Analysis Ricks Analysis (The Shinboner Blog)

[R00StaR]

Hey MRickey

 

[Grogg]

 

[GarnerSmash]

So I know I'm supposed to be voice of reason guy all the time. But if this performance against Fremantle was the style North wanted to play, and not just a result of Fremantle's pressure (which was really good) ... I'm very worried.

A bit about the style, potential options for it, the caveat around Round 1, and a few other things: https://theshinboner.com/2019/03/25/round-1-alarm-bells-north-melbourne-fremantle-match-review/

Well, Brissy are going to be applying manic forward pressure mext week so we'd better come up with something pretty damn quickly. Unfortunately from what I saw over preseason, handball might actually be our answer to this question which gives me ******* chills.

 

[Snake_Baker]

Get a hit up marking target, go long, and make sure there are blokes at the drop off the ball.

If we're going to turn over the ball, then at least do it 60 metres from the opposition goal, rather than 30 metres from it.

As Pagan used to state; "If I am going to have a contest, I would rather have it in my forward line."

The simple truths of football still apply.

 

[Grogg]

Well, Brissy are going to be applying manic forward pressure mext week so we'd better come up with something pretty damn quickly. Unfortunately from what I saw over preseason, handball might actually be our answer to this question which gives me ******* chills.

We've been using the get-out-the-back release for a long time now & it's easily countered by well drilled, well coached teams.

 

[TennisPlayerAndy]

We've been using the get-out-the-back release for a long time now & it's easily countered by well drilled, well coached teams.

And funnily enough, its the easiest way to beat us.

Loose man off the back of a contest to set up.

 

[Snake_Baker]

We've been using the get-out-the-back release for a long time now & it's easily countered by well drilled, well coached teams.

Sooner or later you have to get the ball up the ground, and the sooner you do it, the better it usually pays off. Once a defender is clear, we should be looking to kick. The problem is that we're so committed to maintaining defensive structure that it kills our offensive impetus.

it's a simple game.

 

[GarnerSmash]

Get a hit up marking target, go long, and make sure there are blokes at the drop off the ball.

If we're going to turn over the ball, then at least do it 60 metres from the opposition goal, rather than 30 metres from it.

As Pagan used to state; "If I am going to have a contest, I would rather have it in my forward line."

The simple truths of football still apply.

Hence why we are going to miss Waite so badly.

 

[TennisPlayerAndy]

Hence why we are going to miss Waite so badly.

Mason?

You there?

Helloooooo?

 

[Snake_Baker]

Hence why we are going to miss Waite so badly.

Goldstein & McKay/Tarrant, or even Brown should be utilised on the way out and we need to get a CHF in to the side asap!!!!

As usual, Brad is 2-3 years behind the times with list structures. He is 3000% REACTIVE.

If we're struggling after 6 rounds then it's time to get Brown to CHF, Larkey to FF and persist.

 

[GarnerSmash]

Mason?

You there?

Helloooooo?

Yeah forget that ever happening.

 

[GarnerSmash]

Goldstein & McKay/Tarrant, or even Brown should be utilised on the way out and we need to get a CHF in to the side asap!!!!

As usual, Brad is 2-3 years behind the times with list structures. He is 3000% REACTIVE.

If we're struggling after 6 rounds then it's time to get Brown to CHF, Larkey to FF and persist.

Honestly Id get Larkey in now, drop Wood and have Ziebell as the 3rd forward marking target. Alls Larkey needs to do is bring the ball to ground. Thats it. Wood is a cat and can't be relied on to do the donkey work and we can't just go to Goldy all day long, unless of course we want to send him to an early retirement.

If we allow the opposition to push right up on us then we need to outnumber the get out contest and get off to the races.

 

[Snake_Baker]

Yeah forget that ever happening.

I'd ask for some perspective on the forwards from the wiser heads like yourself.

Could you imagine gut running to make constant leads all day, only to see the ball stutter about upfield, and turnover for 90% of the game?

I wouldn't be a forward in our side for a million bucks.

If North don't make drastic regime change, he should leave and identify Hawthorn or Collingwood as his destination clubs. He'd kick 40 a year at those clubs.

I am deadly serious about this. Anyone talented under 25 years of age, should just look elsewhere.

 

[Snake_Baker]

Honestly Id get Larkey in now, drop Wood and have Ziebell as the 3rd forward marking target. Alls Larkey needs to do is bring the ball to ground. Thats it. Wood is a cat and can't be relied on to do the donkey work and we can't just go to Goldy all day long, unless of course we want to send him to an early retirement.

If we allow the opposition to push right up on us then we need to outnumber the get out contest and get off to the races.

Okay, but Larkey has to play FF.

Brown goes to CHF, and JZ sits next to Larkey.

 

[TennisPlayerAndy]

Yeah forget that ever happening.

Best KPP tank at the club.

Never anywhere to be found on the field.

 

[GarnerSmash]

I'd ask for some perspective on the forwards from the wiser heads like yourself.

Could you imagine gut running to make constant leads all day, only to see the ball stutter about upfield, and turnover for 90% of the day?

I wouldn't be a forward in our side for a million bucks.

If North don't make drastic regime change, he should leave and identify Hawthorn or Collingwood as his destination clubs. He'd kick 40 a year at those clubs.

I am deadly serious about this. Anyone talented under 25 years of age, should just look elsewhere.

He's too one dimensional, drops easy marks on the lead and won't put his head over the ball. Which is all fine if we are flying, because he can do fantastic things with time and space, but we ain't. And we need him to have an impact on each contest he gets into, which he doesn't because he avoids contact.

 

[amaz199]

It appeared we tried to do wayy too much going forward and completely disregarded the thought of a turnover. This is 2012 reincarnated. The handball to space sort of thing just invites way too much pressure. On top of that, this also requires a lot of running and composure which would absolutely destroy the players physically.

What we did, was handball, handball, handball, handball, handball, handball backwards, handball to no one and goal against.

What we should do, short kick, mark. Look QUICKLY for give and room to spare, give off. Another short kick. Give, and DO IT AGAIN! Oddly, we did this a couple of times and scored from it! Ben Brown could move and find room. But he needs support of course.

The handball style CAN work, if we combine the short kicks with them. It kills any chances of opposition tightening the corridor if we move it quickly. And it makes them as tired as we are going to be if they keep chasing. That is IF, they don't double back. But we should be smart enough to just run in and score.

Again, this works if the team is able to pressure without the pill in their hands, and run with it. So far, this is far from what we think this team is capable of. And it has never been able to do it consistently.

 

[Grogg]

Okay, but Larkey has to play FF.

Brown goes to CHF, and JZ sits next to Larkey.

Wouldn't be unhappy with that.

I would add though that neither are particularly contested mark beasts, which we need down there, especially with 666 in force.

It's one reason why Ive been advocating McKay out of the square up forward.

 

[Snake_Baker]

He's too one dimensional, drops easy marks on the lead and won't put his head over the ball. Which is all fine if we are flying, because he can do fantastic things with time and space, but we ain't. And we need him to have an impact on each contest he gets into, which he doesn't because he avoids contact.

C'mon mate, be honest. How the * do you time leads in our side?

Solve this and I'll nominate you for the Nobel Prize.

First lead: Defenders handball backwards, get pressured & go backwards again. Opportunity missed, double back.
Second lead: Ball squirted forward in to the midfield and fumbled, three more handballs and now it's a turnover, go back again...........ad infinitum for 90% of the match.

It's okay for BBB as he likes it dropped on his head, but skilled foot passing is Woods oxygen.

 

[GarnerSmash]

C'mon mate, be honest. How the **** do you time leads in our side?

Solve this and I'll nominate you for the Nobel Prize.

When we are playing well it ain't that hard to get hit up. Waite did it, Brown does it, Wood can do it. But I don't think we can carry a fair weather hit up forward who avoids contact and can't impact a pack. Especially when our movement off half back is poo and we desperately need another get out option.

 

[Snake_Baker]

When we are playing well it ain't that hard to get hit up. Waite did it, Brown does it, Wood can do it. But I don't think we can carry a fair weather hit up forward who avoids contact and can't impact a pack. Especially when our movement off half back is poo and we desperately need another get out option.

Basically, he should be dropped because the transition is constantly inefficient?

I can't have that mate, the transition is the real issue here.

Sure, I can see where he can't play the CHF role if we do adjust our game plan. In that case I would put him on a flank, which is his true position anyway.

 

[GarnerSmash]

Basically, he should be dropped because the transition is constantly inefficient?

I can't have that mate, the transition is the real issue here.

Sure, I can see where he can't play the CHF role if we do adjust our game plan. In that case I would put him on a flank, which is his true position anyway.

Im coming from the position that the transition won't be an easy fix, so until the point where it is fixed, Wood is a liability IMO.

 

[shintemaster]

Basically, he should be dropped because the transition is constantly inefficient?

I can't have that mate, the transition is the real issue here.

Sure, I can see where he can't play the CHF role if we do adjust our game plan. In that case I would put him on a flank, which is his true position anyway.

I think you're being pretty generous to Wood here although the last sentence is spot on. Essentially he's a crumber / flanker and should play as such or not play. I think we absolutely have to get a proper 2nd forward into this team. I'd play Brown further up as well because then he will actually need to get on leads again. Larkey / McKay with JZ on the side.

 

[Snake_Baker]

Im coming from the position that the transition won't be an easy fix, so until the point where it is fixed, Wood is a liability IMO.

I see your point, but ultimately the true liability is the coach slotting him in to that role under that terrible transition.

Like I stated, if he went to Hawthorn or Collingwood it would be an entirely different story.

 

[RobZombie]

Don't know quite where to put this but an analysis thread seems as good a place as any.



As a sometimes training watcher, this rings true to me. We're good at contested stuff and NM training is pretty willing and contested so I'd say we get closer to training as we play for that, but the skills execution, while it looks good at the time, isn't under the real pressure of enemy fire. We're not alone in this but I'm sure the Brad Haters will have a field day with it.

It also makes sense to me in the context of our round 1 results or as I like to call it, "JLT3".

I'm not shelling out $43USD for the whole thing so you'll have to make do with the abstract.