Answers to Adelaide's lacklustre start

I agree about the depth. I think the list is fairly good. They probably need another strong tall forward, even when Walker returns, but I have very high hopes for Jenkins. I get the feeling he is one bag of goals away from becoming a major threat. I like both Hartigan and Luke Thompson, but prefer Hartigan at present. Ellis-Yolmen has huge potential. Grigg, Kerridge, Lyons, Jaensch and Matt Crouch have potential, although I'm not totally convinced about any of them. I think Brad Crouch will be as good as Dangerfield and Sloane. They probably need one or two really hard midfielders.

Rutten is needed down back. Play McKernan as a permanent full forward and give him a gee up, or Jenkins! Then, if you're going to bomb there's a tall there who's not thinking about ruckwork. The smalls feed off him, and Betts would love to. J-Pod is free to go down back or be a second forward tall. Both McKernan and Jenkins have the ability to lead well too. The Crows were the smallest team last week and there's a case for playing the two of them and Jacobs. But who do you drop? The team is in transition for some time to come, as injured players gradually return.

It is good to be spoiled for choice when it comes to picking a team. These days there is more flexibility needed, so top 22s are slowly giving way to top 25s as a measuring stick. Team balance is crucial too, as is choosing horses for courses (which will become more and more common as the game progresses). So, Lynch is in my top 25, especially when Walker is not playing. VB might have to play for his spot on form, but fans don't really know what he means to the team on the ground, and more than once he has kicked the goal that really mattered. The Crows definitely have depth, some of it still only potential to what it can and will be, and that means hard to select teams.

Can't argue with most of that. They need someone in the forward line, or preferably a couple, who can take a contested mark, or at least bring the ball to ground. That means that they can't have the talls getting kicks on the centerline, and if the talls are going to stay forward then the midfielders need to work harder to become targets and providers. If there are numbers in the forward line the ball won't come straight back out, especially if there is better delivery. Even bombing the ball can be effective if you at least put it to the forwards advantage and not on their heads. The problem is that it is not just the last quarter. While it undoubtedly helps if you can lock the ball in your forward line, that is never achieved in total by the forwards. Their job is to delay it coming out so that the midfield have more time to set up walls, but the reality is if you control the middle third of the ground, i.e an area that can't be cleared with one kick, you have a very good chance of controlling the game. The object is to create contests, instead of allowing the opposition to run it through. To do that the midfielders must work harder. Firstly they ALL need to dispose of the ball MUCH better.

I agree that the midfield needs to be much better but the main thing that is really hurting the crows is their inability to score from their forwards. If we are getting more inside 50's but not scoring and just turning it over then that's the problem. If the half back or midfield was finding targets when they kicked the ball into the forward line we wouldn't have these blow out losses or inability to play out the last quarter. If on the majority of times the ball was put into the forward line and we could find a mark or then at least someone to bring the ball down to small forwards who are in the right place then you would see scores being kicked. If the backline and the mids are working hard to get the ball to te forwards and it's just automatically turnd over in the forward line an comes straight back out how do you expect them not to be leaky and totally burnt out by the last quarter. Scoreboard pressure is the best pressure you can have. Even if the miss lose the contest and it results in the other teams goal at least they have the confidence that "yep we win the next clearance and get it to our forwards and we have a goal back". But right now all we have is Betts. I think we need another big target up forwards but someone who presents to te ball properly, can bring down a big grab or understands how to crumb it to betts. McKernan doesn't know how and Jenkins cannot kick straight and often finds himself caught out of position.

Okay, the stats. I was talking to someone after the game, and we were both under the impression that Sydney murdered Adelaide in the clearances. Then, I look at the stats, and see that it was approximately equal. So how is the clearance stat measured. Is it the first person to lay hands on ball, or the team that gets the advantage. All I know is that it certainly looked like Sydney went forward a lot more often than Adelaide from both centre bounces and stoppages. They also don't publish figures on turnovers. It would be interesting to see how many times Adelaide turned the ball over in the midfield and defence as opposed to Sydney. Forward turnovers are a bit less relevant because they will always be relatively high. What stats do you rate a midfield on? The number of times they handball or kick the ball to each other as they go sideways or backward. Seriously some of those possession figures are totally pointless. If you want an interesting stat, work out the percentage of contested possession against total possessions for each player. It would also be interesting to see how many tackles were laid in general play as opposed to a stoppage, where even I could make a tackle. 37 of Adelaide's 61 tackles were made by seven players (4 or more tackles). Five of those players were midfielders, and the majority of theirs would have been at stoppages. Brent Reilly had four as a defender, and Jared Petrenko topped the list with nine as a small forward. You can't have the talls playing in the midfield and the forward line at the same time. I agree that if you look up and see two or three small forwards and 4 or 5 defenders, the easy option is to just bomb it and hope for the best. The smarter option would be to try and put the ball to the small forward's advantage and let him use his pace. The ideal option would be for the midfield to have some control over the middle of the ground so that the talls could stay in the forward line. In the same way, the defenders are being placed under huge pressure because the Adelaide midfield seems incapable of defence. I was going to say they leak like a sieve but its more like a broken dam. The forwards have to take the blame for the woeful inaccuracies. There is a little relevance in uncontested possession, since it indicates your ability to control the ball, but having ten uncontested possessions across the half back line doesn't matter a damn if the eleventh goes wrong and the opposition scores.

I actually think that the problem lies within the forward line. The midfielders collect the ball and look for a target but there is none. This results in then second guessing or aimlessly bombing the ball in resulting in turnovers. We beat Sydney and others on inside 50's and all the other stats that you would rate a midfield upon. There just isn't anyone up in the forward line that is leading/playing their role. Aside from Eddie but he's a small forward. I would put Rutten up there. He's played 200+ games on the best forwards in the comp and knows how it's done. He would be a fantastic target, amazing kick, cool head and provide another option than pods. Put Luke Thompson in the backline to cover Rutten.

The Crows didn't play that well with Walker in the team at the beginning of last year, I feel the loss of Tippett hurt a lot more than anyone will admit in fact I would say Tex pushed himself further up the field and tried to make up for the loss which contributed to the injury and now with such a popular guy like Vince gone there might be some underlying ill will. I think a healthy list and playing the bottom 6 teams twice papered over cracks in 2012 and development of youngsters during the Neil Craig era was too focused on fitness and hard running over everything else. Some recruitment decisions for example Wayne Carey took away a pick 2 also trading on either McLeod or Edwards when they weren't passing to each other on the field would've yielded a number 1 the Tippett affair cost them a chance to trade him for a high draft pick a year or 2 before he left after all they new he wanted out that's why they broke the rules and offered so much for him.

Tom Lynch kicked thirty odd goals last year, ten of which were in one game where he ran around all day without an opponent. I think he's a good player, who knows where to position himself and is a good kick. However, he doesn't have a defensive side, and is at his best in uncontested situations. There are already plenty of them. I agree with Van Berlo. I'm not sure he's best 22, but there's no way he wouldn't be in there if fit. Otten? He's versatile, but so is Henderson, and I don't think there's room for both.

I think there is only room for two of Otten, Reilly and Henderson, The problem is still the midfield. Sure most of them are inexperienced, but the problem is deeper than just youth. I know that I'm an old fashioned guy, but some things are always true. When the other team has the ball, you're a defender, and when your team has it, you're an offensive player. Good teams own the middle third of the ground. Defensively you don't allow space and free players, and offensively you make space and offer options. In 2012 Adelaide were great at this. They had help from a forward line that was absolutely miserly in letting defenders rebound easily. The difference, on Saturday, between Adelaide and Sydney was like chalk and cheese. The Sydney players had absolute confidence in their teammates ability to win the ball and deliver it. The transition from defence to attacking mode was instantaneous. In defending they were relentless. Adelaide, on the other hand, were static. They looked slow, but what was worse they appeared half-hearted when chasing. I think they lack leadership. The big forwards spent a lot of time up the ground trying to offer a link through the midfield, and they got possessions, but they left a forward line with two or three small forwards competing against 3, 4 or 5 defenders. No wonder Betts, Petrenko and Grigg could only manage 32 possessions between them. I think that they need to make better use of Petrenko. He's quick, has the hardest body on the list, is completely fearless, and never gives up a chase. I can never understand why he's spent the better part of the past two years in a forward pocket, tagging defenders. If you wanted someone with some grunt in the midfield to help Dangerfield, he looks to me like the right type.

In response to Vocans, Andy Otten and Tom Lynch (when fit) are very much in Adelaide's best 22. Tom Lynch was the club's leading goal kicker last year. The only reason players like Lewis Johnstone are getting a sniff is because both Lynch and Walker are missing. Tom works hard around the ground, and doesn't stop moving (unlike many of the Crows forwards at the moment). Andy Otten is a cool head and a versatile player. He's had a horribly unlucky run with injury, and can be a little slow to find his best form once back on the park. Neil Craig was always keen to turn Otten into a midfielder (http://www.sportsnewsfirst.com.au/articles/2011/02/12/otten-on-way-to-elite-craig/). Sando's tried him as a forward. Realistically at the moment, we could use someone who is calm under pressure and able to play almost anywhere on the park. The question for me, is who would fall out of the current 22 for van Berlo. Right now Matt Crouch would make way for Brad, but of the other midfielders, who's spot does he take? Dave McKay, Matt Wright, Matt Jaensch, Mitch Grigg and co would seem to be the obvious candidates on paper, but they're all actually playing reasonably well at the moment... (I also with agree with other commenters - this article is headed "Answers", but only raises questions)

Surely Tom Lynch is in their best 22?

Finally an honest assessment from a crows fan, thank you sir.

Part of the solution is more games under the belt for a number of youngsters.

I too rate Henderson highly - always have. It has taken time for him to begin to realise just how good he is/can be, and then that awful injury. Personally, I was almost as devastated as him because I was looking forward to his arrival in the elite. He would have been a devastating old style wing and his long kick should be used from just outside the 50 - Adelaide have a number of players with long penetrating accurate kicks that could be used better - Jaensch, Smith, Henderson, Grigg, Dangerfield, McKernan, Walker. Danger is off and it may have to do with developing a different attitude to the treatment he's getting, but I don't agree he has to get suspended to do it. Ablett Jr has found a way, and I think it involved meeting the cynical brutality with an even fiercer determination. Danger is no. 1 in a close race with Sloane, but Brad Crouch is something of a turnover merchant himself at the moment. The mids are not far off, but it is an attitude thing partly down to some youth and also to the attacking style they want to play but no one can play all the time. Sometimes you've just got to be fiercely defensive. That will add up to giving as good as you get. Can't agree that Otten isn't best 22 after last season. He is a cool head like Rutten and has an all round game. May be a bit slow especially in a team with the Truck and Sam Shaw.

Of the guys on Adelaide's injury list, I think that, realistically, four are best 22. Walker, Van Berlo, Crouch and Henderson. I rate Lynch and Otten as best 25 or 26. McKernan's consistency is an issue, but I think that Jenkins will eventually be as valuable as Tippett was. Right now, if you wanted to try something different, I would consider planting Rutten in the goal square. It seems that the Crows are determined to continue last season's effort of bombing the ball onto the heads of the forwards, even when the talls are up the field, so why not have someone there who will, at least, bring the ball to ground. Henderson, looks great. He can mark and run and kick, but defensively, in close, I'm not sure. Lynch, to me, is a very good uncontested footballer. I am probably a little unkind in my thoughts on Dangerfield. He is a great player, I don't doubt his courage, or is endeavor, and his ability to produce the spectacular, but I don't rate his decision making at all. He wouldn't make my top ten players in the competition, and if I had to choose two out of Dangerfield, Sloane and Brad Crouch, "Danger" would miss out.

Jack, You've got to be joking. There is no doubt that Dangerfield is getting hammered every time he goes near the ball, often illegally. I hate to see that type of thing no matter who is on the receiving end, and would love to see some kind of action from the AFL to protect players from that kind of thing. However, the response out of Adelaide that his teammates need to do more to protect him, is simply unbelievable. This is a guy who is a short odds-on favourite to be captain of the club in the not so distant future. What kind of message does that send? What desperately needs to happen is for "Danger" to stand up for himself. He needs to dish a bit out, even if it costs him a few weeks of suspension. I can remember a young Wayne Carey being in much the same position. Finally he cracked, took the punishment, and never looked back. But, as for protection from teammates, I don't think so. My take on the Crows is that most of their problems lie in the midfield. I think that both the forwards and backs are being let down badly by a midfield who (generally) don't work hard enough defensively, or create enough options offensively, and whose quality of disposal is appalling, under pressure or not. I also am fairly sure that the events of the off-season have had a negative effect on the playing group. It became clear to the players that there was a very large group of them being shopped around in order to secure a decent draft pick. There were a couple of guys who heard in the media that they wanted to return home to Victoria, and were somewhat surprised by the news. Then there was Bernie. He was a very popular guy at West Lakes, and despite all the club's denials, everybody, including his former teammates, know that he was "shafted". Tex and Dangerfield may be part of the solution, but it will take more than that.

I agree about the pressure game being the Achilles heel at the moment. Once you're giving way under pressure it's very hard to stop the rot. WIth a number of young players and bodies the Crows are in effect undermanned. Injuries, some of them freaks, have robbed the Crows of a large number of players most of whom would be first picks and provide a steadying influence under pressure. A number of those playing also had interrupted pre-seasons and streaky starts to the season. Clubs like to say that there are no excuses, and there aren't, but there are reasons, and reasons can add up. The Dangerfield tag is not that new, but the way it is done is: there is a concerted effort to deck him whenever the chance arises, sometimes within the spirit of the game and sometimes not. I don't see too many Crows responding in kind, and I do think they need to protect him better. But who in the Crows would have that role? Each of the current mids is a playmaker or trying to be. Van Berlo might have taken it up. There's been talk about Otten as a mid, and he would fit the role, but that depends on not needing him at the back. J-Pod showed his worth and will be a very handy utility when Walker is back. Jenkins had opportunities early but his kicking let him and the team down. McKernan has to put in consistent effort for more than one game at a time. I think Jenkins needs game time and I'd throw him back, rather than forward, with a brief to be a spoiler and not worry about creative play right now. Let him gain his feet in the game, and then maybe think of him as a forward. He is very fast, very big, an awkward opponent in tight, and suited to spoiling the big faster forwards that many teams have these days. But the real problem at the moment is the pressure game. I'd hate to be playing it - it doesn't look like much fun to me; and it is often very ugly and boring.

Dangerfield was good against Swams for 2-3 quarters. Easily best on ground for Crows.