’m hoping Ken identifies this and can coach this out of him – get the runner on his tail as soon as the going gets tough and get in his ear to lift the team when we start dropping off as we saw in the Carlton match that when he gets going, he can win games off his own boot.

Agree with all that you've said, especially the bolded. Noticed it quite a lot in the first two rounds, he seems to run twice as hard offensively compared to defensively which just doesn't cut it with our game plan. Constantly letting his man get space on him, and not bothering to chase him down, or even man up on someone else in case of a rebound.
Having said that, I think we have to un-Brisbane him a fair bit still. Build his fitness, his confidence, and his understanding of how the team needs all its players to run both ways to really be successful.

 

[Chrizzt]

Some serious underrating of North went on during the week and still after the game.

You tipped us by 6 goals in the podcast, maybe you were giving us delusions of grandeur.

 

[tribey]

You tipped us by 6 goals in the podcast, maybe you were giving us delusions of grandeur.

Although North wouldn't go away, we still didn't look in genuine danger until Schulz hurt himself and Monfries tore his hamstring.

Wingard hurting his ankle in the midst of kicking an excellent goal summed things up nicely.

 

[Garibaldi Red]

Their midfield shut down our run and spread and I think at times, particularly in the second half, players went for the big play instead of taking the closer (and maybe more difficult) option (Ken referred to selfish football the week earlier). I recall Butch (?) running through the wing/half forward line and the Skipper blasting the ball into a contest in the F50 and people have already mentioned the Matty White incident. There were other times when we simply tried to take on too much and we either turned the ball over immeidately or upon disposing of the ball.

Yes there were decisions that went against us, but no more than those that NM supporters could hang on to.

In the end, they were harder at the footy for longer.

Disappointed, absolutely. Giving up, never - We Are Port Adelaide.

Looking forward to this weeks game and the celebrations of that day in 2004.

I always wear a Port Adelaide tie on a workday Monday, today I have my 2004 Premiers tie on

 

[Macca19]

You tipped us by 6 goals in the podcast, maybe you were giving us delusions of grandeur.

I thought we'd be up for the challenge, not that I think North are s**t.

 

[Spadge]

Pardon my intrusion but based on what?

our form (we've been switched on and nailed 2 wins comfortably)
your form (39 point loss to the bombers and i saw the bulldogs north game and it was terrible and it took a 35yr old to get you over the line)
our early lead, and leading for most of the game

nothing more than that

 

[Doctor Feel]

I thought we'd be up for the challenge, not that I think North are s**t.

I'm pretty sure north are s**t, which is what pissed me off the most.

Miss feel was like "calm down, it was a good game and I thought they did well."

I'm like "I don't think you understand just how horrendous that was, north are genuinely awful."

Then I had hot dogs for dinner, and everything was alright.

 

[Janus]

Some serious underrating of North went on during the week and still after the game.

I rated them, I just thought that our best was so much better than theirs. Still do. If we are switched on, we beat them easily. Kudos to them though, they didn't allow us to do that, and we aren't experienced enough yet to force teams onto our terms. So they were definitely better on the day, but I'd back us in to win a final against them.

 

[Ford Fairlane]

Yeah we could go back and forth all day. On to next week and the Lions I would expect us to come out firing after the loss.

The one thing we need to learn this loss is to keep the pressure up and limit the momentum shifts.

 

[QPower]

Even though we were poor and off our game we only just lost against them at their home ground. Very confident we will take North if play them in September.

Also Andrew Moore will be a big inclusion as we were clearly missing another 6'2 90kg inside mid to help Ollie.

 

[mic59]

No Pittard isn't a good sub. We also missed Pittards run from defense, Jasper not there for 4 quarters is the main reason we lost

I thought we should win before the game started. My first(minor) doubts came when I noticed Pittard was the sub. The fact that he had to come on early reduced the impact that he could have had as a sub, too.

 

[DMN8]

Some serious underrating of North went on during the week and still after the game.

If your referring to Ken then you would be so wrong it's not funny.

 

[Macca19]

If your referring to Ken then you would be so wrong it's not funny.

err, no. Im talking about on here.

 

[bringbackbucky]

The lesson I hope the boys take out of this is one of the oldest lessons in football but it still rings true...

Give the first give everytime.

Too many times we ignored the first instinctive option and tried to create something that maybe wasn't there. The first option is usually the best option and leaves you in a better position if you turn the ball over.