Review Round 6, 2024 vs Collingwood

[Long live PAFC]

Playing 2 ruckman in the side was worth having a crack imo. Overrated as hits out are we still had more than Collingwood.
Sweet had 21, took 3 marks, and made 6 tackles.
If S Hayes ever had those types of stats, some around would be giving him BOG and the 3 votes on Brownlow night.

It was considering we lost two key forwards who part time ruck. So to keep a tall presence up front it was worth it.

However, each are slow, tap and stoppage focused rucks. I think this fed into the Pies plan.

I think having McKenzie as a defensive forward on Moore could have worked. Then rotate Wines, SPP, Marshall and McKenzie as second rucks - give us an extra mid in the stoppage.

 

[JakeNeadeFan]

C Rozee - 23 centre bound attendances, 0 centre clearances
Z Butters - 21 CBAs, 1 centre clearance
W Drew - 21 CBAs, 1 centre clearance
O Wines - 15 CBAs, 0 centre clearances
Mead - 5 CBAs, 1 centre clearance

JHF - 14 CBAs, 5 centre clearances

Outside of JHF, dire.

I'm not sure why we persisted with Rozee after he had 0 centre clearances at half time from 14 cbas. Should've been pulled and sat in a forward pocket. Again, shows a complete lack of imagination in terms of making in game changes to rectify issues.

 

[Peninsula Boy]

The groundhog day against contested ball teams sees our will whither away by the end of the first quarter. A very similar game to last year.

It was a tale of two teams. Port Adelaide have a lot of highly skilled players and are badly coached. Collingwood have a lot of very good players who are fundamentally sound and are coached to a very high standard.

THE GOOD

Horne-Francis was awesome. Never say die.
Jase Burgoyne continuing to play well.
Georgiades looking the goods.
The tall backs playing well given the onslaught.
Butters first quarter.

THE MEDIOCRE

The rest of Butter's game.
Drew trying.
The rucks were OK enough.
Marshall I guess. The forwards did enough when it went in.

THE UGLY

The contested possession count which shows the boys had no heart today.
A terrible gameplan and no real alternative.
Sweet starting in ruck. WTF?
Soldo as a tall forward. WTF?
Rozee's entire game.
Our small defenders where killed by their small fleet. Bobby Hill could've kicked 7 if he wanted to.
Wines being shown up for being a very average midfielder with zero impact on the game.

 

[Izzy01]

Such a disappointing performance.
Every year they suck me in to the hope and maybe it’s this year, only to be bitterly disappointed again.

 

[Scodges]

I literally just answered you m8. Trying to act like I haven't won this argument is hilarious. Don't bother answering because I won't respond x

Is this an automated response ? Lmao
So anyone, that’s a pre school response.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Janus]

Haha your pathetic excuses are never ending. You'd get on great with Ken.

On SM-G975F using BigFooty.com mobile app

Not excuses.

Collingwood had a pressure rating that was good in the first quarter and then ramped it up to elite in the second and third quarters. Port was at elite in the first quarter, was still elite in the second quarter but wasn’t able to maintain the same level of energy cause they didn’t have a week off.

The AFL scheduled almost every team that played in the opening round to play an opening round opponent the following week - when Brisbane had their bye they played Collingwood the next week at home.

When GWS and Gold Coast had their bye they played each other at Gather Round.

When Sydney had their bye last week they play Gold Coast this week at home.

Melbourne and Richmond had their bye this round - they play each other next week.

There are only two clubs that didn’t have to play other Opening Round clubs after their bye - Carlton who played North Melbourne “away” at Marvel and Collingwood who played Port Adelaide at home.

The only way we were ever going to win this game was if we jumped Collingwood out of the blocks (check) AND we played Dixon or Lord (great contested marks) at the very least so that when Collingwood pressed we had a bail out. Do people seriously think our side is that great that we can win with four of our best 23 (Dixon, Finlayson, Boak, Lord) out of the side? That playing Sweet when Cox, who is not really a great ruck but does take 4 contested marks and kick 2 goals, would have been done if Lord or Finlayson was available?

I think this is the only fan base that is dumb enough to celebrate a key forward going out for a backup ruck. And then doubles down on this stupidity by thinking we will actually play BETTER.

 

[TeeKray]

The idea that we play better without Dixon and that the forward line would look great without Dixon always belonged in the BigFooty fan fiction category. Maybe if Lord was there to play the same role it could've worked but the existing personnel was never getting it done.

Georgiades is a run and jump type player. He did a pretty good job yesterday all things considered. But he's never going to be the main guy down there.

Marshall is essentially a mid sized leading forward in the mould of say Mark LeCras

Mark Lecras

Age

38

Ht

184cm

Wt

82kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

14.6

4star

K

10.2

4star

HB

4.5

3star

M

4.5

4star

T

2.7

4star

G

2.0

5star

No current season stats available

D

9.2

3star

K

6.8

3star

HB

2.4

3star

M

4.4

4star

T

1.6

4star

G

1.4

5star

, except nowhere near as good. He's got minimal physical presence and doesn't thrive on the contest.

The two ruckmen both showed they can't play forward. Soldo has previously floated forward and kicked the odd goal but that's because he's playing ruck and he gets down there and finds a mismatch. As a permanent forward, he's easy to defend.

 

[Poo Eckert]

C Rozee - 23 centre bound attendances, 0 centre clearances
Z Butters - 21 CBAs, 1 centre clearance
W Drew - 21 CBAs, 1 centre clearance
O Wines - 15 CBAs, 0 centre clearances
Mead - 5 CBAs, 1 centre clearance

JHF - 14 CBAs, 5 centre clearances

Outside of JHF, dire.

I'm not sure why we persisted with Rozee after he had 0 centre clearances at half time from 14 cbas. Should've been pulled and sat in a forward pocket. Again, shows a complete lack of imagination in terms of making in game changes to rectify issues.

This has been an issue the last 3 weeks now!

Honestly, they’re to good not to have more, must be coaching set up or breakdown between ruck and mids?

 

[philreich]

I think the Giants did us a favour last September, because what we saw yesterday was what would have happened in the preliminary final - plus interest.

 

[Ford Fairlane]

Narrator: "It wasn't"

I actually really enjoyed watching two teams with finals proven game plans go to battle for four quarters. Both of those teams would have thrashed Ken Hinkley's Port.

 

[Peninsula Boy]

The idea that we play better without Dixon and that the forward line would look great without Dixon always belonged in the BigFooty fan fiction category. Maybe if Lord was there to play the same role it could've worked but the existing personnel was never getting it done.

Georgiades is a run and jump type player. He did a pretty good job yesterday all things considered. But he's never going to be the main guy down there.

Marshall is essentially a mid sized leading forward in the mould of say Mark LeCras, except nowhere near as good. He's got minimal physical presence and doesn't thrive on the contest.

The two ruckmen both showed they can't play forward. Soldo has previously floated forward and kicked the odd goal but that's because he's playing ruck and he gets down there and finds a mismatch. As a permanent forward, he's easy to defend.

I'm going to have to disagree with you on Dixon.

There were posters during the week that thought our forward line would crumble without Dixon and that wasn't the case.

I thought the forward line looked pretty good. No real issues. Could be better.

It was a chance for Kenny to do something a bit different but he decided on sticking to his only gameplan and put our first ruck Soldo into the Dixon role which was always going to end badly. Once McRae got the matchup right, I think Moore went to him, it was easy pickings. It was just another inept move by Kenny Average of once again putting a square peg into a round hole. Absolute moron.

Anyway, the problem was not the forwards but the midfielders because the ball didn't make it past the centre line for the last three quarters.

And I'm going to add something maybe controversial and people might say this about our other forwards so fair enough but I would much prefer Mihocek over Dixon at the moment. Give me a solid player who can kick a set goal from 50 in our team and we would be so much better.

 

[MrMeaner]

As I mentioned in the game day thread, I was at the game yesterday. From that perspective, the idea that this loss was because Collingwood had last week off is even more laughable than it is from just watching the broadcast.

It was clear from there that the only strategy we had all day was to kick it long to a tall. That did not change at all, despite it being clear that it was not working after quarter time. It was frustrating to see leads for short options, completely in the clear get ignored time and again. It was worse when the kick then went to a contest, at which Collingwood were able to commit numbers because they knew exactly what we were going to do and there was no risk in doing so, which was halved and Collingwood ran it out.

In the first quarter, I dared to dream because we got that start. However, despite getting the run of things then, it seemed clear it was unlikely to last because we were still getting torched out of the middle. Our relative success in that period was built on the defence holding up well and Collingwood's general malaise. Even then, we let our usual couple of time-on goals in (as an aside: I wonder if we get a kick back from the AFL for doing that and keeping things tight when we are on top. Surely it happens too regularly to be coincidence).

The loss is totally on the coaches. They clearly did not do enough to instill confidence in the team from the start. When things were not working, nothing changed. It was just braindead stuff.

Just on Dixon: the thing is not that we are necessarily better without him. It's that without him, hopefully, the coaches will be forced to adopt a strategy and a structure that plays to the other forwards' strengths.

 

[Weez]

Both our losses are to Melbourne and Collingwood at their best.. Our positioning at contests is atrocious, every loose/ground ball goes to the them. Happened in the Freo game too..

 

[JUSTWORK]

Both our losses are to Melbourne and Collingwood at their best.. Our positioning at contests is atrocious, every loose/ground ball goes to the them. Happened in the Freo game too..

Melbourne kicked very well at goal in their game against us, we again kicked poorly. Outside that, we comfortably beat them in every other aspect of the game.

That aside, take out a couple of questionable frees and we beat Melbourne.

Freo, as poor as they were yesterday should have beaten Carlton and aren't a bad side.

This game was the atrocity.

 

[Sewer de Lance]

The idea that we play better without Dixon and that the forward line would look great without Dixon always belonged in the BigFooty fan fiction category. Maybe if Lord was there to play the same role it could've worked but the existing personnel was never getting it done.

Georgiades is a run and jump type player. He did a pretty good job yesterday all things considered. But he's never going to be the main guy down there.

Marshall is essentially a mid sized leading forward in the mould of say Mark LeCras, except nowhere near as good. He's got minimal physical presence and doesn't thrive on the contest.

The two ruckmen both showed they can't play forward. Soldo has previously floated forward and kicked the odd goal but that's because he's playing ruck and he gets down there and finds a mismatch. As a permanent forward, he's easy to defend.

I’m not sure what game you were watching yesterday, but our meek performance had nothing to with Dixon being out. We were manhandled around the contest, and our Captain was first in line to raise the white flag when Collingwood mounted their offensive.

 

[JakeNeadeFan]

You must have rocks in your head if you think playing soldo forward looked better than Dixon. I don't remember soldo taking a mark, let alone a mark inside 50.

 

[all seeing eye]

When our 2 contested inside types (drew, wines) , are only getting it out once, then your in trouble. We needed to change it up and try something different ie even spp into the middle for a burst.

 

[wayb2912]

I think it is time to move Wines out of the team. He has only had 1 good season since 2015 and constantly let's the team down.

On PHN110 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Poo Eckert]

I think it is time to move Wines out of the team. He has only had 1 good season since 2015 and constantly let's the team down.

On PHN110 using BigFooty.com mobile app

Hard to pin it all on Wines. However since his return we’ve been belted at the centre clearance, or it’s a coincidence.

Alarm bells are ringing with Josh Carr however, our midfield was smashed, centre stoppages smashed. Surely that’s on him?

Same with Schofield before him, our midfield disappeared in big games.

Like many, Hinkley has been in my sights since 2017 but it’s a worry Josh has been earmarked when we have glaring issues in his zone

 

[Nelso]

I am still dumbfounded that Soldo spent the majority of his time up forward before Sweet got subbed out.

Soldo is the one who has given our midfielders first use of the ball this season.

 

[Peninsula Boy]

You must have rocks in your head if you think playing soldo forward looked better than Dixon. I don't remember soldo taking a mark, let alone a mark inside 50.

No one's thinking that.

 

[Peninsula Boy]

I am still dumbfounded that Soldo spent the majority of his time up forward before Sweet got subbed out.

Soldo is the one who has given our midfielders first use of the ball this season.

I was shocked that Soldo started in the Dixon role and Sweet was our first ruck.

There was never going to be any synergy with Sweet and the midfield in their first game together.

And Soldo had started to work with the midfield better and better as the year went on. It was just crazy.

So basically our first ruck was playing tall forward which he's never done before and our second ruck was playing first ruck. WT?

 

[JakeNeadeFan]

The only reason why our forward line looked more efficient this week is because all our goals were coming from the back half and we were kicking into an open forward line.

It's actually a sign we are playing shit, not a sign that the forward line is functional.

 

[Schulzenfest]

I am still dumbfounded that Soldo spent the majority of his time up forward before Sweet got subbed out.

Soldo is the one who has given our midfielders first use of the ball this season.

This is what I've been banging on about for months. Two rucks doesn't work because you can only play one ruck at a time. So you end up either rucking them both 50/50, which doesn't give either of them enough time to have an impact (see Goldstein/Draper, both of whom are having by far the worst year of their careers statistically), or you end up making one the #1 ruck and sticking the other one up forward for the majority of the game, in which case why not just play a forward (see Gawn/Grundy, which was such a disaster it led to Melbourne banishing a dual All-Australian to the VFL within a few months and trading him back out within a year).

Far better ruck duos than Soldo and Sweet have tried and failed to make it work, the most relevant examples being Nankervis/Soldo and English/Sweet. The Soldo/Sweet combo sure as shit isn't gonna be the one to buck the trend.

 

[JUSTWORK]

This is what I've been banging on about for months. Two rucks doesn't work because you can only play one ruck at a time. So you end up either rucking them both 50/50, which doesn't give either of them enough time to have an impact (see Goldstein/Draper, both of whom are having by far the worst year of their careers statistically), or you end up making one the #1 ruck and sticking the other one up forward for the majority of the game, in which case why not just play a forward (see Gawn/Grundy, which was such a disaster it led to Melbourne banishing a dual All-Australian to the VFL within a few months and trading him back out within a year).

Far better ruck duos than Soldo and Sweet have tried and failed to make it work, the most relevant examples being Nankervis/Soldo and English/Sweet. The Soldo/Sweet combo sure as s**t isn't gonna be the one to buck the trend.

Two rucks works when one of them is a good enough forward to get picked to play predominately forward and the other has enough forward craft to spend maybe 30% time forward.