Autopsy Round 1: Loss against the Saints

[Van_Dyke]

Have at it. Report any trolls instead of engaging with them please

 

[TheInjuryFactory]

I didn't know V Capri had reformed.

 

[Taylor]

I watched the replay of the first quarter yesterday while on my spin bike and we just couldn't hit a target and couldn't hold a mark. Sean Darcy

4

Sean Darcy

Age

25

Ht

203cm

Wt

111kg

Pos.

Ruck

Career

Season

Last 5

D

10.1

3star

K

3.4

1star

HB

6.6

4star

CL

2.4

4star

HO

28.8

5star

D

6.8

1star

K

2.0

1star

HB

4.8

3star

CL

1.8

4star

HO

20.3

5star

D

11.4

3star

K

4.6

2star

HB

6.8

5star

CL

2.6

5star

HO

32.0

5star

, Josh Treacy particularly would have kicked simple shots at goal if they had held their marks which bounced off their arms. Both of those resulted in rebounding ball movement from the Saints to score too.

That's enough improvement before we factor in that our stoppage team couldn't win a hard ball.

 

[arsesmart]

I think in modern footy there is too much emphasis on "process" and not enough on "outcome"

They spend all pre-season working out how they want to play, whether that be how mids structure up and move around at a ball up or whatever. And they get drilled in them to stick to the plan ... the plan will work ... just give it time

Sometimes you just wish players would react to the immediate situation a bit more and freelance.

You don't get outcomes without process.

Process is here and now, while outcomes are future based and replete with uncontrollables.

 

[Boppo]

Definitely needs to be at half forward. Not sure about CHF, he'll dominate in a tall flanker role IMO

Fyfe was tageted 3 times out of 65 entries. He led, marked and had a shot on goal for one of those. Definately needs more time in the f50.

 

[nurries]

Fyfe would be perfect as a 3rd tall (when you have 2 good first talls!!). Should be the icing and not the cake

 

[Big Animal]

My general thoughts now I am calm.

I love Darcy, but basically every one of his taps he won (which was most of them) ended up in the arms of a Saints player or resulted in a Saints clearance. Needs to work out a better strategy with his mids.

I missed a lot of the first, and the end of the game (for obvious reasons) but only saw one kick to a lead (Young to Fyfe's chest). That was all. The rest was a bombing raid the 1940s RAF would have been proud of.

While not wanting to focus on certain players too much (the back half were very very good thankfully), Henry must realise you don't have all the time in the world at AFL level. Too many times, took just that bit longer to make a decision, tried something too speccy or cute, was too far off his man after disposing of the ball so couldn't help with second efforts to at least pressure the ball carrier, and we ended up in a worse position than before his involvement. Needs to watch old vids of Walters.

JLo - outcoached by Lyon. Very big learning curve for him. Had all the forward pieces on the board but apparently there was no plan because the players didn't have any specific instructions on how they wanted to get the ball in to the forward line. The only way to beat Lyon's zone (it hasn't changed much) is to get ahead of it with speed, or pinpoint passes to leads like how Hawks used to pick us apart every game. We took way too long most of the time, and then just bombed it in allowing them a contest and 50/50 the ball. Also, JLo went the safe option of Tabs and Banfield over Amiss and Sturt. Tabs didn't even finish the game and Banfield had no discernible impact. Fail.

 

[tonygeeks]

Fyfe would be perfect as a 3rd tall (when you have 2 good first talls!!). Should be the icing and not the cake

Problem solved

 

[arsesmart]

I watched the replay of the first quarter yesterday while on my spin bike and we just couldn't hit a target and couldn't hold a mark. Sean Darcy, Josh Treacy particularly would have kicked simple shots at goal if they had held their marks which bounced off their arms. Both of those resulted in rebounding ball movement from the Saints to score too.

That's enough improvement before we factor in that our stoppage team couldn't win a hard ball.

Pretty much rewatched it all and we really left some goals out there with the "nearly" plays. Some shaky decision-making, lack of composure, simple skill errors and a little bit of luck all cost us goals, particularly when we dominated for long periods of the 2Q & 3Q, when we easily could've gone in 5+ goals up at 3/4 time. This includes getting more one touch pick ups and cleaner feed-outs at the stoppage.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

While not wanting to focus on certain players too much (the back half were very very good thankfully), Henry must realise you don't have all the time in the world at AFL level. Too many times, took just that bit longer to make a decision, tried something too speccy or cute, was too far off his man after disposing of the ball so couldn't help with second efforts to at least pressure the ball carrier, and we ended up in a worse position than before his involvement. Needs to watch old vids of Walters.

Because I know you're a good poster, I'm going to keep going to bat for Henry here. People are too focused on his bad plays. He does still have the odd glaring clanger where he bites off too much but we all watched that game lamenting the lack of run or dare didnt we? At least Henry TRIES to get something working.

• Henry lead scoring involvements and his disposal efficiency (79%) was only bettered by Schultz, the backline who played kick to kick to each other and the key forwards who touched it about 4 times between themselves.
• He had 3 clangers in his 21 possessions (a clanger on 14.2% of his possessions), just over the team average of 13.5% of the day which included way way way too much safe football.
• While he didnt get credited a tackle, he had 18 pressure acts, 6th best for the team

Sometimes it doesnt come off but I'll take that and back the backline to do it's job if it means the forwards actually have a chance to score. The more players with Henry's approach to the game, the closer we get to playing like Collingwood.

 

[arsesmart]

While not wanting to focus on certain players too much (the back half were very very good thankfully), Henry must realise you don't have all the time in the world at AFL level. Too many times, took just that bit longer to make a decision, tried something too speccy or cute, was too far off his man after disposing of the ball so couldn't help with second efforts to at least pressure the ball carrier, and we ended up in a worse position than before his involvement. Needs to watch old vids of Walters.

Are you sure about this? How many did you see specifically?

Having just watched the whole game back, I didn't see it being any big issue for him. There was perhaps one occasion where Henry took the game on in order to either mop up some mess or drive some attacking play and it didn't come off. Most otherwise he was at least taking the game on and creating overlaps and it got to a teammate (reinforcing that he registered 2 turnovers, one of which was an OOB).

 

[Boppo]

Because I know you're a good poster, I'm going to keep going to bat for Henry here. People are too focused on his bad plays. He does still have the odd glaring clanger where he bites off too much but we all watched that game lamenting the lack of run or dare didnt we? At least Henry TRIES to get something working.

• Henry lead scoring involvements and his disposal efficiency (79%) was only bettered by Schultz, the backline who played kick to kick to each other and the key forwards who touched it about 4 times between themselves.
• He had 3 clangers in his 21 possessions (a clanger on 14.2% of his possessions), just over the team average of 13.5% of the day which included way way way too much safe football.
• While he didnt get credited a tackle, he had 18 pressure acts, 6th best for the team

Sometimes it doesnt come off but I'll take that and back the backline to do it's job if it means the forwards actually have a chance to score. The more players with Henry's approach to the game, the closer we get to playing like Collingwood.

Agree. You can tell he has been charged with the task of pulling off the skilled but risky game opening precision kick. Few others will attemp it (though Darcy gave it a shot early and got picked off).

 

[Big Animal]

Not calling for him to be delisted or something else dramatic, but watching Henry's last game caused me a number of frustrating moments (and I have never had any hate for him) and just calling for him to learn from one of the best (Walters) to improve on that. Like my comments on Darcy (whose stats would also looked quite good but the results of which showed a different story), he and Henry play important roles and need to improve if we want to improve.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Not calling for him to be delisted or something else dramatic, but watching Henry's last game caused me a number of frustrating moments (and I have never had any hate for him) and just calling for him to learn from one of the best (Walters) to improve on that. Like my comments on Darcy (whose stats would also looked quite good but the results of which showed a different story), he and Henry play important roles and need to improve if we want to improve.

I know, I'm just going to keep going to bat for the dude because of all the problems on the weekend, I dont think he was one of them. Henry's bad moments do stand out but on the weekend, they were outweighed by the good ones (which also stand out). I think if that game is the average we can expect (he'll have a couple worse, a couple a better) from him this year then that's ok for him to be best 22 and he can keep building.

 

[arsesmart]

Not calling for him to be delisted or something else dramatic, but watching Henry's last game caused me a number of frustrating moments (and I have never had any hate for him) and just calling for him to learn from one of the best (Walters) to improve on that. Like my comments on Darcy (whose stats would also looked quite good but the results of which showed a different story), he and Henry play important roles and need to improve if we want to improve.

Fair enough, I know there's the "too fancy" Liam Henry story that goes around, but I'd just question the accuracy of your original take based on the weekend having just re-watched the game.

 

[Spirit Level]

Because I know you're a good poster, I'm going to keep going to bat for Henry here. People are too focused on his bad plays. He does still have the odd glaring clanger where he bites off too much but we all watched that game lamenting the lack of run or dare didnt we? At least Henry TRIES to get something working.

• Henry lead scoring involvements and his disposal efficiency (79%) was only bettered by Schultz, the backline who played kick to kick to each other and the key forwards who touched it about 4 times between themselves.
• He had 3 clangers in his 21 possessions (a clanger on 14.2% of his possessions), just over the team average of 13.5% of the day which included way way way too much safe football.
• While he didnt get credited a tackle, he had 18 pressure acts, 6th best for the team

Sometimes it doesnt come off but I'll take that and back the backline to do it's job if it means the forwards actually have a chance to score. The more players with Henry's approach to the game, the closer we get to playing like Collingwood.

This is the reason he needs to stay in the seniors and build some consistency. He was one of the only players on the weekend daring to try open the game up and attack.

If he gets an extended run at it, more of those kicks into the centre will come off and more scoring opportunities will be created.

Some of our best plays last year were off the backs of Young and Chapman pulling attacking kicks into the centre which opened the other team up. Hopefully they can start doing this again, the more players we have like this in the team the more we are going to score

 

[Son of a Wizard]

Thank you my friend for also being old.

 

[Son of a Wizard]

Because I know you're a good poster, I'm going to keep going to bat for Henry here. People are too focused on his bad plays. He does still have the odd glaring clanger where he bites off too much but we all watched that game lamenting the lack of run or dare didnt we? At least Henry TRIES to get something working.

• Henry lead scoring involvements and his disposal efficiency (79%) was only bettered by Schultz, the backline who played kick to kick to each other and the key forwards who touched it about 4 times between themselves.
• He had 3 clangers in his 21 possessions (a clanger on 14.2% of his possessions), just over the team average of 13.5% of the day which included way way way too much safe football.
• While he didnt get credited a tackle, he had 18 pressure acts, 6th best for the team

Sometimes it doesnt come off but I'll take that and back the backline to do it's job if it means the forwards actually have a chance to score. The more players with Henry's approach to the game, the closer we get to playing like Collingwood.

Henry was the very least of our problems. He should not be dropped.

 

[Ysaye]

There is a lot of focus on Henry but one question that hasn't been asked is what kind of distance did he run for the game? Personally I thought one of the key reasons he didn't get picked much last year (and part of the reason Hughes is playing as a wing this year) was because of his endurance levels and the fact they were trying to play him on the fat side. Obviously he got 21 possessions on 86% game time (his most ever for both categories?) but it sounds like he tired towards the end (eg. not being able to goal from 30m out).

It would be interesting to know because I can see them kicking him out of the team instead of Hughes for NOD (assuming available) if it is all about the kms travelled and he was beaten in that category.

 

[arsesmart]

There is a lot of focus on Henry but one question that hasn't been asked is what kind of distance did he run for the game? Personally I thought one of the key reasons he didn't get picked much last year (and part of the reason Hughes is playing as a wing this year) was because of his endurance levels and the fact they were trying to play him on the fat side. Obviously he got 21 possessions on 86% game time (his most ever for both categories?) but it sounds like he tired towards the end (eg. not being able to goal from 30m out).

It would be interesting to know because I can see them kicking him out of the team instead of Hughes for NOD (assuming available) if it is all about the kms travelled and he was beaten in that category.

Can't speak as to exactly why he wasn't getting games last year, other than most likely not getting enough of it.

Having seen his running patterns in the preseason (and going on how much constant movement he did previously) I don't think the "poor tank" is (or ever has been developmentally) that much of an issue for him.

He got 6 possessions in the last quarter and was pretty lively with them, so he seemed to be running out the game ok.

 

[Johnny Dalmas]

You don't get outcomes without process.

Process is here and now, while outcomes are future based and replete with uncontrollables.

So when the process is to do X when the oppo have specifically structured up to stop X, you just keep on banging away like an automaton?
Or do you show some awareness and react to your surroundings?

 

[Madas]

Henry was fine in this game and a huge improvement on last year . Fingers crossed it’s starting to click .
I can only recall one play where he made a bad choice .

Question I have is why is Freddy such a protected species around here ?
Plays about 10 minutes of good football most games and then is invisible for the rest

Probably the most inconsistent player in the team IMO.
Runs up and down the ground a lot I’ll give him that , but it would be better if he did it with the ball in his hands.

 

[arsesmart]

So when the process is to do X when the oppo have specifically structured up to stop X, you just keep on banging away like an automaton?
Or do you show some awareness and react to your surroundings?

Well that would all depend on the process. But if the process is refined enough it allows you to adjust it without being too reactive/jumpy.

Collingwood, for example, is probably the most process driven side out there at the moment. They keep their process regardless of scoreboard and time of match.

The best sports people have always been more process driven (eg Bradman), it's just more widely communicated and adopted these days.

 

[FreoRicci]

That nagging feeling definitely came that St Kilda were going to be tough to beat after Treacy dropped that mark in the first quarter. So simple yet so clumsy.
Kicking inside 50 was so bad, dropped mark or handballs under pressure. It was diabolic.

 

[s_wd6]

Question I have is why is Freddy such a protected species around here ?
Plays about 10 minutes of good football most games and then is invisible for the rest

Players ignore him so many times. He's rarely utilised properly.

And the answer to ur question is because he has x-factor. When he's on he's extremely dangerous. And not just with the ball. Clutch moments last year with that tap back against melbourne, smother against tigers, chase down v dogs.

 

[Square Peg]

Well that would all depend on the process. But if the process is refined enough it allows you to adjust it without being too reactive/jumpy.

Collingwood, for example, is probably the most process driven side out there at the moment. They keep their process regardless of scoreboard and time of match.

The best sports people have always been more process driven (eg Bradman), it's just more widely communicated and adopted these days.

I don't know much about cricket, but I am not sure that's true of all the best sports people or even all the best cricketers
I recall watching Ian Botham getting interviewed once about his low opinions of cricket coaches, after Botham had smashed a ball for six the coach came up to him and asked "Where's your footwork?" to which Botham replied 'Where's the ball?"