RussellEbertHandball
Flick pass expert
Never really was, never really will be Port Adelaide.
Let's talk Ports! Part 3
- Thread starter bomberclifford
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Never really was, never really will be Port Adelaide.
GremioPower
Taking notes of policy re: bikini/lingerie images
- May 26, 2017
- 22,688
- 46,954
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Grêmio, DC United, Pistons
And the fact that we fail to see that, even after nine years, is really worrisome. It’s not only Hinkley. Unfortunately, there are currently more people in positions they should not be into.
GremioPower
Taking notes of policy re: bikini/lingerie images
- May 26, 2017
- 22,688
- 46,954
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Grêmio, DC United, Pistons
I don’t have a beef against any form of playing as long as it works. We must outscore the opposition. It doesn’t matter if it is through low-score contested matches or high-score fast-tempo affairs.
We had a great defensive game against Melbourne. It’s was really great to see. But it was for naught because we couldn’t back it up with any decent form of attack. If it were the other way around (an unstoppable offense that lost due lack of defense), it would make no difference.
There is a Brazilian soccer coach who became a meme after saying in a post-match presser: “We lost; but it was beautiful, mate!” Sorry, but attractive footy is irrelevant, if we aren’t winning games.
Has anyone heard anything about Bassett potentially having big problems with his diabetes? Heard its affecting him big-time and he's definitely not interested in a senior job again, this could even be his last year coaching at AFL level
- Apr 27, 2008
- 65,950
- 80,434
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Chael Sonnen: Moral Champion
The problem is for example Ross Lyon had complete buy in from two lists that were premiership worthy and couldn't win on grand final day. His style of football with those teams was good enough to win almost every game and get to the grand final, but it could not win them. It was just not quite good enough to win them.
Almost always in AFL, the team with more attacking intent wins the grand final. Not attack only, but the one with more intent, on the day, between the two.
AFL is one of the few leagues where defence cannot overwhelm offence where it matters most. You cannot sit back and try to defend your way out of something.
Sent from my Nokia 7.2 using Tapatalk
GremioPower
Taking notes of policy re: bikini/lingerie images
- May 26, 2017
- 22,688
- 46,954
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Grêmio, DC United, Pistons
Thanks, edgie. Great comments.
First, losing GF just tell part of the story. Another part is that he was able to REACH the Grand Final twice.
Well, he lost both. But would he be able to GET THERE with those lists in another way? I ask this because I don't see the point of having a style that is suitable for GF Day, if your team would have better results with a different one. [See, e.g., 2017 Hinkley's Port v. Pike's West Lakes.]
A team must compete in the best way it can. It needs to give itself the best chance of winning it all. Which team is closer to that goal: the one who played in the GF and lost, or those who didn't make as far?
You've said yourself: "Not attack only...". Precisely my point.
Grand Finals are so complicated that it's practically unavoidable to oversimplify it. It's one game, played after a marathon followed by sprint races. There are an absurd number of variables.
Let's imagine that the conditions are perfect for both teams: well-rested First-XXII; no wind; fair umpiring.
Now, the match-up itself could be balanced, or there could be a clear favourite. If the match-up is balanced, the game is basically an awesome coin flip. Teams play 100 times, and the overall result will be close to 50 wins for each. The matches should be close affairs, and ultimately luck decide the winner. If the GF is not close, one team has overplayed in the day; one has underplayed; or both.
If there is a favourite, then another element comes into play: one team can exceed expectation and still lose. They would be the opposite of chokers; but would not get the flag, regardless.
When talking about GF winners and losers, we need to consider that as well. They aren't all equal.
It's off the nature of Australian football. In this regard, the sport is closer to basketball than other football codes. In low-score games, teams would still manage to get 50 points (7.8, 6.14...) In brief, there's a lot of scores.
So, a team cannot simply park the bus in its D50 and fight for a 0-0 draw. That doesn't mean you cannot play defensively, or have a defense-first mentality. It means that, if your are going to play defensively, the way you defend defines how you attack.
Do they work? Of course, they do. It all depends on execution. It needs to be suitable for your playing group, giving it the best chance for winning.
Does this all make any sense?
First, losing GF just tell part of the story. Another part is that he was able to REACH the Grand Final twice.
Well, he lost both. But would he be able to GET THERE with those lists in another way? I ask this because I don't see the point of having a style that is suitable for GF Day, if your team would have better results with a different one. [See, e.g., 2017 Hinkley's Port v. Pike's West Lakes.]
A team must compete in the best way it can. It needs to give itself the best chance of winning it all. Which team is closer to that goal: the one who played in the GF and lost, or those who didn't make as far?
You've said yourself: "Not attack only...". Precisely my point.
Grand Finals are so complicated that it's practically unavoidable to oversimplify it. It's one game, played after a marathon followed by sprint races. There are an absurd number of variables.
Let's imagine that the conditions are perfect for both teams: well-rested First-XXII; no wind; fair umpiring.
Now, the match-up itself could be balanced, or there could be a clear favourite. If the match-up is balanced, the game is basically an awesome coin flip. Teams play 100 times, and the overall result will be close to 50 wins for each. The matches should be close affairs, and ultimately luck decide the winner. If the GF is not close, one team has overplayed in the day; one has underplayed; or both.
If there is a favourite, then another element comes into play: one team can exceed expectation and still lose. They would be the opposite of chokers; but would not get the flag, regardless.
When talking about GF winners and losers, we need to consider that as well. They aren't all equal.
It's off the nature of Australian football. In this regard, the sport is closer to basketball than other football codes. In low-score games, teams would still manage to get 50 points (7.8, 6.14...) In brief, there's a lot of scores.
So, a team cannot simply park the bus in its D50 and fight for a 0-0 draw. That doesn't mean you cannot play defensively, or have a defense-first mentality. It means that, if your are going to play defensively, the way you defend defines how you attack.
- You can give the ball to your opponent and sit back; then you will try to score through fast breaks. [Slingshots, I believe is that how you call it.]
- You can take the ball away from your opponent and keep possession through uncostested marks; then, you will try to score through exploring holes that may open in their defense.
- You can put the ball on the ground and pressure your opponent deep down the field, forcing the ball to be constantly close to your goal as possible; then, you will try to score whenever and however you get the ball. [Does this remind you of something?]
- You can mix some or all of those, add some others, etc.
Do they work? Of course, they do. It all depends on execution. It needs to be suitable for your playing group, giving it the best chance for winning.
Does this all make any sense?
Last edited:
Put simply.
You dont make a grand final (or top 4) without a great defence.
You dont win a grand final without a great offence.
Pretty much sums up Ken's career.
bomberclifford
Importer/Exporter
- Thread starter
- #5,809
From: “Unbeatable”: Each team summed up in six words or less
Port Adelaide
Maher: Something’s wrong.
Gaze: Key injuries costing them dearly.
De Stoop: Missed the boat. Missed their chance.
Grave Danger: Need a new game plan, coach.
Port Adelaide
Maher: Something’s wrong.
Gaze: Key injuries costing them dearly.
De Stoop: Missed the boat. Missed their chance.
Grave Danger: Need a new game plan, coach.
Doctor Feel
Shitposter In Chief
Everyone: "Sack Hinkley"
Haven't heard anything.... haven't had much dealings with that client, nor would I expect that client to be telling me that stuff - nor would I ask!
He was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes at the age of 20 and continued playing for crows. Whether that has worsened with time or stress, maybe he just knows that time is up and change is coming. Hes had a good run.
Dad is a bit worried that if he can't organise a forward line, he sure as heck can't trust him with organising the biscuits in to the appropriate packets. Dad's still new in his role there, so they need quality. It's no good just lobbing biscuits at the packets and hoping someone else will come along and put them where they need to be.
RussellEbertHandball
Flick pass expert
2005 GF Sydney 6.5 defeated WCE 5.9
Neither team had a great offence that year - only 11 goals kicked on a perfect day. They improved next year
2006 GF WCE 12.13 defeated Sydney 12.12. Lets jump forward a decade.
I don't think WB had a great offence in 2016, they kicked between 300 and 600 points less than the 6 teams above them at the end of the minor round, 4 teams that didn't make the finals scored more points than them in the minor round, but that flag is the outlier in so many ways.
Richmond weren't a great offensive team in 2017, had the 7th most points for of the top 8 teams, but they built from the back and developed a style to win + they had Dusty. Next year they improved by over 200 pts in the minor round, with 2nd most points for of the 8 finals sides, but stuffed up the PF. I wouldn't say the side that knocked them out had a great offence, Cox had a day out in the PF and the 2018 GF was a pretty defensive game with both sides kicking 11 goals, despite WCE having more firepower than collingwood.
Melbourne had a great offence, midfield and defence in 2021.
As scoring averages per game keeps coming down ( ignore 2020 season with reduced quarter games), you don't necessarily need a great offence to win, you need a competent one, who can beat the best defence in the big games, to win a flag.
That was a fun game to be at. Now that was a young exciting side, great coach and a willingness to take the game on, even though everyone expected them to be smashed. I miss those days.
- Apr 27, 2008
- 65,950
- 80,434
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Chael Sonnen: Moral Champion
Offence isn't just about points scored. Malthouse's Collingwood scored the most in 2011 but to anyone watching they had a grinding gameplay that emphasised forward pressure, trapping the ball, and repeat entries. Malthouse even said that year he doesn't care if they kick behinds as long as they win the footy back from kick in.
The stats say they were more attacking but to the eye Geelong and Hawthorn were more offence orientated, more about moving the footy forward and kicking goals. Collingwood were offensive through defensive mindset. Other teams were offensive minded.
Sent from my Nokia 7.2 using Tapatalk
RussellEbertHandball
Flick pass expert
Collingwood might not have been the most attacking side in mindset, but they still attacked plenty, because they had plenty of players driving the ball from stoppages and kicking goals, Pendlebury 24, Swan 32, Sidebottom 25, and Beames 21, and 3 big blokes to kick to, Cloke 65, Dawes 27 and Leigh Brown 21.
It's rare you get 4 midfielders all kicking 20 goals in a season. I don't reckon Brisbane's fab 4 ever achieved it between 2001-04, when the game was more attacking, as Lappin didn't kick a lot of goals.
RussellEbertHandball
Flick pass expert
No more Masks, Covid Vax proof and QR code necessary at AO anymore.
Maybe Tredders will go to the game, and will be free to be our forwards coach next year.
www.portadelaidefc.com.au
A shift in COVID restrictions has paved the way for the entire Port Adelaide faithful to return to the footy.
In line with the further relaxing of COVID restrictions announced this week by the State Government, Adelaide Oval has updated its Conditions of Entry, effective Friday 15 April 2022.
Consistent with these changes, patrons will no longer be required to show proof of double COVID-19 vaccination.
This change has been made on the basis of South Australia’s high vaccination rate, continued easing of restrictions and the return to 100% stadium capacity.
Maybe Tredders will go to the game, and will be free to be our forwards coach next year.
Adelaide Oval updates Conditions of Entry
Adelaide Oval has announced updates to its Conditions of Entry to the venue.
A shift in COVID restrictions has paved the way for the entire Port Adelaide faithful to return to the footy.
In line with the further relaxing of COVID restrictions announced this week by the State Government, Adelaide Oval has updated its Conditions of Entry, effective Friday 15 April 2022.
Consistent with these changes, patrons will no longer be required to show proof of double COVID-19 vaccination.
This change has been made on the basis of South Australia’s high vaccination rate, continued easing of restrictions and the return to 100% stadium capacity.
COVIDSafe Measures and important arrival information
Keep Adelaide COVIDSafe. If you have been in a hot spot in the past 14-days, you cannot attend this event. Follow SA Health advice and keep up to date on cross border travel here.- Arrive on time: Please arrive at your earliest convenience to swiftly move through the entry process in a COVIDSafe manner.
- QR codes: You are no longer required to check in via a QR code when entering the stadium or any space within Adelaide Oval.
- Face masks: Face masks are no longer a requirement, however any persons choosing to continue to wear a mask are welcome to do so. This includes staff.
- Food and beverage: Vertical consumption is allowed throughout Adelaide Oval, including indoor spaces. We endeavour to have to have as many food and beverage outlets open as possible. Every effort has been made to ensure ample staff are rostered for game day, however, we continue to face challenges with the staffing of shifts as a result of COVID-19 cases and close contacts prohibiting people from working. We may at times need to close a kiosk or work our way through a longer queue, but, as always, our staff will be working hard to serve you as quickly as possible.
- Seating: Adelaide Oval has returned to full capacity. You will likely have people seated either side of you, in front and behind. If you are in a reserved seating area, please sit in the seat designated on your ticket or member card. If you are in a general admission area, or on the Northern Mound, please be mindful of others.
- More information on the COVIDSafe Measures in place at Adelaide Oval can be found here.
How do you think he got diabetes.
Kenny only left him the full strength cokes?
