AFL Autopsy R8: 5 point loss to the Powa

[fairbump_playon]

As far as I’m concerned the most I’ll take away from this game was the lack of care those boys showed to Ridley. Did anyone even get into Rioli for that cheap shot. They would have known who did it at HT. Look at Collingwood if a player lays a finger on Daicos they stand up for their team mates.

Our team is full of nice guys who have no mongrel. Pathetic. This club won’t do anything while Dodoro keeps recruiting straight A students from private schools

Unpopular opinion but I agree.

That was a proper cheap shot on Ridley, miles behind the ball. You have to fly the flag and let people know in those circumstances. And not to create the appearance of caring - it should happen because players are genuinely angry at Rioli for a dog act that took out their mate - for this week and next.

AFL doesn’t have a send off rule. Justice for acts that impact the outcome of the present game has always been served on field. You can’t do that properly now but you still have to send the message that you won’t be walked over. Don’t get suspended but it’s certainly worth risking a free or a fine. IMO being known as a pack of rabid hard nuts is worth risking giving away a goal in 4 games a year.

And before someone says push and shove is nothing, winning the hard ball is all that matters… why can’t we have both?

 

[Pweter]

While I'm sick of losing I'm comfortable with where we're at.

Scott has a list he's had next to no input to. He is learning about that list in the heat of battle while trying to teach them his game plan. The fact that he's doing it while battling a glut of injuries to our talls and pseudo talls isn't making it easy.

Watching some of the games it seems we've been smashed however the results says we haven't had our arse handed to us on a platter this year. He's doing it while giving games to Perkins, Hobbs, Davey, Menzie, D'Ambrosio. Then there's the slightly older players like Jones, Durham and Caldwell who are also playing or had a run of games.

Looking at our list, who else is fit and has smashed down the door in the VFL aside from Voss who his tailed off considerably the last couple of games?

Yesterday we deserved to lose by more but we didn't. Our dearth of KPDs was further exposed when Ridley went down which threw out our structure again, a structure we struggle to cover when impacted because we're out of fit options to support it. The guys aren't throwing in the towel and keep on keeping on. It's obvious we have a defensive game plan that all can understand, even if some still have trouble executing it.

As of next week we will have played the top 6 on the ladder in the last 7 weeks. When the fixture was release the common thought around here was we'd be losing every one of those games comprehensively. Well we haven't, and we even snatched one of them.

The rest of this year will tell us plenty when we play a lot more teams we should beat, and how we handle player movement at seasons end will be very interesting.

 

[fairbump_playon]

Remember, we wanted Scott, who is a strip it back to basics, floor raising coach that will clearly only take us so far.

We didn’t want Rutten who had grand designs on raising the ceiling and implementing something a little bit more complex, that would take a little bit more time and would involve a little bit more pain.

We are here because we are impatient. We’re here because this is what we want.

Look, I’d rather be married to someone I like than getting ignored by someone I’m absolutely burning for. Let’s just get that one finals win and hang around the middle of the eight for a few years. You’ll be amazed at how much better it feels to be complaining about getting blown away in a prelim.

 

[Pweter]

Look, I’d rather be married to someone I like than getting ignored by someone I’m absolutely burning for. Let’s just get that one finals win and hang around the middle of the eight for a few years. You’ll be amazed at how much better it feels to be complaining about getting blown away in a prelim.

What would you be doing differently?

 

[P Money]

Main thing I noted throughout the whole game was how easily our players got stepped, had their tackles brushed aside or were just a few cm off being able to clamp their opponents. We are a young and slight team but it didn’t look like a strength issue, looked more like being just a little bit off with positioning and technique, but gee it really affected our ability to defend across the ground. So many times in the second half port we’re streaming through the corridor kicking inside 50 with zero pressure


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Zach Package]

On the basis that we don’t play enough kids in the midfield after 8 games?

Are we under the impression that Rutten would have brought Setterfield in to play VFL?

The midfield we’ve run with the last 2 weeks is basically the same centre bounce team we had in the first 8 rounds of 2022 under Rutten.

More Setterfield, less McGrath.

Only other difference is they’re all 12 months older and hopefully a bit smarter

On the basis that he’s not really someone who pulls levers, he’s kind of set and forget in how he sets the ground up and he’s not here to work miracles.

 

[HirdsTheWord]

i have no idea where these "brave win" comments are coming from.

We should have been absolutely belted. Port scored more points than we did scoring shots.

We were completely and utterly outplayed & out pressured.

 

[Call Me Cake]

i have no idea where these "brave win" comments are coming from.

We should have been absolutely belted. Port scored more points than we did scoring shots.

We were completely and utterly outplayed & out pressured.

I don't buy into the "they kicked more behinds so they should have won" culture that the game has. Missing the big sticks is just as much of a skill-error as not executing tackles, losing out in clearances, getting lots of possessions and doing nothing with them or dropping your marks. Not to mention that other things can contribute to an opposition missing their shot on goal, like being stretched to less desired angles, forced to rush their snaps in compromised positions or pushed to their limits by the defense so as to impede their kick through an increase in fatigue.

 

[citizen-erased]

Was always going to be a battle of midfields, but felt we shot ourselves a bit with setterfield out of the CBA rotation.

Argue that weakened us esp after the strong start and not shifting to hold the power at bay.

I am wondering if brad is copping the losses to test who has the mettle

 

[HirdsTheWord]

I don't buy into the "they kicked more behinds so they should have won" culture that the game has. Missing the big sticks is just as much of a skill-error as not executing tackles, losing out in clearances or dropping your marks. Not to mention that other things can contribute to an opposition missing their shot on goal, like being stretched to less desired angles, forced to rush their snaps in compromised positions or pushed to their limits by the defense so as to impede their kick through an increase in fatigue.

Shots at goal is a direct result of a whole bunch of other statistics going Ports way. They had 20 more inside 50's than us. 20. That is a massive difference.

By the mere fact they kicked more points than our total shots on goal means they controlled play throughout the game to give them that opportunity.

We were garbage. And were very lucky to have lost by 6 points. We had 71 turnovers rofl, and if fumbles were a measured stat, I'm sure we would have set the record for that.

 

[Runk]

You don't really feel this was Runk as there's been marked improvement across the ground. Last year we lose that game by 60.

True

My 9yr old daughter was diagnosed with Type 1 diabetes at Easter.

I have struggled to find a lot of joy lately and will happily admit I've probably invested far too heavily in this club and it's results ensuring unrealistic expectations. I will say the Collingwood loss really set me off. I was genuinely angry that day but was feeling angry before that too.

As I say I'm just trying to find some joy and I guess the past 3 weeks investing in this team hasn't been the best move.

 

[rumply]

True

My 9yr old daughter was diagnosed with Type 1 diabetes at Easter.

I have struggled to find a lot of joy lately and will happily admit I've probably invested far too heavily in this club and it's results ensuring unrealistic expectations.

I will say the Collingwood loss really set me off. I was genuinely angry that day but was feeling angry before that too.

As I say I'm just trying to find some joy and I guess the past 3 weeks investing in this team hasn't been the best move.

Big shout out to dank420_ for trolling my previous posts.

All the best mate. I've got myself into the mindset of being happy enough with what ever comes provided they continue to show the improvement & fight they have in most quarters so far this season.

 

[ghostdog]

Remember, we wanted Scott, who is a strip it back to basics, floor raising coach that will clearly only take us so far.

We didn’t want Rutten who had grand designs on raising the ceiling and implementing something a little bit more complex, that would take a little bit more time and would involve a little bit more pain.

We are here because we are impatient. We’re here because this is what we want.

Preach bro.
“No one team has any more right to be successful quicker than any other team just because they’re a big-name club”.
J Worsfold

 

[ghostdog]

True

My 9yr old daughter was diagnosed with Type 1 diabetes at Easter.

I have struggled to find a lot of joy lately and will happily admit I've probably invested far too heavily in this club and it's results ensuring unrealistic expectations. I will say the Collingwood loss really set me off. I was genuinely angry that day but was feeling angry before that too.

As I say I'm just trying to find some joy and I guess the past 3 weeks investing in this team hasn't been the best move.

Big shout out to dank420_ for trolling my previous posts.

I know that feeling when the kids are sick- you feel helpless because their health is in the hands of others in many ways.

If it means anything, I'm getting my kicks from observing the small differences that are winners. You can see our progression; we're still handballing aggressively like we did under Rutten but at times we're doing it quicker and moving (though we were at times inaccurate yesterday), mids have started looking well beyond the contest for longer handballs too, Weideman is really starting to present as a viable and damaging foil for 2MP, we know how to set up our zone and implement it now - by the end of next year when its more drilled and refined, how strong will we be? These are exciting times!

I remember Truck saying something along the lines of his belief that we are so close to turning the corner but we have to be patient; that when the improvement comes it will come very quickly. I think that's what we're seeing.

 

[Runk]

I know that feeling when the kids are sick- you feel helpless because their health is in the hands of others in many ways.

If it means anything, I'm getting my kicks from observing the small differences that are winners. You can see our progression; we're still handballing aggressively like we did under Rutten but at times we're doing it quicker and moving (though we were at times inaccurate yesterday), mids have started looking well beyond the contest for longer handballs too, Weideman is really starting to present as a viable and damaging foil for 2MP, we know how to set up our zone and implement it now - by the end of next year when its more drilled and refined, how strong will we be? These are exciting times!

I remember Truck saying something along the lines of his belief that we are so close to turning the corner but we have to be patient; that when the improvement comes it will come very quickly. I think that's what we're seeing.

I'll be incredibly mindful of this

 

[Matthew_Lloyd]

Some of my thoughts:

- We were comprehensively outplayed (moreso after Ridley was taken out by Rioli). Our mids badly let us down in the 2nd and 3rd quarters. It was like a tsunami for our backline, and we were saved I guess by Port's terrible goal-kicking. Heading forward during this period, we had no method or structure (Langford being forced down back hurt us badly), so Port were easily able to rebound it the other way.

- Our midfield finally woke up sometime near the end of the 3rd. Our pressure went up, and we were able to move the ball much better and looked more threatening. Unfortunately, we let ourselves down with horrible skills.

- We had our chances to win that game in the final quarter. Port's horrible goal-kicking rubbed off on us, and we could only manage 2.6 in the final term.

- Most pleasing part of it was that we kept fighting and cracking in all day, even when we were under the pump. Yes we didn't get the win and were outplayed, but the reality is that we are simply not good enough yet.

The Lions at the Gabba is going to be brutal. And there is nothing more certain than that flog going out of his way to try and kick a big score, considering our lack of defensive KPP now with Ridley out. Hopefully his selfishness costs his team badly!

 

[Squeaky]

Main thing I noted throughout the whole game was how easily our players got stepped, had their tackles brushed aside or were just a few cm off being able to clamp their opponents. We are a young and slight team but it didn’t look like a strength issue, looked more like being just a little bit off with positioning and technique, but gee it really affected our ability to defend across the ground. So many times in the second half port we’re streaming through the corridor kicking inside 50 with zero pressure


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

From what I was able to see - admittedly on the phone - the umpires were not paying HTB anyways.
The Boak one was laughable!

 

[Call Me Cake]

Shots at goal is a direct result of a whole bunch of other statistics going Ports way.

That's fine but it has no bearing on the final result. To say that is to do a disservice to the efforts of our defense and our accuracy in front of the sticks. Shots matter nothing if you don't execute - about as useless a stat as a disposal that ends up nowhere or on a turnover.

 

[Lore]

Inside 50s are generally the result of midfield dominance. The more your midfield wins, the more you get the ball in the forward half, the more shots you take.

And once it's in there, if your forward pressure is any good, all behinds lead to a kick in, a front half turnover, and another chance to convert.

Port having more inside 50s = their midfield is winning.

Port having more shots at goal and high number of behinds = their forward pressure is elite but battling.

Converting those shots to goals is your forwards vs their defenders. Shot conversion is higher when you're kicking from straight in front at close range. Sounds obvious but it's important to understand the next part.

If the opposition defenders are blocking that space directly in front of goal, (through team defence structures) they increase their ability to intercept mark, block leading lanes, and force you to consider other options when kicking inside 50.

You're then more likely to be asking Caldwell and Stringer to take low percentage shots from stupidly difficult angles, Redman and Phillips to kick from outside 50, or bombing it to a marking contest at the top of goal in the hope that Draper brings it down or Perkins, Walla, Davey, Menzie can crumb it.

A good one on one defence doesn't give Caldwell or Stringer the opportunity to lead into places they can convert, but that 1v1 stuff is really the last line of defence after all other defences have failed.

Now, Caldwell, Stringer and Redman are all reasonably skilled in those particular low percentage shots, but if ALL of your shots are being taken that way, then the likelihood of kicking a winning score is reduced.

Port having worse shot conversion = our defenders are beating their forwards

Us having better shot conversion = our forwards are beating their defenders

 

[HirdsTheWord]

That's fine but it has no bearing on the final result. To say that is to do a disservice to the efforts of our defense and our accuracy in front of the sticks. Shots matter nothing if you don't execute - about as useless a stat as a disposal that ends up nowhere or on a turnover.

yeah i 100% disagree.

See Lore response above generally though port missed alot of easy goals. They werent from tough angles.

Shots at goal means you are winning the rest of the game.

We were beaten soundly across the park. It was only Ports inaccuracy that kept us in it.

 

[HirdsTheWord]

Inside 50s are generally the result of midfield dominance. The more your midfield wins, the more you get the ball in the forward half, the more shots you take.

And once it's in there, if your forward pressure is any good, all behinds lead to a kick in, a front half turnover, and another chance to convert.

Port having more inside 50s = their midfield is winning.

Port having more shots at goal and high number of behinds = their forward pressure is elite but battling.

Converting those shots to goals is your forwards vs their defenders. Shot conversion is higher when you're kicking from straight in front at close range. Sounds obvious but it's important to understand the next part.

If the opposition defenders are blocking that space directly in front of goal, (through team defence structures) they increase their ability to intercept mark, block leading lanes, and force you to consider other options when kicking inside 50.

You're then more likely to be asking Caldwell and Stringer to take low percentage shots from stupidly difficult angles, Redman and Phillips to kick from outside 50, or bombing it to a marking contest at the top of goal in the hope that Draper brings it down or Perkins, Walla, Davey, Menzie can crumb it.

A good one on one defence doesn't give Caldwell or Stringer the opportunity to lead into places they can convert, but that 1v1 stuff is really the last line of defence after all other defences have failed.

Now, Caldwell, Stringer and Redman are all reasonably skilled in those particular low percentage shots, but if ALL of your shots are being taken that way, then the likelihood of kicking a winning score is reduced.

Port having worse shot conversion = our defenders are beating their forwards

Us having better shot conversion = our forwards are beating their defenders

Ports misses weren't from bad angles. They just had an off day.

Alot of their misses were from relatively easy goals. Their 20 points was not a representation of them kicking from boundaries etc. They just had one of those days.

 

[Ford Fairlane]

FWIW thought your team played an exciting brand of footy that is hard to defend when it comes off.

Love watching Sam Draper play, especially those galloping runs from the centre square (even if it hurt us a few times )

Also hats off to the large Essendon supporter contingent that turned up and helped fill out an awful timeslot, and for not being sheeple with no booing of Jason Horne-Francis.

 

[Lore]

Ports misses weren't from bad angles. They just had an off day.

Alot of their misses were from relatively easy goals. Their 20 points was not a representation of them kicking from boundaries etc. They just had one of those days.

I'm speaking pretty generally as I don't have time to rewatch the whole game.

A couple of examples to pick apart:

Junior Rioli had 5 shots, 2 goals:

Q1: Converted one goal from an uncontested mark 20m straight in front (20 mins).
Second shot was a behind 45m out from goal, touched play on (no mark paid) so he rushed to kick around the corner (under no physical pressure) and missed.
Q2: nil
Q3: nil
Q4: 1 goal receiving the ball out of a contest on the flank running streaming into goal, sold some candy and kicked from 20m on the run, under no physical pressure.
1 behind, more or less an exact repeat of shot 2 in Q1, gathered, round the corner kick 45m out on the same angle (under some physical pressure this time) and missed.
Last one is also a behind, from a mark just outside 50 in the dying seconds of the game. Wound down the clock and kicked a behind.

Jeremy Finlayson had 5 shots, 1 goal:
Q1: Mark on the lead, 45m out straight in front. Starts left, stays left, through for a behind
Q2: Contested mark, 47m out on a slight angle (right). Hits the right post.
Q3: Attempted a Draper. Free kick advantage out of the centre clearance, couple of running bounces and bombs it from 45m straight in front. Behind.
Q4: Gathered from a forward half turnover on the flank. Kicked around the corner from 30m, just in from the boundary line. Goal.
Another behind from a mark on the lead, slight angle 35m out.

The 3 goals those two converted were the easier ones to convert. Finlayson probably should've converted the last one as well but by that stage of the game it probably wasn't crucial. The others were not good shots, a bit unrealistic to kick 45m out, let alone on the run.

I don't have time to check Dixon's extended highlights just now but... did he get to kick anything closer than 40m from goal? I remember Zerk wearing him like a glove

 

[HirdsTheWord]

I'm speaking pretty generally as I don't have time to rewatch the whole game.

A couple of examples to pick apart:

Junior Rioli had 5 shots, 2 goals:

Q1: Converted one goal from an uncontested mark 20m straight in front (20 mins).
Second shot was a behind 45m out from goal, touched play on (no mark paid) so he rushed to kick around the corner (under no physical pressure) and missed.
Q2: nil
Q3: nil
Q4: 1 goal receiving the ball out of a contest on the flank running streaming into goal, sold some candy and kicked from 20m on the run, under no physical pressure.
1 behind, more or less an exact repeat of shot 2 in Q1, gathered, round the corner kick 45m out on the same angle (under some physical pressure this time) and missed.
Last one is also a behind, from a mark just outside 50 in the dying seconds of the game. Wound down the clock and kicked a behind.

Jeremy Finlayson had 5 shots, 1 goal:
Q1: Mark on the lead, 45m out straight in front. Starts left, stays left, through for a behind
Q2: Contested mark, 47m out on a slight angle (right). Hits the right post.
Q3: Attempted a Draper. Free kick advantage out of the centre clearance, couple of running bounces and bombs it from 45m straight in front. Behind.
Q4: Gathered from a forward half turnover on the flank. Kicked around the corner from 30m, just in from the boundary line. Goal.
Another behind from a mark on the lead, slight angle 35m out.

The 3 goals those two converted were the easier ones to convert. Finlayson probably should've converted the last one as well but by that stage of the game it probably wasn't crucial. The others were not good shots, a bit unrealistic to kick 45m out, let alone on the run.

I don't have time to check Dixon's extended highlights just now but... did he get to kick anything closer than 40m from goal? I remember Zerk wearing him like a glove

Dixon had knee issues and whilst zerk played well on him, his misses were from relatively easy set shots as far as a key power forward would be concerned.

 

[Keystone agony]

We did generally get smacked. X score was like a 40 pt win to Port.

We have similar issues still. We equalled them in clearances yet lost i50s by 18. Our ability to defend transition and win or half one on ones forward of the stoppage was starc.

We made Dyl Williams look like an AA half back in that 3rd quarter

Lost clearances by 5 during the 2nd and 3rd quarters

What i like:
Our first quarter. We came to play for Scott hes got the playing group and motivating them

Our last quarter. When the game was on the line, i felt like we were better. We won the i50s by 3 in the last and clearances by 1 Runk