Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Adelaide' started by Cleric, Sep 30, 2017.
Probably when Lever's defection to Melbourne is formal.
(Log in to remove this ad.)
I wonder if we'll just announce it next time as soon as we know?
Assuming there'll be a next time.
What am I saying. Of course there will.
There's a fair amount of truth to this post.
Clarkson was in Hardwick's pocket all week and you just knew they were gonna come up with something that would skittle us.
The ruck thing I mentioned earlier is just unforgivable. We had a ruckman with a clear ascendancy, and allowed - or, worse, instructed him - to finesse tap the ball down Richmond players' throats all day (while his direct opponent virtually acted as an extra midfielder for them). How ******* dumb can you get?
I mean, if Matthew Clarke isn't being asked serious questions about that, we might as well pack it all in.
This bloke has outlasted Craig and Sanderson by the way. He's gonna outlive cockroaches at that club.
That was insane.
Our ruck was completely dominant - but Richmond profited! And we did nothing about it, all game.
Remember Camporeale in the week before Geelong beat us? He said we played our game, and we didn’t care what the opposition did.
That stupid arrogance was on display over the weekend, and it was the single biggest factor in our loss.
We selected the worst possible side imaginable to take on Richmond; we picked a team that had massive weaknesses which directly fed their strengths.
I was going to do an in depth post on the loss, but I can’t be ******.
Our dumb refusal to blood players during the year once against hurt us - exactly the same as it did last year.
Our moronic tall/slow forward line killed us, exactly like it did against Hawthorn.
Our stoppage set ups were a joke - they constantly had players free at ball ups, and even at centre bounces.
Our kick ins from a point were predictable and dumb - same as they’ve been most of the year.
Picking a defense which completely ignored the oppositions forward line buried us.
The same arrogance and short sighted stupidity that caused our mid season slump was the cause of the weekend’s dismal performance.
The players can’t hold their heads high, but that game was lost by the coaching panel, no question.
The arrogance and the audacity of the AFC to insist on no changes each week when winning when there were some times during the year we needed to trial a few players in order to have a strong squad in September.
By the time the finals came around and we had injuries we didnt get the games into players to play them in a grand final.
With that said, it still wouldnt have mattered the mindset of the playing group was shot. 9 points down at HT and they couldnt throw everything at it after HT, there was a small part of me that tried hard to believe that the Pies game was going to be used as template of how to come from behind at the G at HT. But nothing, we just gave up and fumbled our way to an 8 goal loss.
This for me is the post of the thread.
Succinctly summarizes all that is f**ked up with the AFC in season 2017.
From WWOS online:
"Adelaide captain Taylor 'Tex' Walker was furious while other players allegedly wanted Jake Lever omitted from the side to play in the AFL's finals series after news emerged the Crows defender wanted out to join Melbourne next season."
If true, would explain a lot about the stony faces in the rooms at half-time as players sat by themselves on the floor, as well as reported Crows' squabbling from Richmond's Grigg.
The truth will out sometime.
Bloody hilarious, thanks for the late-night laugh for a Crows insomniac.
Reading between the lines and observing some body language over the past week or two at least, there has been reason for one to suspect there has been trouble in the camp, which has now been confirmed. Crows staff and leadership need to make sure this is dealt with before next year, as it, along with selections which may have been related, no doubt was a factor in our Grand final performance.
Sorry folks, but this Clarkson thing is a nonsense. We played an unchanged team and unchanged game style the whole finals series (even before that).
You lost it at the selection table. And Pyke did nothing from the coaches box at any stage to alter the game outcome. It was that simple.
We knew your second quarters all year were unbelievable (percentage of 180). We also knew if we were within 2-3 goals at halftime then we were in with a massive show as we had been smashing teams in the second half.
Sent from my iPad using righteous man power
I naively thought player contracts wouldn't impact match day but obviously they do. So how do we stop this from happening again in the future. If they haven't signed by round 20 banish them from the club?
Watched bits of the game again last night
I honestly think our guys just thought we would win and did not respect the opposition. There is a bit if champagne football at the start of the game to show this ie a distinct lack if defensive running.
Watched Dons presser and I think he knows this as well.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
Its more who the player is. If Harrison Wigg hasnt signed by round 20 who cares?
That it is/was a top 10 player makes it all so much harder. There are no winners. I always believe you play your best and you sit everybody down and manage it. The players should be more professional about it. If they themselves have ever thought of greener fields then why should they get upset when someone else does.
Once again for me its how you manage the issue rather than the issue itself
Was posted in the Lever thread, someone from Fox has spoken to players and they say this is rubbish
I agree with all of this, good stuff, apart from the assertion that not picking players throughout the year hurt us. Who exactly should have played (presumably for Otten)? Milera? Showed he wasn't up to it in pressure matches (yet anyway). Menzel? Lol. Wigg? His 2 way running not good enough. Thommo? Double lol. Other players performances in the SANFL didn't really warrant a call up. I would've played Hampton, but it wouldn't have mattered due to the other reasons you mentioned.
Note also that the same structure resulted in us defeating Richmond by 13 goals at AO, so I can see why they would back it in to some extent.
I thought we had 1 too many talls going into the game, but the biggest disappointment to me was that there was NONE of the intensity and ferocity at the contest and the body that we'd seen in the 2 other finals, and zero composure with the ball. If we'd had that, our selection issues wouldn't have mattered nearly as much
Nobody's saying you made wholesale changes, but you're kidding yourself if you think there wasn't elements of what Clarkson did to us earlier in the year brought to the table.
Sorry for intruding, but any coach worth their salt would simply have been able to watch vision of the games Adelaide lost and emulate it. Clarkson's advice was most likely about mental preparation rather than anything strategic.
Must be a lot of shit coaches then
There wasn't. That game style was the same for the last 6 weeks. The Geelong loss at Skilled was the catalyst if anything.
You'd never do it (and fair enough to), but if you watched our last two months you'd understand why i'm saying what i'm saying. You seriously believe a catch up at a coaches award night results in a game revision after a full season?
Sent from my SM-J320ZN using Tapatalk
Its probably somewhere in between. Clarkson was interviewed in the lead up to the game and mentioned that they meet up weekly and have done for a long time. It was insinuated Clarkson was in a mentoring type role. And no problem there. If you've got access to any resources that can give an advantage, why not utilise them.
I didn't know it had been posted previously and, yes, there have been conflicting reports/rumours about it.
We'll probably never know the full story.
Not so much confirmed as alluded to, I think. I agree re: body language; half-time shots of the rooms and second half performance certainly reflected weakened effort and maybe player discord.
In another thread I speculated that Walsh should've taken Dangerfield aside at the start of 2015 (PD's last contracted year) and told him to sign on, or rack off to Melbourne for the two first-round draft picks they offered. We'll probably never know if that happened or not, too.
With Lever, around your suggested Round 20, Pyke could've said similar --- sign on or rack off. If Pyke knew he was leaving, he would've had time to put more games, say, into Keath (or another defender of his choice --- at that stage we still had Smith).
While players can say "I'll decide at the end of the year" (which usually means, "I'm going"), the Club can say, "Well, sorry, we need to know now" and if they don't get a commitment the Coach can do what he thinks is best for the Club/team.
All good, just letting you know the latest developments
I will never understand how this can happen in a Grand Final...what a bunch of mental pygmies to even think this way.
- why did they pick Otten when the set up was so obviously stupid? He's a bog average player yet we made room for him. Structure is useless if the players filling it are substandard.
- why did they pick a 3rd tall, slow defender when the opposition had only one key forward. Different if he was athletic and not a cancer on the playing group but sounds like half the team didn't want Lever and here is a game where he had no role.
- I love Greenwood but he needs to repay a lot of broken trust after declaring himself fit to play
- Tex and the other leaders should've manufactured some aggression to stop the momentum of the game but whimpered out and just didn't give a crap IN A GRAND FINAL...that is their legacy now unless they can win one.