- Aug 21, 2007
- 31,669
- 99,013
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Aston Villa, San Antonio Spurs
I love Brendan Lade like a brother, but he simply must be moved on.
Our forward entry has been s**t for years. It's undeniable.
In 2014 we looked great going forward because our running power meant we'd have options everywhere, and even if we didn't, we had Schulz and Wingard slotting them like clockwork from the 3rd row.
In 2015 when we started to have to contend regularly with teams who would sit back on us and deny us the slingshot, we had no answers. It's been 4 frustrating as heck years watching an increasingly talented forwardline struggle to have much impact at all because of the lack of structure and support, to the point where during this year both Chad Wingard and Charlie Dixon have been subject to calls for an SANFL stint.
However that ultimately is based on an overly defensive overall team strategy, and is ultimately not Lade's fault. He's expected to do a lot without much support up there.
What is Lade's fault is the obviously coached decision making once we get within range, with 2 particular issues that have cropped up this year grinding my gears down to a barely protruding nub.
Issue 1 - The thing about Port Adelaide is, they always try'n walk it in.
There appears to have been some sort of recognition over the off season that we take a lot of low percentage shots, and that's why we're inaccurate.
The apparent solution to this has been to try to generate higher percentage shots, but not by something as bold as say, keeping players forward, or using team movement to create leading space, no. It's been to get into a position where we have a low to medium percentage shot, and then dink the ball to a congested area 25m out straight in front.
This has been an abject failure. What usually results is that we give up a shot from 50m on a medium angle for what is essentially maybe a 25% chance of the likes of Dixon clunking a pack mark and then having a shot from 25m at no angle.
I just don't think it's a higher percentage option in any way to repeatedly sacrifice a shot at goal for a low percentage chance of a better shot at goal.
You'd hope AFL footballers can make the distance from 50m. If you're in range with a mark or free kick, unless there is someone in an acre of space by himself in a better position, take the f***ing shot. If the F50 is congested, take the shot.
Issue 2 - The checksides from slight angles when a drop punt would be a far better option
While i'll admit this isn't only a Port Adelaide problem, can we f*** this stupid idea off for good?
Again, in theory it makes sense. If you're on a slight angle, the checkside opens up the goalface for you.
The glaringly obvious issue to literally everyone watching is, that a checkside brings in an entire new variable to the shot, which is the curl of the ball through the air. Now instead of just having to kick it with the right accuracy hard enough that it will go through, you need to combine a specific accuracy AND a specific distance or it won't go through.
Some players are great at checksides and can kick them reliably. Those players should go for it. For other players, like a certain future number 1 with minutes to go in a Showdown, should just kick a f***ing drop punt.
While traditionally, you'd think of something like that as something that would have the forwards coach tearing strips off of Ollie, instead we got this, as posted by Nemesis in the Wines thread.
I mean f***. It's literally your job to teach players about good forward craft. Why are they getting away with increasing the degree of difficulty on their set shots for no good reason? Why are our players so low on confidence with their set shots that one of them would checkside from 20m out on a slight angle?
These two issues are completely within the remit of Brendon Lade as a forwards coach. We're getting them wrong. It's obvious we're getting them wrong. It hasn't been working all year. We struggle to score enough with our gameplan without introducing these dumb, low percentage options to our scoring opportunities.
Move Lade elsewhere or move him on.
Our forward entry has been s**t for years. It's undeniable.
In 2014 we looked great going forward because our running power meant we'd have options everywhere, and even if we didn't, we had Schulz and Wingard slotting them like clockwork from the 3rd row.
In 2015 when we started to have to contend regularly with teams who would sit back on us and deny us the slingshot, we had no answers. It's been 4 frustrating as heck years watching an increasingly talented forwardline struggle to have much impact at all because of the lack of structure and support, to the point where during this year both Chad Wingard and Charlie Dixon have been subject to calls for an SANFL stint.
However that ultimately is based on an overly defensive overall team strategy, and is ultimately not Lade's fault. He's expected to do a lot without much support up there.
What is Lade's fault is the obviously coached decision making once we get within range, with 2 particular issues that have cropped up this year grinding my gears down to a barely protruding nub.
Issue 1 - The thing about Port Adelaide is, they always try'n walk it in.
There appears to have been some sort of recognition over the off season that we take a lot of low percentage shots, and that's why we're inaccurate.
The apparent solution to this has been to try to generate higher percentage shots, but not by something as bold as say, keeping players forward, or using team movement to create leading space, no. It's been to get into a position where we have a low to medium percentage shot, and then dink the ball to a congested area 25m out straight in front.
This has been an abject failure. What usually results is that we give up a shot from 50m on a medium angle for what is essentially maybe a 25% chance of the likes of Dixon clunking a pack mark and then having a shot from 25m at no angle.
I just don't think it's a higher percentage option in any way to repeatedly sacrifice a shot at goal for a low percentage chance of a better shot at goal.
You'd hope AFL footballers can make the distance from 50m. If you're in range with a mark or free kick, unless there is someone in an acre of space by himself in a better position, take the f***ing shot. If the F50 is congested, take the shot.
Issue 2 - The checksides from slight angles when a drop punt would be a far better option
While i'll admit this isn't only a Port Adelaide problem, can we f*** this stupid idea off for good?
Again, in theory it makes sense. If you're on a slight angle, the checkside opens up the goalface for you.
The glaringly obvious issue to literally everyone watching is, that a checkside brings in an entire new variable to the shot, which is the curl of the ball through the air. Now instead of just having to kick it with the right accuracy hard enough that it will go through, you need to combine a specific accuracy AND a specific distance or it won't go through.
Some players are great at checksides and can kick them reliably. Those players should go for it. For other players, like a certain future number 1 with minutes to go in a Showdown, should just kick a f***ing drop punt.
While traditionally, you'd think of something like that as something that would have the forwards coach tearing strips off of Ollie, instead we got this, as posted by Nemesis in the Wines thread.
I mean f***. It's literally your job to teach players about good forward craft. Why are they getting away with increasing the degree of difficulty on their set shots for no good reason? Why are our players so low on confidence with their set shots that one of them would checkside from 20m out on a slight angle?
These two issues are completely within the remit of Brendon Lade as a forwards coach. We're getting them wrong. It's obvious we're getting them wrong. It hasn't been working all year. We struggle to score enough with our gameplan without introducing these dumb, low percentage options to our scoring opportunities.
Move Lade elsewhere or move him on.
