Review Scratch match analysis of North V Saints

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

The issue is that talls take time, and the fact we haven't recruited any means it will take longer still.
Skinner didn't really show anything IMO. X is also yet to show anything as a forward at any level. Walker we all know is not the answer.
I'm not advocating Walker as a long term option. Just a immediate structural option if we wanted to go that way.

As far as the recruiting goes, If we don't rate them we're not taking them.

We're year 1 onto a new regime. We've shed 2/3 of our poor footballers and I expect the rest at the end of this season. I imagine we'll look a lot different in 2-3 years than we do now.

Sent from my SM-A908B using Tapatalk
 
I find the "shown nothing as a forward" calls quite strange really. Yes X is probably more suited to a ruck role, but he has shown the ability to kick a goal or two in an albeit small sample size.
At worst he's a big aggressive bastard who compete.

Sent from my SM-A908B using Tapatalk
 
Look deeper than this - yes we would have lost the game with W Carey in our forward line as well. But I am not talking about that. I am talking about the fact we had one viable target in our forward 50, and even he had to waste energy in the ruck for periods of the game. You can't tell me we can win too many games with this structure.

I think we have more pressing concerns then our forward line structure in the short-term. Noble has said numerous times, the ball starts in the middle and that's our focus. It's also an area that we have been systemically poor for decades.

I also think we have more then 1 viable target in our forward 50, Larkey just happens to be the only one that is above 190cm, which is why I'm suggesting J.Walker as a temporary option.

Your point about talls taking time is fair - which is likely why we drafted Comben last year, and will likely target another this year given his injury concerns.

We always have the trade/FA to fall back on.
 
I think we have more pressing concerns then our forward line structure in the short-term. Noble has said numerous times, the ball starts in the middle and that's our focus. It's also an area that we have been systemically poor for decades.

I also think we have more then 1 viable target in our forward 50, Larkey just happens to be the only one that is above 190cm, which is why I'm suggesting J.Walker as a temporary option.

Your point about talls taking time is fair - which is likely why we drafted Comben last year, and will likely target another this year given his injury concerns.

We always have the trade/FA to fall back on.
If we start playing some good footy and look like we're on the verge of something we'll suddenly look way more attractive to FA's.

Sent from my SM-A908B using Tapatalk
 
I find the "shown nothing as a forward" calls quite strange really. Yes X is probably more suited to a ruck role, but he has shown the ability to kick a goal or two in an albeit small sample size.

Statistically he did but he hasn't demonstrated particular productivity as a forward imo just yet.

Larkey, Brown or Petrie at VFL level were clearly ruck-sized forwards constantly generating opportunities. I haven't seen the same ground coverage and nouse from Xerri.

He has merits as a collision player up forward but don't think his forward craft will translate to a goal+ per game over a 50+ game career. He's not in Goldstein's galaxy as a forward either.
 
Got a lot to work on; be it with our current 'depth' players or otherwise.
Sorry but if you're into your mid/late 20s and get called up you're expected to compete like others clubs' players do.
Some good signs yesterday like transition up the ground leading to goals but man there were some stinkers too.
Got some major issues to work over the next month otherwise we'll be going for another bottom 4 finish.
 
Got a lot to work on; be it with our current 'depth' players or otherwise.
Sorry but if you're into your mid/late 20s and get called up you're expected to compete like others clubs' players do.
Some good signs yesterday like transition up the ground leading to goals but man there were some stinkers too.
Got some major issues to work over the next month otherwise we'll be going for another bottom 4 finish.
Unless we have a miraculous injury run, bottom 4 is a given.

We're building from a base of 3 30+ stars, maybe 6 solid AFL players plus 26 kids. It'll take longer than a month.

Sent from my SM-A908B using Tapatalk
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Unless we have a miraculous injury run, bottom 4 is a given.

We're building from a base of 3 30+ stars, maybe 6 solid AFL players plus 26 kids. It'll take longer than a month.

Sent from my SM-A908B using Tapatalk

I've got to get my head around the fact we are finally, for the first time rebuilding.

If I see Noble, Luff, Rawlings chasing quick fixes at year's end I'll be pist tho. If we're doing this, do it properly. No Lance Piccioanes or Farren Rays.
 
Very true.
However, I reckon Turner would be about 25% from that range over his career.
My insisting nowadays is that Turner would miss a set shot but I recently watched the replay of a 2018 august match at the gabba v Brisbane. Turner kicked three in the first quarter, outmarking Hodge on one occasion from memory. Would love to see him do that more regularly.
Generally agree with comments that he can’t miss his opportunities but he seems to be decent at set shots statistically which wasn’t what I was expecting to find.
 

Attachments

  • AFL Goal Kickers Player Stats Shot Charts Heat Maps - Stats Insider.pdf
    221.7 KB · Views: 41
I've got to get my head around the fact we are finally, for the first time rebuilding.

If I see Noble, Luff, Rawlings chasing quick fixes at year's end I'll be pist tho. If we're doing this, do it properly. No Lance Piccioanes or Farren Rays.
I hope back to an interview Noble did at Brisbane 2-3 years as a baseline. There'll be no shortcuts. I reckon it's the biggest factor as to why we're a good fit.

Clayton, Luff and co took the list slashing with too much gusto to change course imo.

Sent from my SM-A908B using Tapatalk
 
I hope back to an interview Noble did at Brisbane 2-3 years as a baseline. There'll be no shortcuts. I reckon it's the biggest factor as to why we're a good fit.

Clayton, Luff and co took the list slashing with too much gusto to change course imo.

Sent from my SM-A908B using Tapatalk

I've been hurt before.

Pagan had a strong core of kids re-building through the draft in 2000 but a year later is chasing Ben Robbins, Paul Dimmatia and David Bourke.

Laidley launched with a full array of draft picks then within 2-3 years is stocking up with Piccioane, Hay, Green etc.

The list managers boot out 3 strong clubmen in 2016 only to chase magic beans for the next 2 years.

No shortcuts this time please. Not even Josh thanks. Take our first rounds at the draft, build the core.
 
I've got to get my head around the fact we are finally, for the first time rebuilding.

If I see Noble, Luff, Rawlings chasing quick fixes at year's end I'll be pist tho. If we're doing this, do it properly. No Lance Piccioanes or Farren Rays.

Would have happened last year with all the outside noise, if it were to happen KC.

Much like this off-season, 2021 is about the draft, young out of favour oppo talent & FA for the long-term.

Luff, Brady & Noble aren’t being measured on short term.
 
I've been hurt before.

Pagan had a strong core of kids re-building through the draft in 2000 but a year later is chasing Ben Robbins, Paul Dimmatia and David Bourke.

Laidley launched with a full array of draft picks then within 2-3 years is stocking up with Piccioane, Hay, Green etc.

The list managers boot out 3 strong clubmen in 2016 only to chase magic beans for the next 2 years.

No shortcuts this time please. Not even Josh thanks. Take our first rounds at the draft, build the core.

Yeah I think it’s fair enough to be a bit scarred by the past, I definitely am.

However, it’s pretty clear that there are distinct differences in the approach that Cam Joyce & co took versus what Noble & Luff have done in their first 12 months.
 
That's what everyone plays for at the end of the day. We don't play for rebuilds for the sake of rebuilds. Good on them for being able to attract the players they wanted and finding cap room to pull it off. Especially so, given they aren't a big club that typically attracts players through its reputation alone.

100%. They believe they’re in the window so it’s unethical and weak not to go for it.
 
I also think we have more then 1 viable target in our forward 50, Larkey just happens to be the only one that is above 190cm, which is why I'm suggesting J.Walker as a temporary option.
This.

It's a different-looking forward line from previous years, and it'll take some time to for them to get used to it - that's the forwards and those kicking to them - but I can see it causing some chaos once oppositions realise we are no longer one dimensional. As long as we don't just keep kicking it to the big bloke again, of course.
 
A whole lot of new players to the club and only two pre-season matches. Why wouldn't you play your best available team and build team chemistry? Instead we had a backline under siege due to an inferior midfield and a forward line that had the ball bombed in to them. Hardly match practise/simulation. In comparison Richmond played Cotchin and Dusty.
 
A whole lot of new players to the club and only two pre-season matches. Why wouldn't you play your best available team and build team chemistry? Instead we had a backline under siege due to an inferior midfield and a forward line that had the ball bombed in to them. Hardly match practise/simulation. In comparison Richmond played Cotchin and Dusty.
A lof of our omissions were due to injury. No point comparing to what other teams do.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top