NAB Challenge Game 1: Sydney Swans v Port Adelaide Power @ BISP

[wolftone57]

Jack, Hiscox and Robinson, to me, don't appear to have what it takes. They all kick poorly and Robinson goes to ground a lot and just seems to be missing something when he attacks the ball. Leonardis looked promising - he gets where the ball's at and Dawson has very clean skills, looks like the ideal footballer and looks like he plays like one.
Lloyd is a concern. He gets plenty of it and gets into space, but is slow to dispose of the footy, and when he is clear doesn't sprint to give himself that extra yard to steady and dispose. The opposition close on him quickly. If he plays like this his disposal must be a hell of a lot better. Doesn't create much.

You forgot to mention Marsh. He was dreadful. Zero disposal to half time. Four for the match. not good. did some ok things but not good enough at this level. time to bite the bullet and delist him and Hiscox. Jack Hiscox can't kick. Simple. He didn't even get the ball either, out of his depth. It's great to have pace around the club but they have to be able to play footy. I still think Robbo has some up side and so does BJ but those two don't. Impressed with Toby, really took the game on.

[wolftone57]

Apples and pears. A small mid v a mid sized forward.

Yes agree. Dawson played third tall for Sturt seniors. Has had experience against men and kicked 5 I think for Sturt. He has a man's body too. They called him a six footer on the telly he's actually 192cm not 183cm. He is 6'3". Takes an exceptional mark apparently. I can't understand why he isn't playing half forward or forward pocket in the NAB.

Dawson, Leonardis and Hewett can come back anytime. Marsh & Hiscox can go back to the reserves.

[wolftone57]

I agree MP that Mills looked good off halfback, but now it's a matter of how to fit everyone in. The consensus seems to be that both Talia and Laidler had good games. So we still have Ted, Rohan, Zak Jones and Macca to fit in the side, all of whom have been slated to go into the back six at times. There is also a bit of love for Nic Newman, who is yet to play and would need to be elevated.

I wouldn't get down on Nankervis just yet. Ruckmen take time to develop, especially Mummyesque types. I'm not expecting him to get up to AFL standard for another 3 or 4 years. The career of a number 1 ruckman doesn't seem to get going until age 24 or so. For example, Matt Lobbe was 24 before getting a full time gig and he was a highly touted 1st round pick who has lived up to his billing.

I've been a fan of Hewett from the start, but still have trouble fitting him into the best 22. We also don't know what the story will be with McGlynn and whether he slots into the senior side if he's fully fit. I'd like to see Hewett get at least 7 or 8 games this year.

Jones, Macca and Benny will not start the season so have to replace them anyway until they are ready.

[wolftone57]

Home sick so have watched twice. The difficulty with these games is 26 players, and a trial so players aren't necessarily drifting out, simply not out there

Port played with a lot of intensity, and they are harder to play against when Jasper Pittard isn't playing

Mills and Parker are freaks, playing off half back Mills was reminiscent of Dennis Carrol. Decision making and foots skills good

Our ruck division looked good, Sinclair looked really solid, definite forward option. nankervis played 2nd half also played some smart footy. So we look better this year than last. Later in the year Nankervis's aggression could be telling

At times our backline looked terrible, just awful. Our lack of run from there is a massive worry. We looked better when Cunningham was there. There is a sameness to Laidler Grundy Talia.

Talia was solid

I though both B Jack and towers looked good. B Jack brings far more intensity and tackling off the footy than Jetta. Towers looks fitter and stronger, damaging

Lloyd and Mitchell were very disappointing with ball use

Not sold on Hewett, he is just ok at everything. Dan Robininson also a little disappointing

Dawson was overhyped he is a booming kick. Leonardis could be a genuine line breaker, had reasonable intensity which Dawson lacked

I saw things far differently to you. Hewett was very good. Very composed. He doesn't need to get 30 odd disposals to be effective.

Dawson got the ball Reggi. Got his own ball. By the way his kicking is very good and at least he can hit a player or kick a goal and doesn't hesitate to do so. Both he and Leonardis got their own ball. They are different players and Dawson lacked nothing. Leonardis is a mid or winger. Dawson is a third tall at 190 or 6'3" in the old.

I wasn't overly impressed with Sinclair in the forward line. He dropped two sitters. If he is to bring his game up a notch he has to take them.


Yes both Mitch and Lloydy abused the ball.

I think you have to look further than the run the ball out of the backline and look to kick our way out of trouble. We over handball and in the backline that is dangerous. We will get flogged by good sides for that.

Nobody has mentioned our winning the clearances but misusing those wins with bad delivery.

What about the long bomb Reggi. That was again a huge part of the game. It is a waste of a kick. We wasted about 70% of our forward entries once again. Should have won by 10 goals with the amount of ball we had.

[wolftone57]

If you are looking for a succinct example of the potential of our young recruits other than Mills , the quick gather dodge and slick handball from Leonardis to Dawson in the final quarter for a goal in the deluge will warm the heart.

I agree it was bloody fantastic. leonardis got his own ball slick to Dawson and Dawson didn't even hesitate. I love how the kid used the wind to bring the ball back into the goal. bloody clever. just knew by instinct where to kick it. That is the difference between a real footballer and an athlete.

[ugg]

I don't agree re Marsh. He had no disposals to half time and only 4 for the match.

Marsh had 0 disposals in the first half because he didn't come on until late in the 2nd quarter. Leonardis and Dawson only saw action in the 2nd half as well.

[Mug Punter]

Jack, Hiscox and Robinson, to me, don't appear to have what it takes. They all kick poorly and Robinson goes to ground a lot and just seems to be missing something when he attacks the ball. Leonardis looked promising - he gets where the ball's at and Dawson has very clean skills, looks like the ideal footballer and looks like he plays like one.
Lloyd is a concern. He gets plenty of it and gets into space, but is slow to dispose of the footy, and when he is clear doesn't sprint to give himself that extra yard to steady and dispose. The opposition close on him quickly. If he plays like this his disposal must be a hell of a lot better. Doesn't create much.

I also thought BJ was disappointing and Hiscox' disposal is very very poor, IMO he could be a very good tagger due to his elite athletics background but his skills are poor.

I thought look Lloyd was quite busy and seemed to deliver the ball quite well and could be an improver, we all see the game differently....

Both Leonardis and Dawson are still a long way off but seem to have made a solid start to life in an AFL program, Dawson showed some nice glimpses and has a nice kick too

[Conor_Dillon]

Not going to bother with any sort of player by player analysis because it's fruitless from such a small sample sized...but my first impression of Leonardis was a good one...attacked the ball hard and seemed to have a real intensity about his game, something we know full well that outside runners can often lack.

[southsideswan]

Interesting how people see things. I thought Jake Lloyd had a good game. I then checked game stats (ok ok they are just a small part of the picture) and that picture is he had 31 disposals, no clangers but a low (for him) disposal efficiency (61%). I saw him get the ball out of the pack, run and kicked long for Cunningham who kicked the goal. The commentators were praising the kick and gave it to Kennedy.

The more Jake improves the better he is going to make others players look.

[Scottee]

Interesting how people see things. I thought Jake Lloyd had a good game. I then checked game stats (ok ok they are just a small part of the picture) and that picture is he had 31 disposals, no clangers but a low (for him) disposal efficiency (61%). I saw him get the ball out of the pack, run and kicked long for Cunningham who kicked the goal. The commentators were praising the kick and gave it to Kennedy.

The more Jake improves the better he is going to make others players look.

Fact is both Jake and Harry C are going to be very important players this year.

[wolftone57]

Fact is both Jake and Harry C are going to be very important players this year.

I agree with that. Most important. their run and carry will be needed, plus they both have that ability to find space in rush hour traffic.

[wolftone57]

Marsh had 0 disposals in the first half because he didn't come on until late in the 2nd quarter. Leonardis and Dawson only saw action in the 2nd half as well.

Marsh came on half way through the second and had 4 for the match against a Port seconds line up. He's 22 been on the list three years and is going nowhere. If he couldn't have a good game against this lot he won't against top quality opposition. He did a couple of good things but his man got a away far too often and he just didn't put himself in the right spots to get the ball. I'm sorry but I think it a pretty pitiful effort the same as Hiscox. He was terrible too. Leonardis and Dawson had more disposals then both and only came on just before (3mins to go) 3/4 time. What's more they used it better and seemed to fit into the team better. That is because they are both natural footballers. Footballers not athletes.

The skill level of the athletes we have had at the club has always let them down. That is why Hawks decided their main focus was to be skills, footy smarts and the ability to deliver great outcomes. Our disposal efficiency was 70.23. High for us really. In contrast Hawks had an average of 77.02. funnily enugh it was their young blokes that let them down Sissily 62,5, Wilsmore 60, O'Brien 57.1, Litherland 69.2 and two experienced players Bruest 61.5 (3 goals) & Schoenmakers 62.5.

for us it was a matter of too many under 70%; Parks 59.4, Mitchell 59.4, Lloyd 61.3 ( normally such a good kick), Joey 60, Hewett 66.7, Sinclair 66.7, Cunningham 60, Hiscox 20, Leonardis 50, Franklin 50 & Heeney 66.

See the difference though. Six under 70 compared to 11 under 70. What's more it is our most prolific ball getters that waste the ball. That will hurt us if we don't get better.