Re: Port Adelaide 2019
Posted:
Thu Apr 18, 2019 9:39 amby stan
whufc wrote:I keep hearing Port saying they 'cant afford' to pay out Hinkley.
I pose this question, can they afford to continue to not improve and go no where under Hinkley? Surely that has significant financial implications.
I think Jim actually raised this point about loss revenue in attendance and sponsorship with continued poor performances due to the coach.
It must be taken into account.
However as Booney also stated that since they have turned the list over a bit and are player more kids this season perhaps Ken has brought himself another year.
Re: Port Adelaide 2019
Posted:
Thu Apr 18, 2019 10:05 amby amber_fluid
MW wrote:whufc wrote:I keep hearing Port saying they 'cant afford' to pay out Hinkley.
I pose this question, can they afford to continue to not improve and go no where under Hinkley? Surely that has significant financial implications.
No club can afford to do it anymore with a salary cap on football dept spend now.
Yeah that’s a fair point.
Clubs need to be smarter when signing coaches to long term deals.
Will we see coaches swap clubs and clubs pay some of their remaining wage if agreed by both clubs in the near future?
Re: Port Adelaide 2019
Posted:
Thu Apr 18, 2019 10:07 amby Jim05
MW wrote:whufc wrote:I keep hearing Port saying they 'cant afford' to pay out Hinkley.
I pose this question, can they afford to continue to not improve and go no where under Hinkley? Surely that has significant financial implications.
No club can afford to do it anymore with a salary cap on football dept spend now.
They can if they have enough money to cover the AFL imposed tax.
Re: Port Adelaide 2019
Posted:
Thu Apr 18, 2019 10:51 amby Brodlach
whufc wrote:I keep hearing Port saying they 'cant afford' to pay out Hinkley.
I pose this question, can they afford to continue to not improve and go no where under Hinkley? Surely that has significant financial implications.
Has the club said that or ‘just in the know’ supporters?
Re: Port Adelaide 2019
Posted:
Thu Apr 18, 2019 11:04 amby Lightning McQueen
Brodlach wrote:whufc wrote:I keep hearing Port saying they 'cant afford' to pay out Hinkley.
I pose this question, can they afford to continue to not improve and go no where under Hinkley? Surely that has significant financial implications.
Has the club said that or ‘just in the know’ supporters?
Or just people who think they know it all?
Re: Port Adelaide 2019
Posted:
Thu Apr 18, 2019 11:05 amby amber_fluid
Lightning McQueen wrote:Brodlach wrote:whufc wrote:I keep hearing Port saying they 'cant afford' to pay out Hinkley.
I pose this question, can they afford to continue to not improve and go no where under Hinkley? Surely that has significant financial implications.
Has the club said that or ‘just in the know’ supporters?
Or just people who think they know it all?
Or people who know **** all?
Re: Port Adelaide 2019
Posted:
Thu Apr 18, 2019 11:13 amby whufc
Brodlach wrote:whufc wrote:I keep hearing Port saying they 'cant afford' to pay out Hinkley.
I pose this question, can they afford to continue to not improve and go no where under Hinkley? Surely that has significant financial implications.
Has the club said that or ‘just in the know’ supporters?
Fair play, I was using Port as a generic time but supporters is probably who I was directing it at.
Re: Port Adelaide 2019
Posted:
Thu Apr 18, 2019 11:16 amby Brodlach
Lightning McQueen wrote:Brodlach wrote:whufc wrote:I keep hearing Port saying they 'cant afford' to pay out Hinkley.
I pose this question, can they afford to continue to not improve and go no where under Hinkley? Surely that has significant financial implications.
Has the club said that or ‘just in the know’ supporters?
Or just people who think they know it all?
Thus why I had them in quotation marks
Re: Port Adelaide 2019
Posted:
Thu Apr 18, 2019 11:35 amby Lightning McQueen
Brodlach wrote:Thus why I had them in quotation marks
Exactly, it's like using "everyone says" or "they've been saying".
Whether I support Hinkley or not, I have no idea on how or why he's at the helm or for how long or what clauses there are, so for now I just have to have faith in the board to make the right decisions to get the club moving forward.
Re: Port Adelaide 2019
Posted:
Thu Apr 18, 2019 4:20 pmby UK Fan
Out: Motlop
In: Marshall
According to afl.com.au
Re: Port Adelaide 2019
Posted:
Fri Apr 19, 2019 12:15 amby Jim05
Sounds like Motlop didn’t drop his bundle and was one of Port’s best in the SANFL tonight
Re: Port Adelaide 2019
Posted:
Fri Apr 19, 2019 12:23 amby LMA
Jim05 wrote:Sounds like Motlop didn’t drop his bundle and was one of Port’s best in the SANFL tonight
Got plenty of it which is what he needs. Trengove would just about have the Magarey wrapped up
Re: Port Adelaide 2019
Posted:
Mon Apr 29, 2019 11:24 amby Booney
Focus on the first 85 minutes or the last 15? The first 85 it is….*
For the majority of the contest Port Adelaide held the whip hand as Travis Boak continued his All-Australian form, you don’t have to be the captain to be a leader and Travis Boak will always be that, a leader.
Clearly Boaky is relishing being free of the extracurricular activities associated with the captaincy but he’s also thriving in his midfield role after spending the last 2 years playing as a high half forward. He’s been nothing short of sensational this year and again was BOG on Friday night. If you follow him on his social media you know he leaves no stone unturned with his physical preparation and it’s showing, he’s in rare form.
With Jonas a late out for Port (and no guarantee to come up this week) and with the Kangaroos losing Shaun Higgins late both sides had key outs at the last minute, fair to say Port covered the loss with more ease than the Kanga’s did.
The first quarter was a template of what I expected the match to be, Port on top with 5 goals to 2, the midfield of Boak, Rockliff (9 first quarter touches but a total of -9m gained – more later) and Wines feeding the likes of Rozee, the rejuvenated S.Gray and Ebert up front. As expected Port were well on top, Pittard turned up with some shockers (not just his sleeves) and the Roos looking like they were at least up for a fight. How good was Paddy’s first goal of the night? Paddys Pocket that shall now be known as.
The second quarter should have put the game to bed, 2.5 to Port as some easy shots went begging and North are held to just one major on the back of Howard, Clurey and the late in Lienert holding strong across half back.
The margin should have been greater at half time as Port got on top with contested possessions (27 to 17 for the quarter) and had 64% of the quarter in our forward half, wasteful in front of goal and reminiscent of the Brisbane game a few weeks ago. Can and will be costly against sides with more scoring power than North, we must tidy up our finishing in front of goal. While he’s doing some excellent work in the forward half Ebert’s 10.8 for the season would have him and the coaches slightly frustrated.
The game, as it often does, opened up in the third as both sides booted 3 through the big sticks, it was here though that the Kangaroos got some inside ball through Cunnington (7 clearances for the quarter with 12 touches) reading Goldstein and they began to win the contested ball, if not for some turnovers that Port turned into majors the ¾ time 27 point lead may have been slightly less. Rozee and Duursma showed their value in the third, some quality touches from them both were important at important times.
They both showed on Friday night they’ve got some substance. 11 contested possessions each, that’s a reflection of their willingness to get inside the contest as well as outside on the wing for X and leading up or marking in the F50 for Rozee. Can’t speak highly enough of both of them.
*The last, well, you could say it was in junk time that North piled on 5 goals to nothing to draw the margin back to 16 points after Port led by 40 points half way through the quarter and it was a look at how Hinkley and the coaches can wrestle back momentum with the new 6-6-6 set up, not just Port’s coaches but all AFL coaches.
In the past Westhoff would drop back once the opposition kicked 2 in a row, whilst it can happen in general play it can’t from centre bounces and we saw North kick a goal, win a clearance, go forward and kick another.
I’m sure all coaches are working on methods to prevent this but it happened to us up in Brisbane and cost us the game, fortunately the lead we had on Friday was enough to ensure the onslaught was to no avail but I don’t like the signs we’ve seen when opposition sides get a run on. In this instance the midfield needs to take control and prevent quick exits from the centre, it all starts here.
Rockliff, so important behind the ball is being squeezed for space by the opposition acknowledging how important he is in our D50 directing traffic, his 27 touches gained just 101m, the coaches will be asking more of him and those around him to ensure the ball he gets can be used with more damage than that.
Boon’s Best – Boak, Howard, S.Gray, Rozee, Wines, Ebert
Next week Collinwood at Marvel Stadium with at least one change. Robbie Gray out for at least 4 weeks with a broken hand, he’s looked just off the pace so far this year and the hands haven’t been as sticky as we normally see, he didn’t have a full preseason so 4 weeks on the track legging it around Alberton Oval might just sharpen him up.
If it’s like for like I expect Kane Farrell to come in, perhaps Motlop with a shuffle of Westhoff back into the forward half and Motlop onto the wing. Trengove has been the standout at SANFL so if it’s form they’re rewarding he must come in, that too might send Westhoff forward.
Apologies for no round 5 WCE review, I was a little *ahem* thirsty in Perth and by Tuesday the game felt like a long time ago.
Re: Port Adelaide 2019
Posted:
Mon Apr 29, 2019 8:20 pmby whufc
I noticed you mentioned the yards gained stat a bit. How is that measured, is it purely the distance forward the ball is disposed.
If so is that a slightly misleading stat as in modern football a 30 yard kick sidewards, even slightly backwards (zero yards gained) could start the slingshot resulting in a inside 50 within two more disposals. Wouldn’t read as yards gain but would be an extremely valuable possession. Same as a quick handball out a pack could then result in the start of the switch.
Genuine question as I Iove the stats aspect of sport but see that stats as needing more secondary research than the stat it produces is worth.
Re: Port Adelaide 2019
Posted:
Tue Apr 30, 2019 12:02 pmby Booney
whufc wrote:I noticed you mentioned the yards gained stat a bit. How is that measured, is it purely the distance forward the ball is disposed.
If so is that a slightly misleading stat as in modern football a 30 yard kick sidewards, even slightly backwards (zero yards gained) could start the slingshot resulting in a inside 50 within two more disposals. Wouldn’t read as yards gain but would be an extremely valuable possession. Same as a quick handball out a pack could then result in the start of the switch.
Genuine question as I Iove the stats aspect of sport but see that stats as needing more secondary research than the stat it produces is worth.
The meters gained stat is measured from where the player disposes of the ball to where the next player disposes of the ball, agreed, it can be misleading.
I don't have time to completely dissect every players performances, but, Rockliff had been "gaining" meters with kicks at 45°, or up field in our more complete team performances, in the last couple of weeks ( more so Kangaroos game and Richmond ) the opposition has been squeezing up on him and been sending him more sideways than he had previously.
Vs Richmond, 243.0m gained, Vs Kanagaroos, 101m gained. Vs West Coast, 304m gained, Vs Melbourne, 504m.....
When Rockliff has been given time/space to delivery more direct or into the corridor he's been more damaging.
Re: Port Adelaide 2019
Posted:
Tue Apr 30, 2019 12:08 pmby DOC
Is this right?
A player who kicks the ball fifty-metres, to an opposing player is still awarded 50 metres to his metres-gained. Compare this to a player who creates space by hand-balling backwards to a teammate who then is able to make efficient progression up the ground. They are docked metres gained, as the first possession goes backwards.
Re: Port Adelaide 2019
Posted:
Tue Apr 30, 2019 12:11 pmby The Bedge
DOC wrote:Is this right?
A player who kicks the ball fifty-metres, to an opposing player is still awarded 50 metres to his metres-gained. Compare this to a player who creates space by hand-balling backwards to a teammate who then is able to make efficient progression up the ground. They are docked metres gained, as the first possession goes backwards.
No, as Booney pointed out the metres-gained completes after second posession.
Therefore I believe
Player A kicks 50m to opposing player = 50m Gained less metres returned from opposing player
Player B handballs backwards loss of 5m and team mate runs and carries and kicks 75m = 70m gain for player B
