Autopsy Round 10 = Collingwood 58-59 Port Adelaide

[Capital Magpie]

Perfect result

If you backed Port to win by a goal or less.

 

[GoDaics]

If you backed Port to win by a goal or less.

Had the draw $10 @ $56.

 

[magpiemaniac44]

I’m sorry, but this stat is exactly what bucks does… We haven’t lost games by over 6 goals, yes. But how many goals in an entire game can WE score? 6? So that stat is misleading. Make no mistake, 5-6 goal losses are floggings when we can only score that in 4 quarters. 6 goal losses against us are the same as 70pt losses

I agree to an extent, but the fact that the backline have held reasonable tight, is pleasing considering we've had Roughy and Howe (yes ik these two are coming to the end anyway) miss games and Moore playing forward for weeks

 

[Scodog10]

1. The quality and depth of players we had on the field were the result of last year's trade period plus the previous past 8 years drafting, trading etc. We had plenty of high picks squandered in that period. The players don't choose the squad or the team.
2. The players we had on the field were also the result of our salary cap mismanagement. The players don't manage the cap.
3. The level of development, experience , understanding of gameplay of the players we had on the field is in considerable part due to coaching. The coaches don't appoint themselves.
3. The players we had on the field had noticeably less bulk than the opponent's, and yet we don't have any edge in fitness... In fact we struggle to finish out games. The fitness staff and medicos don't appoint themselves.
4. The playing group is fragmented and lacking cohesiveness due to recent list management disasters, pr disasters and messaging failures and the trust/credibility between the playing group and offield/coaching has been lost. Some players such as Maynard appear to have lost commitment. The players didn't cause this.
5. You are complaining about the way they played. They played to the coaches instructions. The coach is still there because those in charge refuse to remove him. He has been coaching and man managing the same way for the last 10 years. The players don't choose the coaches.

Hmm I think I’m going to struggle explaining this to you because you’re on a different page of a very different book (nothing wrong with that btw), but here goes. I think it comes down to the interpretation of on-field because in this context I’m talking coaching and how they set the team for game day.

The game I watched was completely different to how we’ve moved the ball in transition all year for 90% of the match (the first 10 mins the obvious outlier). In terms of comments on the playing group I think it’s clear the coach hasn’t lost them because they stuck to their task admirably.

The coaching groups plan yesterday was devised by the underpants gnomes so the instructions seemed to be:

Step 1 retain possession
Step 2 ....
Step 3 win

Either step 2 wasn’t communicated at all or it wasn’t emphasised enough.

We’re a contested ball side with very few kickers that doesn’t know how to move the ball except from contest to contest through hands and long kicking. If you ask a contested ball side to move it on the switch you get what happened yesterday. The instructions needed to be that the receiver of that first or second switch needs to play on immediately in order to get ahead of the Port grid. We did that on maybe three occasions. There were times where a grub kick would have been a better outcome than a mark because it would have meant they played on.

Yes it’s clear there’s work to be done off field, but if you can’t organise a team that’s clearly buying in to play a sustainable brand of footy you’re going nowhere. Also to be clear I’m nowhere near as down on the playing group overall as most on here. There’s holes definitely, but with more efficient systems in place our results would be better.

 

[Scritchyscroony]

Hmm I think I’m going to struggle explaining this to you because you’re on a different page of a very different book (nothing wrong with that btw), but here goes. I wasn’t referring to anything relating to the players on-field in this context relates to coaching and how we setup on game day.

The game I watched was completely different to how we’ve moved the ball in transition all year for 90% of the match (the first 10 mins the obvious outlier). In terms of comments on the playing group I think it’s clear the coach hasn’t lost them because they stuck to their task admirably.

The coaching groups plan yesterday was devised by the underpants gnome coaching group so the instructions seemed to be:

Step 1 retain possession
Step 2 ....
Step 3 win

We’re a contested ball side with very few kickers that doesn’t know how to move the ball except from contest to contest through hands and long kicking. If you ask a contested ball side to move it on the switch you get what happened yesterday. The instructions needed to be that the receiver of that first or second switch needs to play on immediately in order to get ahead of the Port grid. We did that on maybe three occasions. There were times where a grub kick would have been a better outcome than a mark because it would have meant they played on.

Yes it’s clear there’s work to be done off field, but if you can’t organise a team that’s clearly buying in to play a sustainable brand of footy you’re going nowhere. To be clear to I’m nowhere near as down on the playing group overall as most on here. There’s holes definitely, but with more efficient systems in place our results would be better.

Not how your post came across.
As ugly and unpalatable as it was; it's the coach reacting to our new reality. We can't compete with teams in any positive sense so we are competing negatively. The result was we only lost by one point against a more fancied opponent. It's our first try with this approach. You'd hope we will get better at it as the year goes on.
In the past under Buckley we have played too defensively for too long to the detriment of what the playing group was capable of. Now though, I feel like this will be the only way we stop ourselves from being blown off the park for the rest of the year. I think copping a spanking consistently is a bad thing for the fabric of a club and a bad way to introduce new youngsters. It won't hurt them to learn defensive structures and strategies first. It will hurt us supporters to watch.. and be frustrating.. but in the long run it's better for the young players we are introducing.

Regarding players "buying in". They were professional and brought the effort and discipline. There's a lot of good reasons players do that other than just "buying in" to the coaches vision. Maynard is a talented heart and sole player. I don't think he's buying in at the moment. Some of the best footy I played was in the year I'd already decided to leave my club.

 

[Scodog10]

Not how your post came across.
As ugly and unpalatable as it was; it's the coach reacting to our new reality. We can't compete with teams in any positive sense so we are competing negatively. The result was we only lost by one point against a more fancied opponent. It's our first try with this approach. You'd hope we will get better at it as the year goes on.
In the past under Buckley we have played too defensively for too long to the detriment of what the playing group was capable of. Now though, I feel like this will be the only way we stop ourselves from being blown off the park for the rest of the year. I think copping a spanking consistently is a bad thing for the fabric of a club and a bad way to introduce new youngsters. It won't hurt them to learn defensive structures and strategies first. It will hurt us supporters to watch.. and be frustrating.. but in the long run it's better for the young players we are introducing.

Regarding players "buying in". They were professional and brought the effort and discipline. There's a lot of good reasons players do that other than just "buying in" to the coaches vision. Maynard is a talented heart and sole player. I don't think he's buying in at the moment. Some of the best footy I played was in the year I'd already decided to leave my club.

I addressed most of your post with my first post re Buckley.

Maynard though is an interesting one I think he carried an injury for the first month and was finally building until yesterday. I didn’t have any reason to question his effort, but I wouldn’t discount it as an issue either.

 

[partypie]

I think you're forgetting that Travis Boak started out like this...

View attachment 1135929

before he built up to this

View attachment 1135932

No I'm not - he was clearly bigger than Bianco is now when he debuted and even back then you could clearly see he had a big frame for a 6 footer.

In the end there's only so much bulk you can pack onto an undersized midfielder, so I can't see him having the same degree of power in his game as Boak does. If you came back and said he'd be a bit closer to a Lachie Neale type then I could buy that for sure.

 

[pie chucker]

Those dinky kicks in our defensive 50 are going to give me a heart attack. So many times we'd have 5 or so possies and actually get no where and nearly stuffed it up. Noble's kick was an example.

The slow methodical game plan will continue to hurt us because we can't put sides away when we're on top. We missed two opportunities because we just don't take the game on. DeGoey had a poor game but you can't really blame him. I'd hate to be a forward in our team.

But we did better than I thought.

 

[stormskye]

Those dinky kicks in our defensive 50 are going to give me a heart attack. So many times we'd have 5 or so possies and actually get no where and nearly stuffed it up. Noble's kick was an example.

The slow methodical game plan will continue to hurt us because we can't put sides away when we're on top. We missed two opportunities because we just don't take the game on. DeGoey had a poor game but you can't really blame him. I'd hate to be a forward in our team.

But we did better than I thought.

Rich are one of the highest turnover clubs. The difference is they have high turnovers because the move the ball forward at all cost. If Theres a turnover it’s not in the defensive 50, it’s up the ground. Under bucks, we’d rather kick back to the defensive goal square (did this multiple times) to avoid a contest up the ground. It’s insanity

 

[pietoon]

He’s not everyone’s cup of tea but… don’t you love the way Chrissie Mayne has slotted into that back pocket like a natural… gotta admire the guys grit…

It was interesting seeing him rip into Maynard when it was Maynard’s turn to go back with the flight of the ball and he hesitated.
That’s one thing I admire about Mayne, when it’s his turn to go,he never thinks twice.

 

[jackcass]

No I'm not - he was clearly bigger than Bianco is now when he debuted and even back then you could clearly see he had a big frame for a 6 footer.

In the end there's only so much bulk you can pack onto an undersized midfielder, so I can't see him having the same degree of power in his game as Boak does. If you came back and said he'd be a bit closer to a Lachie Neale type then I could buy that for sure.

Nah, bugger all in it.



Even in his final year of NAB he wasn't some stick figure. I'm not sure if the 4-5cm's height difference will be all that telling.

 

[loki04]

No I'm not - he was clearly bigger than Bianco is now when he debuted and even back then you could clearly see he had a big frame for a 6 footer.

In the end there's only so much bulk you can pack onto an undersized midfielder, so I can't see him having the same degree of power in his game as Boak does. If you came back and said he'd be a bit closer to a Lachie Neale type then I could buy that for sure.

He is almost identical in build as bianco at the same age so yes you are forgetting, he is also not even that big framed at 184cm.

Ever seen a power lifting comp? Heaps of them are short assess. Power can be trained and built.

178cm vs 184cm yes they have a height difference but Boak doesn't use it.

 

[loki04]

Nah, bugger all in it.

View attachment 1136652

Even in his final year of NAB he wasn't some stick figure. I'm not sure if the 4-5cm's height difference will be all that telling.

Travis Boak doesn't even use his height he isn't bont or fyfe etc.

He is a gut running inside, outside mid burrows in and if not spreads hard both ways.

These are attributes the hard running and hard attack I would like to see Bianco develop.

 

[jackcass]

Travis Boak doesn't even use his height he isn't bont or fyfe etc.

He is a gut running inside, outside mid burrows in and if not spreads hard both ways.

These are attributes the hard running and hard attack I would like to see Bianco develop.

I agree. Biggest concern I'd have on Bianco would be if he'll ever gain that inside intent Boak seems to have in spades, not his physical attributes.

 

[loki04]

I agree. Biggest concern I'd have on Bianco would be if he'll ever gain that inside intent Boak seems to have in spades, not his physical attributes.

Yup mindset. Can he get there i hope but who knows.

 

[TradeDraft]

Sounds like there could be no Crowd for the Game

 

[Anzacday]

Sounds like there could be no Crowd for the Game

There was over 23,000

 

[Gaben]

Aren't we certain to play finals? Possibly top 4 material. Our President said so.

You may want to but we are not ready to accept mediocrity and incompetence.

..huh?

 

[Gaben]

Disregarding results might be fair enough if there was some evidence of improvement in the near future. Instead it’s more of the same timid, slow sideways game but with a few promising youngsters thrown in the mix. You call it a rebuild but what are we building towards? I’m not seeing it.

I didn't say disregard results, I just said that it's unfair for people to be potting PURELY based on the end result of the game. A lot of people have clearly made their minds up about our future direction and offer no objective insight into our performance.

And while I agree the gameplan is too defensive currently, it also nearly got us across the line against a certain top 4 contender while we are a bottom 4 side. Rebuilding the way Essendon did under Matthew Knights clearly isn't sustainable. It looked flashy and impressive for a bit, but it didn't get them anywhere. You have to build a sustainable base just like Roos did with Melbourne.

If we played an aggressive brand of football at the moment, sides like Port would be beating us by 10 goals and what does that do for the confidence and development of the group? Our back half is our strongest element, it's not that surprising that it's what we are playing and building around.

Ultimately though, Graham Wright is in the box alongside Buckley now though. He'll be the deciding factor (as he should be) on whether we are heading in the right direction. My gut feel is that he knows Buckley is the best available much to the dismay of the 'attacking football facebook squad'.

 

[PonsfordMagpie]

Following on from my post on Sunday, some further thoughts came to my mind.

We should consider giving De Goey and Maynard more time in the midfield, particularly JDG who was effectively frozen out of the game for 115 minutes on Sunday, before doing some damage in the last five minutes of the game.

Further, we can't keep relying on Pendlebury and Sidebottom to carry our midfield forever. The fact that they're still so pivotal to our midfield core is an indictment.

Still can't believe the amount of times players looked sideways rather than kicking to a one on one contest. The one that really stood out was in the third quarter when McCreery to the attacking 50 on his own, and Sidebottom overlooked him and opted to kick to the wing instead. This is clearly a coaching directive.

I'm starting to warm to the idea of recruiting Stengle in the mid-season draft despite his past off field troubles. He'd fit in nicely as a crumbing forward which we've lacked in spades for a long time.

 

[ppoiter]

I didn't say disregard results, I just said that it's unfair for people to be potting PURELY based on the end result of the game. A lot of people have clearly made their minds up about our future direction and offer no objective insight into our performance.

And while I agree the gameplan is too defensive currently, it also nearly got us across the line against a certain top 4 contender while we are a bottom 4 side. Rebuilding the way Essendon did under Matthew Knights clearly isn't sustainable. It looked flashy and impressive for a bit, but it didn't get them anywhere. You have to build a sustainable base just like Roos did with Melbourne.

If we played an aggressive brand of football at the moment, sides like Port would be beating us by 10 goals and what does that do for the confidence and development of the group? Our back half is our strongest element, it's not that surprising that it's what we are playing and building around.

Ultimately though, Graham Wright is in the box alongside Buckley now though. He'll be the deciding factor (as he should be) on whether we are heading in the right direction. My gut feel is that he knows Buckley is the best available much to the dismay of the 'attacking football facebook squad'.

I don’t think you did actually make that distinction about it not being “purely” about results in the post I quoted ("People need to accept the fact we are in a rebuild stage, and when you're in a rebuild it's not down to the outcome of individual matches"), but fair enough if that’s what you meant.

I also don’t accept that we’d be much worse off if we took the game on a bit more. I’m only really talking about playing on a bit quicker and looking to move the ball forwards over constantly switching it. You’re expecting people you disagree with to be more objective but your point about having to play defensively or get hidings is pretty subjective. Paul Roos at Melbourne has nothing to do with our situation and I don't see anything in this style of play that sets us up for the future, or is in any way a 'sustainable base'. A base for what exactly?

 

[TradeDraft]

I got a Message from the Government I am Tier 3 as a Guy at the Footy Had Covid.

So my Mum better to get tested in Small Chance I have Covid

 

[ExcitementMachine]

Lucky we are an ordinary side and no one wants to watch...

 

[jathanas]

Following on from my post on Sunday, some further thoughts came to my mind.

We should consider giving De Goey and Maynard more time in the midfield, particularly JDG who was effectively frozen out of the game for 115 minutes on Sunday, before doing some damage in the last five minutes of the game.

Further, we can't keep relying on Pendlebury and Sidebottom to carry our midfield forever. The fact that they're still so pivotal to our midfield core is an indictment.

Still can't believe the amount of times players looked sideways rather than kicking to a one on one contest. The one that really stood out was in the third quarter when McCreery to the attacking 50 on his own, and Sidebottom overlooked him and opted to kick to the wing instead. This is clearly a coaching directive.

I'm starting to warm to the idea of recruiting Stengle in the mid-season draft despite his past off field troubles. He'd fit in nicely as a crumbing forward which we've lacked in spades for a long time.

Sidebottom is currently a pale shadow of the 2018 version. Still runs all day and I suspect covers the same ground he used to but his impact has dropped alarmingly.

Pendles had his worst game for the club IMO. He appeared restricted like he's carrying something.

Neither can change the course of a game.

Agree on Maynard and JDG having spells on the ball as circumstances require.

Elliott returning will transform our forward line, the question is how long will he stay in the team before he's out again. If our recruiters don't at least seriously consider Stengle they're not doing their job.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

If our recruiters don't at least seriously consider Stengle they're not doing their job,

Surely we’ll take Stengle. It’s just a matter now of whether it’s Stengle +... I suspect it’ll just be Stengle.