Some consolation for Dane

Adelaide game

3. Dale Thomas
2. Nick Maxwell
1. Steele Sidebottom

Geelong game

3. Heath Shaw
2. Harry O'Brien
1. Dale Thomas

Dane Swan 23
Scott Pendlebury 18
Alan Didak 16
Nick Maxwell 14
Leon Davis 13
Heath Shaw 11
Tarkyn Lockeyer 7
Josh Fraser 6
Simon Prestigiacomo 6
Travis Cloke 6
Dale Thomas 5
Dayne Beams 5
Harry O'Brien 4
Brad Dick 4
Marty Clarke 3
John Anthony 2
Leigh Brown 2
Paul Medhurst 1
Sharrod Wellingham 1
Steele Sidebottom 1

So concludes the tallying of the finest Magpie for 09. Not surprisingly, Dane Swan comes out on top. Thoroughly deserved too. The beginning of the year was all about Pendlebury, while the middle to latter phases of the season saw Didak and Davis shine. Swan was the rock of the team though, it's no surprise his purple patch of form coincided with Collingwood's 12 of 13 streak. Looking at that list, I think I more or less got things right. 2009 in my opinion saw six individuals stand out in particular, and that's the six fittingly represented at the top of the standings.

After a dreadful 2008 it was fantastic to see Heath Shaw's return to form. The finals especially saw his unique combination of dash and hardness on display. Skipper Nick also came into his own in 2009. While the early stages saw the captaincy somewhat burden his play, as he tried to be too aggressive, he eventually established himself in the team. Critics that said he might not be amongst Collingwood's 15 best players were put to shame in the later part of the year. Maxwell's unrelenting courage, defensive awareness and underrated strength in the contest earned him a rightful spot in the All-Australian team. One of the highlights of the season was his heroic performance against the Saints in the qualifying final.

It's hard to objectively evaluate 2009 overall for Alan Didak and Leon Davis following the events of Saturday night. I will leave it at this. Both are immensely talented football players, but neither is at the stage where they can simply expect to contribute on the sole basis of their skills. For Davis, it's all about workrate. During the home and away season his running was exceptional and the results were evident. During the finals his workrate slipped noticably. Performing against great teams has been the great stain on Davis' career. In the finals he was made to look terrible. By the end of the Geelong game he looked like he had reverted back to his 2002 self. On the basis of this season and last, it's clear that isn't true. However, to win back the fans he needs to perform from the start in 2010, and maintain that performance into September.

I'm not going to question Alan Didak's workrate. From what I saw in the finals, he was legitimately carrying his own weight. However, his decision making needs drastic improvement - with and without the ball. A pair of brain fades (the turnover in the pocket against St. Kilda and the 50m penalty to Mooney Saturday night) led to massive turning points in losing finals. Also, we saw Didak's once famous radar for goal go pathetically out of whack in September. One goal in three finals isn't a good enough return for one of the best kicks for goal in the league. His decision to impotently centre the ball in the final quarter against the Cats, when will within range, summed up his season past few weeks around goal. His six game stretch after returning from injury in the middle of the season showed that when at his best, Didak is a bona fide matchwinner. He just needs to do it more often.

The steady improvement of Scott Pendlebury took its greatest leap in 2009. The first ten weeks of the season especially saw the team's smoothest mover and user establish himself as the midfield general. You really have to go to the game to appreciate Pendlebury's leadership in the midfield. The major blight on Pendlebury's game is his lack of courage and general toughness. While that is still somewhat of an issue, his ability to win first possession at stoppages and gain the contested touches around the ground negates it a little. His absence in the finals series was sorely, sorely lacked.

One man who failed to compensate for Pendlebury in September was Dane Swan. Swan hardly embarassed himself, but his inability to be the prolific ball winner down the stretch that he was earlier in the year played its part in Collingwood's exit. The stats, which so many define Swan by, speak for themselves. In the first 20 weeks of the season, Swan failed to reach 29 disposals twice (one of those was a 28 touch game). In the final 5 weeks of the season, he didn't reach 29 disposals once. I'm not going to place too much responsibility on Swan for Collingwood's September failure. He had solid games against St. Kilda and Adelaide, and was beaten by the league's best tagger against Geelong. You would expect him to wear down late in the season having to cope with hard tags week-in-week out for the first time in his career. With Dane, it's best to focus on the positives. 2009 saw him truly make the leap into 'star' territory. In the past, I've written him off because of his poor disposal and untrustworthy nature around goal. 2009 sees the end of that. Another player you must see in person to appreciate, Swan's strength, vision, awareness, football IQ and running ability is elite among the league. What is most impressive about Swan is not so much his ability to win possession, but the sense one gets when he has it. Once just another body in the team, I get the same sense with Swan as I do with Didak, Davis, Thomas and Pendlebury - I expect him to do something special when he gets the ball. 2009 has seen Swan evolve into a playmaker, and a legitimate star. For these reasons, he's Collingwood's best player of 2009.

NFL picks week two

Last week: 10-6

KANSAS CITY (-3) over Oakland
TENNESSEE (-6.5) over Houston
NY JETS (+3.5) over New England
GREEN BAY (-9) over Cincinnati
DETROIT (+10) over Minnesota
New Orelans (+1) over PHILADELPHIA
Carolina (+6) over ATLANTA
WASHINGTON (-9.5) over St Louis
JACKSONVILLE (-3) over Arizona
SAN FRANCISCO (-1.5) over Seattle
BUFFALO (-5) over Tampa Bay
DENVER (-3) over Cleveland
Baltimore (+3) over SAN DIEGO
CHICAGO (+2.5) over Pittsburgh
NY Giants (+2.5) over DALLAS
Indianapolis (-3) over MIAMI

With a whimper

Richmond game

3. Dane Swan
2. Travis Cloke
1. Dayne Beams

Sydney game

3. Dayne Beams
2. Nick Maxwell
1. John Anthony

Bulldogs game

3. Heath Shaw
2. Tarkyn Lockeyer
1. Nick Maxwell

St. Kilda game

3. Nick Maxwell
2. Heath Shaw
1. Dane Swan

Dane Swan 23
Scott Pendlebury 18
Alan Didak 16
Leon Davis 13
Nick Maxwell 12
Heath Shaw 8
Tarkyn Lockeyer 7
Josh Fraser 6
Simon Prestigiacomo 6
Travis Cloke 6
Dayne Beams 5
Brad Dick 4
Marty Clarke 3
Harry O'Brien 2
John Anthony 2
Leigh Brown 2
Paul Medhurst 1
Dale Thomas 1
Sharrod Wellingham 1

NFL picks week one 2009

The new season is upon us. I'll have some final predictions at the end of the post, but for now I'll get stuck right into it. Going through every single game isn't going to be realistic long-term, so what I will do is discuss the four games I feel are the most interesting. Or the four I feel strongest about. Here we go, home team in caps.



PITTSBURGH (-6.5) over Tennessee
Alright, the game is already over, but this is how I would have picked. And I would have been wrong. Neither team really impressed me last night. Pittsburgh looked like a slightly less formidable version of last year's championship team - no way to run the ball the ball, inconsistency in the passing game for the first three quarters, but an excellent defence, a clutch quarterback and a lot of heart. Last night that was enough to beat a timid Tennessee.

Denver (+5.5) over CINCINNATI
An improved defence, the loss of two overrated big names and a lot to prove makes Denver an interesting team this year. The Bengals are getting way too much hype for a team that has done nothing the past two years and lost its best offensive player.


BALTIMORE (-13) over Kansas City
Philadelphia (-1.5) over CAROLINA
HOUSTON (-4) over New York
Detroit (+13) over NEW ORLEANS

ATLANTA (-4) over Miami
Minnesota (-3.5) over CLEVELAND

INDIANAPOLIS (-7) over Jacksonville

Dallas (-4.5) over TAMPA BAY
San Francisco (+6) over ARIZONA

Washington (+7) over NEW YORK
Everyone's late sleeper team, the Redskins. With reason. The defence was already good, and Haynesworth's addition gives them a feroucios extra dimension. The Giants have a worrying lack of buzz around them. It feels like they're on track for a 9-7 or 10-6 type season, and then go out meekly in the playoffs. I like the Redskins to cover the points, and maybe even win the match.

GREEN BAY (-4.5) over Chicago
Possibly the most talented in the NFC this year. Expect the Bears (who should be a decent team this year) to be shocked by the Packers.

NEW ENGLAND (-11) over Buffalo
San Diego (-9) over OAKLAND

Marching

Essendon game

3. Josh Fraser
2. Alan Didak
1. Travis Cloke

Bulldogs game

3. Dane Swan
2. Alan Didak
1. Nick Maxwell

Hawthorn game

3. Heath Shaw
2. Dane Swan
1. Leon Davis

Carlton game

3. Travis Cloke
2. Dane Swan
1. Leon Davis

Brisbane game

3. Pendlebury
2. Davis
1. Swan

Adelaide game

3. Maxwell
2. Didak
1. Wood

Leaderboard

Dane Swan 19
Scott Pendlebury 18
Alan Didak 16
Leon Davis 13
Nick Maxwell 6
Josh Fraser 6
Simon Prestigiacomo 6
Tarkyn Lockeyer 5
Travis Cloke 4
Brad Dick 4
Heath Shaw 3
Marty Clarke 3
Harry O'Brien 2
Leigh Brown 2
Paul Medhurst 1
Dale Thomas 1
John Anthony 1
Dayne Beams 1
Sharrod Wellingham 1

Rolling

Fremantle game

3. Alan Didak
2. Dane Swan
1. Harry O'Brien

Sydney game

3. Alan Didak
2. Dane Swan
1. Harry O'Brien


Melbourne game

3. Brad Dick
2. Alan Didak
1. Scott Pendlebury


Leaderboard

Scott Pendlebury 15
Dane Swan 11
Alan Didak 10
Leon Davis 9
Simon Prestigiacomo 6
Tarkyn Lockeyer 5
Brad Dick 4
Marty Clarke 3
Josh Fraser (ugh) 3
Harry O'Brien 2
Nick Maxwell 2
Leigh Brown 2
Paul Medhurst 1
John Anthony 1
Dayne Beams 1
Sharrod Wellingham 1

Back on track

Carlton game

3. Scott Pendlebury
2. Simon Prestigiacomo
1. Marty Clarke

West Coast game

3. Leon Davis
2. Tarkyn Lockyer
1. Scott Pendlebury

Port Adelaide game

3. Dane Swan (a lazy 48)
2. Leigh Brown
1. Brad Dick

Leaderboard

Scott Pendlebury 14
Leon Davis 9
Dane Swan 7
Simon Prestigiacomo 6
Tarkyn Lockeyer 5
Marty Clarke 3
Josh Fraser (ugh) 3
Nick Maxwell 2
Alan Didak 2
Leigh Brown 2
Paul Medhurst 1
Brad Dick 1
John Anthony 1
Dayne Beams 1
Sharrod Wellingham 1

Quick (very quick) notes on a blowout (and a win)

Apologies for not making posts about the past two matches. I didn't think there was much to be said really. We beat a North Melbourne side we should have beaten, and we got smashed by a team we had no business beating. The injuries are ridiculous, and you could almost say that tomorrow's match could decide the season. Anyway, here are the votes...

North Melbourne game
3. Tarkyn Lockeyer
2. Leon Davis
1. Dane Swan

St. Kilda game
3. Scott Pendlebury
2. Nick Maxwell
1. Sharrod Wellingham

Leaderboard

Scott Pendlebury 10
Leon Davis 6
Simon Prestigiacomo 4
Dane Swan 4
Tarkyn Lockeyer 3
Josh Fraser (ugh) 3
Nick Maxwell 2
Alan Didak 2
Marty Clarke 2
Paul Medhurst 1
John Anthony 1
Dayne Beams 1
Sharrod Wellingham 1

...

It's been almost two hours since the match ended and I still can't believe what just happened. That incredible turn of events can lead to one question and one question only... what the fuck?

How the fuck did that happen. How the fuck can you concede a 14 point advantage in the rain (IN THE FUCKING RAIN) with not more than three minutes game time remaining to an inferior team. I take that back, Essendon is not the inferior team. Right now no one is inferior to the Collingwood Football Club. Such a statement would be too harsh a damning. Today, Collingwood simply embarassed themselves. As to how a team with premiership aspirations can lose to a team that will struggle to escape the bottom four I don't know. But as to how it can happen when the weaker team loses their two most important players (Lloyd was on one leg) and still win is completely beyond me.

Management needs to re-evaluate everything the football club has been aiming for. This is not a premiership contender or even a top four contender. Making the eight will be difficult enough. Think this is a blood-pumped over-reaction? It's not. This team hasn't achieved anything in the past that would suggest an improvement. The past five years have seen two bottom four finishes and three unsuccessful finals campaigns. And yeah, they were unsuccessful, let's not kid ourselves. Two heartless and skilless exits to the Bulldogs and St Kilda, and a failure to capitalise on Geelong choking.

There are a lot of players that need to take a good hard look at themselves in the mirror today. Barham and Brown need to go back to the two's. Barham can't kick or handball, and Brown missed two opportunities to seal the game. Neither of them justified their place in the team. Shannon Cox I'm willing to give another week, on the basis of sheer potential. He needs to make better decisions though. He's at his best when he's instinctive, when he starts to think about things he turns it over. That's a worry. Credit to Travis Cloke today for lifting his game from 'dreadful' to 'extremely mediocre'. Small steps Travis. Blazing away on your left foot every single time isn't getting you anywhere. Robert Walls is a bit of a prick but he made a good point that Medhurst has reverted back to his Fremantle ways of playing for the free kick. Eyes for the footy Paul. Anthony Rocca needs more time to work on his body.

Josh Fraser. The best personification of the past decade for Collingwood football. A lot of hype, a lot of talent, a lot of promise... no reward. Josh Fraser was atrocious today. He cost us the game. There may have been 43 other players that were on the field yesterday, but none (including Patty Ryder), had more of a say in Essendon winning. For such a massive swing early to go Collingwood's way with Hille's injury, and then for Fraser to completely and utterly fail to capitalising on it - it cost Collingwood the match. Fraser has never been a good ruckman. Never. But there's no excuse for a veteran player who has spent ten years playing the position of ruck in the AFL to get beaten by a 21 year old playing out of position is simply unacceptable. Fraser had 10kg, 2 inches, 6 years and 122 games on Ryder and was completely embarrassed by him. Ryder was Essendon's best player. Fraser was Collingwood's worst. It's that simple. On a day which Collingwood supporters regard as the biggest day until September, Josh Fraser embarrassed us. On a day when he was chosen to be captain and represent his team, he let down his teammates. And on a day which evokes hardness, courage and heart, Josh Fraser let down his country. Josh Fraser, today, you are a fucking disgrace.

Another disgrace - Mick Malthouse. No excuses, he has to go. Today it became abudantly clear that his style of game simply doesn't win matches. Essendon, like Adelaide and Geelong before them, abused Collingwood through the corridor. You can't win matches tippytoeing along the wings. You simply can't. St Kilda does it too, but to a lesser degree, and they make up for it with incredible defensive pressure that Collingwood just doesn't bring anymore. Malthouse needs to go.

Today wasn't all bad. Okay, that's a lie, but there are a handful of players that didn't disgrace themselves. John Anthony was terrific all day, Mr. Reliable as always. Dane Swan racked up a tonne of possessions. Scott Pendlebury was great early and late, and kicked a magnificent goal in the last quarter. Marty Clarke and Dayne Beams were both solid. O'Brien, Brown and Presti in defence were rock solid. Dale Thomas, same story as always, when he got it he was terrific, he just didn't get it enough. Leon Davis had a shocking first half, but was fantastic in the second half.

Collingwood now has to evaluate everything. They'll have to because everyone else will to. Where exactly is this list, playing this style of game going? Some say that your only as good as your five worst players. I don't want my team to be measured by Leigh Brown, Jaxson Barham, Alan Toovey, Tyson Goldsack and Shannon Cox. For all the talk of promising youth, I really don't see it. Cox makes horrible decisions with the ball, Goldsack and Toovey have little to no skill, Barham has the worst disposal in the league and the likes of Cam Wood, Chris Dawes, John McCarthy, Ryan Cook, Danny Stanley and Ben Reid aren't going anywhere. Of the really young guys only Beams, Anthony and Wellingham look like they are AFL players. The old guard of Fraser, Prestigiacomo, Davis, Lockeyer, Johnson, O'Bree and Rocca just isn't good enough. For once, Collingwood has an excellent middle tier age of players in Pendlebury, Thomas, Cloke, Clarke, O'Brien, Shaw and Swan, with Didak and Medhurst hovering too. They can't do it alone though. This list isn't good enough to make a grand final. Something has to happen. With each passing week it becomes clearer and clearer that Nathan Buckley has to be the man to make the changes. The countdown to Mick Malthouse's exit begins today.

Votes

3. Dane Swan. I'm not his biggest fan to say the least, but today he played well. 37 disposals and 11 marks is a fantastic effort. His disposal was adequate and he took some fantastic marks. Solid all round effort.

2. Leon Davis. The spark. Today, as he went, Collingwood went. Stat line of 30 disposals, 8 marks, 7 tackles and 2.2 looks sensational. Fact is though, his first half was probably the worst he's played in two years. To his credit he turned it around in the second half, and in a big way. Two massive goals and his run off half-back swung the match into Collingwood's favour.

1. John Anthony. The only reliable presence in the forward line. Just the 9 touches but he sure makes them count. Four huge goals.

Honourable mentions to Scott Pendlebury and Harry O'Brien.

Leaderboard

Scott Pendlebury 8
Simon Prestigiacomo 4
Leon Davis 4
Dane Swan 3
Josh Fraser (ugh) 3
Alan Didak 2
Marty Clarke 2
Paul Medhurst 1
Dayne Beams 1

The Power Poll

Providing a scouting report for every team in the league is going to be more difficult than I anticipated. In other words it's not going to happen. Count yourselves lucky you got in there Fremantle, thats about the only thing you have to be thankful for. Instead, every four weeks I'm going to list a 'Power Poll'. The purpose of this is to show which teams in the AFL have the 'power'. I'll divide the teams into sections, corresponding with their 'power'. I'll list it in reverse order for the purpose of unbearable suspense. It's a cheesy premise that American sports writers use for all the major sports. We're all drifting towards Americana, so why not. Let's do it;

"The Clippers and the Cursed"

16. Fremantle (0-4, 16th)
There's an NBA team called the Los Angeles Clippers. There's another Los Angeles team aside from the Lakers? Yep, that's the Clippers. The most cursed and disastrous team in the NBA is the LA Clippers. Their players don't try, the coach doesn't know what he's doing and bad things just happen to them. So basically their the NBA's version of the Fremantle Dockers. The Dockers are dreadful, perhaps to the point of being cursed. Matthew Pavlich must see his wasted career flashing before his eyes. I feel for him. I hope for his sake he moves to the Gold Coast team or forces a trade to Collingwood. The latter would be fine. Fremantle aren't in a position to win matches now, and they don't look like they'll even be sniffing that position any time soon. Maybe they really are cursed.

15. Richmond (0-4, 15th)
Now this team really is cursed. I can't remember a year when hype has been failed to live up so in such a shocking manner. From the Cousins injury in round one everything has gone down hill. Incredibly Ben Cousins has been lost amidst the myriad of shocking results. Never thought I'd say that Ben Cousins had been forgotten by media, but that's how bad the Richmond situation is right now. I for one never understood the hype to begin with. This Richmond team had approximately 4 1/4 good players (Deledio, Joel Bowden and Nathan Brown count as whole numbers, Nathan Foley and the inconsistent Matthew Richardson, who I still maintain hurts the team, count for a half each, and the potential of Ben Cousins counts as a quarter). This team beat one other team last year that finished in the eight. They were never ready for finals. 2010 guys, maybe you'll climb up to ninth again.

"We're terrible but at least we try"

14. Melbourne (1-3, 14th)
Seeing this Melbourne team play Collingwood they looked pretty bad. When Collingwood started focusing in the second half Melbourne simply melted, and their true level of quality emerged - the quality that has Brad 'can't kick straight' Miller as their key forward. This Melbourne team is awful and has no business winning more than 5 matches for the season, but to their credit they play and play hard. They played hard against North Melbourne and pushed Collingwood for a half. Even the Port Adelaide loss wasn't that bad. Yeah and they beat the Tigers. Not sure though if we can attribute that to good play or the curse of Richmond. I just realised that Melbourne has more good players than Richmond. Brad Green, Brock McLean, Aaron Davey and Cameron Bruce are all good players, and you can't tell me we can't find another 1/2 a good player on the rest of the list. That's how we roll at the Melbourne Demons Football Club.

"We look good, but trust us, we're really not"

13. Essendon (2-2, 9th)
Don't believe the hype. Two big wins and two hard-fought losses looks okay on the surface, but I can see past this Essendon smoke and mirrors crap. This team simply isn't that good. Wait until Geelong beats them by 120 points. You'll see. The defense is horrible, the midfield lacks composure and strength and the forward line is throwing out two dead bodies. Okay that's a bit harsh. Only Scott Lucas is deceased. Their attacking free-flowing brand of football will beat some bad teams, but it won't be enough for a decent season. Geelong. 120 points. It's gonna happen.

12. North Melbourne (2-2, 11th)
Where can this team go? I think we saw them to their fullest potential last year, and that was a first final exit to a not-so-great Sydney team. The team's fortunes lie with two players, and Brent Harvey has clearly lost a step while Daniel Wells doesn't ever look like turning into the player he should be. They're solid across the board and they play hard, but that's all you can say for them. Maybe playing hard and having slightly more talent than Melbourne gets you 8th spot, but I doubt it. Stuck in purgatory. "We're genuine contenders... for a first round of the finals exit"

11. Brisbane (2-2, 8th)
Really didn't like what I saw from them on Friday night. They are so dependent on Jonathan Brown and Daniel Bradshaw to kick 8-10 goals between them every match. Without that they're extremely beatable. If Simon Prestigiacomo and Harry O'Brien can stop those two that means trouble for Brisbane fans. The midfield is potentially excellent. Simon Black is a top ten player in the league, Rischitelli is a gun, Travis Johnstone and Luke Power are all class and Daniel Rich is a star already. But with Leunebeurger (that's spelt wrong I know) out for 12 weeks and Charman's health questionable whose going to tap it to those guys? Also, people seem to shy away from the fact that Brisbane's back six is awful. Daniel Merrett? Really? Jed Adcock (and he's not even really a defender) is the only guy I feel comfortable with in that back six. I think people want to like this team because Michael Voss is such a likable guy. We'll see how much they like 11th place come September.

10. Sydney (2-2, 7th)
This Sydney team has been underrated for so long that I think they've become overrated. The fact that they're in 7th right now is misleading. They beat a decimated Hawthorn team and a Carlton team they match up perfectly with. It's really just a perfect matchup. Perfect. On the flipside they were beaten convincingly by a Brisbane team that maybe isn't so good, and destroyed by St. Kilda in a performance that sat comfortably alongside Richmond's round one defeat. That's the worst damning I can hand out on a team. It still makes me sick that people will look back on Round 1 2009 in 50 years and see that Collingwood were among the losers in the round alongside Richmond. Ugh. Back to Sydney though. Jarrad McVeigh and Adam Goodes are stars. Darren Jolly is playing out of his mind. Michael O'Loughlin's return will only help. And yet... nothing. What can this team achieve? That St. Kilda match can't be that much of an abberation. This Sydney team doesn't inspire me with any ummm... inspiration... at all. 10th to 12th written all over them.

9. Adelaide (2-2, 12th)
Was that the most heartening 48 point home loss of all time? That Crows team played hard all night, and at the end of the third quarter they had Geelong legitamately worried. Then the Cats took over and looked headed towards a 12 goal win, but to their credit the Crows made it a 'respectable' 8 goal loss. As long as we're making NBA parallels, the Crows (and the Swans too really) are the San Antonio Spurs. The Spurs are a team that always gets overlooked, but always performs. They go under the radar, but they're so well-coached and disciplined that they always make the playoffs. They're driven by a handful of star players and have a number of role players that willingly accept their, um, role (see Sydney and Adelaide are so alike I'm even using the same joke for both of them). That's the Crows in a nutshell. They play hard, never get embarassed, and will win more matches than they lose generally.

Another thing that people seem to be overlooking... this team is loaded. Adelaide's turnover from composed slow-paced veteran team to young exciting attacking team has happened so fluently it's almost suspicious. When did this re-building phase take place? The Crows have made finals like the last five years in a row. And now they're stocked with young talent and are only going to get better? While still possibly/probably making the finals again this year? How did that happen. Taylor Walker is going to be the face of the AFL mark my words. In spite of my lofty praise, I don't think the Crows have much of a say in the finals this year. They use the handball at an insane rate, and don't quite have the experience not to make bad decisions that will lead to turnovers playing that attacking style of play. Still though, exciting.

"The wildcard"

8. West Coast (2-2, 10th)
Don't understand why everyone was picking West Coast for 15th this year. Did everyone forget that West Coast were the dominant team in the league over the 2005-2007 period? That was only two years ago guys. The list has generally been retained from that era as well, except for two minor absences from guys with the maiden names of Chris and Ben. Seriously though, I'll buy into last year being an abberation. The shock of losing Cousins and Judd coupled with the absolute rape the team copped through injuries. I swear every single player in the starting 22 last year had an injury at some stage or another. It was insane. Now that they've had a year to combat Cousins/Judd withdrawal symptoms and are fighting fit the Eagles are dangerous. The midfield with superstar Daniel Kerr, superstar Dean Cox, sparkplug Andrew Embley, hard nuts Tyson Stenglein and Adam Selwood and youngsters Rosa and Masten is very solid. The defence has always been a strength, and although it isn't what it once was it's not going to be too much of a hindrance. Darren Glass won't allow it. Also, the forward line is quietly quite good. Quinten Lynch and Ashley Hansen are both decent players and Mark LeCras seems like he's taken the next step. The presence of Wirrpanda and Staker, two guys who can create something out of nothing, is dangerous as well. Add Adam Hunter to the mix and this team can be dangerous up front.

The wildcard though is Subiaco. Watching them play there against Port Adelaide and the Bulldogs (two teams so good we haven't even seen mention of them yet), and beating both convincingly, you can see that Subiaco takes them to a whole other level. That was the huge advantage they've always had, and it seems this year they're going to use it. God knows the other Western Australian team isn't.

I see the Eagles as the 'weird' team of 2009. The team that can potentially beat or lose to any given team (aside from Geelong) by ten goals. They've played a bizarre fixture so far. Honourable loss in Brisbane, belting of Port Adelaide, 100 point smashing by St Kilda, handily beating the Bulldogs. See, bizarre. The fact is though - this team is going to win at home. They've already beaten two quality teams their, and by convincing margins. Throw in two sure victories against Fremantle at Subi and that's four victories at home already. Say that they win five of the other eight matches at home, a pretty reasonable estimation. That gives them nine wins. Three wins from eight away games remaining and they play finals. Can they do that? The strong performance on the road to Brisbane gives me the belief that they can.

"If this, and that, and maybe this too goes right we can play for a spot in the Grand Final"

7. Carlton (2-2, 5th)
They're not ready yet. They just don't have the depth, experience or defence to do it this year. They'll play finals and probably win a final too, but beyond that I don't see them doing it. But with that midfield of Judd, Murphy, Gibbs and Stevens I won't say otherwise concretely.

(A team I like - West Coast - gets three paragraphs, a team I don't like - Carlton - gets three lines. That's how I roll, unlike the Melbourne Demons)

6. Collingwood (2-2, 6th)
No this isn't a biased pick. I genuinely believe we're better than Carlton, although the Blues will probably beat us twice and Brendan Fevola will kick a combined 27 goals in the two matches. That aside, the Pies are better and have a better chance at a home final or double chance than Carlton. Don't underestimate the importance of finishing 5th or 6th opposed to 7th or 8th this year either. There's a good chance that Sydney, Brisbane, West Coast and Adelaide will be filling out the 7th or 8th spot, and playing them in Melbourne is much more favourable. I think the Pies will have that advantage. Collingwood are hot and cold, but when they're hot they can beat anyone in the league (cough, 86 points, cough). I think we've also seen Collingwood are good enough to be trusted to get themselves out of bad patches within games and turn it around (see: Melbourne, Brisbane and Adelaide matches). I'm also willing to treat the Adelaide game as a virtual abberation. Play that last quarter ten times and I think Collingwood win eight of them.

We know all about the big names of Pendlebury, Cloke, Thomas, Didak and Davis. Shockingly the man who might have the biggest say in Collingwood's season is Simon Prestigiacomo. That statement doesn't frighten me as much as you might think it should. If Presti can neutralise the oppositions best forward (as he has done the past two weeks with Mooney and Brown) then the young Collingwood defence should put up enough of a fight to keep Collingwood in the match against quality teams. But with too many questions in the midfield (who is the best midfielder after Pendlebury? O'Bree? Johnson? Swan? ugh), secondary defence, and my lack of trust in Josh Fraser and Travis Cloke, I doubt Collingwood are a top four team. Maybe, but unlikely. Save us Travis?

5. Port Adelaide (3-1, 4th)
Everyone's sleeper pick this year, and with good reason. This Port Adelaide team is loaded. Chad, Kane, Shaun, Peter, Pearce, Boak, Gray, Cassisi, Ebert, Brogan, Lade, Motlop. This team should be top four. It wasn't complete luck that Port Adelaide got to the Grand Final just two years ago (okay maybe it was, but bare with me). This team is stacked with a tremendous amount of skill, speed and talent. Heart, hardness and desire are the questions. The Hawthorn game may have answered some of those questions. But there's still the lingering thought that Mark Williams doesn't have his heart completely in the job, and resulting of that neither do the players. 50-point losses to West Coast don't help disprove that either. Because of that they remain in this group for now.

"Threatening... lingering... but something's wrong"

4. Western Bulldogs (3-1, 3rd)
I don't know. Can this Bulldogs team win the flag? Really? I just don't think you can win a Grand Final without a semi-decent tall key forward. Unless you have a Judd-Cousins-Kerr-Cox or Ablett-Bartel-Corey-Selwood-Ottens midfield. Even those teams had Quinten Lynch and Cameron Mooney though. The Bulldogs don't even have a Quinted Lynch. Hell, they don't have an Ashley Hansen. My last NBA parallell, I promise. The Bulldogs are the Phoenix Suns of the AFL. The Suns, led by star point guard Steve Nash, played basketball at a breakneck speed. They put up insane scores every night, consistently leading the league in scoring. They defied conventional wisdom because they didn't play defence and yet they were one of the top teams in the league for years. But in the playoffs they could never advance to the finals because of the fact that in the playoffs, playing against the best teams, defence simply mattered too much. That's the Western Bulldogs. With this list the Bulldogs are managing to play the style that suits them the best - fast. But it's not going to win them a Grand Final. Steve Nash can tell you that.

3. Hawthorn (1-3, 13th)
Yep, the 13th team is 3rd in the Power Poll. Just wait. This team has too much talent not to be a force in finals. Still though, there is something wrong and the question it presents is glaringly obvious - can Hawthorn recover from injuries and get themselves back together in time to mount a run at the top four? The answer to that question will decide their year.

"The Contender"

2. St Kilda (4-0, 1st)
The surprise team of the year? Who saw this coming? The committment to defence, pressure and tackling that was never there in the past. The emergence of Nick Dal Santo as a top 15 player in the league. With Riewoldt and Hayes returning to full health they should only get better. Koschitzke is the obvious wildcard, he needs to get to a state of consistent health. St. Kilda have answered every question posed to them emphatically this year. The way to unsettle Geelong is through ferocious tackling and pressure (well, that will unsettle any team, but still my point is valid) as Collingwood (Woo!) demonstrated last year. St. Kilda have shown a capacity to do that. They're a legitimate threat. I think

"The Team to Beat"

1. Geelong (4-0, 2nd)
On Saturday night in Adelaide, a quality team with a good shot to play finals, threw everything and the kitchen sink at Geelong. They played hard, they played well and they played with swagger. And yet midway through the final term Geelong led by almost ten goals. This team is scary. Until they're beaten they remain here - in their rightful place.

Kicking the habit

The habit? Losing to Brisbane in big matches. Well, that's not true. Losing to Brisbane in general is probably more apt. Friday night Collingwood showed something that they haven't showed all year - sustained resilience. Coming from behind to beat Melbourne doesn't count. That they were down in the first place in that match is damning enough. But last night Collingwood were down - really down - and they had the heart and the composure to mount a comeback and ultimately finish it off. Medhurst was Mr. Ignition, singlehandedly turning the game for the Magpies in the early third quarter. Two fantastic goals to start the third quarter from Medhurst and the Pies were on their way.

We'll focus on the good for now. From the middle of the second quarter on the Pies played their best brand of football. Quick, accurate, hard football with few turnovers. Collingwood did a great job of winning one-on-ones and contested ball when it counted. Charman's injury was a massive boost for the Pies. With Charman off the ground Fraser started to gain some ascendancy in the ruck. 37 centre clearances for Collingwood, 28 to Brisbane was directly related to Fraser's work in the ruck.

The story of the game though was the ability of Prestigiacomo and O'Brien to curtail the influence of Brown and Bradshaw. The conditions helped, but the body work of Presti and O'Brien can not be understated. Both were significantly weaker than their direct opponents, but timing and intelligence allowed them both to break even in contests. They were the most significant reason for Collingwood's victory.

The midfield was dominated by one man. Scott Pendlebury was a star, as usual, with 35 disposals and an insane 10 centre clearances to go with 13 contested possessions. The contested possessions tells a story of Pendlebury's development from very good player to midfield star. In the past Pendlebury would drift around packs, waiting for the hands-off. Now Pendlebury is the main midfield at stoppages, standing stationary directly underneath the contest. This is the reason Pendlebury is winning so many first possessions at stoppages. Being in such proximity to the contest he is winning the ball, even if it is only a handball under extreme pressure. The rest of the midfield was overshadowed by Pendlebury. Tarkyn Lockeyer was solid with 29 touches and two important goals. O'Bree in his milestone game did his usual thing. Dane Swan didn't have much of an impact. Dayne Beams made every one of his limited touches count.

A quick something on Jaxson Barham. The media and Malthouse seemed stoked with Barham's outputs. On the surface, why shouldn't they be!? 28 disposals and 9 tackles (most in the team) in a harsh environment in your first game is an astounding achievement. Not when you look closer. Barham's effort can not be questioned. He ran hard and tackled fiercely all game. He played his heart out. It's a pity heart doesn't correlate to skill. His disposal is absolutely shocking. He can't kick. At all. 61% disposal efficiency is terrible. 9 clangers is even worse. Hopefully he'll develop skills in time, but it's safe to say he's not a natural.

Someone we thought was a natural continued their shocking start to the year. Travis Cloke played another shocker. With 7 disposals no one on the team got fewer touches of the ball than Travis. He was virtually nowhere to be seen for 90% of the match. To his credit he kicked a clutch goal after the half time siren which had a massive impact on the momentum of the match. Aside from that though he was completely useless. Remove the Melbourne game (which we should considering their quality, or lack of) and Travis is averaging 9 disposals 5 marks and 1 goal on the season. He desperately needs to lift. Anthony Rocca was much the same as Travis, but at least he commanded a presence. Rocca didn't do much but he did take one spectacular mark and made a great goal assist. Something to build on.

A quick note on the players that didn't play so well. Nathan Brown was thoroughly outclassed by Jonathan Brown in the first quarter. He needs to re-evaluate his game. Dale Thomas was quiet once again, he needs to step up. Alan Didak did absolutely nothing. Shannon Cox actually played pretty well, winning plenty of the ball (27 touches), but he needs to improve his decision making. He has a Pendlebury quality of having exceptional evasive skills, but he needs to perfect them. In a big way. Finally, Leigh Brown needs to be dropped. There's no two ways about it.

All in all this was a fantastic win for the Pies. The first sign of the young season that Collingwood means business. The Pies were challenged and they fought back tremendously. The second half was something special. Brisbane at the Gabba are no pushover, especially for this Collingwood team. But the Pies persisted and they came away with a crucial 4 points that will have Essendon worried. With good reason.

Votes

3. Simon Prestigiacomo. The decisive play of the game came in the latter half of the final quarter. Michael Rischitelli was attacking a loose ball hard on the left half forward flank for Brisbane. Simon Prestigiacomo attacked it harder. The two clashed and Presti came away with the ball. A dangerous Brisbane move was killed and the Pies went on to win the match. That and he kept the best forward in the league goalless for three quarters. Yeah. Three votes.

2. Scott Pendlebury. I feel like it kind of should be Medhurst, but I can't overlook Pendlebury. 35 brilliant disposals, 13 gutsy contested possessions and 10 crucial centre clearances are too tough to overlook. His vision and awareness, the ability to have a half-second longer than anyone else in the league make him the most aesthetically pleasing Collingwood player since Buckley. Now that's a wrap.

1. Paul Medhurst. Singlehandedly changed the outlook of the game. His burst of brilliance in the third quarter, and miraculous goal to begin the final term changed the match. Amazing. Hope he's fully recovered from his concussion. We need him.

Honourable mentions go to Josh Fraser, Harry O'Brien and Leon Davis. A fantastic team effort.

Leaderboard

Scott Pendlebury - 8
Simon Prestigiacomo - 4
Josh Fraser - 3
Alan Didak - 2
Leon Davis - 2
Marty Clarke - 2
Paul Medhurst - 1
Dayne Beams - 1

A disastrous paradox - Fremantle 2009 scouting report

This year I'm going to go through all 16 AFL teams and provide a scouting report for each. The reason? None in particular, just to enhance my knowledge of each team. How I select the team for each week will be mostly random. I'm going to try and choose a team for which the game they are playing that week holds particular importance.

This week's team is Fremantle. Coming off a belting at home from the Bulldogs and a lifeless display away to Essendon, Fremantle had come under the pump during the week. The clash against Adelaide on Sunday represented an opportunity to bounce back. The Dockers came in at slight favourites as well. Here's how the game was played...

Fremantle 11.14 80 def. by Adelaide 15.14 104 (Subiaco)

Freo came out all guns blazing in the early stages taking advantage of the supposedly three goal breeze. From the first bounce the attack on the ball and the tackling was ferocious. It was fantastic to see youngster Stephen Hill, of a very slight build, lay a hard tackle in the opening minutes. The Dockers were maintaining possession as well, but were wasteful going forward. Instead of trying to hit leads the Dockers blazed away kicking long into packs. Kicking long towards the square has its benefits, it can catch the defence off-guard, but Fremantle players took far too long to move the ball forwards. The one time they did hit a lead inside 50, the player kicked truly. Unsurprisingly the kick to hit the lead was Paul Haselby, the most skilled player on the team, and the goalscorer was skipper Matthew Pavlich.

Fremantle did not capitalise on their early dominance. The dominance was massive, with Adelaide not making a forward push until the 12-minute mark, which is insane. Unfortunately the Dockers were wasteful in front of goal missing relatively basic set shots. For 12 minutes of complete dominance the Dockers had just 2 goals to show for it. As good teams usually do, Adelaide punished the Dockers going forward and kicking a goal through Brad Symes. Incredibly the Crows could have almost drawn level if not for a horrible missed shot by Kurt Tippett in the right forward pocket. Fremantle retained some of their momentum though, goaling late through good quick ball movement from Chris Tarrant and Hill, followed by a strong mark and goal from Clayton Hinkley. A 14 point lead at quarter time didn't reflect Fremantle's dominance, and the Dockers paid for not taking more advantage of the breeze.

Adelaide dominated the second term to a greater extent than Fremantle did in the first. More importantly, Adelaide were effective and reflected their dominance on the scoreboard - unlike the Dockers. The Crows held Fremantle goalless, and kicked five of their own to take a three goal lead to the main break. More incredible was the fact that Fremantle didn't register a score of their own. Adelaide 'rushed' two behinds. Kicking against the breeze Fremantle were rendered useless. Whereas in the first quarter Fremantle could kick the ball over Adelaide's zone - and with the confidence that came with the breeze, were moving the ball quickly before the Crows could set up - kicking into the breeze forced Fremantle to be accurate and precise with disposal. That didn't end up well. Fremantle have been labelled the team with the worst disposal in the league. The second quarter was proof of that. The Dockers were completely stagnant against the Adelaide zone, stuck in their back third going nowhere on countless occasions. On occasions when Fremantle did move the ball forward they inevitably turned it over. Adelaide punished them and went into half time with a commanding lead.

The Dockers seemingly came out with a purpose in the third quarter, huddling intensely on the field before the bounce looking like they meant business. Whatever was said, it worked, as the Dockers came out strong registering the first five scoring shots of the quarter. Predictably four of those were behinds. The one goal though, from spark Hill, was fantastic. Despite the innaccuracy, the Dockers had worked their way back into the match and were within 9 points. The Crows responded with two classy goals from Porplyzia and Edwards and the game seemed to be over. This kept with the pattern of Adelaide rebuking the Dockers whenever they had a glimmer of hope. Surely enough after a fantastic goal from David Mundy, the Crows responded with a Van Berlo goal. The margin was out to 25 points. To their credit the Dockers didn't back down. A stellar composed goal from Haselby, and a strong set shot kick from Schammer and the Dockers were back within 12 heading into the final change. This is where things got interesting.

With the breeze down to nothing the Dockers came out strong in the final term. Matthew Pavlich got things started with a fantastic opposite foot snap goal 22 seconds into the quarter. Set shots from Tarrant and Crowley and the Dockers shockingly led by a goal 6 minutes into the quarter. A clever goal from Andrew McLeod and the game was level. The turning point of the game came just after this at the 11 minute mark of the quarter. With the scores tied young gun Rhys Palmer took a mark on the wing. He was hit after taking the mark and a 50m penalty ensued. The 50 metres turned into 65 and Palmer took his shot from the corner of the goal square. He missed. Adelaide responded with the next three goals and the game was over. A late Pavlich goal kept things interesting, but two late Adelaide goals sealed the match.

That's what happened. How'd it happen?

The Dockers are at their best when they don't have to think. The two main stages of Docker dominance came at the beginning of the first quarter and last quarter. The Dockers were working off adrenaline there. Tackling hard, winning contested possession and getting into space. When the game was played at an end-to-end pace the Dockers had the upper hand. When play got bogged down, noticably in the second quarter, the Dockers were absolutely clueless. The Fremantle disposal and especially the decision making is horrible. Simple things that all junior footballs know not to do, the Dockers do and do it regularly. Blazing away out of defence without looking where your kicking. Kicking to 1 on 3's. The thing the Dockers were most guilty of was handballing to contests. That's something you just can't do. On countless occasions Docker players handballed to teammates who had an opponent literally on them. In AFL football that's unforgivable.

The periods where the Dockers were playing good football seemed to be created by the crowd. Playing away from the home without the momentum of the crowd to play off the Dockers are going to be in trouble all year. As evidenced last week in the loss to Essendon the results aren't going to be pretty.

Looking at the Docker list there's plenty of talent.

-Captain Matthew Pavlich is a superstar, there's no denying that. In terms of sheer athleticism he's one of the top 5 players in the league. Super strong, agile and skillful. I loved the aggression he showed yesterday. Stuff as simple as hip and shouldering players after they dispose of the ball is something that leader's need to do and he did that. Fremantle's hope.

-Stephen Hill is a spark, and the player that ignited the Dockers yesterday. He's skillful, super quick and creative. He still lacks some conviction and confidence, but that will come. The Dockers have a lot invested in him - he was the third draft pick last year - and you have to worry about his incredibly thin build. Will be interesting to see how he pans out.

-Garrick Ibbotson is a classy performer. Cool under pressure and disposes of the ball well. A little unpolished but still a future star.

-David Mundy looks like a keeper. He's got some class and looks to be a good kick of the ball. He can kick it a fair way anyway. Got them going in the third quarter.

-New guys Nicholas Suban and Greg Broughton looked good yesterday. Broughton in particular showed a cool head in defence.

-Michael Johnson is a bizarre player. His kicking style looks awful, like someone that's never played football before. It's not very effective either, he turned the ball over a bit. In spite of that he seems to be an asset. Great dash off the backline and worked his way into space frequently as evidenced by his 26 touches.

-Luke McPharlin still hasn't really lived up to his potential. At 27 time is running out. He'll remain a handy swingman though, capable of holding down key positions.

-The surprise swingman Chris Tarrant still has some use as well. Playing him in defence is logical - super athlete, strong and quick but can't kick for goal to save his life. He played mostly up forward yesterday and did okay. Takes a strong mark, has an excellent short kick and switches the play well. So maligned he's become sort of underrated.

-Ryan Crowley is the type of player every team needs to have. Hard nut, ferocious attack on the ball and can kick a goal. Among the best yesterday.

-Aaron Sandilands is obviously an asset to the team, the best tap-ruckman in the league. He didn't play well yesterday though, but I'm assuming his performance was an exception to the norm.

-Dean Solomon, often grouped with Tarrant in the maligned section, is a guy I still like. Has shocking, shocking disposal, but gives 110% every time out. Great hardness.

-Clayton Hinkley, Joshua Head and Steven Dodd were nowhere to be seen.

-Kepler Bradley I still can't take seriously. Apparently benefits the team though.

-Antoni Grover goes hard at it all the time, leaves nothing on the field. Can't kick or make decisions to save his life.

-Daniel Gilmore is useless.

-Byron Schammer: see Dean Solomon.

-Brett Peake looks like a deer in headlights whenever he gets the ball.

-I left the most interesting to last. Matthew Pavlich is the obvious choice as the barometer of the team, and he probably still is, but yesterday the team's fortunes rested on Rhys Palmer's shoulders. I love Rhys Palmer. He's my favourite first or second year player in the league to watch. Super quick and has no fear. Spectacular in the air and shows composure around the ground beyond his years. He might be the worst kick of the football in the AFL. He's well aware of it too. He looked to handball at every possible opportunity. Of his 7 kicks I can't remember one hitting a target. It's a mental block he's going to have to over come. Right now it's not just hurting him, it's hurting his team. His miss from 10 metres out in the final quarter cost his team the match. He knew it as well, his body language dropped completely after it. Minutes after the miss he slowed to a halt so he wouldn't create contact with an Adelaide player just after they disposed of the ball. From a normally aggressive player that told the whole story. He's young, but it's something you hope won't hold him back for his career. How he responds next week will tell a lot about his character.

In terms of structure the Dockers are a mess. The defence is weak, too often defenders were caught behind. Gill, Walker and Porplyzia had 12 scoring shots between them. The main problem with the defence was clearing the ball. Johnson, Gilmore and Mundy all turned the ball over with horrible kicks inside defensive 50. The midfield isn't much better. Aside from horrible disposal, Fremantle's other trademark is their inability to take advantage of Sandilands' ruckwork. It's a fair criticism. He didn't dominate yesterday, but still when he did win the taps the Docker rovers failed to gain clean possession and couldn't get quick fluent clearances. The forward line is the biggest area of concern. The forward is clogged up with dead bodies. I don't understand why the Dockers wouldn't try to isolate Matthew Pavlich more. He's one of the three or four best forwards in the league and they barely targeted him. Playing Pavlich up the ground is stupid as well. Fair enough you want him to get his hands on the ball, but who are the Dockers going to kick to? Chris Tarrant won't win you a game of football. The Dockers should be playing Pavlich deep with Tarrant and Crowley as secondary options. Have one smaller crumber as well, then push the other forwards well up to the flanks.

Here is the 'disastrous paradox'. The Dockers are a team with horrible disposal, and that's because they're a young developing team. Makes sense right? Wrong. The shocking thing is, although yes the Dockers are a young inexperienced side, it's the experienced players who are the culprits for ill-disposal. In fact, the young players are probably the best users of the ball in the team. Yesterday, Hill (18) and Ibbotson (21) were disposing of the ball better than anyone, bar Haselby. Mundy The Dockers turnovers and shocking disposal can be placed on the likes of Solomon (191 career games), Gilmore (26 years old), Schammer (105 career games), Grover (29 years old) and Brett Peake (25). It's hard to say whether this is a good thing or a bad thing, but for the present it's a horrible thing. Youngsters are looking up to the likes of Solomon and Schammer, players that can not kick or make decisions under pressure. It tells a tale for the history of the Fremantle football club.

The Dockers play St. Kilda next weekend and they're going to get thumped. I can't see the Dockers getting within 50 points of this strong, skillful and disciplined St Kilda team. A complete demolition (likely) and there might be calls for Mark Harvey's job. They couldn't be more warranted. Harvey has looked lifeless and apathetic in his stay at Fremantle. Say what you want about Chris Connelly, but at least he gave the impression that he cared. Harvey was taken to the cleaners in the coaching department yesterday. As I alluded to above, youth can be no excuse. Fremantle had 8 players playing yesterday with less than 50 games experience. Adelaide had 12. The Dockers also had 4 players with over 150 games experience to Adelaide's 3. Adelaide were a young team coming into a hostile unfamilliar environment and they made Fremantle look leaps and bounds behind them. Fremantle as we stand is a poor-drilled, talent-wasting, uninspired mess. Watching them in contrast to Adelaide, a disciplined well-coached team that milks every last drop of talent it has must have been depressing for Fremantle.

Top 5 Fremantle players
1. Matthew Pavlich
2. Paul Haselby
3. Rhys Palmer
4. Garrick Ibbotson
5. Ryan Crowley

The Barometer - Matthew Pavlich

Best case scenario for 2009
The return of Roger Hayden shores up the defence and Des Headland provides some added toughness and skill to the lineup. Matthew Pavlich has a season for the ages, Rhys Palmer gets some magic boots and Chris Tarrant turns into a great key defender. Best case scenario sees Fremantle taking advantage of Subiaco and winning 7 or 8 games.

My prediction
The returns of Hayden and Headland help the Dockers quest for respectability. Palmer improves his kicking as the season progresses, Hill shows glimpses of stardom and Ibbotson emerges as a potential superstar. Everything else goes horribly wrong. The Dockers continue their implosion, Mark Harvey gets the sack and they finish either 15th or 16th with 4-6 wins for the season. In other words, just another year for the Fremantle Dockers football club.

Not there yet...

Last night's clash between Carlton and Essendon was probably the most interesting match of the season so far. Following two impressive victories everyone was labeling Carlton a top four team to be. Last night put a massive dent in that speculation.

Carlton is scarily talented. Scarily talented and scarily good. The midfield - Judd, Murphy, Gibbs, Stevens - is going to be the best in the league. Already it's probably only second to Geelong's. The Blues have an elite key forward with capable smalls around him, and lost in the hype is that Jarrad Waite has developed into one of the better key defenders in the league. The problem is everyone else. It's still the same story of plenty of talent, but little exposure and the experience that comes with it. The defence still isn't up to the task. Every time Essendon went forward last night they looked like they were going to score. If that's going to happen against Essendon, good luck against Riewoldt/Koschitzke, Franklin/Roughead and Brown/Bradshaw. It's not just the backline though, accountability and tackling in the midfield is a worry too. Essendon simply had too much space last night. Lovett in particular always seemed to have a paddock in front of him. The Blues are still another year away at least from seriously contending for a spot in the Grand Final.

Essendon looked fantastic last night. That's their style of play and the way they'll win matches. The game was played entirely on their terms. If I were an Essendon supporter I'd savour the moment, because moments like that won't come around too often this year. Fletcher is the only better than mediocre defender right now, so quality teams will kick 20 goals against the Dons regularly. I love what Matthew Knights is doing with the team though. Essendon might finish bottom four this year, but they're doing it with a purpose. The team has recruited well, and recruited to suit the style of play Knights is teaching. Jetta, Houli, Winderlich, Zaharakis, Davey, Lovett and Dempsey are all super quick evasive and intelligent players that suit Knights' free flowing running style of play. Watson and Stanton balance things out adding some grit and hardness to the midfield. As long as Hille is in the team Essendon will win plenty of first possessions from stoppages. The main concern though, and it's a big one, is developing key position players to replace Lloyd, Lucas and Fletcher.

It was the game of the year to date, and it revealed plenty about both Essendon and Carlton - and showed that perhaps they're closer to each other than we would have thought 24 hours ago.

Evaluating the 22 vs Geelong (Round 3)

This year I've decided I'm going to evaluate every Collingwood player 1 through 22 after the 'big matches' of the season. The criteria for a 'big match' is still up in the air right now, but the matches we can pencil in so far are... Round 3 vs Geelong, Round 8 and 17 vs Carlton, Round 15 and 22 vs the Bulldogs, and Round 16 vs Hawthorn. For now, we can focus on last night's match. In alphabetical order...

John Anthony - 4
Went missing. Had a solid first term getting his hands on the ball half a dozen times, but after that was rarely seen. Thoroughly outclassed by Scarlett.

Dayne Beams - 6
Solid follow-up to his explosive debut. Showed composure on a big stage, and slotted a good goal. Lack of penetration on a few of his shots at goal hurt.

Leigh Brown - 4
Hustled all night, was a presence in the forward line and kicked a fantastic goal in the third quarter. Just those misses that cost Collingwood the game hurt a little.

Nathan Brown - 2
Dominated on all night. Be it Rooke or Hawkins or even Johnson, Brown was well out of his league.

Marty Clarke - 7
Great dash from the back flank. Played a particularly good third quarter where he helped shift the balance of the game back closer towards Collingwood.

Travis Cloke - 1
... no comment.

Shannon Cox - 5
Played the entire match. That's no doubt significantly tied with his high possession total of 22 (14 in the first half). Made some shocking decisions and produced costly turnovers.

Leon Davis - 5
Very quiet night by his standards. Racked up just 14 disposals. Needs to illustrate that he can match it with quality teams, which has been the problem that has plagued him his entire career. Played a good third quarter, teaming with Clarke to lead the revival.

Brad Dick - 3
Did nothing. 9 mostly meaningless disposals. Kicked one good goal and missed one absolute shocker.

Alan Didak - 6
Not quite last week's incredible performance, but held his ground last night. 18 disposals and made most of them count. Showed his usual class and skill.

Josh Fraser - 4
Dominated on in the ruck and missed key shots at goal. Was solid around the ground but failed miserably in spots where a leader of the team needed to step up.

Ben Johnson - N/A
Started well keeping Ablett quiet but got injured and took no further part in the game.

Tarkyn Lockeyer - 5
One of the rocks of the team did his usual thing. Hard at the ball, good around the ground and took some strong overhead marks. Like Fraser though, missed too many set shots that could have changed the match.

Nick Maxwell - 5
The skip had a pretty quiet night. Did well in the one on ones and didn't embarass himself.

Paul Medhurst - 6
The only Collingwood forward that could claim to have a good night. Kicked truly and posed a constant threat.

Shane O'Bree - 4
Nowhere to be seen. Never an impact player needs to rack up disposals and clearances to justify his spot in the team. 14 touches and 1 clearance doesn't cut it.

Harry O'Brien - 4
Quiet as well. Didn't provide very much dash and over-committed a few times in defence.

Scott Pendlebury - 7
Didn't do anything special, but the general was consistent all night. Hit targets and won first possession at stoppages 9 times. Solid night.

Simon Prestigiacomo - 7
Did a good job of keeping Mooney quiet. Pushed him to the outer flank for his possessions and kept him to the lone goal. Also showed surprising creativity.

Heath Shaw - 3
Had a poor night by anyone's standards, let alone his. Stupid 50 metre penalty cost Collingwood dearly.

Dane Swan - 6
Racked up possessions and clearances like he always does but didn't really do anything. Missed a sitter.

Dale Thomas - 5
Daisy won himself 20 possessions but didn't have his usual impact. Missed a goal that he should have kicked at the end of the third.

MICK MALTHOUSE - 5
Nothing glaringly right or wrong with what Malthouse did. Got the matchups more or less right, and can't be held accountable for the shocking kicking from Fraser, Lockeyer and Brown.

Plagued by inconsistency, ill-disposal and innaccuracy

Kicking 8 goals 15 behinds through three quarters is no way to beat the best team in Australia. Sleepwalking through an entire quarter doesn't help the cause either.

The Collingwood of the first quarter and the Collingwood of the second quarter were two entirely different teams. The Jekyll/Hyde act Collingwood teams of the past three years pull on a weekly basis was never more evident than in the first half tonight. The first quarter was Collingwood close to their best. Running with the ball, switching inside to outside and outside to inside, and winning the contested ball. The superior play was reflected on the scoreboard, doubling Geelong's scoring shots and taking a 20 point lead to the first break. The decisive period of the match came at the beginning of the second quarter. Collingwood started well retaining the momentum from the first quarter. The momentum evaporated after bad misses from relatively routine set shots gone awry from Travis Cloke and Leigh Brown. Eight consecutive goals Geelong goals followed and with the exception of a pseudo-fightback in the third quarter the game was over.

What went wrong? Glad you asked.

1. The second quarter was a disgrace. There's no excuse for not kicking a goal in a quarter of a football, let alone conceding eight at the opposite end. Collingwood's tackling pressure dropped off, Geelong started winning the contested possessions and dominating the clearances, and Collingwood's disposal and decision making were horrible.

2. For all the hype about Josh Fraser, he was thoroughly obliterated tonight in the hitouts department. The Geelong duo of Blake and West combined to double Fraser's hitout total. The sooner Malthouse accepts that Fraser is a second-option forward masquerading as a ruckman the better for the club. Bring in Cam Wood.

3. Inaccuracy was a killer. The 2007 season was infamous for Collingwood's (in particular Travis Cloke's) inability to convert in front of goal. Last year represented significant progress. Tonight was a definite regression. Two of the main culprits were veterans (and usually reliable) Fraser and Lockeyer. Fraser missed three routine set shots, Lockeyer also sprayed shots he would usually nail. The main offender though was Leigh Brown. Brown is probably on his final AFL lifeline, and while I'm not going to question his workrate and desire, his kicking tonight cost Collingwood the match. The miss from five metres out five minutes into the game was unforgivable, followed by the game-altering momentum-killing miss early in the second quarter and Brown was the single greatest reason Collingwood lost. Yes, he partially redeemed himself by kicking that sensational goal at the end of the third quarter, but drawing your team within three goals isn't the same as extending the margin to almost five goals.

4. Being completely re-active to the opposition isn't the way to win matches. The first quarter was defined by Collingwood's intensity and ability to win contested possession, taking the initiative in the contest. That died at quarter time. The Collingwood of the final three quarters was lifeless and re-active to the movements of Geelong players. There was simply no aggressive defensive movements or actions. Too often Collingwood players were stationery simply waiting for Geelong to move the ball on. Giving time like that to the likes of Ablett, Bartel and Chapman is a recipe for disaster.

5. The defence is a worry. He's young, he's athletic and he's seemingly got a good head on him, but right now Nathan Brown is simply not up to the task of being a key defender in the AFL. Brown was caught behind way too often and looks like he has some issue with his spoiling technique. He spoil attempts are always to the outside of his opponents arms coming in towards the ball. The way to spoil is to get between your opponents arms and meet the ball at a more vulnerable point. Brown has a ways to go. Also, the team defence was terrible. Collingwood had a habit tonight of sending about four players to the ball carrier on the last line of defence, freeing up all the other Geelong forwards. I can't count the amount of times Varcoe and Chapman were left free in the pocket for snaps at goal from point blank range.

6. Travis. Travis Cloke was disgraceful tonight, there's no sugarcoating it. Travis continues to fail miserably when faced with decent opposition. He was rendered totally useless tonight, taken out of contests at ease and never making an impact on the game. Cloke had two set shots on goal, both times failing to register a score. The 'barometer' of Collingwood needs to lift his game or else I can't see a reason to keep him in the firsts. Must improve.

For all of Collingwood's faults, and there were many, most can be attributed to the stellar play of Geelong. Soon I'll devote an entire post to Geelong's play, but for now I'll keep it to praise from afar. Amazing.

Votes

3. Scott Pendlebury (the only Collingwood player not to embarrass himself at one stage or another. Seeing him in person he's truly established himself as Collingwood's midfield general. Plays the percentages, never turns it over, and is developing an inside game to compliment his brilliant outside game. The shining light)

2. Marty Clarke (statistically didn't make much of an impact - 19 disposals, 2 tackles and a behind - but his dash and creativity enlivened Collingwood in the third quarter)

1. Simon Prestigiacomo (Presti continued his good form, playing an all-round solid game, keeping Cam Mooney quiet. Best on ground for Collingwood in the first half, winning one on ones and forcing Mooney to take his marks up along the wing)

Leaderboard

Scott Pendlebury - 6
Josh Fraser - 3
Alan Didak - 2
Leon Davis - 2
Marty Clarke - 2
Simon Prestigiacomo - 1
Dayne Beams - 1

Mixed emotions

A few notes on last week's lost to Adelaide...

-It's been covered enough already, but Collingwood's (Malthouse's) absolute refusal to use the corridor cost them the match. If the Pies don't want to use the corridor, fine, it's a strategial error in my mind, but something that can be dealt with. Allowing the opposition to run rampant through the corridor on the other hand is unforgivable. You don't have to use it, but you have to at the very least defend it.

-Andrew McLeod kills Collingwood again. How does Malthouse not plan for this guy? Andrew McLeod dominates Collingwood without fail. Malthouse was quoted as saying 'If he played on the ball or on a wing we would have considered placing a tag on him'. Really Mick? Really? It doesn't matter where a player dominates from, if he's controlling a match singlehandedly you have to place a tag on him. It's not that difficult. Simply drag him to the goalsquare (something that St Kilda did successfully on Friday night). Terrible coaching.

-Collingwood were let down by a number of things. The continuing inability of Travis Cloke to make an impact when matched with a quality opponent cost us dearly. Basic skill errors from Didak and Clarke in the final seconds killed hopes of a comeback. Ultimately though, Collingwood were simply outcoached in every aspect of the game.

Votes

3 - Scott Pendlebury (stood out with his usual exceptional skill and awareness. The only player that was able to consistently hit targets through the Adelaide zone)
2 - Leon Davis (skills stood out all day as well, his class a notch above everyone else)
1 - Dale Thomas (on a day when Collingwood were bogged down constantly, Thomas' dash and creativity was vital)

On a brighter note, yesterday's win over Melbourne was much more impressive. The second half anyway. It was a clinical demolition of a weaker side, something Collingwood have struggled to do in recent years. There's little to say about the match really. The first quarter was terrible, as flat as it was last week - hopefully this isn't going to be an ongoing problem. Melbourne and Adelaide both dominated the opening quarters but didn't put it on the scoreboard enough. Collingwood come out flat again next week against Geelong and the game will be out of reach at quarter time.

Votes

3 - Josh Fraser (everything has already been said. Dominated a lesser ruckman, something that he should be doing. Played fantastically around the ground and kicked a good goal as well. What we expect from him)
2 - Alan Didak (horrible game from Didak last week, great turnaround this week. 29 disposals, 10 marks and 3 goals, fantastic. Didak of old)
1 - Dayne Beams (no sentimentality here, I genuinely believe Dayne Beams was the third best player on the ground yesterday. Creative, fearless and skillful. He's gonna be a star)

Super Bowl pick

Last week: 1-1 (Playoffs: 8-2/Overall: 14-7-1)

Arizona (+7) over Pittsburgh
Double digits and the perfect playoffs went out the door but with a win here I get to finish with more than twice as many wins than losses on the year. That's something. To be honest I don't think either of these teams are all that good. Arizona is riding an all-time hot streak of an individual player and at the same time being aided by some inept coaching from the opposition (HOW DO YOU NOT DOUBLE TEAM FITZGERALD!?). Pittsburgh on the other hand, while arguably the better team, doesn't exactly leap off the page at you. Yes, the defence is fantastic. But that offense is a real worry. They can't run the ball and living and dieing with Big Ben isn't exactly ideal.

In spite of that I like Pittsburgh in this match. I think Pittsburgh's greatest strength (defence) is better than Arizona's (the passing game). The thing about Pittsburgh is that when they play quality teams (which I think we have to label Arizona now) they may win, but they don't do it in style. In the regular season the Steelers went just 5-4 against teams with winning records and their 5 wins were by 3, 1, 23, 7, 4. The 23 obviously stands out but it's very deceiving. That was the New England game where Randy Moss dropped about 28 passes in the end zone. The touchdown victory was over Dallas where Tony Romo just imploded. I think the Steelers win here but I think Arizona does enough to cover the spread.

Pittsburgh 23 Arizona 17

At a stand still

The Day the Earth Stood Still was one of the most panned films of 2008, and the criticism has leaked into 09 too. First of all it’s not that bad. You’d be hard pressed to label the film a success but it’s not exactly a glaring failure either. It’s a fairly easy film to sum up – The Day the Earth Stood Still has a pedestrian and uninvolving narrative supported by an okay cast and packed with a pleasant moral story. It’s as simple as that.

The greatest problem with the film is that too often it feels like a television movie. For an alleged movie blockbuster, The Day the Earth Stood Still feels like something you’d flick on at 2pm on a Tuesday afternoon. This is due to the lack of a visual and auditory presence. When you watch War of the Worlds or The Day After Tomorrow you genuinely feel like the world is ending. The Day the Earth Stood Still doesn’t exert that feel. The budget of US 80 million is very tame for an end-of-the-world action film and it shows. Visually the film is nothing really, the effects are ordinary and there’s nothing at all groundbreaking.

Despite its narrative shortcomings the film remains credible because of its star-studded cast. Jennifer Connelly is solid in the role of the heroine, a role she could probably play in her sleep. The two stories of the film though are most certainly Jaden Smith (son of Will) and Keanu Reeves. First of all Jaden Smith is okay in his role. The problem is his painfully annoying character, someone so poorly written that we can never fully sympathise with him in the end. Keanu though is probably the brightest spot in the film. Is there any actor in the world better suited to play Klaatu? I don’t think so. Emotionless alien trapped in a human body? Come on! It’s too perfect. Some would say Keanu plays that role in all his films. Keanu has Klaatu down pat, his deliberate movements, his cold stare and his chilled voice are all done perfectly. Jon Hamm is good in a minor role, and Jon Cleese is terrific in his one scene.

Aside from the capable cast, the other thing Earth has going for it is it’s effective message about global warming. Some have labelled the film An Inconvenient Truth 2.0, and with good reason. Only thing is Keanu Reeves probably doesn’t have as much political credibility as Al Gore. Still, the message that we are destroying the Earth, and that perhaps it is more valuable than we are is, makes its mark. More impressive though is the uplifting message the film ultimately conveys, that ‘at the precipice of disaster we change’.

Despite my inclination too, I simply can’t recommend this film. It’s simply not very good. The script is very weak, the acting merely okay despite the very promising cast, and most importantly the film has absolutely no presence. It fails to create suspense, and never truly involves the viewer. Is it worth the $14 it now costs to watch a film in the cinema? Probably not. But it’s at least worth a 2pm TV viewing on a Tuesday afternoon.

NFL Conference Championship picks

Last week: 3-1 (Playoffs: 7-1/Overall: 13-6-1)

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! Well Eli Manning and Tom Coughlin cost me a chance at a perfect record against the spread. Funny thing is, that and the Arizona game (ha!) were the two I was most confident about. Oh well. 7-1 is nothing to complain about I guess. The aim now is to reach double digits, would I think would be quite an achievement. Obviously I have to run the table from here. So let's see how we go.

Philadelphia (-3) over ARIZONA
I just can't pick the Cards here. I think that the Atlanta win was due to the fact they were playing a rookie quarterback, with the benefit of that hostile home environment and a couple of amazing momentum changing plays. The Carolina win was just a case of everything going right. The Panthers really weren't all that good all season, overrated for sure. They fluked more plays than any other team in the regular season, and got hot at the end because of DeAngelo Williams' incredible run. Poor coaching and Jake Delhomme's genuinely phenomenally inept performance (by the end of it he really looked like he was expecting to throw picks) as well as Larry freakin Fitzgerald accounted for the win. This week, the Eagles are smart enough to double Fitzgerald and they should be able to control the clock much better than Carolina. Oh yeah and they beat Arizona by four touchdowns last time. Philadelphia 28 Arizona 17

PITTSBURGH (-5) over Baltimore
You can tell the Steelers mean business. They looked fantastic against the Chargers - they know they belong. Big Ben made plays all day, and they converted on all the big plays. Can't help but feel the Ravens are a little overrated. Tennessee murdered them in virtually every facet of the game, except luck and turnovers. Pittsburgh should be more careful with the ball, they won't give Baltimore the game ala Tennessee. Also when is the last time two teams played three painfully tight matches in the one season. No way Flacco leads the Ravens to a comfortable victory, so I'm liking the Steelers based on that law of averages. Liking them based on everything too. Pittsburgh 27 Baltimore 9

Still perfect...

My run of perfection picking games against the NFL spread continues. With Baltimore not only covering, but winning, and the Cardinals up 10 on Carolina I'm in pretty good shape to be 6-0 heading into tomorrow's games. Knock wood.

Replay that Baltimore-Tennessee game 10 times and I think Tennessee wins 8 of them. Today they were the superior team, and by a long way. Three turnovers in the redzone is unforgivable, especially in a defensive struggle like this where points were impossible to come by. If Chris Johnson stays healthy I think the Titans win this game 24-10. The Baltimore defence is extremely overrated. We saw quality teams (Indy, New York, Dallas) put up lots of points against them, and Tennessee should have done the same today. They certainly put up the yards anyway. With quick elusive backs you can run on the Ravens (Johnson 11 carries 72 yards 1 touchdown), and they were vulnerable to screen passes today as well. The one area thought to be a weakness, the deep ball, was defended well though (only gain of 25+ yards was a screen pass to Johnson). The defense is a big play unit that will surrender yards, but will also create turnovers as it did today.

The Alge Crumpler fumble at the 1 yard line in the fourth quarter, the most damaging turnover no doubt, was the result of huge hits from the Ravens D. The other two turnovers were the result of poor ball protection from LenDale White and horrible judgement and a weak throw from Kerry Collins.

The Ravens offence was hopelessly stagnant all day. 50 yards on 30 carries via the ground won't get it done next week. The running game started to be mildly effective when McGahee had the ball in the final quarter, his 11 yard run on 2nd and 10 from the 45 was huge. Offensively for the Ravens, the game came down to four huge plays. The first was Flacco's incredible 48-yard touchdown strike to Derrick Mason. Following a pair of 3-and-outs that netted a total gain of 3 yards, and coming right after the Tennessee touchdown drive with Chris Johnson looking invincible, the Ravens had to make something happen. And Flacco did with that perfect pass down the sideline to Mason, splitting the zone coverage, on 3rd and 13 no less. Huge play.

The second big Ravens play was nothing more than a fluke. Flacco made one of his few poor decisions of the game to end the third quarter, heaving a ball up into double coverage that was completely midjudged by the Titans defensive backs and caught my Mark Clayton. 9 times out of 10 that's an interception or incompletion. Lucky break. The other two big plays came on the final drive, the 23-yarder to the tight end on 3rd and 2, and the 8-yarder to Clayton to set up Stover's field goal.

The Ravens benefited immensely from luck, timely plays and fantastic coaching. Tennessee may very well have been the better team, but it was Ravens who made plays when they had to. And that's all that matters really. Meanwhile, the Cardinals are leading 27-7 so I think I'm going to declare a perfect 6-0 heading into tomorrow.

Kid B

It was the year 2000 and the turn of the century and British rock band Radiohead held the world in their palm. Their previous two albums, The Bends and OK Computer, were phenomenal and already being regarded as two of the greatest guitar rock albums of all time. So what did the year 2000, and the band's fourth album bring? Kid A, the bizarre completely random collection of electronic computer music totally unlike anything Radiohead had done before. In other words it was Radiohead's Fuck You to the world. They were the biggest rock band on Earth, they could do whatever they wanted and we would buy their album even if it was rubbish computer music. Burn After Reading is the Coen brothers' Kid A. Following the dark, deep and brilliant Oscar-winner No Country for Old Men, the Coen brothers have given us a bizarre, disjointed and meaningless film to chew on. And I couldn't be happier.

Sometimes bizarre, disjointed and meaningless is fine. Spending two dark involving hours with Josh Brolin and Javier Bardem's terrible haircut is fine on occasion, but do it too often and it gets to be too much. Sometimes you need a breath of fresh air. Sometimes you need Burn After Reading. I can't help but feel that everyone involved in this film was making it purely for the purpose of fun. There's no deeper meaning or moral discussion going on here. Burn After Reading is what it is.

Having 'quit' his job as a CIA analyst Osbourne Cox (John Malkovich) decides to write a potentially controversial memoir chronicling his time with the agency. An electronic copy of the memoir finds its way to Hardbodies, a fitness club, where employee Chad Feldheimer (Brad Pitt) comes across it. Chad realises the importance of what he has and teams up with Linda (Frances McDormand), who comes up with the plan to blackmail Osbourne Cox so she can pay for the plastic surgery she needs. Meanwhile Osbourne's unhappy wife Katie (Tilda Swinton) is having an affair with Harry Pfarrer (George Clooney), a treasury agent. Complicating matters is the fact that Harry is also seeing Linda, and what follows is a disastrous chain of events resulting in murder, the Russian embassy and wielding axes in broad daylight.

Burn After Reading sticks with having a coherent and mildly believable storyline but as it approaches the finish line it throws caution to the wind and opts for the most incredible ending possible. If you understand the film you won't have any problem with this. The film is about producing laughs, and it does so on a regular basis. Osbourne's gradual slide into insanity, Harry's bizarre erotic hobby and just about every scene with Brad Pitt had me in a fit. The way the film ends is abrupt and completely irrational, but it's perfect considering.

The cast look like they're having a wonderful time. John Malkovich plays the pathetic loser role he's starting to grow into with gusto. George Clooney is terrific as the pitiable womanising treasury agent. Frances McDormand, our main protagonist, is great playing her part with wide-eyed enthusiasm. Tilda Swinton is solid as the cold bitchy straying wife. J.K. Simmons is hilarious in a cameo role. The thing with superstar ensemble casts is that one actor always seems to stand out from the rest. Tom Cruise in Magnolia, Matt Dillion in Crash. Here it's without a doubt Brad Pitt. Pitt's self-deprecating performance is right on the money, virtually everytime he opened his mouth I laughed. His scenes with Malkovich and his facial expression in his lone scene with Clooney will go down as the funniest of the year I'm sure.

You can only hope that people don't see Burn After Reading as No Country for Old Men 2, nothing could be further from it. It's unlike anything the Coen brothers have done recently, more in tune with their wacky stuff from the early days. If No Country for Old Men is their best drama, and Fargo is their best all round film (which I stand by), then Burn After Reading has to be their finest comedic work.

Crooked cops, airport vodka and Keanu

As preparation for seeing The Day the Earth Stood Still I thought I’d set myself by seeing Street Kings, the other Keanu Reeves movie of 2008. Big mistake. Clichés, gratuity and a script as underdeveloped as it is poorly written run the show here. The storyline is completely uninteresting and predictable, and the ‘twist’ at the end of the film, as well as the strange moral epilogue that follows is painfully bad. There’s nothing royal about Street Kings

Detective Tom Ludlow (Keanu Reeves) is one badass motherfucker. He’s a hothead racist cop that knows no rules or limitations. He is also Captain Jack Wander’s (Forest Whitaker) mercenary. In the name of efficiency Wander sends Ludlow out on missions to kill criminals in cold blood then plant evidence to make it look like lethal force was necessary. Corruption is the name of the game - a good deal of Ludlow’s peers are fully aware of what is going on and more than willing to turn a blind eye. Things go pear-shaped though when Ludlow’s ex-partner Washington (Terry Crews) is murdered in a convenience store with Ludlow present. Ludlow becomes a suspect, and things become even more complicated when he finds out Washington was speaking with Captain Briggs (Hugh Laurie) of Internal Affairs, seemingly ratting him out. What follows is some telephone-book and shovel smacking violence as well as a disastrous web of corruption and back-stabbing.

There are two types of characters that Keanu Reeves can play well. Icy cool leather clad action heroes (The Matrix, Constantine) and offbeat and likable characters (Bill and Ted, Feeling Minnesota). The exception to this rule is when Keanu does his absolute best to succeed at the role, throws everything into it and it comes out in a wonderful jumble. See: Point Break and The Devil’s Advocate. Unfortunately Street Kings gives us cruise control wooden Keanu, who isn’t even unintentionally funny. He’s just plain bad. Keanu is over-the-top and a complete mismatch for his character. Perhaps the highlight of the film comes when Keanu, of Asian heritage no less, goes on a racist rant against a pair of Korean gangsters. It’s ridiculous. And he doesn’t seem like he even cares. But honestly who can blame him when you look at the mess the rest of this film is.

Not all films need to have strong themes, morals and messages. I’m fine settling on occasion for something with an interesting narrative and good characters. Unfortunately Street Kings is 0-for-everying. I’m still not sure what this film is about. It flirts with ideas of alcoholism, loss, racism, revenge, loyalty and ultimately the power of secrets. Nothing is explored, everything is dealt with superficially. The storyline is no more impressive. Fifteen minutes in I was already anticipating this film’s ultimate villain and the ‘climatic’ final scene which would come in turn. These aren’t my incredulous skills of narrative deduction, no, this is just common sense.

With a relatively impressive cast and a decent author upon which the story is based I expected much greater things from Street Kings. The best I can say about it is that it’s a very poor man’s L.A. Confidential. A homeless man’s L.A. Confidential maybe is more apt. It’s not as boring as The Black Dahlia, but it’s a hell of a lot less visually impressive. It comes down to this; Street Kings does a lot of things badly, and nothing in particular good. And generally that formula never leads to a decent film. Generally.