SA Footy

Uncontested Possession- 247 to 164 Adelaide's way
Uncontested Marks- 95-31 Adelaide's way.

I didn't watch the game, but christ that doesn't read well for our workrate.

valleys07 wrote:Uncontested Possession- 247 to 164 Adelaide's way
Uncontested Marks- 95-31 Adelaide's way.

I didn't watch the game, but christ that doesn't read well for our workrate.

Thats where I was sort of going. Didnt work hard enough. You would get it but seemed like you didnt want tk chase.

stan wrote:Interesting after the wash up looking at the stats. Lobbe matched Jacobs in terms of hit outs to advantage which is interesting as well as the contested ball and clearances.

Jacobs 41 - 8 to advantage
Lobbe 38 - 7 to advantage

From that you would say Lobbe held his own. Jacobs is no mug and one of the best in the comp, so I would suggest it was a fair improvement form Lobbe this week and hence he was not your issue. Also you guys one your share of contested ball and clearances. Smashed in un contested possesions as we saw the crows had so much space. Obviously the issue others have eluded to about the press.

Another interesting fact, inside 50's: Port 70 Crows 55. Staggering really, your delivery was terrible to your forwards.

Ergo me telling Wubbsy to piss off when he asked "Is Dixon playing this week?".

Clearly didn't watch the game, none of the forwards had any chance to work with the delivery they were given.

I'd like ( am I really asking this? ) another stat, Inside 25, clubs get lots of shallow entries into the F50 that just cross the arc and I think the modern game would reflect a sides attacking power better by tracking how many times they get within 25 of goal.

Also, I'd like "pass backs" where defensive players take the ball into the others sides F50 to not count as a F50 entry. Adelaide used the fat side to their advantage on the weekend and I'd say 5 or more of Ports I50's would have been Adelaide switching and taking it into the F50 for Port with no Port player in sight.

Pass backs do not count as an inside 50

CoverKing wrote:Pass backs do not count as an inside 50

Just checked, it does if the attacking team touches the ball I50, it doesn't if it's simply defender to defender and out.

Play on.

Booney wrote:

stan wrote:Interesting after the wash up looking at the stats. Lobbe matched Jacobs in terms of hit outs to advantage which is interesting as well as the contested ball and clearances.

Jacobs 41 - 8 to advantage
Lobbe 38 - 7 to advantage

From that you would say Lobbe held his own. Jacobs is no mug and one of the best in the comp, so I would suggest it was a fair improvement form Lobbe this week and hence he was not your issue. Also you guys one your share of contested ball and clearances. Smashed in un contested possesions as we saw the crows had so much space. Obviously the issue others have eluded to about the press.

Another interesting fact, inside 50's: Port 70 Crows 55. Staggering really, your delivery was terrible to your forwards.

Ergo me telling Wubbsy to piss off when he asked "Is Dixon playing this week?".

Clearly didn't watch the game, none of the forwards had any chance to work with the delivery they were given.

I'd like ( am I really asking this? ) another stat, Inside 25, clubs get lots of shallow entries into the F50 that just cross the arc and I think the modern game would reflect a sides attacking power better by tracking how many times they get within 25 of goal.

Also, I'd like "pass backs" where defensive players take the ball into the others sides F50 to not count as a F50 entry. Adelaide used the fat side to their advantage on the weekend and I'd say 5 or more of Ports I50's would have been Adelaide switching and taking it into the F50 for Port with no Port player in sight.

So boon. What needs to be fixed?

I'll just get a new key board, the keys on this one might wear out before I'm finished.

Booney wrote:Ergo me telling Wubbsy to piss off when he asked "Is Dixon playing this week?".

Clearly didn't watch the game, none of the forwards had any chance to work with the delivery they were given.

From what i saw none of them (except young) were really working that hard either though. Seemed to be a lot more kicking into stationary targets, which allowed Lever and Hartigan to drift in and take easy intercept marks.

I probably didnt watch the game as closely as some given i was on the hill and it was party mode after about half time, but I dont remember it being a skill issue for the power, more a ball movement issue in that it wasnt quick enough, so it allowed the Crows to create the extra man at most contests.

bennymacca wrote:

Booney wrote:Ergo me telling Wubbsy to piss off when he asked "Is Dixon playing this week?".

Clearly didn't watch the game, none of the forwards had any chance to work with the delivery they were given.

From what i saw none of them (except young) were really working that hard either though. Seemed to be a lot more kicking into stationary targets, which allowed Lever and Hartigan to drift in and take easy intercept marks.

I probably didnt watch the game as closely as some given i was on the hill and it was party mode after about half time, but I dont remember it being a skill issue for the power, more a ball movement issue in that it wasnt quick enough, so it allowed the Crows to create the extra man at most contests.

So that's the mids, not the forwards.

Advetisers 2 standouts in the SANFL yesterday - Mitchell & Butcher!

Guess we will see if Dixon is going to be the recruit Port hoped for in the next few weeks, people seem to forget he has only played 60 games of AFL, and wouldn't be used to the scrutiny of a football mad town and media....going to be intriguing.

Dutchy wrote:Advetisers 2 standouts in the SANFL yesterday - Mitchell & Butcher!

Guess we will see if Dixon is going to be the recruit Port hoped for in the next few weeks, people seem to forget he has only played 60 games of AFL, and wouldn't be used to the scrutiny of a football mad town and media....going to be intriguing.

Butcher kicked 4, handed 2 off and missed 1, Mitchell had 38 touches, what would you expect them to be seen as?

Dutchy wrote:Guess we will see if Dixon is going to be the recruit Port hoped for in the next few weeks, people seem to forget he has only played 60 games of AFL, and wouldn't be used to the scrutiny of a football mad town and media....going to be intriguing.

I think he could be.. but Port seem to expect miracles of him - poor delivery, just bomb it on his head and hope he's going to pluck contested mark after contested mark.. Would like to see Port look to go through Westhoff a bit more, stop being so one dimensional.

Not sure if it's been mentioned, so forgive me if it has. I am a big Hinkley fan, but if the next few weeks are shockers (which I doubt they will be) will he be under the pump?

Zartan wrote:

Dutchy wrote:Guess we will see if Dixon is going to be the recruit Port hoped for in the next few weeks, people seem to forget he has only played 60 games of AFL, and wouldn't be used to the scrutiny of a football mad town and media....going to be intriguing.

I think he could be.. but Port seem to expect miracles of him - poor delivery, just bomb it on his head and hope he's going to pluck contested mark after contested mark.. Would like to see Port look to go through Westhoff a bit more, stop being so one dimensional.

This is the part that annoys me.

I expected this 10 metre exclusion rule to be beneficial for Port in allowing quick transition of the footy. So far it has proved anything but.

woodublieve12 wrote:Not sure if it's been mentioned, so forgive me if it has. I am a big Hinkley fan, but if the next few weeks are shockers (which I doubt they will be) will he be under the pump?

The media will begin their circus if we get done by Essendon, make no mistake.

valleys07 wrote:

woodublieve12 wrote:Not sure if it's been mentioned, so forgive me if it has. I am a big Hinkley fan, but if the next few weeks are shockers (which I doubt they will be) will he be under the pump?

The media will begin their circus if we get done by Essendon, make no mistake.

He will be safe then.
I'm going there Friday night fully expecting us to cop a 100 point hiding. If we give Port 70 inside 50's or whatever they had against the Crows we will concede 35-40 goals[emoji20]
Port are the best front running side in the comp, if they get on top early it will be a long night

Jim05 wrote:

valleys07 wrote:

woodublieve12 wrote:Not sure if it's been mentioned, so forgive me if it has. I am a big Hinkley fan, but if the next few weeks are shockers (which I doubt they will be) will he be under the pump?

The media will begin their circus if we get done by Essendon, make no mistake.

He will be safe then.
I'm going there Friday night fully expecting us to cop a 100 point hiding. If we give Port 70 inside 50's or whatever they had against the Crows we will concede 35-40 goals[emoji20]
Port are the best front running side in the comp, if they get on top early it will be a long night

A win on Friday night may just delay things. If we serve up Saturday in Rounds 4-10, we will probably find ourselves 3-7 or 4-6 and most likely outside of finals contention.

2 years where we have been predicted to feature deep in September and have failed to live up to the hype will see pressure on Hinkley.

Let's go down the path and say that Port have a horrid couple of months, and the pressure goes on Hinkley etc etc.

Who in the current AFL system realistically would be suitable at the moment to come across to Port and take Hinkleys place and have immediate success?

I don't think we need to go down that path at this point.

Booney wrote:I don't think we need to go down that path at this point.

Come on I'm bored, entertain me haha!!

Hinkley is the right man, even if they have a lean period.. changing isn't going to help anyone.