Was impressed tonight

[macca23]

Originally posted by tinman

How did Skippy and Schuey play?

How were Bodes foot skills? He finds the footy but last week just wasted it. If he can improve there he will be a champ.

I'm also interested in how Hentschell played and Begley if he got any game time.

Skippy - really pleased with him. Played just short of a half, got plenty of it and goes in hard.

Schuback - not a lot of game time - did a few good things.

Hentschel - some very clever stuff from FF, with tap-ons and ruckwork around goals etc. Delivery to him wasn't good. Showed that he has got it at this level.

Begley - didn't play.

 

[macca23]

Originally posted by jod23
Anyone who was at the game, can you tell me how some of the Eagles went. I know Paul Johnson, our young CHF kicked a couple of goals? How did McDougall play at FF and where was Jakovich playing as he was named our best. Just anything you noticed from a WC point of view would be handy, oh and dont tell me we sucked because I already knew that...something constructive.

I also read a few of you saying you wouldnt have been bothered had you lost the game? If I were a Crows fan I would have been very annoyed had the Crows lost that game. Looking at both squads, the Crows were near full strength and the Eagles were without Judd, Cousins, Gardiner, Chick, Matera, Embley, Wirrpunda just to name a few. Not to mention we rarely beat Adelaide at AAMI with a full squad anyway so to lose to a well below full strength squad would have been a concern.

However an 88 point margin seemed pretty fair. Should go down to a couple of goals with everyone back, still wouldnt count on WC beating either Adelaide side at AAMI though.

Johnson played at FF and he looks like he has a heap of promise. Bassett was far too good for him but he in turn he was far too good for Perrie.

Jakovich played in defence in a pocket. He was in the Eagles best players by default, as he did a few good things but wouldn't have won his position.

Seaby was the shining light for the Eagles. He is a ruck star of the future who gets the ball around the ground and can play up forward. I'd love to have him.

Fletcher ran and ran and worked his back-side off to be their next best.

Kerr got the ball, but dear oh dear, one of the most innefectual lairy displays once he had it. Normally a very good player, he left his brain at home I feel.

Others showed little bits and pieces, but overall there weren't too many who would have been proud of their efforts - the intensity was insipid, apart from the 3rd quarter.

McDougall will probably never get a big a caning again in his career as he got from McGregor last night at CHF. He was thrashed.

As for your other comments, I agrree with you. Crow supporters who were saying that they wouldnt have been bothered had we lost the game can only be described as very easily pleased. West Coast never fire here even with a top side, and to come here without those 7 players, while we were virtually at full strength, should have meant a handsome win to the Crows, as it did. A loss would have spelt a long long winter.

 

[macca23]

Re: SOUTH ADELAIDE BOYS

Originally posted by Panther Power
HOW DID THE SOUTH BOYS GO LAST NIGHT? DID THEY GET MUCH OF A RUN APPART FROM GOODY?

GOODWIN
DOUGHTY
SMART
TORNEY
CLARKE

I hear you, I hear you!!! Stop shouting!!

Goodwin - superb. Nothing short of superb. BOG.

Doughty - replaced Reilly when he was injured in the 2nd quarter and really put his hand up. Went in hard, got the ball and used it well.

Smart. Enjoyed the gallop and got better and better as teh game progressed. Still got it.

Torney - only got just over a quarter but was impeccably errorless in the time he did play. Should be in our best 22.

Clarke - had a good game and actually took three marks uncontested.

 

[macca23]

I just thought I'd repost my match report on this thread, as it is probably a more appropriate one. See below.

Final scores

Adelaide 17 -16

West Coast 4 -6

A final margin of 88 points in what proved to be a very one-sided game.

Adelaide's mid-field dominated from the very first bounce and in the first quarter it was all the Crows with them leading 4-7 to 1-0 at the first change.

Adelaide's intensity was first class, West Coast's deplorable. my only criticism was that there was still far too many leads to the boundary rather than down the corridor.

Surprisingly Perrie started on the bench and the forward 6 were Welsh, Hentschel, Stevens, Carey, Johncock and McLeod. Johncock was outstanding in this first quarter, with all the forwards with the exception of Welsh very prominent.

The second quarter produced one of the poorest spectacles ever seen at this level. Totally error-ridden with Adelaide playing wider than you could possibly imagine. I was 25 rows back and I was involved in 3 passages of play myself!!! We managed a mere 6 scoring shots (4-2) from 20 entries into the forward line for the quarter. As a spectacle - disgraceful.

On top of that Reilly copped one to his bad shoulder and had to go off after burning on his wing. The official word is that it is only a ligament sprain and he should be right by round 1. Hope so because he was oozing class and was the best user of the ball on the ground.

West Coast came out to play after half time but could not find a winner in attack. McGregore slaughtered McDougall - I mean slaughtered - and Ben Hart was superb on the last line of defence with top support from Bassett and Edwards. I should have mentioned Massie who was as mean as cat sh*t and absolutely fearless while Smarty ran himself into form.

Doughty, who replaced Reilly, grabbed his chance with both hands and was as physical as I've ever seen him while getting a lot of the ball and using it well. Ronnie Burns came on in this quarter and added great zip from the forward pocket setting up 2 of our 4 goals for the quarter.

Perrie came on during this quarter and played a very stupid one and a half quarters at FB from that point on. He is not a defender's ********.. Skipworth joined the mid-field party and let the selectors know he was around as did Torney who looked all class from HB

The last quarter was all Crows who by this stage had fully deteriorated into their round the boundary game at all costs. The criss-crossing in defence was kept to a minimum and done well when it was done. The biggest disappointment was a failure in general to centre the ball when ahead of center, which really was my only criticism of the night, with teh exception of Perri's placement at FB

Best Players

Goodwin - Outstanding with 34 disposals,. Back to his very very best.
Roo - dominant with 30 disposals but leads to the pockets too much. the only flaw in his game
Macca - at his magical best for the 3 quarters he played
Hart - did he make an error all night?? If he did I can't remember it.
Johncock - the best forward all night and did well well running on the ball.
Mcgregor - did a number on McDougall. They're still picking up the bits of theWest Coast CHF who was craved into little pieces.
Hentschel - looked every bit an AFL player and offered a target all night at FF.

One could virtually say all played well - except Perrie.

 

[no1bankteller]

Originally posted by macca23
Johnson played at FF and he looks like he has a heap of promise. Bassett was far too good for him but he in turn he was far too good for Perrie.

Jakovich played in defence in a pocket. He was in the Eagles best players by default, as he did a few good things but wouldn't have won his position.

Seaby was the shining light for the Eagles. He is a ruck star of the future who gets the ball around the ground and can play up forward. I'd love to have him.

Fletcher ran and ran and worked his back-side off to be their next best.

Kerr got the ball, but dear oh dear, one of the most innefectual lairy displays once he had it. Normally a very good player, he left his brain at home I feel.

Others showed little bits and pieces, but overall there weren't too many who would have been proud of their efforts - the intensity was insipid, apart from the 3rd quarter.

McDougall will probably never get a big a caning again in his career as he got from McGregor last night at CHF. He was thrashed.

As for your other comments, I agrree with you. Crow supporters who were saying that they wouldnt have been bothered had we lost the game can only be described as very easily pleased. West Coast never fire here even with a top side, and to come here without those 7 players, while we were virtually at full strength, should have meant a handsome win to the Crows, as it did. A loss would have spelt a long long winter.

Thank you for the break down on how some of WCE played. It can be tough during the pre-season to gauge how your team is performing when no supporters get to see the game. If we can return the favour all you need to do is ask.

Cheers

PS who played on Carey? Did Quentin Lynch do any good?

 

[macca23]

Originally posted by no1bankteller

PS who played on Carey? Did Quentin Lynch do any good?

A 2 part answer to this one.

Lynch did a reasonably good job - played close to Carey and spoilt at every opportunity.

Once the ball hit the ground, Carey was far too good with the footy smarts, as you would expect, unless it meant there was a reasonable distance of a foot race to the ball.

Lynch did okay, bit so did Carey.

 

[AngelEyes]

Originally posted by macca23
I just thought I'd repost my match report on this thread, as it is probably a more appropriate one. See below.

Final scores

Adelaide 17 -16

West Coast 4 -6

A final margin of 88 points in what proved to be a very one-sided game.

Wow, that really was a blow out in the end! hopefully the confidence from this win will continue into the Showdown! How was the accuracy in this match though...16 points? was it windy down at AAMI last night?

 

[macca23]

Originally posted by AngelEyes
Wow, that really was a blow out in the end! hopefully the confidence from this win will continue into the Showdown! How was the accuracy in this match though...16 points? was it windy down at AAMI last night?

There was a cross breeze blowing to the grandstand side, but it had very little bearing on that number of points - just bad kicking.

 

[maccas_no1]

Good to get a win on the board and good to here a few players are hitting some form, hopefully another win next week against the Power and then get fired up for Rnd 1, Im a lil more fired up today, 2004 bring it on

 

[Jerome]

Originally posted by macca23
The effort was excellent, the game plan crap.

Cornesy and Ebert both said on 5AA the same point that I have made repeatedly - we cannot have Carey at CHF for these reasons.

Cornesy went on to say that all the scribes have made this point - if Adelaide want to go somewhere this year, the they can't have Carey at CHF. His value will be close to goal.

He went on to say that sadly the scribes' criticism is almost like guaranteeing that a certain streak of stubborness within a certain member of the the coaching panel WILL play Carey at CHF regardless of the damage - similar to when we had that pathetic kick-off situation that lost us game after game but the coach wouldn't admit that he had it wrong.

Agreed well summed up.

The man on man huddle/wide, indirect gameplan is a good comparision.

The Carey situation reminds me of 2001 when everyone was screaming for Darren Jarman to play full forward. When Jars finally went forward in the last few rounds - hey presto we looked great!

I hope we move Carey to FF sooner rather than later.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Good to hear that the players lifted their intensity to what will be required for the real stuff ... though can't get too excited about playing an under-manned Weagles. Can't see us missing the finals if Goody, Roo, Macca, Birdman & Reilly stay fit for most of the year, as we will get plenty of midfield drive. Hopefully we can rectify going more direct into the forward line. Given last week's training drill the coaching staff do want to fix this.

 

[Jerome]

Originally posted by Kane McGoodwin
Hopefully we can rectify going more direct into the forward line. Given last week's training drill the coaching staff do want to fix this.

I'm starting to think that was designed to make us kick straight down the wings. Someone will then mark it just outside centre square, but not far out on the boundry. He then has to switch play to the pockets/flank.

Thats how it looked last night, we'll move it straight outside the square but thats it. Once we get to the flank its all over the joint.

We had minimal pressure on us last night yet we still went wide.

We had forwards leading out wide and midfielders waiting for the ball on the wing near the boundry to take marks.

It was clear last night ... they ran to position and followed instruction.

 

[ok.crows]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18
At least this win will shut up ok.crows for a while. You are not a succesfull side because you play good footy in early march. you are good side if you are playing good footy in september.

What the hell do you mean by that ?

I said I wanted to see some form.

As it turned out, that is EXACTLY what the coaches & the club and even the players said too.

I'm glad they delivered. IMO they needed to do well in this game for the sake of their confidence.

I think AFC have planned this pre-season very well.

I don't. They are still going too wide.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Originally posted by Jerome
I'm starting to think that was designed to make us kick straight down the wings. Someone will then mark it just outside centre square, but not far out on the boundry. He then has to switch play to the pockets/flank.

Thats how it looked last night, we'll move it straight outside the square but thats it. Once we get to the flank its all over the joint.

We had minimal pressure on us last night yet we still went wide.

We had forwards leading out wide and midfielders waiting for the ball on the wing near the boundry to take marks.

It was clear last night ... they ran to position and followed instruction.

From my understanding of Ayres' press conference, the players are instructed to go straight where possible, but are to go wid when a player is free.

 

[maccas_no1]

Originally posted by Jerome
THE BAD

At this point in time, in my opinion...Our current gameplan is an unflushed ****. The sooner we press the button and send it out to Bolivar the better.

Everyone around me at the ground was frustrated by the way we went so wide down the wings. This could be a very frustrating year unless they improve the gamne plan over the next few months.

Blight, hell not even Cornes would run with this on their worst days. This thing is totally against what these guys believe in. They just would not touch it.

In the first quarter it didnt look so bad. From defence we would kick it straight down the wings.

When we got to the flank, instead of kicking staright down to the pocket, we would look to deliver it to the centre and kick through CHF.

We have left CHF open for us to either drive the ball through there or try and lead straight up the ground. Most leads were to a pocket.

Carey is playing very wide and leading out to the flanks to ensure this happens.

From the second quarter it got worse. Players would keep leading to the pockets or flanks and being rewarded. We over use the ball and work so damn hard to get a shot at goal or kick accuratley. Our forwards worked hard to keep it in the area but the set up is terrible.

Our half forward line could become turnover city. By leaving CHF so open and not playing through the middle I can see oppositions sides running hard straight down the guts and hurting us. They'll have players 25 m out from goal ready to spoil, mark, dish off and their blokes will be around centre driving them forward.

One of the worst parts of the whole thing was the constant switching of play. TJ this is where it might seem Carey is being ignored.

Example : We get the ball in defence, inside 50 outer side. kick to a bloke members side of the ground around HB. Kick it straight down the side of the ground almost on the boundry, mark at HFF.

Then we dont play straight, we kick to a bloke leading out to a flank on the outer side again! We criss crossed the ground that many times, I was starting to think Zorro had devised the game plan.

Anyone who lead straight was ignored or spoiled as not all the Eagles lead out wide, they stayed around the centre corridor to clear the ball. Our defenders are in for a a tough year with this gameplan, theyre gonna need to be rock solid.

Very rarely did we go straight through the centre to set up play - Stiffy's run in the third huge execption. It was like finally - we are playing football!

I've got real concerns with this game plan. We have the players and the passion but the brains??...remains to be seen

What I dont understand is that every AFC supporter can see this game plan isnt working yet the coaching staff or the AFC cant see this, yet from the sounds of things we are going through training drills that indicate long direct footy into our forwardline I have said it on countless occassions along with alot of other people, THIS GAME PLAN HAS GOT TO GO, and yeah I agree with your statement Jerome " it is a concern" The AFC will never in a million years win a Premiership with this current gameplan, it doesnt work has never worked and never will work, no room on the flanks/wings, rely to much on VERY precision foot and hand skills otherwise the ball either goes out of play (we are then reling on the ruckman to win the tap and get it to one of our players) or the ball is turned over the opposition have an easy road to goal through the centre corridor as all our players are on the flanks, It frustarates me to tears, if the AFC are fair dinkum about winning a Premiership, this bull**** game plan has got to go, and someone at the AFC should realise that, all the AFC Supporters do, I am very disapionted to hear that we persist with the bull**** football style of play, I thought when Macca23 and other's were giving training reports that we were practicing direct forwardline drills that we had ditched this bull****, but obviously not, fix it or there anit going to be any premierships at all

 

[Stiffy_18]

Has Perrie played himself out of favour??????

Is it a coincidence that our forward line functioned the best when he was not in it?????? I think Perrie should be our CHF but with AFC being hell bent on playing Carey at FF and Perrie's inability to play behind Carey might see the Sarge playing for the Roosers this year.

What are your thoughts??????

PS. Did Scott Stevens play out of FF last night or was he on his usual flank and Hentschel was played out of the goal square.

 

[macca23]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18
Has Perrie played himself out of favour??????

Is it a coincidence that our forward line functioned the best when he was not in it?????? I think Perrie should be our CHF but with AFC being hell bent on playing Carey at FF and Perrie's inability to play behind Carey might see the Sarge playing for the Roosers this year.

What are your thoughts??????

PS. Did Scott Stevens play out of FF last night or was he on his usual flank and Hentschel was played out of the goal square.

The opening forward line-up was rather unusual.

Stevens Hentschel Welsh

Johncock Carey McLeod

It's a very tall FF line but all mobile players. It worked well in the 1st quarter apart from leading too wide.

Carey also played very deep towards goal while the flankers played closer to the wings.

Perrie's problem appears to be Carey related. Perrie had been outstanding in the pre-season but as seen in the first 2 Wizzer games he just doesn't seem to be able to play in front of Carey.

You and I probably would have done a positional switch but Ayres seems determined to play Carey at CHF, which is why Hentschel went to FF and Perrie out.

When he did get a bit of a run, Perrie was played at FB, not up forward as one would have expected,

He continued his run of looking very very ordinary at FB.

I'd say yes - he's right out of favour.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by macca23
I'd say yes - he's right out of favour.

In that case who do you think will take over his spot??????

I think Hentschel should be played as a defender and it would appear that AFC wants to play 3 talls in the forward line. One would think that another tall would take Perrie's spot at FF. I and probably another handful of posters would play Burton at FF but we know that AFC won't opt for that option.

Watts is still very raw, Krueger is not physically ready but he is a chance to play as a tall forward once he gets some match fitness with Glenelg. Rutten has stress fractures so one would think he is not in consideration until probably round 4 or so.

Who do you think will take over Perrie's spot??????

 

[macca23]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18
In that case who do you think will take over his spot??????

I think Hentschel should be played as a defender and it would appear that AFC wants to play 3 talls in the forward line. One would think that another tall would take Perrie's spot at FF. I and probably another handful of posters would play Burton at FF but we know that AFC won't opt for that option.

Watts is still very raw, Krueger is not physically ready but he is a chance to play as a tall forward once he gets some match fitness with Glenelg. Rutten has stress fractures so one would think he is not in consideration until probably round 4 or so.

Who do you think will take over Perrie's spot??????

I think they declared that last night Stiffy.

Hentschel. He certainly went well enough to persevere with that.

That of course ignores the basic problem that Carey creates at CHF by leading wide and wanting to take chest marks - and they appear to be ignoring that.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by macca23
I think they declared that last night Stiffy.

Hentschel. He certainly went well enough to persevere with that.

I must admit I am not a big fan of that move at this stage. While he will develop into a good forward in time, I think it will be too much to expect Hentschel to play well for the entire year. Personally, I think it is much harder to play as a forward than it is as a defender. For the sake of Hentschel's confidence he must be played in the backline.

You are right that they seem to be ignoring the main problem (Carey at CHF) but what will **** me off more is if they play Hentschel as a FF at this early stage of his AFL career.

Surely there would have to be another way out of this.

 

[macca23]

For what it's worth, stiffy, Graham Cornes agrees with you on all points:

Hentschel should be in the backlines at this stage of his career

Carey should be in a forward pocket to stop the leading to the flanks and get maximum results from Carey.

Perrie should be the CHF

BUT he says that stubborness by the coach will probably guarantee that none of the above happen.

Just as a wild card, what do you think of playing Hudson as a CHF along the Matthe Robran mould of having to stay in a very limited space at CHF down the centre of the spine. His job of course would be to contest, with the crumbers knowing exactly where the ball would be.

Hudson is raw as dog's guts, but he wouldn't be outmarked, he would compete in both the air and on the ground and he can mark a footy. He does have a red hot crack at anything and everything.

It wouldn't be about possesions as much as it would be about structure.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by macca23
Just as a wild card, what do you think of playing Hudson as a CHF along the Matthe Robran mould of having to stay in a very limited space at CHF down the centre of the spine. His job of course would be to contest, with the crumbers knowing exactly where the ball would be.

Hudson is raw as dog's guts, but he wouldn't be outmarked, he would compete in both the air and on the ground and he can mark a footy. He does have a red hot crack at anything and everything.

It wouldn't be about possesions as much as it would be about structure.

Mate I would be all for it. Anyone at CHF but Carey would do me fine. As you say one thing Hudson will give you is a contest. He will scrap for everything that comes in his area. He will contest everything and if he doesn't take the mark he will follow up with 2nd and 3rd efforts at ground level.

I think we can debate this all we like but the more we debate it the more AFC will stick to their guns. We all know how long it took to change our man on man strategy when the opposition takes kick ins. I bet AFC play Carey at CHF even if it runs us into ground.

Quite frankly, I am getting fed up with this subborness coming out of West Lakes. We have options who can play a role at CHF and straighten us up more than Carey does but we are choosing to ignore them. Stevo's buggered knee has made things worse as he would hav been our CHF. Now we are stuck with a bloke who is hell bent on leading to the grand stand because he can't take over head mark.

Get your act together AFC.

 

[jod23]

Thanks for the feedback.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Originally posted by macca23
For what it's worth, stiffy, Graham Cornes agrees with you on all points:

Hentschel should be in the backlines at this stage of his career

Carey should be in a forward pocket to stop the leading to the flanks and get maximum results from Carey.

Perrie should be the CHF

BUT he says that stubborness by the coach will probably guarantee that none of the above happen.

Just as a wild card, what do you think of playing Hudson as a CHF along the Matthe Robran mould of having to stay in a very limited space at CHF down the centre of the spine. His job of course would be to contest, with the crumbers knowing exactly where the ball would be.

Hudson is raw as dog's guts, but he wouldn't be outmarked, he would compete in both the air and on the ground and he can mark a footy. He does have a red hot crack at anything and everything.

It wouldn't be about possesions as much as it would be about structure.

Good to think outside the square, but what could Hudson do at CHF that Perrie couldn't do? Perrie showed us last year he could play as a key forward & has put in a big pre-season. We should persist with him. I like the idea of having Hentschel on the bench as he gives us an option both in defence & attack.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by Kane McGoodwin
Good to think outside the square, but what could Hudson do at CHF that Perrie couldn't do? Perrie showed us last year he could play as a key forward & has put in a big pre-season. We should persist with him. I like the idea of having Hentschel on the bench as he gives us an option both in defence & attack.

Hudson is better at ground level.

And I like th eidea of having Hentschel on the field because it will provide him with the experience and will do wonders to his development. No use to him playing cameo roles of the pine at tis stage of his development. We must find a spot in the 18 for Reilly and Hentschel even if its at the expense of a more exprienced player.