Remove this Banner Ad

Review R9: The Good, Bad and the Ugly vs. Port Adelaide

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Just on this, I've heard a bunch of commentary around how it was a "fantastic" game, or a "real showcase" of footy. Obviously, it was close and still alive as a contest until the very end, which helps. And there were a couple of big moments, such as Rankine's goal or Keane's mark. But my impression on the night was that it was a pretty poor contest overall. Is that just me being a grumpy supporter and wanting a better showing?
It was quite entertaining, but yeeeeah, skill level was all over the shop. Some truly amazing displays of skill, but the baseline level for the game would have been quite low.

It's good to get grumpy at the state of things. It shows maturity. :)
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Please feel free to bump all my glowing comments about Nicks over the last 5 years.

Perception is an interesting thing. Watching the Showdown, my impression was that it was a high intensity contest with both teams having periods of dominance. I then ready the Gameday Thread and it was the usual sewer pit of comments about how crap many of our players were and the total stupidity of Nicks (all well before the last 10 minutes).

The point behind my post was that both games were quite similar with the losers dominating the stats, particularly the inside 50s, and the winners very efficient in the F50.

It will be interesting to see how our midfield matches up against the Pies.
Your point was the criticism of Niclks was unfounded because we won and had similar stats to Collingwood. You had a go at posters again, in your customary style.

Issue is you clearly missed the objection to Nicks tactics of slowing the game down and as a result nearly choked and lost.

Hinge confirmed the board that went up was more control less risks. Which meant we played into Ports strengths on the night in contest and clearances.

It’s why we were smashed for inside 50s and almost lost except for some poor goal kicking.

But hey you do you, but you’re not as clever as you pretend, clearly.
 
Maaaate
--- Nicks is not that smart or tactical
--- it was just a bad call by him. They went defensive too early.
I saw Rowey interviewing Hinge and asking him why they went defensive so early when Port were resting Visentini, Rozee and Butters or something to that effect. Hinge said it was more about control from D50 rather than going defensive and the execution needed some work.

Perhaps its a reaction from the Geelong game where we were far too aggressive coming out of D50 and Geelong players just peeled back and cut everything off.

If Nicks said "keep going aggressive" who knows what would have happened. We could have kicked 0.3 and Port got us on the rebound and 6/6/6 from the centre kicking 4.2 to win by a point.

I doubt anyone on here would be saying "I'm glad Nicks didn't order a defensive setup, 5-4 is awesome" after that (or whatever the T+Bicep sign actually means).
 
It was weird because the sign that appeared to be telling the players to tough it out, came out with about 7 or 8 minutes remaining but we seemed to have gone into our shells when Rankine kicked the soccer goal when there was still 15 mins to go. I guess it's splitting hairs but I'm just not sure about the too early stuff. It's also possible that the timing was okay and we're just incompetent at shutting a game down because our coaching isn't very good.
 
I doubt anyone on here would be saying "I'm glad Nicks didn't order a defensive setup, 5-4 is awesome" after that (or whatever the T+Bicep sign actually means).
Do you actually football?

Nobody has said we shouldnt have tried to lock the game up - the 100% issue was when in the game it happened

Everyone recognises the momentum shifts in games but it doesnt validate doing it 10 minutes to go
 
It was weird because the sign that appeared to be telling the players to tough it out, came out with about 7 or 8 minutes remaining but we seemed to have gone into our shells when Rankine kicked the soccer goal when there was still 15 mins to go. I guess it's splitting hairs but I'm just not sure about the too early stuff. It's also possible that the timing was okay and we're just incompetent at shutting a game down because our coaching isn't very good.
There is a moment about 10 minutes out when the camera is on Nicks and he is visually shitting bricks and orders the shut down
 
It was weird because the sign that appeared to be telling the players to tough it out, came out with about 7 or 8 minutes remaining but we seemed to have gone into our shells when Rankine kicked the soccer goal when there was still 15 mins to go. I guess it's splitting hairs but I'm just not sure about the too early stuff. It's also possible that the timing was okay and we're just incompetent at shutting a game down because our coaching isn't very good.
I reckon its too early still.

I mean we did knock 5 minutes off the clock without them doing any real damage. It was from about the 8 minute to go mark that we started to drop our bundle.

But for a side who's been lauded for our offence this season so far, its a strange move to try and slow it down for so long.
 
Is Fogs game going under the radar? Thought it was sneakily important to the result.

When the game was slipping he set-up Keays with a pearler of a kick inside 50 which was prime Tex esque, then kicked our next two.

The drop in the goal square was a howler that cost him his fourth, which Rankine thankfully saved, but feel like he was a big part of why we got across the line.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Is Fogs game going under the radar? Thought it was sneakily important to the result.

When the game was slipping he set-up Keays with a pearler of a kick inside 50 which was prime Tex esque, then kicked our next two.

The drop in the goal square was a howler that cost him his fourth, which Rankine thankfully saved, but feel like he was a big part of why we got across the line.
It was also his kick to ROB that ROB then handballed to Rankine for his first goal in the last quarter.

Not sure how much science was involved - it might have just been a long kick down the line to a contest that ended up being luckily uncontested - but another key involvement.

You could make the argument that he stepped up as Thilthorpe suffered under some extra attention after half time.
 
Is Fogs game going under the radar? Thought it was sneakily important to the result.

When the game was slipping he set-up Keays with a pearler of a kick inside 50 which was prime Tex esque, then kicked our next two.

The drop in the goal square was a howler that cost him his fourth, which Rankine thankfully saved, but feel like he was a big part of why we got across the line.

Him and Thilthorpe reviving that beautiful Tex/Tippett double act circa 2012
 
There is a moment about 10 minutes out when the camera is on Nicks and he is visually shitting bricks and orders the shut down

A T sign appears at the bench with 12 minutes to go. With 7 minutes to go that becomes T bicep.

I reckon he decided to shut down the game with more than half the quarter to go after Port had just one shot on goal that quarter
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Do you actually football?

Nobody has said we shouldnt have tried to lock the game up - the 100% issue was when in the game it happened

Everyone recognises the momentum shifts in games but it doesnt validate doing it 10 minutes to go

Yeah, I football. I just don't think I know more than an AFL coach.

As I said, you don't know what the result would have been if we continued with a more aggressive approach with 10 minutes left.

If Nicks didn't make the call to control/shut up shop/go defensive with 10 minutes to go AND we lost because we kicked 0.3 to their 4.2, what would you think?

What if the call was made with 7 minutes left after they kicked 2 goals quickly? You reckon that JHF, Rozee, Butters etc wouldn't smell blood with 48000 of them chanting "POWAAAHHH".

We could have kicked 2 in that time as well.

Who knows!
 
Interesting to hear Jack Riewoldt in the post game saying Thilthorpe was clearly the best and most influential player on the ground, and he was ticked off that Rozee won the medal.
Spoken like a true forward defending another forward over what has become a midfielders medal.
 
Yeah, I football. I just don't think I know more than an AFL coach.

As I said, you don't know what the result would have been if we continued with a more aggressive approach with 10 minutes left.

If Nicks didn't make the call to control/shut up shop/go defensive with 10 minutes to go AND we lost because we kicked 0.3 to their 4.2, what would you think?

What if the call was made with 7 minutes left after they kicked 2 goals quickly? You reckon that JHF, Rozee, Butters etc wouldn't smell blood with 48000 of them chanting "POWAAAHHH".

We could have kicked 2 in that time as well.

Who knows!

You can spin it however you want, in boxing terms Port were on the ropes and were begging to be put out of there misery after trying to stay in touch with us all night.

Instead of putting the finishing combination together, we decided to sit back and play for a Unanimous Decision (way too early) and in doing so we nearly risked getting caught ourselves.

It was bad coaching.
 
I don't have much of an issue with the decision to go more defensive when we did. It should have been a winning strategy.

The problem was in the execution, which seemed completely directionless. There was no players moved behind the ball, no setting up short marking targets to eat up time, nothing to neutralise contests and create repeat stoppages. We just... kicked it long down the line and prayed for a mark, then got torched every time in the resulting stoppage.

It wasn't just that we executed the plan poorly... it was that we didn't even seem to have a plan.

In the end, the only reason we won was because Port choked.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Review R9: The Good, Bad and the Ugly vs. Port Adelaide

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top