Round 4: Sturt v West - Sunday 26 April @ Peter Motley Oval

Lee wrote:PS, Big Phil.

I'll also look forward to West's sponsors getting a big plug next broadcast from City Mazda.

Do you always do that?

Still no answer.

I won't be drawn into the debate about so-called incidents. Obviously I was pleased with the way our guys were able to handle the pressure and remain focused through the tough parts of the game. And West certainly made it a very tough contest for three quarters. Then were able to grab our chances when they came, and put it on the scoreboard. Something we didn't do the previous week at Noarlunga. Nor in Round 1 against Norwood. A long way to go and a lot still to do. But I thought we took a step in the right direction on Sunday. Consistency is the next hurdle we have to jump.

Lee wrote:I look forward to the Recovery Session highlighting 'misdemeanours' by all sides during a game for the Match Review Panel in future. Not sure how appropriate that is before anyone is notified of any players cited.

How do you know anyone wasn't notified? The people that need to know would have known...

Bundy wrote:

Lee wrote:PS, Big Phil.

I'll also look forward to West's sponsors getting a big plug next broadcast from City Mazda.

Do you always do that?

Still no answer.

Give me a chance to see the question, Bundy...

Only just noticed now, going back through the thread...

In answer to Lee's question - I don't know?

It was my first time commentating for the LifeFM Live Stream and was going off the instructions I was given by the LifeFM Manager. I assume if LifeFM Live Stream a West game, then yes, the West sponsors will get a read out.

Thanks for the correction of Francis and Anderson, we are all human and make mistakes...

Lee wrote:Those highlights give a somewhat inaccurate (like West's goalkicking) impression of the game, by showing so much of the last quarter.  West dominated for long patches and had more Inside 50's, but wasted their chances and didn't have a marking forward.

Not sure I agree with that, Lee...

In terms of the edits that make the final cut for The Recovery Session, the Champion Data coded highlights get used to extract the vision for the collating of the final snippets used...

The guy that does the editing has time restrictions, both in editing the games and getting The Recovery Session package uploaded onto the SANFL site...

Not sure if people want to see 'highlights' of West, or any team for that matter, going inside 50 and not being able to capitalise on the scoreboard...

The things that the guy looks for when cutting the vision are goals, contested marks, tackles, report referrals or coast-to--coast passages of play...

Have to appreciate that when cutting through 5 games on a Sunday night, often staying up until the wee hours of Monday morning, the most effective manner to get the 'highlights' will be used.

it was an entertaining game to watch as a neutral, West blew their chances with the aid of the breeze in the third term when they butchered plenty of opportunities, when Sturts' chance came in the final stanza, they took it & therefore deserved their win

Phil, given your extensive and excellent commentary experience and your comments on Brad Helbig, who do you think are the player/s from each club who are similar risks of attention from other clubs, or is he the only one?

Scrunch wrote:Nothing to see in the Helbig incident .. Free kick the correct the decision, the argy bargy is just footy and I'd hope it's never taken out of the game. To that extent I didn't think there was much in the Tuck incident either. Who hasn't played footy and given and received a whack in the guts/chest before? That Penfold kid looked alright for Sturt too btw.

Agree with all that, even about Penfold.

countrycousin wrote:I won't be drawn into the debate about so-called incidents. Obviously I was pleased with the way our guys were able to handle the pressure and remain focused through the tough parts of the game. And West certainly made it a very tough contest for three quarters. Then were able to grab our chances when they came, and put it on the scoreboard. Something we didn't do the previous week at Noarlunga. Nor in Round 1 against Norwood. A long way to go and a lot still to do. But I thought we took a step in the right direction on Sunday. Consistency is the next hurdle we have to jump.

That's pretty much how I saw it too.

West probably dominated play for the middle two quarters, then were over-run. I thought Sturt deserved the win, after they soaked up enormous pressure, then played terrific footy in the last 15 minutes. Kurtze was a dominant player early and late, while Beard is a key and Coad is quite simply one of the best players in the League.

From a West point of view it was disappointing. Even when we were only 2 points down well into through the last quarter, few thought it would be anything but a Sturt win. Still, for three quarters, West played a fast running, attractive style of footy and they'll only keep improving. They really suffered from a lack of a marking forward and will keenly wait for Middleton and Hardy to play. That would change their forward line dramatically and allow players such as Beech and Tuck to play on lesser defenders.

Shannon Green kicked another 3 and is becoming a dangerous small forward.

I'd like to see Sturt away from Unley before judging them too early. but they certainly were much better than the week before against South.

Looking at the highlights it was fairly even time wise and not just focussing on the last quarter. I'm also certain that players from all clubs who get a bit sucked in gain attention from other players , have done for years it's not just West players. There was a bit of off the ball tactics from West I believe trying to ratttle Sturt but it didn't seem to work too well.

Lee wrote:Phil, given your extensive and excellent commentary experience and your comments on Brad Helbig, who do you think are the player/s from each club who are similar risks of attention from other clubs, or is he the only one?

I'd need a bit of time to have a think about it, Lee, but will come back to you in due course...

I have since had a chat to someone who was pretty close to the action on Sunday and I want to clarify my comments, initially based on purely what I was seeing through binoculars, at the back of the grandstand...

Whilst Brad Helbig did get a little heated, of course after being prompted by Ben Hansen, he did have a bit to say to the yappy Sturt runner coming off, he did have a bit to say back to Zane Kirkwood, who was coming off the ground at the same time AND he did cop a spray from an innapropriate supporter in the crowd, as he came to the bench.

The comments that were directed Brad's way were terrible and West officials (and Brad himself) showed great resolve as to not take it any further, in a situation that could have easily got out of hand...

Seems as though there are some serial offenders amongst supporter bases that just aren't getting the message...

Thanks Phil, well said.

Nathan Eagleton whilst he was at Norwood was one who clearly couldn't handle it. The attention he received at times was ridiculous, with some opponents not even facing the ball and having two handfuls of his guernsey. Unfortunately for Nathan, he made his frustration pretty clear and effectively wrote out an open invitation for every opponent to treat him that way.

Sorry Big Phil bit pushy.