Autopsy Autopsy vs WCE

[ChopChopDigDig]

3. FOS - All business!! Doesn’t need to be in a group hug to celebrate his first goal. And you must be good if Healy is celebrating you as a North player.

This stood out to me too. Muted celebration, cmon boys back to work let’s get this win. Great attitude for a first year player - hope it rubs off onto some of our more senior players.

 

[CharlieMortdecai]

I wasn't initially going to try and pull it apart but some of the vitriol from 'more positive' posters is ridiculous. The reason some people aren't happy, campaigners, is because we should've outgrown that sort of performance years ago.

You seem to be missing the bit where the negative campaigners tell us that we're not allowed to enjoy the win, or we're morons if we do. Or they claim to speak on behalf of all North Melbourne supporters like Chad's ridiculous OP.
Perform well and lose - all that matters are Ws.
Win ugly - it's all about the performance and that W doesn't count.

 

[zoomba23]

KYou seem to be missing the bit where the negative campaigners tell us that we're not allowed to enjoy the win, or we're morons if we do. Or they claim to speak on behalf of all North Melbourne supporters like Chad's ridiculous OP.
Perform well and lose - all that matters are Ws.
Win ugly - it's all about the performance and that W doesn't count.

You're allowed to do whatever you please. That's the beauty of this place; diversity of opinion. We're all at different stages of grief

 

[Ischenko]

Yeah some of you are too head-****ed to be watching a professional sports team atm. I don’t blame you, it’s been excruciating, but looked at objectively - percentage, wins, being in games longer - things are starting to turn. Perhaps a thread could be created so people can whinge, vent and rage regardless, and the game autopsy threads could be kept a bit more focused?

 

[amaz199]

I'm probably not going to make the same mistake of getting ahead of myself. We need to improve drastically to be even half a chance to get another victory against Freo and any other team from here.

We're still just as vulnerable as ever despite the defensive mechanisms in place and the players cannot rely on individual talent all the time to win games of footy.

 

[Event Horizon]

Well seems he'll either kick it or miss

Career 53 goals 53 behinds. Time at North 0 goals 5 behinds

The above is all a bit shit tbh.

I just think back to his late miss vs Collingwood last season from 30m directly in front, and his several attempts late in the game on Sunday, I think I've seen enough

 

[CharlieMortdecai]

Or do you literally want someone to say it was a turning point?

Really? Could there be anything more tentative than "should at least be slightly encouraging?"? It's far from trumpeting our bright future and proclaiming this will be seen as the game where we turned the corner.
You seem to want to deny us the pleasure of finding the smallest positive out of this game.

 

[shintemaster]

Yeah some of you are too head-****ed to be watching a professional sports team atm. I don’t blame you, it’s been excruciating, but looked at objectively - percentage, wins, being in games longer - things are starting to turn. Perhaps a thread could be created so people can whinge, vent and rage regardless, and the game autopsy threads could be kept a bit more focused?

Unequivocally we have improved. Two disgusting games against Carlton & Sydney don't change that (aware there have been bad bits in other games).

People who went into this year expecting to not lose a game by 40+ were kidding themselves, last year's runner up Sydney were obliterated by a Melbourne team that we kicked a cricket score against. There will always be big blowouts in the modern game.

I'm as frustrated as anyone that on paper we've left 3-4 wins begging that would see us essentially in the 8, but we are improving (too slowly for many of us I'm sure).

 

[Souup]

Interesting to have a look at our strengths and weaknesses over the last 5 games:
...

Elaborating on this stuff a bit more:

Scores from turnover is a particularly interesting one. We've clearly tightened up defensively and tried to be more safe moving the footy. The fact our defense experiences the equal lowest amount of defensive 1v1's show we're getting numbers back and not sending as many forward to capitalise on turnover - the trade off is of course a poorer attacking return.

Points from turnover for us - points against us from turnover - opposition score

R1 - 56 points from turnover - 46 - 113
R2 - 60 points from turnover - 43 - 66
R3 - 41 points from turnover - 72 - 114
R4 - 22 points from turnover - 72 - 117
R5 - 43 points from turnover - 74 - 141
R6 - 33 points from turnover - 69 - 153
________________________________
R7 - 36 points from turnover - 40 - 97
R8 - 21 points from turnover - 31 - 65
R9 - 34 points from turnover - 42 - 71
R10 - 26 points from turnover - 32 - 74
R11 - 17 points from turnover - 63 - 108
R13 - 22 points from turnover - 43 - 52

• We averaged 42.5 points from turnover in the first 6 games and 26 points from turnover in the last 6
• We conceded 62.6 points from turnover in the first 6 games (worst in the comp) to 41.8 points in the last 6 (8th best in the comp)
• We conceded on average 117.3 points over the first 6 games to 77.8 points in the last 6

Extremely clear which round we made a really deliberate decision to sacrifice scoring from turnover by taking less risk and instead be more conservative with our ball movement and instead focus on restraining opposition scores.

It's worked. We're 2-1-3 in the last 6 games, should have beaten Brisbane and could have easily beaten Port and Essendon. We're in games for longer and the results are there. Yeah sure you could equally argue we could be 0-0-6 because we were shit against Richmond and WC but the point is we're in games and have gotten some results.

The task from here will be finding the right balance - at some stage we'll need to bring in more risk.

 

[the big lebowski]

Elaborating on this stuff a bit more:

Scores from turnover is a particularly interesting one. We've clearly tightened up defensively and tried to be more safe moving the footy. The fact our defense experiences the equal lowest amount of defensive 1v1's show we're getting numbers back and not sending as many forward to capitalise on turnover - the trade off is of course a poorer attacking return.

Points from turnover for us - points against us from turnover - opposition score

R1 - 56 points from turnover - 46 - 113
R2 - 60 points from turnover - 43 - 66
R3 - 41 points from turnover - 72 - 114
R4 - 22 points from turnover - 72 - 117
R5 - 43 points from turnover - 74 - 141
R6 - 33 points from turnover - 69 - 153
________________________________
R7 - 36 points from turnover - 40 - 97
R8 - 21 points from turnover - 31 - 65
R9 - 34 points from turnover - 42 - 71
R10 - 26 points from turnover - 32 - 74
R11 - 17 points from turnover - 63 - 108
R13 - 22 points from turnover - 43 - 52

• We averaged 42.5 points from turnover in the first 6 games and 26 points from turnover in the last 6
• We conceded 62.6 points from turnover in the first 6 games (worst in the comp) to 41.8 points in the last 6 (8th best in the comp)
• We conceded on average 117.3 points over the first 6 games to 77.8 points in the last 6

Extremely clear which round we made a really deliberate decision to sacrifice scoring from turnover by taking less risk and instead be more conservative with our ball movement and instead focus on restraining opposition scores.

It's worked. We're 2-1-3 in the last 6 games, should have beaten Brisbane and could have easily beaten Port and Essendon. We're in games for longer and the results are there.

The task from here will be finding the right balance - at some stage we'll need to bring in more risk.

IMO the big cross is in clarko.

The exact same thing happened last year. Crucified from turn over for the first half of the year. Then he openly stated we needed to take less risks and we start winning games.

At least he made the adjustment quicker this year.

But I feel he is coaching us for what he wants rather than what we are.

Which won’t work.

 

[shintemaster]

IMO the big cross is in clarko.

The exact same thing happened last year. Crucified from turn over for the first half of the year. Then he openly stated we needed to take less risks and we start winning games.

At least he made the adjustment quicker this year.

But I feel he is coaching us for what he wants rather than what we are.

Which won’t work.

Might not work this year, might work over a longer term though.

 

[Souup]

Might not work this year, might work over a longer term though.

This for sure.

Rome wasn't built in a day. I believe the talent is on the list for the most part, and the longer we have stability and players building together, the better we'll get.

 

[the big lebowski]

This for sure.

Rome wasn't built in a day. I believe the talent is on the list for the most part, and the longer we have stability and players building together, the better we'll get.

For sure. But clarko has now twice acknowledged that the way he wants us to play hasn’t worked and he’s had to change things because

A: we weren’t winning
B: we were getting destroyed

Does he do it again round 1 next year?

 

[Passmore]

Might not work this year, might work over a longer term though.

If we're ever going to be successful at any point, we need to play a more attacking brand of footy. So I doubt he'll abandon this line of thinking.

Probably going to be a case of bringing it back, and refining it until we hit on the right balance.

 

[Souup]

For sure. But clarko has now twice acknowledged that the way he wants us to play hasn’t worked and he’s had to change things because

A: we weren’t winning
B: we were getting destroyed

Does he do it again round 1 next year?

Is that not actually a sign of a guy who's doing exactly what he should be doing as a coach?

He's trying stuff, assessing things and adjusting as necessary.

 

[Event Horizon]

Is that not actually a sign of a guy who's doing exactly what he should be doing as a coach?

He's trying stuff, assessing things and adjusting as necessary.

Exactly right. AFL footy presents a unique challenge for a coach - there is virtually no opportunity to test yourself against real opposition. All you get is one and a half practice games. In soccer teams play countless friendlies during preseason allowing the coach plenty of time for experimentation.

 

[shintemaster]

For sure. But clarko has now twice acknowledged that the way he wants us to play hasn’t worked and he’s had to change things because

A: we weren’t winning
B: we were getting destroyed

Does he do it again round 1 next year?

Your point is valid, I guess glass half full he wants to go into each season, well, glass half full. If they hit the first few games and win 2-3 attacking then anything is possible. Might be a valid argument though we should start conservative, grind out a few wins and see what the team can do with a live season.

 

[FlyHigh18]

IMO the big cross is in clarko.

The exact same thing happened last year. Crucified from turn over for the first half of the year. Then he openly stated we needed to take less risks and we start winning games.

At least he made the adjustment quicker this year.

But I feel he is coaching us for what he wants rather than what we are.

Which won’t work.

Coaching for what we are will lead no where. This why teams get stuck in the 8th - 13th cycle.

Coaching for what he wants will get us a flag. If the players can’t do it, get new damn players I say.

 

[the big lebowski]

Coaching for what we are will lead no where. This why teams get stuck in the 8th - 13th cycle.

Coaching for what he wants will get us a flag. If the players can’t do it, get new damn players I say.

Sure but we seem stuck in the bottom 3.

You can’t just keep playing a style that gets you smashed very week and expect it will just click in 4 years time.

Everyone is on a limited time line.

 

[Caracas]

Onward to Freo…

 

[danj]

Win ugly

Thanks CharlieMortdecai you've inspired me to come up with the term that defines Norths winning ways ‘Wugly’ TM

Yes we are North Melbourne and we Wugly!!!

 

[danj]

For sure. But clarko has now twice acknowledged that the way he wants us to play hasn’t worked and he’s had to change things because

A: we weren’t winning
B: we were getting destroyed

Does he do it again round 1 next year?

I’m confident there will be big changes both in personnel and game plan next season. 12 players out of contract and lose the extra rookie spots, you’d reckon a big penny should have dropped for this group and how they perform in every match from now on is going to determine their future at this club beyond this season

 

[Hatchy1992]

I'm probably not going to make the same mistake of getting ahead of myself. We need to improve drastically to be even half a chance to get another victory against Freo and any other team from here.

We're still just as vulnerable as ever despite the defensive mechanisms in place and the players cannot rely on individual talent all the time to win games of footy.

I've been enjoying that win for what it was. A win, where we came from behind to win which we haven't done in a while.

But I'm also under no illusion as to how much work is yet to be done. We're against a hot and cold Freo side this week. If we're to have any chance it has to be their cold side. But I'm also aware the performance on the weekend won't cut it against the top 15 sides.

 

[Samsquanch]

Thanks CharlieMortdecai you've inspired me to come up with the term that defines Norths winning ways ‘Wugly’ TM

Yes we are North Melbourne and we Wugly!!!

No wuckers!

 

[travelli]

Or I might have been making a point about confirmation bias and the reflexive negativity with a streak of genuine nastiness that has led to me disengaging from bf somewhat.

There's only about 20 people who post here regularly nowadays.