Autopsy Round 6, 2021: Port Adelaide v St.Kilda

[snails13]

Having a look at the last few weeks I think last year was an exception to the rule and that we need this year to grow and develop through our players and game plan etc to be able to climb in 2022+

gotta think we have a new coach now in his second season with 7 of your best 22 being acquirerecently from other clubs and missing about the same in key players

this year is gong to suck but will get better

2022 Fixture will be favourable with a bottom 4 finish

 

[Crusty Undies]

I think the issue is that both Long (and to a lesser extent Battle) aren't as good as many on here think they are. Both show a bit, have good traits but like hundreds before them are missing other skills to make them really shine.

Better than Aaron Siposs, not as good as Jason Blake.

Long is leagues behind Battle imo. Battle was in the running for a rising star when he played CHB. Long would be lucky to have received a nomination even if he weren't recruited as a mature ager.

 

[#gosaintas]

Just for my football education, can someone provide an explantion/rationale for grouping forwards, especially grouping marking forwards?

when the leads start. which for us they never do, it's much easier to block for your leading team

Jb. nothing wrong with forwards being in a group. Most clubs would do that. Doubt at training they then just bomb it to a group. Now if that what those famous track watchers said they are watching with zero eyes open.

I went to training last week and that's exactly what they were practising. In turns, the mids were thrown a loose ball by Ratten and they streamed forward while King and McKernan signalled for the ball to be kicked on their heads. Next play those two went to the side and Carlisle and Wood replaced them. Same play same deal. Kicked on their heads. No leads for the entire exercise. Bombed to the goalsquare.

 

[Yawkey way]

Re the long kick out, it can work a lot better but it's not just a matter of roosting it as far as you can. You need to still kick it to a good spot where you have a good chance to win it. Howard looks like he is at the driving range when he's kicking out

I posted that link earlier but our stats man is adamant it was a looser before you were able to just run 10 and roost it and that change actually made it even more so.

I don’t know what’s changed since the stand on the mark rule but my guess is it’s only increased the effectiveness of maintaining possession so going short to a target is the logical play. I can only think that we’re kicking long because we lack the skills to play out hitting targets.

Sometimes it’s what they don’t say, clearly when he talks about outcomes in relation to the kick out he’s talking about maintaining possession and it leading to a scoring opportunity. If we were able to ask him maybe the run your ten and roost it often ends in a stoppage and we see that as better than us turning it over 50 out from goal. I’d love he hear someone ask ratts why we’re doing it.

 

[plugger66]

when the leads start. which for us they never do, it's much easier to block for your leading team

I went to training last week and that's exactly what they were practising. In turns, the mids were thrown a loose ball by Ratten and they streamed forward while King and McKernan signalled for the ball to be kicked on their heads. Next play those two went to the side and Carlisle and Wood replaced them. Same play same deal. Kicked on their heads. No leads for the entire exercise. Bombed to the goalsquare.

Well for a side that doesn’t practice leading they did well in the first quarter on Sunday. As if they don’t practice leading. They also would practice the option of setting up for long kicks. When did two mean a pack or a group as being described

 

[#gosaintas]

Well for a side that doesn’t practice leading they did well in the first quarter on Sunday. As if they don’t practice leading. They also would practice the option of setting up for long kicks. When did two mean a pack or a group as being described

okay

 

[pebblesofsand]

Battle has more “potential” than Blake did but hasn’t really been allowed to show it with being a mr fix it a such a young age.

Don't doubt that Battle has "potential" and a better skill set than Blake but I'm yet to be convinced he has the drive and discipline to achieve a level that actually matches his potential. Exactly the same thing applies to Long but to a greater extent.

Its irrelevant where people are named to play - its the outputs they achieve when asked to play a position. If Battle is as good as people on here suggest, he'd be getting 20+ possessions a game playing on the wing.

He's got a great tank, good hands, excellent kick but he's simply not an athletic type - and that creates problems if you are expecting someone of his size and skill set to hold down a key position at HB and at HF.

 

[plugger66]

okay

Well that means so much to me. Is 2 a group? Did we take 4 marks on the lead in the first term on Sunday? Do you logically think they don’t practice leading? Do you think you may have gone there when they were practicing marking from a long kick? I know the aim of many is to find all the faults possible even if it’s illogical.

 

[plugger66]

Don't doubt that Battle has "potential" and a better skill set than Blake but I'm yet to be convinced he has the drive and discipline to achieve a level that actually matches his potential. Exactly the same thing applies to Long but to a greater extent.

Its irrelevant where people are named to play - its the outputs they achieve when asked to play a position. If Battle is as good as people on here suggest, he'd be getting 20+ possessions a game playing on the wing.

He's got a great tank, good hands, excellent kick but he's simply not an athletic type - and that creates problems if you are expecting someone of his size and skill set to hold down a key position at HB and at HF.

Yet you expect him to get 20 on the wing. I’m not sure how he will end up but it certainly does matter where you play

 

[#gosaintas]

Well that means so much to me. Is 2 a group? Did we take 4 marks on the lead in the first term on Sunday? Do you logically think they don’t practice leading? Do you think you may have gone there when they were practicing marking from a long kick? I know the aim of many is to find all the faults possible even if it’s illogical.

Of course I have no idea what they try when I'm not there. I was just commenting on what I saw last week. The week before the session I watched focussed on short kicking and maintaining possession. I commented on the day of each training session what i witnessed. Was not intending to be contraversial or upset anybody.
I have no idea what we did in the first term last week. I taped the game and will never watch it. Why waste my time watching them if they won't try. Have seen enough of their soft underbelly already this year. I will do the same this week too.
I will turn up to training again this week and hope to see some leading and forward craft.

 

[AirWinmar]

I posted that link earlier but our stats man is adamant it was a looser before you were able to just run 10 and roost it and that change actually made it even more so.

I don’t know what’s changed since the stand on the mark rule but my guess is it’s only increased the effectiveness of maintaining possession so going short to a target is the logical play. I can only think that we’re kicking long because we lack the skills to play out hitting targets.

Sometimes it’s what they don’t say, clearly when he talks about outcomes in relation to the kick out he’s talking about maintaining possession and it leading to a scoring opportunity. If we were able to ask him maybe the run your ten and roost it often ends in a stoppage and we see that as better than us turning it over 50 out from goal. I’d love he hear someone ask ratts why we’re doing it.

Yeah that makes sense, its much easier to maintain possession with the stand on the mark rule. I can't believe where not doing it because we don't have the skills. We did it against Carlton well in the preseason game. I also can't believe that most afl players wouldn't be confident hitting a 25-35 meter kick

 

[plugger66]

Of course I have no idea what they try when I'm not there. I was just commenting on what I saw last week. The week before the session I watched focussed on short kicking and maintaining possession. I commented on the day of each training session what i witnessed. Was not intending to be contraversial or upset anybody.
I have no idea what we did in the first term last week. I taped the game and will never watch it. Why waste my time watching them if they won't try. Have seen enough of their soft underbelly already this year. I will do the same this week too.
I will turn up to training again this week and hope to see some leading and forward craft.

Fair enough.

 

[PoppedCorn]

Does Battle replace Carlisle permanently moving forward?

I'd be for it
Reckon he did a decent job when Jake was Injured a while back

Just make a decision
If Jake is stuffed and can't play Chb then just give it to battle and play him there perm as he has proven he can do it.
Or
Leave him fwd, but stop dickng around with him
Make a decision.

I'd play him at ff and make king stay at chf
But I do like him back

 

[Saintbloke]

I think the most likely explanation is that King doesn't have the conditioning to play this leading game all day. I would also hazard a guess that he got through his entire junior career just jumping over opposition defenders without much leading required.

You're right there. I think it was expected that King could continue to play a forward style like his junior days but better. Once at AFL level, the opposition KPDs are just as a tall, strong bodied and stronger marks, and so his main strength is nullified, that's why he needs to get more leading in his play. At this stage I would play Battle deep as FF for an entire game.

 

[Ephemeral Hope]

Marshall makes a difference, but he's never been a hitouts to advantage guy, even in 2019 when he broke out as a ruckman. Ryder hits it to where our blokes are AND where the other teams blokes are not. As a hit out man, Ryder is in the best five or six I've ever seen.

As a ruckman, Marshall is more a Luke Darcy type. Good personal clearance man, extra mid around the ground, excellent contested mark everywhere.

We just need Paddy to teach Marshall and hopefully our next ruckman after him that skill. Where you tap the ball is nothing to do with your body or strength, it’s all in the mind. That’s why he can still be damaging at his advanced age. If he can impart that knowledge onto Ro and whoever’s next he’s worth 100x more than we paid

 

[True Blue Saint]

Bang there ya go!!!

This is the most damning thing that Ratten said in the presser.

He has to take some accountability on behalf of Rath and the coaching staff. OWN IT. Admit we weren't prepared.

Trying to pin the lack of preparedness for the rule changes on the players is farcical.

 

[True Blue Saint]

Was illuminating watching both coaches press conferences.

When asked about Port’s crazy high uncontested possession numbers, Ratts muttered a rhetorical question about him not being sure it’s a good look for our game or something along those lines to have those high numbers of uncontested possessions. It’s clearly not something philosophically he likes as a coach and it showed in the press conference and shows in the way we are playing under him.

Sadly, with the new man-on-the-mark rule and less rotations, uncontested possessions is something we (and all clubs) simply have to do better as it conserves energy and tires out the opposition. Problem is, to execute a possession game effectively requires skill, training, decision-making and composure to pull off: you need to train for this constantly, over a long time to get results. It also requires patience, composure and intelligence on positioning to execute on match day. Our guys, even if they try and hold possession either stuff up a kick, lose patience and bomb it long, or stop leading, again leading to the long bomb.

Hinkley was different, praising the composure of the team, acknowledging he knew we’d come out with pressure but confident that his players would have the composure and skill to kick it around, keep possession, render our pressure ineffective, and then cash in when we inevitably lose energy and our pressure drops.

It was “how to beat St Kilda 101”. If it wasn’t already clear that, competition-wide, there is a very clear blueprint on how to beat us, then listening to press conferences like this dispels that.

Matching the above with Ratts admitting the new rules have hurt us, you’d hope that the likes of Rath are feeling the heat from our President. We seem to be the only team playing the game the same way we were last year.

Something like this (adapting tactics to newly implemented AFL rules) is surely right bang in the middle of Rath’s job description. On any measure he has failed dismally so far (I still have faith trust it can be turned around.... but we need a complete re-think on how we play from here on in).

This is a terrific post.

We've been figured out, and we have no Plan B.

It's glaringly obvious.

 

[bergholt]

I think you missed the sarcasm and spin on positivity as were were having a bit of a laugh and a joke at that point

Oh yeah, sorry, mine was smart arse too - should probably have added an emoji!

 

[gringo2011]

Don't doubt that Battle has "potential" and a better skill set than Blake but I'm yet to be convinced he has the drive and discipline to achieve a level that actually matches his potential. Exactly the same thing applies to Long but to a greater extent.

Its irrelevant where people are named to play - its the outputs they achieve when asked to play a position. If Battle is as good as people on here suggest, he'd be getting 20+ possessions a game playing on the wing.

He's got a great tank, good hands, excellent kick but he's simply not an athletic type - and that creates problems if you are expecting someone of his size and skill set to hold down a key position at HB and at HF.

Battles stats are very good and for his age and experience he's shown heaps. I don't get the hate coming for him. Playing him on a wing was moronic but any decent coach would be building him up in one role. Since moving back he's had 16, 19 and 14 possessions a KPB. He's tracking at Jake Lever level at the same age and he was better managed.

 

[StCicatriz]

This is the most damning thing that Ratten said in the presser.

He has to take some accountability on behalf of Rath and the coaching staff. OWN IT. Admit we weren't prepared.

Trying to pin the lack of preparedness for the rule changes on the players is farcical.

the only other time I've heard a coach publicly acknowledge something like this was Ross Lyon after the pre-season debacle that backfired massively. he never recovered from it.

hopefully ratts can..

 

[StFly]

This is a terrific post.

We've been figured out, and we have no Plan B.

It's glaringly obvious.

Look at least year and lead in under "different" interpretations with the stand rule, by and large we were mobile and getting separation where the "hack"sort of disposals were generally to actual advantage even if they didn't hit the actual intended target. Hence the absurd goals from 10m out stat.

Look at then the Eagles game this year sicne we had a #1 ruck in Marshall and round 1 was a wet ball slog, the eagles killed us on the outside, but the second that dried up, game was ours basically, they broke first.

Dees didn't break, Port didn't break, Tigers didn't break, these teams also generally love outside runners and retaining possession on the outside to work angles whilst we clump to crate pressure on the carrier.

It's not that we've no plan B, it's that plan B isn't what we need it to be, as the focus isn't on the outside, it's still focused on creating that contest, when the focus should be different; finding touch, working angles, killing the contest and havign a breather for 5 mins of "no, our time now" and actually figuring out a workable zoning during a match, just something different instead of contest centre, contest CHF, contest BP, contest, contest, contest oh, 3v 1 I50 rebound as lop sided contest meets poor execution...

 

[True Blue Saint]

Look at least year and lead in under "different" interpretations with the stand rule, by and large we were mobile and getting separation where the "hack" sort of disposals were generally to actual advantage even if they didn't hit the actual intended target. Hence the absurd goals from 10m out stat.

Look at then the Eagles game this year since we had a #1 ruck in Marshall and round 1 was a wet ball slog, the eagles killed us on the outside, but the second that dried up, game was ours basically, they broke first.

Dees didn't break, Port didn't break, Tigers didn't break, these teams also generally love outside runners and retaining possession on the outside to work angles whilst we clump to crate pressure on the carrier.

It's not that we've no plan B, it's that plan B isn't what we need it to be, as the focus isn't on the outside, it's still focused on creating that contest, when the focus should be different; finding touch, working angles, killing the contest and having a breather for 5 mins of "no, our time now" and actually figuring out a workable zoning during a match, just something different instead of contest centre, contest CHF, contest BP, contest, contest, contest oh, 3v 1 I50 rebound as lop sided contest meets poor execution...

The working angles bit you mention in the last paragraph is huge with the new man on the mark rule.

That little 45 degree, 25-30m pass in to the corridor can open up the whole ground and aid transition forward.

We just go long to a contest down the line. So draining.

 

[True Blue Saint]

the only other time I've heard a coach publicly acknowledge something like this was Ross Lyon after the pre-season debacle that backfired massively. he never recovered from it.

hopefully ratts can..

Remember under the likes of GT & RL it felt like the players not only bled for the club, but would die for one another.

Hamill, Lenny, Roo, Bakes, Goddard, Blakey, Sam Fisher. The list is endless.

The team was built around camaraderie and trust in one another.

We don't have that now. We have a team of individuals. And that falls on the coach IMO.

 

[LiterallyNobody]

the only other time I've heard a coach publicly acknowledge something like this was Ross Lyon after the pre-season debacle that backfired massively. he never recovered from it.

hopefully ratts can..

Pre season debacle?

 

[Kennedy84]

I thought Hills tackling intent was a lot stronger, he brought down Lycett early on which was pretty impressive, he definitely cares about his performance.

Derm made some interesting comments throughout the game, it was almost as if he had read bigfooty. (Re Sebb Ross and Hill)