Preview AFL Round 19 - North Melbourne v Geelong, Etihad Stadium, 7:40PM Saturday 2 August

[Daniel McL]

I agree with people who say Simpson did better than McIntosh last week, but personally watching it looked like Simpson took a LOT more of the ruck contests which is probably why...

 

[Daniel McL]

I think we should:

-Bring Bundy in for Hartman (obvious one)
-Bring Blicavs in for Simpson (HMac against old side will help)
-Would love to see Bews on Thomas but don't know who we would bring out for him...
-Would also love to see McCarthy in, could only see him in for Murdoch but with the rest I think Murdoch will be back to his best with the pressure acts & goals so probably not for McCarthy sadly.
-Lastly would love to see Thurlow & Jansen given goes but that's basically impossible at the moment without injuries (people say we could bring in Jansen and drop Caddy but even though Caddy hasn't had the ball as much as we hoped he did get 10 tackles so make sure to keep an eye on Caddy when he doesn't have the ball)

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Bundy will come in for Hartman and Blitz fo Simpson, and that's basically our best 22.

I know people are down on Murdoch, and he needs to produce more but there's not much competition for his spot. Burbury is injured, McCarthy probably doesn't have enough match fitness yet, and Smedts is in average form.

Our best prospects to come in based on vfl at the moment are Thurlow, Bews and Hunt (pre his injury) and they are all half back/wing options, none can fill Murdoch's spot.

 

[dazbroncos]

Some pretty harsh assessments on a 36 gamer I would of thought. How many players are match winners with that little experience? Not many. Not to mention when you're surrounded with guys like Bartel, Hawkins, Selwood, Kelly, Johnson, Stokes et al who live for those moments. Don't really remeber those guys doing it after 36 games though either.

Mind you, he did ok in the last qtr vs the Hawks last year with 3 crucial goals. Maybe revisit in 50 games time?

I wasn't suggesting Murda is no good - just that of the fast fleet we have he is the most unsettled. He is getting better and brings a unique perspective to us - tall ( 192) super fast raking left footer. He has been up and he has been down - to be expected - I was just taking him out purely to ensure the Thomas does not get a free run at kicking 6 goals again. Bews mission in life would be to sit in him all day. And as soon as we get the pill take off the other way and burn Thomas with the plus 1 in the MF. Thomas for mine plays a lot only 1 way and this would help to expose him. Murda plays a different role.

Go Catters

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

I wouldn't use the term fantastic for any rucking performance until we start winning the clearances, particularly against the likes of Melbourne and Footscray.

We comfortably won the hitouts and clearances against Melbourne, with McIntosh putting up a 26 (hitouts)/20 (disposals) game, Blicavs chipping in with 14 hitouts and 12 disposals and the two combining for 14 tackles (the work rate of our ruckmen was almost directly responsible for us winning the tackle count, despite having far more of the football than Melbourne: our rucks were +8 in tackles laid, the team was +9 overall). I'll take that any day of the week from my two rucks.

McIntosh clearly had the better of Minson and clearances is only 50% the responsibility of the ruckman anyway. It could just as easily be the midfielders didn't get to the right spot, or the opposition midfielder simply read it better and our players weren't defensive enough.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

That's true and Simpson would be unlucky to miss out. But that analysis neglects two points.

1. Assuming we go in with only two of Blicavs/McIntosh/Simpson, McIntosh and Blicavs have been outstanding together in the past few weeks.
2. McIntosh knows Goldstein like the back of his hand. Of course, the opposite is also true, but Goldstein had minimal impact the last time the teams met (Simpson's first H&A game against North Melbourne).

And of course, who knows? Maybe Blicavs isn't an automatic inclusion.

I'm curious as to your basis on which they have been outstanding.

It certainly isn't with clearances. Of the 5 games where only Blicavs and McIntosh have featured. Which are rounds 6, 12, 14, 16, 17 against Port Adelaide, Carlton, Gold Coast, Western Bulldogs and Melbourne respectively.

So as for clearances the combo of MB and Hmac has averaged -6 clearance differential, in their 5 matches (-10, 5, -12, -21, 8), whereas the combination of MB and Dawson has resulted in an average of -2 from a small sample size of 2 games (-7, 3).

Hmac and Dawson combined for the first time last game v GWS for -12 differential. In the 9 games where all 3 have played it has resulted in being beaten in clearances on average of -5.55 per game (4, -7, -1, 4, 1, 0,-18, -13, -20)

I also have which combinations were playing against the top and bottom 5 clearance teams, if you would like me to go and put it in?

As a team that ranks 9th currently in average hitouts, the Blicavs and McIntosh combination yields an average of 41.8 which is exactly the same as our overall season average.

However hitouts to advantage is what matters, which of our ruckmen is best at that?, also which ruckmen is best at limiting hitouts to disadvantage?

I understand hitouts and clearances are only part of the role a ruckmen plays but a critical one none the less I would have thought, I also understand generally throughout the season Hmac has been better around the ground than Dawson... I'm just curious as to the measurement you have used to arrive at the conclusion of the above statement

P.s I'm not sold on which combo works best, so I'm just seeking your justification, so if it is a solid justification you can persuade me.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

I'm with you Daz, but I'm not a Murdoch fan, so it stands to reason that I'm happy to see him out of the side. My main issue with him is that he looks great when we are winning comfortably, but he seems to struggle badly when we are getting beaten. He's obviously not on his lonesome as a poor player in a losing side, but it's the consistency of this pattern (poor player in a losing side) that is my concern. I reckon he is Geelong's version of Isaac Smith - a pacy, raking left footer who is a great front runner, but is not the guy who is going to drag his team back into a game when the chips are down.

I think he's not far off. If he'd kicked 3-4 goals that he absolutely should have in the past four weeks, we'd probably be saying how well he's going. Of course, nailing those shots has got to be a player in Murdoch's role's bread and butter and if he keeps missing those, his spot has to be in jeopardy. Still, I think it's a bit unfair to suggest that he doesn't stand up when the chips are down: he's been outstanding in the last two H&A games against Hawthorn and despite being quiet in the Preliminary Final last year, he stepped up and kicked a critical (right foot snap in heavy traffic, on an acute angle about 25m out...an incredibly difficult kick) goal just before three quarter time to give us that infamous 20 point lead. He kicked two steadiers in the Richmond game this year, kicked the goal that started our last quarter comeback against Carlton...he's got it in him to step up when it counts. He just hasn't been doing it recently.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

I'm curious as to your basis on which they have been outstanding.

Getting a heap of hitouts and disposals and laying lots of tackles in their recent two games together.

It certainly isn't with clearances. Of the 5 games where only Blicavs and McIntosh have featured. Which are rounds 6, 12, 14, 16, 17 against Port Adelaide, Carlton, Gold Coast, Western Bulldogs and Melbourne respectively.

So as for clearances the combo of MB and Hmac has averaged -6 clearance differential, in their 5 matches (-10, 5, -12, -21, 8), whereas the combination of MB and Dawson has resulted in an average of -2 from a small sample size of 2 games (-7, 3).

Hmac and Dawson combined for the first time last game v GWS for -12 differential. In the 9 games where all 3 have played it has resulted in being beaten in clearances on average of -5.55 per game (4, -7, -1, 4, 1, 0,-18, -13, -20)

I also have which combinations were playing against the top and bottom 5 clearance teams, if you would like me to go and put it in?

As a team that ranks 9th currently in average hitouts, the Blicavs and McIntosh combination yields an average of 41.8 which is exactly the same as our overall season average.

The thing about 'average hitouts' and 'average clearances' is that unlike pretty much every other stat, no matter how good or dominant you are, there's only a set amount available each game. Case in point: last year Simpson had 55 against Melbourne, which helped boost his average for the season to just below 30. What an amazing performance, right? Well, not really...see Simpson's opponent, Max Gawn, had 48 hitouts of his own and there was a whopping 127 hitouts total for the game. So, it's problematic to compare team averages for clearances and hitouts, because sometimes your team will see twice as many stoppages in a game from one week to the next. What really matters is how it goes from week to week.

On that front, Geelong has won the hitouts in 11 of its 17 games, while winning the clearances seven times and tying once. Surprisingly, it's only won both on four occasions. The ruckman is completely in control of whether he wins the hitouts or not, but there are many moving parts that determine whether the team gets a clearance, beyond just the ruckman. Since we've tried multiple ruck partnerships over the past few years and the only constant seems to be generally losing the clearance battle, maybe it's time to look at what the midfielders are doing.

However hitouts to advantage is what matters, which of our ruckmen is best at that?, also which ruckmen is best at limiting hitouts to disadvantage?

On the first point, who knows? For some reason, it's easier to find the Loch Ness Monster than it is to find hitout to advantage statistics. Going by the clearance numbers, which tend to be pretty ordinary regardless, I'd suggest the answer is 'none of them'. On the second count, it would probably be whoever is winning the hitouts, which, in general, tends to be whichever combo we throw in there (won the hitouts five of the past six weeks).

I understand hitouts and clearances are only part of the role a ruckmen plays but I critical one none the less I would have thought, I also understand generally throughout the season Hmac has been better around the ground than Dawson... I'm just curious as to the measurement you have used to arrive at the conclusion of the above statement

Exactly that. The hitout numbers seem to be good irrespective of which tandem we go with, so why not go with the two who do far more around the ground?

 

[Pivo]

Bundy will come in for Hartman and Blitz fo Simpson, and that's basically our best 22.

I know people are down on Murdoch, and he needs to produce more but there's not much competition for his spot. Burbury is injured, McCarthy probably doesn't have enough match fitness yet, and Smedts is in average form.

Our best prospects to come in based on vfl at the moment are Thurlow, Bews and Hunt (pre his injury) and they are all half back/wing options, none can fill Murdoch's spot.

Probably clutching at straws here however you did throw up the names of Burbury and McCarthy.

I honestly think Schroder could also play the crumbing forward. Good goal sense, good inside packs when the forward line gets clogged with players and doesn't mind a tackle.

His foot speed would count against him but I've often scratched my head wondering why he isn't given an opportunity to be stationed deep, at Hawkins feet (added bonus, he can run through the midfield to give some of the other guys a breather).

This late in the season it seems unlikely to happen but I'd throw his name up for consideration (if, for no other reason than I really like the kid).

 

[nohairandfair]

Bundy will come in for Hartman and Blitz fo Simpson, and that's basically our best 22.

I know people are down on Murdoch, and he needs to produce more but there's not much competition for his spot. Burbury is injured, McCarthy probably doesn't have enough match fitness yet, and Smedts is in average form.

Our best prospects to come in based on vfl at the moment are Thurlow, Bews and Hunt (pre his injury) and they are all half back/wing options, none can fill Murdoch's spot.

Can't see McCarthy or Burbury usurping Murdoch unless they really start turning it on consistently in the VFL over the next month.

Both were given a decent run early in the season with both Christensen and Motlop out and while providing some defensive forward pressure weren't able to win too many contested possessions or snag the odd opportunistic goal that a small forward should.

 

[Partridge]

I agree with people who say Simpson did better than McIntosh last week, but personally watching it looked like Simpson took a LOT more of the ruck contests which is probably why...

Except McIntosh had an entire extra quarter (the last) all by himself. Yet they both finished with 20 hitouts.

 

[Partridge]

I think he's not far off. If he'd kicked 3-4 goals that he absolutely should have in the past four weeks, we'd probably be saying how well he's going. Of course, nailing those shots has got to be a player in Murdoch's role's bread and butter and if he keeps missing those, his spot has to be in jeopardy. Still, I think it's a bit unfair to suggest that he doesn't stand up when the chips are down: he's been outstanding in the last two H&A games against Hawthorn and despite being quiet in the Preliminary Final last year, he stepped up and kicked a critical (right foot snap in heavy traffic, on an acute angle about 25m out...an incredibly difficult kick) goal just before three quarter time to give us that infamous 20 point lead. He kicked two steadiers in the Richmond game this year, kicked the goal that started our last quarter comeback against Carlton...he's got it in him to step up when it counts. He just hasn't been doing it recently.

I actually think that's a big part of why he stays in the side. He has shown multiple times an ability to create a goal from absolutely nothing.

 

[Seeds]

Except McIntosh had an entire extra quarter (the last) all by himself. Yet they both finished with 20 hitouts.

Its not just the hit outs. Its where the hit outs are going. Simpsons are a lot more decisive then McIntoshs. He can hit it forward to open spaces that we can run onto as well as backwards. Because McIntosh doesn't jump and isn't as tall as Simpson the majority of his hit outs involve holding off the other ruckman and hitting the ball backwards to our players who are either standing still or running sideways. Not only does this prevent us from charging forward to goal and enables time for opponents to defend if we do get the clearance but it makes it very predictable as to where McIntoshs hits outs are going and opponents can anticipate it.

 

[Seeds]

Getting a heap of hitouts and disposals and laying lots of tackles in their recent two games together.



The thing about 'average hitouts' and 'average clearances' is that unlike pretty much every other stat, no matter how good or dominant you are, there's only a set amount available each game. Case in point: last year Simpson had 55 against Melbourne, which helped boost his average for the season to just below 30. What an amazing performance, right? Well, not really...see Simpson's opponent, Max Gawn, had 48 hitouts of his own and there was a whopping 127 hitouts total for the game. So, it's problematic to compare team averages for clearances and hitouts, because sometimes your team will see twice as many stoppages in a game from one week to the next. What really matters is how it goes from week to week.

On that front, Geelong has won the hitouts in 11 of its 17 games, while winning the clearances seven times and tying once. Surprisingly, it's only won both on four occasions. The ruckman is completely in control of whether he wins the hitouts or not, but there are many moving parts that determine whether the team gets a clearance, beyond just the ruckman. Since we've tried multiple ruck partnerships over the past few years and the only constant seems to be generally losing the clearance battle, maybe it's time to look at what the midfielders are doing.



On the first point, who knows? For some reason, it's easier to find the Loch Ness Monster than it is to find hitout to advantage statistics. Going by the clearance numbers, which tend to be pretty ordinary regardless, I'd suggest the answer is 'none of them'. On the second count, it would probably be whoever is winning the hitouts, which, in general, tends to be whichever combo we throw in there (won the hitouts five of the past six weeks).



Exactly that. The hitout numbers seem to be good irrespective of which tandem we go with, so why not go with the two who do far more around the ground?

The highlighted is the reason for the difference in views. McIntosh wins hit outs like Simpson but they rarely are any good. There are no good statistics for this. But there are your eyes. Watch the game and watch where the hit outs go to.

 

[Seeds]

I think we should:

-Bring Bundy in for Hartman (obvious one)
-Bring Blicavs in for Simpson (HMac against old side will help)
-Would love to see Bews on Thomas but don't know who we would bring out for him...
-Would also love to see McCarthy in, could only see him in for Murdoch but with the rest I think Murdoch will be back to his best with the pressure acts & goals so probably not for McCarthy sadly.
-Lastly would love to see Thurlow & Jansen given goes but that's basically impossible at the moment without injuries (people say we could bring in Jansen and drop Caddy but even though Caddy hasn't had the ball as much as we hoped he did get 10 tackles so make sure to keep an eye on Caddy when he doesn't have the ball)

Why? Yes McIntosh can help us understand their tactics but he doesn't need to be playing to help us there. Goldstein knows McIntosh just as well as McIntosh knows Goldstein so I can't see any advantage there. If anything there may be a reason why Goldstein was the first choice over McIntosh at North and North will exploit that.

 

[Seeds]

Can't see McCarthy or Burbury usurping Murdoch unless they really start turning it on consistently in the VFL over the next month.

Both were given a decent run early in the season with both Christensen and Motlop out and while providing some defensive forward pressure weren't able to win too many contested possessions or snag the odd opportunistic goal that a small forward should.

But their defensive pressure was awesome apparently. Who cares if they are slow for their position, couldn't get the ball, gave away dumb free kicks that cost us goals (McCarthy numerous times) and couldn't kick any goals. Defensive pressure is where it is at.

 

[vinum coupe]

Why? Yes McIntosh can help us understand their tactics but he doesn't need to be playing to help us there. Goldstein knows McIntosh just as well as McIntosh knows Goldstein so I can't see any advantage there. If anything there may be a reason why Goldstein was the first choice over McIntosh at North and North will exploit that.

That's my thinking.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

Can't see McCarthy or Burbury usurping Murdoch unless they really start turning it on consistently in the VFL over the next month.

I wouldn't be against any of our other small forwards (add Schroder to the names above) getting a look before September. But I think only Burbury has the skill-set to be a relative like-for-like for Murdoch. So, for the most part, I'd like to see someone like McCarthy or Schroder getting a crack alongside Murdoch, not in his place.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

The highlighted is the reason for the difference in views. McIntosh wins hit outs like Simpson but they rarely are any good. There are no good statistics for this. But there are your eyes. Watch the game and watch where the hit outs go to.

I agree, Simpson gets more decisive hitouts. But a lot of times, those decisive hitouts go straight to an opponent (again, whether this the fault of Simpson, the midfielders, or a combination is hard to know) but in that Essendon game, Simpson seemed to consistently be getting a decisive tap, then the ball would go straight to Heppell or Zaharakis. When that is happening, sometimes it's better to either spike the ball forward, or put it straight on the ground (i.e. an 'indecisive' hitout), to stop the opposition getting another easy take-away.

 

[Daniel McL]

Why? Yes McIntosh can help us understand their tactics but he doesn't need to be playing to help us there. Goldstein knows McIntosh just as well as McIntosh knows Goldstein so I can't see any advantage there. If anything there may be a reason why Goldstein was the first choice over McIntosh at North and North will exploit that.

They're always going to go with HMac when fit because he can go forward as well (e.g. Hawthorn game those marks he took) while Simpson can only ruck...

 

[Partridge]

They're always going to go with HMac when fit because he can go forward as well (e.g. Hawthorn game those marks he took) while Simpson can only ruck...

To an extent yes. I don't think there's any disputing that he provides more around the ground, and on occasion he can push forward (he's not a key forward though). He started great - 5 goals in his first 7 games this year. But he's only kicked 1 in the next 8 (6 from 15 overall, still our best of the ruckmen). Simpson on the other hand kicked 1 in his first 8 games, but has kicked 2 in his last 4 (3 from 12 overall). So while McIntosh might offer more around the ground for sure, it's not like he kicks bags up forward. He doesn't.

In any case, he's a far, far better ruckman than forward.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Its not just the hit outs. Its where the hit outs are going. Simpsons are a lot more decisive then McIntoshs. He can hit it forward to open spaces that we can run onto as well as backwards. Because McIntosh doesn't jump and isn't as tall as Simpson the majority of his hit outs involve holding off the other ruckman and hitting the ball backwards to our players who are either standing still or running sideways. Not only does this prevent us from charging forward to goal and enables time for opponents to defend if we do get the clearance but it makes it very predictable as to where McIntoshs hits outs are going and opponents can anticipate it.

I don't think that's necessarily untrue but a lot of blame has to fall on the midfield, we have gone through several ruck combinations the last three years, and with all of them we still get beaten in the midfield most times, and a lot of times by non top four teams. I think the midfielders need to impove more so than us changing the ruck set up.

Secondly, while Simpson does hitouts better, McIntosh does everything else better. At the moment half this board would move better than Simpson around the ground, and he is nowhere near fit enough. This is critical for us because the good teams that beat us park their bus in our forward line and play us on the break, exposing our lack of speed and ground coverage. This is only exacerbated by playing Dawson which basically leaves us with 17 players once the ball hits the deck and we can't carry that. I am not sure what the cause is, because while he is not as good a mark or as agile as McIntosh, last year he was moving much better around the ground and contributing more after the ruck contest, but at the moment he's not moving nearly as well and until he is he has buckley's chance of playing ahead of HMac in the finals.

 

[nohairandfair]

Many of the rucking duels are indecisive; a ruckman's hit-outs to advantage is often a single figure tally per game.

Clearances are more about midfield personnel and how they structure up and compete in congestion. Of course the ruckmen also have a role here and need strong second efforts.

A case in point is Melbourne. While sitting at #3 in total hit-outs are at the bottom of the table in clearances (we are second last).

 

[TheJimmyCartel]

I think we should:

-Bring Bundy in for Hartman (obvious one)
-Bring Blicavs in for Simpson (HMac against old side will help)
-Would love to see Bews on Thomas but don't know who we would bring out for him...
-Would also love to see McCarthy in, could only see him in for Murdoch but with the rest I think Murdoch will be back to his best with the pressure acts & goals so probably not for McCarthy sadly.
-Lastly would love to see Thurlow & Jansen given goes but that's basically impossible at the moment without injuries (people say we could bring in Jansen and drop Caddy but even though Caddy hasn't had the ball as much as we hoped he did get 10 tackles so make sure to keep an eye on Caddy when he doesn't have the ball)

I think we posted almost identical suggestions, we should probably overthrow the MC!

In regards to Jansen/Caddy though, Jansen was averaging about 8 tackles a game for the 6 weeks prior to last outing and would be averaging about 6 a game for the year so I don't think we'd lose much in that area.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Getting a heap of hitouts and disposals and laying lots of tackles in their recent two games together.

The thing about 'average hitouts' and 'average clearances' is that unlike pretty much every other stat, no matter how good or dominant you are, there's only a set amount available each game. Case in point: last year Simpson had 55 against Melbourne, which helped boost his average for the season to just below 30. What an amazing performance, right? Well, not really...see Simpson's opponent, Max Gawn, had 48 hitouts of his own and there was a whopping 127 hitouts total for the game. So, it's problematic to compare team averages for clearances and hitouts, because sometimes your team will see twice as many stoppages in a game from one week to the next. What really matters is how it goes from week to week.

That is why unlike the afl who deal in aggregates, and averages, I'm more interested in the differentials, as this gives a clearer picture as to who has performed better. Case in point the afl has hawthorn as the best clearance team in the afl based on aggregates, but they have won clearances in 8 of 16 games and 7 of those were by 5 clearances or less, hardly dominant?

On that front, Geelong has won the hitouts in 11 of its 17 games, while winning the clearances seven times and tying once. Surprisingly, it's only won both on four occasions. The ruckman is completely in control of whether he wins the hitouts or not, but there are many moving parts that determine whether the team gets a clearance, beyond just the ruckman. Since we've tried multiple ruck partnerships over the past few years and the only constant seems to be generally losing the clearance battle, maybe it's time to look at what the midfielders are doing.

On the topic of clearances, last night in a FS interview Chris Scott commented that...

As a team they need to be better in clearances and when we have lost we have been smashed in the contest, but seeing as we have won having been beaten in this area... it's not the be all and end all. Did note that against the best teams we can't afford for this to continue, and to be constantly defending from the back 50.....

So he clearly is of the opinion we won't be successful in finals unless we improve in clearances (doesn't mean we have to be dominant, we just can't continue to be inept in clearances), against the teams that are a realistic chance of playing finals (the current top 8 + GC & Adelaide), we have won the clearances against Adelaide (+4), Collingwood and Hawthorn (+1) and Essendon (+3), However when we have been beaten at clearances, we've been smashed, Port Adelaide (-10), Fremantle (-18), North Melbourne (-13), Sydney (-20) and Gold Coast (-12). I think those last 5 is why he recognises improvement needs to be made, that isn't just getting beaten, that's comprehensively beaten and as he said we can't be constantly defending from the back 50.

So there needs to be an improvement not just from the ruckmen, but also his midfielders. Who knows maybe the addition of Christensen and Caddy may help in this area, given the first four times we lost clearances as above, neither were playing.

Exactly that. The hitout numbers seem to be good irrespective of which tandem we go with, so why not go with the two who do far more around the ground?

I wasn't saying you were wrong, I was just curious as all season my old man has been carrying on about how superior Simpson is over McIntosh and we shouldn't have drafted Hmac, whereas I see he is better at giving quality hitouts, he is also significantly inferior to Hmac around the ground, hence the split opinions.