SA Footy

Dutchy wrote:I went to a SANFL coaching workshop last night and the presenter was Carl Woods the new PAFC AFL skill Acquisition coach who was outstanding in challenging the way coaches think and develop their players.

He gave a great insight into the changes at Port over the Summer, they have turned everything upside down and challenged everything they have done in the past. Firstly they had to change the coaches mindset which was more difficult than the players. He admitted the players have been over coached in recent years which has stifled their creativity. He used the key words Adaptive and Creative all night. Training is much more unstructured now to match the chaos of a game scenario.

One example he gave was in 2018 the defence had a rule that they had to hit 2 short kicks before anyone could play on or handball, hence why they were so slow coming out of defence.

They are also focusing heavily this year on players using their non dominant side much more often, they are keeping stats on it and it has improved from 2018 but they have a fair way to go, their players have used it 55 times so far, the competition low is Sydney with 17.

They have done a lot of work on their reaction to turnovers both ways, and showed some vision from the Port game on how they are spreading the field when the opposition turnover the ball and how they compress the field when they do.

I have only seen a small amount of Port so far, are Port fans seeing the changes?

Booney wrote:Nope, Wines has to come in. It will allow Gray to go forward, we've used him in the middle a fair bit in the first two games and now we'll be able to "pinch hit" with him in there. Marshall has had no impact forward, Ryder looks a little lost in his new role, we need some star power inside 50 to make the most of the entries we're getting.

In - Wines, Howard/Hartlett
Out - Watts ( inj ), Amon ( inj ).

I think they might give Hartlett another week in the SANFL before he comes back in, although he's more like-for-like than Howard / Watts.

Booney wrote:Rockliff starts in the middle but then plays behind the play, he's been the architect of that movement from defence a lot this year, he'll still rack them up. I think it will mean Gray, Drew and SPP spend less time in the middle.

The Bedge wrote:

Booney wrote:Rockliff starts in the middle but then plays behind the play, he's been the architect of that movement from defence a lot this year, he'll still rack them up. I think it will mean Gray, Drew and SPP spend less time in the middle.

Watched a replay of the game last night, i thought Drew was really good especially early on.

Also thought Clurey was outstanding - how did you view his game?

The Bedge wrote:

Booney wrote:Rockliff starts in the middle but then plays behind the play, he's been the architect of that movement from defence a lot this year, he'll still rack them up. I think it will mean Gray, Drew and SPP spend less time in the middle.

Watched a replay of the game last night, i thought Drew was really good especially early on.

Also thought Clurey was outstanding - how did you view his game?

The Bedge wrote:

Booney wrote:Rockliff starts in the middle but then plays behind the play, he's been the architect of that movement from defence a lot this year, he'll still rack them up. I think it will mean Gray, Drew and SPP spend less time in the middle.

Watched a replay of the game last night, i thought Drew was really good especially early on.

Also thought Clurey was outstanding - how did you view his game?

valleys07 wrote:Xavier Duursma covered 17.4kms on Saturday. That is the 9th highest distance covered since GPS data tracking was published (start of 2017). Only Tom Scully, Andrew Gaff and Nick Roberton have covered more.

Quality numbers from a 2nd gamer!

LMA wrote:

valleys07 wrote:Xavier Duursma covered 17.4kms on Saturday. That is the 9th highest distance covered since GPS data tracking was published (start of 2017). Only Tom Scully, Andrew Gaff and Nick Roberton have covered more.

Quality numbers from a 2nd gamer!

Does that mean that the 3 latter mentions have multiple entries inside the top 9 distances covered

valleys07 wrote:Port have made 3 changes for this weekends game.

In: Wines, Howard, Sam Gray.
Out: Watts (inj), Amon (inj), Marshall (omitted).

Right - Gray had a terrific game against Westies. Can't do much more than 30+ and 4, but; i'm not happy.

Gray has reached his ceiling as a player. He will forever be that player that is too good for SANFL footy, not quite up to AFL. Two things- to run with a Ryder/Lycett and Westhoff tall forward set up voids us of flexibility moving the footy between half back and half forward, which will inevitably lead to turnovers when having to kick to small targets down the line. If we absolutely have to replace Marshall with a small, can it be someone in the Farrell/AJ mould - a player with better crumbing ability, more pace and better skills.

I see Sammy in the same position as Jack Trengove - handy depth and will be called upon when absolutely desperate. To change the dynamic now makes no sense. Continually rewarding the good performances of players in the Gray ilk reverts us back to the systematic failure we have endured for the past 4 years, without any consideration to the future.

Ken has learned nothing.

Lightning McQueen wrote:

valleys07 wrote:Port have made 3 changes for this weekends game.

In: Wines, Howard, Sam Gray.
Out: Watts (inj), Amon (inj), Marshall (omitted).

Right - Gray had a terrific game against Westies. Can't do much more than 30+ and 4, but; i'm not happy.

Gray has reached his ceiling as a player. He will forever be that player that is too good for SANFL footy, not quite up to AFL. Two things- to run with a Ryder/Lycett and Westhoff tall forward set up voids us of flexibility moving the footy between half back and half forward, which will inevitably lead to turnovers when having to kick to small targets down the line. If we absolutely have to replace Marshall with a small, can it be someone in the Farrell/AJ mould - a player with better crumbing ability, more pace and better skills.

I see Sammy in the same position as Jack Trengove - handy depth and will be called upon when absolutely desperate. To change the dynamic now makes no sense. Continually rewarding the good performances of players in the Gray ilk reverts us back to the systematic failure we have endured for the past 4 years, without any consideration to the future.

Ken has learned nothing.

First goal.

Booney wrote:Howard / Watts is almost like/like so no issues there. Howard may play a swing man role and spend some time forward perhaps?

If I was the forward line coach arguing to keep Marshall in the side I would have struggled to mount a case. Brisbane's midfield now runs deep, adding another fwd/mid ( S.Gray ) for a forward ( Marshall ) who was having little impact makes some sense. Ebert will need to offer an avenue to goal across half forward without Marshall there.

There will need to be some shuffling of inside mids to move Wines in, the skipper had to come in though so Drew might go out to the wing to facilitate that.

Not sure S.Gray is the right in, but, get 33 and kick 4 and you make a case for yourself. Surely having Rozee, Butters, Duursma, Drew, DBJ, Bonner, Houston, Burton is an eye to the future?

valleys07 wrote:
Ok, fair play. A bit of an overreaction.

Let's be honest - Gray isn't going to feature in the side in 5 years time. If the need to replace Marshall is there (which I do not disagree with), surely looking to Farrell/AJ would be more productive to the future look of the side, than selecting an above average SANFL player who has well and truly reached his ceiling at the top flight?

beef wrote:Do you get the feeling Marshall will be looking elsewhere for more opportunities? Going to be even worse when/if Dixon comes back. Too good to be playing SANFL and think lots of AFL clubs would love him in their side