Booney wrote:Sponsor said "Port will never win a premiership under Mark Williams". Alan Scott, was wrong.Psyber wrote:I reckon the Power may have won a couple more premierships if the administration had listened to the sponsor in 2003, and got someone who would weed out a few front runners and revise the game plan...
Revise the game plan,hmmm? So how does the game plan of one side differ to any other in the modern game, for that matter at any point during the history of the game?
Most sides play a very similar style, some have the playing group to execute the style and some dont.
Front runners,hmmm. So in 2001/2/3/4 when we were top or thereabouts who would be the "frontrunners" then? Like most sides when on top of the table you have what could be termed frontrunners, they are in front more often than not afterall.
Booney, Alan Scott was only "wrong" because 'Bucky' Cunningham stepped in to placate Alan Scott, and modified Choco's approach somewhat in 2004.
In the 2000s, my wife followed her family connections and supported Port Adelaide in the AFL, even though she hadn't at SANFL level.
She got to the point she couldn't continue to watch every time they got a couple of goals in front and then went ultra-defensive yet again - both before and after 2004.
She was proved right in her gloomy expectations of that style more often than not.
I shared my wife's frustration because I supported her supporting them - except against the Crows.
I feel the same way about the Crows when they adopt the same crazy approach, and go completely defensive, loose the impetus that got them in front, and get run over.
The Crows seem to have had a bad dose of it this year, and of course they have also followed, lately, Choco's tendency to play the "stars" fit or not.