Review R6: Port v West Coast Review

Remove this Banner Ad

How can we not if we want to play Ryder instead of a running midfielder.
Surely adding one athletic tall to the side shouldn't turn our game style into a blithering disjointed mess? Please explain for most of this season why Monfries has been playing so far up the ground unlike 13/14?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Surely adding one athletic tall to the side shouldn't turn our game style into a blithering disjointed mess? Please explain for most of this season why Monfries has been playing so far up the ground unlike 13/14?
Unlike 13 and 14 pre injury.
I've posted in the other thread but just to repeat some of it we would have a lot more run with say Neade instead of Ryder but long term we will be better off with Ryder. We just need to adjust to having one less running player and get it in our 50 quicker.

Nothing against Neade as I think he is a very good player and could have used other names of anyone not in the side atm.
 
I'll give you a stronger hint.
Those who thought it was touched:
Goal Umpire
Jackson Trengove
The Video Review Umpire
Every Port supporter
The Officiating Umpire
Me

Those who don't think it was touched:
Crows Supporters
You
Everyone else who doesn't matter
i thought it was a goal.
 
So here's the Inside 50 map for the game. Port going to the top of the image:

193bd4c4e6be1b76f3b0b00ddec57ce1.png


The simple fact is, it was hard work from the Eagles which created the luck they needed in order to win the game. But this game was a mirror image of the Adelaide game from last week - but instead of always stupidly putting the ball back the same way it was kicked from or going down the line, West Coast took some risks and opened up the play to the other side - most of their genuine inside 50 scoring goals came from spotting up the open man in the 50 when they switched.

As for Port - just ****ing fumbling the ball all night. If there was an opportunity to go, you can bet that an Eagle would get a stray hand in the way, or the ball would bounce wrong, or whatever. But the main quarter where it was lost was the third. To have the game in control and then have a lead evaporate just based on the other team working harder than us should sit in the gut of every player and burn.
 
I think we are close, our best is good enough, the young boys I feel may have a bit of a 2014 hang over. Plenty of young teams can experience this. Hopefully they snap out of it quickly...

And snap out of it quickly Port must. I don't want the poos and wees to win it again, the menstrual bloods with their COLA can gagf, and no self-respecting heterosexual male wants dudes who prance around in purple outfits to win anything. May this game be the kick in the arse that Port need to get their hustle on.
 
Prove it ? The goal umpire clearly saw it as a goal...

I watched it again. The goal umpire wasn't sure, thought it to be a goal but wanted a check and so the field umpire called for the review. The commentary are saying it is inconclusive (which doesn't mean much more than that because the are not the umpire review panel) and the umpire review panel did not say inconclusive, they said it was touched behind.

Another umpire may have called it kicking in danger. It was that close.
 
Have not read the thread. Apologise for any repetitions. Have not seen the replay. I have tried to stay cool about the game but I am really pissed. We looked slow and our decision making was rubbish. We struggle with teams that come at us. That is how they do us, they come at the player. We were out coached on the day. I could not understand why we went wide when we won the ball in the centre rather than go more direct down the centre. Could be the way WCE set up clogging up the centre or we felt we were not getting enough out of our forward entries and wanted to control the ball. But it did not work. The chaos ball forward worked better for us. We are really struggling against big body teams and we look trimmer than last year. Hope this is not a link. I am just pissed off.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

No I havent learnt how to pinch footage of my Foxtel IQ. I rang them once and asked them if I could, got a no, and then asked why there is a USB port on the box. I got a bit of a s****** from them.

I asked years ago (I think it was when I got the IQ2 box) about the USB Port and got the response "future enhancement". I assume Foxtel/Telstra are adhering to the slogan M8 IT CAN W8
 
I agree with REH, as a former umpire on replay the correct decision was made, Gray collapsed as a result of a fair Shepherd. IMO The shepherd never even went low, Robbie Gray just fell to the ground bringing the arms down with him.

Not a big deal anyway. We lost the game in the coaches box, not via umpiring

F'en maggot ;)
 
I agree with REH, as a former umpire on replay the correct decision was made, Gray collapsed as a result of a fair Shepherd. IMO The shepherd never even went low, Robbie Gray just fell to the ground bringing the arms down with him.

Not a big deal anyway. We lost the game in the coaches box, not via umpiring

So if he kicks that and we go on to win the game, you would have taken it away from us somehow?
 
Think West Coast worked out stop Broadys lethal kicks from defence and it stops our counter attack big time. We couldn't get it into Broadys hands. Jonas, Hartlett, White turned it over too many times.
 
Don't knock Kornes' effort tonight still above average on the night.
He falls over and goes to his knees at any contest which is a clear sign that he knows that he will get burnt off by foot. His has been a great warrior but he is gone, he will not play finals again at Port, Kenny was filthy with his prelim last year and he has got slower again in 2015. Monfries is in the same bucket
 
Can Port's iffy form be traced back to Walsh leaving? Walsh was around when we went from wooden spoon to prelim final, playing a brand of football very closely resembling the minor premiers of that year, Collingwood, and I very much doubt that Woosha thought of it up by himself. When he left, we went to shit.

On topic though, I think we got you at a good time after the Showdown, where you are at your most vulnerable. 9 out of 10 times you would do us in, so no need for panic as of yet. A good run of games to come will hold you in good stead at the bye.

No, No and No. As far as I know walsh was at WCE in 2013 when our form spike kicked in. This guy gets too much credit for someone who was around for only 5 minutes.
 
Personally I think Port suffers from expectation of an easy win or a come down from a big game, I look at 2013 when we we're expected to continue on from the previous 5 years but we beat all the lower ranked teams plus a couple of close wins against better teams who were doing it a bit tough for that year (Pies and Swans).
The rd 1 game of 2013 against Melbourne we thrashed them but then last year when Melbourne were not much better and we were expected to repeat what we did the previous meeting we struggled both times to get over them.
Yes I think most teams suffer from this but what makes it stand out so much with Port is our "God mode" as El Scorcho calls it is so impressive that surely we must go on and become premiership winners but we still have a young team with some more age we will get that under control.
 
Kane is almost finished. Struggled to keep up after half time. Stuggled to kick the ball 35m. 2 games on and 1 off or 2 games on and 2 off should be how we handle him for the rest of the year. That way if he makes it to September he is relatively fresh to do 1 or 2 jobs.
 
I watched it again. The goal umpire wasn't sure, thought it to be a goal but wanted a check and so the field umpire called for the review. The commentary are saying it is inconclusive (which doesn't mean much more than that because the are not the umpire review panel) and the umpire review panel did not say inconclusive, they said it was touched behind.

Another umpire may have called it kicking in danger. It was that close.
Usually if you go to a goal review the evidence has to be conclusive a clear finger bend back etc in this case there is nothing so how can it be overturned, they have the same footage we receive and if anyone can see a clear touch of the footy they should be a linesman for tennis, I agree it should of been kicking in danger but that is after the fact so clearly should of been a goal, If the umpire said it was touched it would of been called a behind because the footage was inconclusive, Thats the thing here the footage is inconclusive it's simple really, But anyway I'll leave you too it Cheers for the great game
 
Last edited:
Kane is almost finished. Struggled to keep up after half time. Stuggled to kick the ball 35m. 2 games on and 1 off or 2 games on and 2 off should be how we handle him for the rest of the year. That way if he makes it to September he is relatively fresh to do 1 or 2 jobs.

Starting to sense that if he'd reached his 300th already he'd almost be depth by now. He's at a stage almost identical to Dom last year just before he stepped down.
 
Yep. The signs are definately there with Kane this year. it's almost 300 and out for him at this point. Discussions on his successor?

I still think it's hard to say. I actually think P. Stew or even O'shea as an inspired choice, with Moore and Hoon possibilities.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Review R6: Port v West Coast Review

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top