Preview Changes & prematch discussion vs Sydney

[hellas_johnny]

Yep he was using his words

Seems a waste not having him play vfl.

 

[Le Grille]

Encouraging pats on the rear end with an apology?

Get ****ed, he sucked at bum pats.

Leigh Brown was the Bradman of bum pats

 

[Passmore]

Seems a waste not having him play vfl.

If he doesn’t want to, you can’t force him.

 

[AnEmptyChair]

Whilst I agree for the most part, if we throw all the senior players out of the side to give the kids a game after they themselves were thrashed by 100 then it won't be another 100 pt loss, it will be 30 goals. If one of our kids had 18 possessions but lost some 1 on 1s and made some errors by foot we would be rapt, but the captain does it and we want his head.

Four outs is four outs. We aren't privileged enough to have the depth in experience or injury list to drop any more. Isn't rocket science is it?

Dropping Ziebell/Turner/Goldy & getting beaten by 100+ for a second consecutive week is a great experience for a young group .

This is such a weird attitude to me and I don't get it -- we're losing by 100+ with them in the side. We've won 5 of our last 25 games with them in the side. We are NOT a better team because they're there. They're not performing. And whatever leadership they're bringing, well from the outside it don't mean s**t.

Take the captain as an example. The only thing more embarrassing than his performances so far is the back-to-back beratings he gave a 2nd year player and then a 1st year player this year because he's not an AFL-standard footballer anymore and keeps getting beaten. That one change would have made a huge statement, would have helped set standards, and s**t, tbh it would have improved us because we'd be getting rid of someone who is a downright liability atm and the only place he's going to find a decent match up in the backline (ie a treacle slow mid-sized forward) might be in the VFL.

 

[the flying ham]

This is such a weird attitude to me and I don't get it -- we're losing by 100+ with them in the side. We've won 5 of our last 25 games with them in the side. We are NOT a better team because they're there. They're not performing. And whatever leadership they're bringing, well from the outside it don't mean s**t.

Take the captain as an example. The only thing more embarrassing than his performances so far is the back-to-back beratings he gave a 2nd year player and then a 1st year player this year because he's not an AFL-standard footballer anymore and keeps getting beaten. That one change would have made a huge statement, would have helped set standards, and s**t, tbh it would have improved us because we'd be getting rid of someone who is a downright liability atm and the only place he's going to find a decent match up in the backline (ie a treacle slow mid-sized forward) might be in the VFL.

Mate we load the side with another 4 kids we will lose by 200. Spin it anyway you like, but you can't throw the baby out with the bathwater. They will get replaced in time, but unless you want a replica of gold coasts inaugural season, then it's only a few kids at a time and the incumbents fill the gaps until there are recruits or internal pressure that forces them out. As for the last weekends game and the good Friday one last year, we didn't lose because of our senior players - we lost because we lacked them.

 

[Passmore]

This is such a weird attitude to me and I don't get it -- we're losing by 100+ with them in the side. We've won 5 of our last 25 games with them in the side. We are NOT a better team because they're there. They're not performing. And whatever leadership they're bringing, well from the outside it don't mean s**t.

Take the captain as an example. The only thing more embarrassing than his performances so far is the back-to-back beratings he gave a 2nd year player and then a 1st year player this year because he's not an AFL-standard footballer anymore and keeps getting beaten. That one change would have made a huge statement, would have helped set standards, and s**t, tbh it would have improved us because we'd be getting rid of someone who is a downright liability atm and the only place he's going to find a decent match up in the backline (ie a treacle slow mid-sized forward) might be in the VFL.

Think of Ziebell, Walker, Turner, et al as cannon fodder. Even Greenwood to a lesser extent as he’s been useful, but there’s no long term future there. He was brought in as a 30 yo battering ram.

You could drop your captain to make a statement, but then you’d be throwing a kid who may not be ready in as a lamb to the slaughter. As far as statements go, we’ve punted about 20 non achievers over the past 2 off seasons.

I wouldn’t be too concerned about standards. There’s some young blokes coming through who are the one’s that will be setting them.

 

[the flying ham]

Think of Ziebell, Walker, Turner, et al as cannon fodder. Even Greenwood to a lesser extent as he’s been useful, but there’s no long term future there. He was brought in as a 30 yo battering ram.

You could drop your captain to make a statement, but then you’d be throwing a kid who may not be ready in as a lamb to the slaughter. As far as statements go, we’ve punted about 20 non achievers over the past 2 off seasons.

I wouldn’t be too concerned about standards. There’s some young blokes coming through who are the one’s that will be setting them.

Seconded

 

[Devington]

I wouldn’t be too concerned about standards. There’s some young blokes coming through who are the one’s that will be setting them.

Depends on the standard really. Training and lifestyle standards should be pretty heavily enforced, but hands are well and truly tied in a few regards when it comes to team selection standards, for example. Hopefully with the Paul Roos™ assisted setup they have going, Noble is able to succinctly explain the situation to players, because I doubt it's only some supporters who are riled up on that issue.

 

[amaz199]

could be worse lads

 

[Passmore]

could be worse lads View attachment 1366690

Kochie certainly hasn’t been wining and dining sponsors in that get up. Looks like he’s thinking “where the * to we stash those tarps?”

 

[The Anvil]

Impeccably timed in the 30 minutes it hasn't been raining today

Walked Circular Quay, ferry to Manly with the fam, and just around. Didn't rain that much.

Let's see what happens on the walk from Surry Hills to the ground tomorrow though.

 

[Makeshift Park]

Walked Circular Quay, ferry to Manly with the fam, and just around. Didn't rain that much.

Let's see what happens on the walk from Surry Hills to the ground tomorrow though.

Wow. I’m about 50km south and it was relentless.

 

[Psicosis]

This is such a weird attitude to me and I don't get it -- we're losing by 100+ with them in the side. We've won 5 of our last 25 games with them in the side. We are NOT a better team because they're there. They're not performing. And whatever leadership they're bringing, well from the outside it don't mean s**t.

Take the captain as an example. The only thing more embarrassing than his performances so far is the back-to-back beratings he gave a 2nd year player and then a 1st year player this year because he's not an AFL-standard footballer anymore and keeps getting beaten. That one change would have made a huge statement, would have helped set standards, and s**t, tbh it would have improved us because we'd be getting rid of someone who is a downright liability atm and the only place he's going to find a decent match up in the backline (ie a treacle slow mid-sized forward) might be in the VFL.

It’s pretty simple. Say what you want about Jacks limitations (some of which I agree with), he is still our best leader.

There is a reason why he’s still captain & there is a reason why he’s still in the 22.

I’m not sure what is so difficult to understand. He’s our best leader & despite obvious limitations, he came third in our BnF last year.

We have a long way to go before we can afford to drop someone like that, unfortunately.

Also I don’t really buy the commentary around berating first and second year players. Unless you’re involved in the inner circle and understand what has been said prior, during and after, you’re just guessing (with an obviously highly negative view).

 

[AnEmptyChair]

It’s pretty simple. Say what you want about Jacks limitations (some of which I agree with), he is still our best leader.

There is a reason why he’s still captain & there is a reason why he’s still in the 22.

I’m not sure what is so difficult to understand. He’s our best leader & despite obvious limitations, he came third in our BnF last year.

We have a long way to go before we can afford to drop someone like that, unfortunately.

Also I don’t really buy the commentary around berating first and second year players. Unless you’re involved in the inner circle and understand what has been said prior, during and after, you’re just guessing (with an obviously highly negative view).

But the argument has been that we can't drop these guys because otherwise we'd be exposing the kids to big losses. That's already happening with these much vaunted leaders in the team. We're downright setting a double a standard atm when you compare our treatment of kids to our treatment of established favourites -- yep, let's drop Jaidyn Stephenson but keep in Ziebell and Turner and co who have been an undeniable net negative to the team this year.

Do you really think we'd be worse this week than we were last week if, say, Curtis and Hayden/Bonar were playing in place of these two? Of course we ******* wouldn't, and it may in fact be a huge boon in the medium to long-term, which should be our focus atm.

This practice was a significant determining factor in Brad Scott's failings and a huge reason why we've been nothing more than distinctly average for a very long time.

And lol at Jack's Syd finish as a justification for anything. While, yes, it was equal (or maybe outright) his highest every finish, it's noteworthy that it was in a terrible side where he racked up huge possession numbers by, one, taking a lot of kick outs for the team that was scored against more than any other in the league, and two, picked up cheap uncontested marks via a style of play that saw us as one of the worst teams transitioning out of our back 50 and one of the worst teams at getting the footy inside 50.

He hasn't won more than a handful of match ups against his direct opponent in the last 3 years. The last consistently good footy he played was when we were playing finals and he was playing forward. The conversation about his contract extension has already been done, but * me if it doesn't look worse and worse by the week.

 

[ferball]

But the argument has been that we can't drop these guys because otherwise we'd be exposing the kids to big losses. That's already happening with these much vaunted leaders in the team. We're downright setting a double a standard atm when you compare our treatment of kids to our treatment of established favourites -- yep, let's drop Jaidyn Stephenson but keep in Ziebell and Turner and co who have been an undeniable net negative to the team this year.

Do you really think we'd be worse this week than we were last week if, say, Curtis and Hayden/Bonar were playing in place of these two? Of course we ******* wouldn't, and it may in fact be a huge boon in the medium to long-term, which should be our focus atm.

This practice was a significant determining factor in Brad Scott's failings and a huge reason why we've been nothing more than distinctly average for a very long time.

And lol at Jack's Syd finish as a justification for anything. While, yes, it was equal (or maybe outright) his highest every finish, it's noteworthy that it was in a terrible side where he racked up huge possession numbers by, one, taking a lot of kick outs for the team that was scored against more than any other in the league, and two, picked up cheap uncontested marks via a style of play that saw us as one of the worst teams transitioning out of our back 50 and one of the worst teams at getting the footy inside 50.

He hasn't won more than a handful of match ups against his direct opponent in the last 3 years. The last consistently good footy he played was when we were playing finals and he was playing forward. The conversation about his contract extension has already been done, but fu** me if it doesn't look worse and worse by the week.

No its also about not exposing them to big bodies.

You need players like Jack in the side to take as much of the physical punishment and protect the younger, smaller, weaker players. Its getting physically smashed as well as being smashed on the scoreboard that does the long term damage on young players minds and bodies.

 

[Psicosis]

But the argument has been that we can't drop these guys because otherwise we'd be exposing the kids to big losses. That's already happening with these much vaunted leaders in the team. We're downright setting a double a standard atm when you compare our treatment of kids to our treatment of established favourites -- yep, let's drop Jaidyn Stephenson but keep in Ziebell and Turner and co who have been an undeniable net negative to the team this year.

Do you really think we'd be worse this week than we were last week if, say, Curtis and Hayden/Bonar were playing in place of these two? Of course we ******* wouldn't, and it may in fact be a huge boon in the medium to long-term, which should be our focus atm.

This practice was a significant determining factor in Brad Scott's failings and a huge reason why we've been nothing more than distinctly average for a very long time.

And lol at Jack's Syd finish as a justification for anything. While, yes, it was equal (or maybe outright) his highest every finish, it's noteworthy that it was in a terrible side where he racked up huge possession numbers by, one, taking a lot of kick outs for the team that was scored against more than any other in the league, and two, picked up cheap uncontested marks via a style of play that saw us as one of the worst teams transitioning out of our back 50 and one of the worst teams at getting the footy inside 50.

He hasn't won more than a handful of match ups against his direct opponent in the last 3 years. The last consistently good footy he played was when we were playing finals and he was playing forward. The conversation about his contract extension has already been done, but fu** me if it doesn't look worse and worse by the week.

As I said, it’s not difficult to understand.

You want him gone, I get it. But it’s not happening until the list is ready.

Fast forward 12 months & we see significant strides from the younger blokes, it might be a different story.

 

[AnEmptyChair]

No its also about not exposing them to big bodies.

You need players like Jack in the side to take as much of the physical punishment and protect the younger, smaller, weaker players. Its getting physically smashed as well as being smashed on the scoreboard that does the long term damage on young players minds and bodies.

Yeah nah mate. Bonar instead of Jack this week, for example, wouldn't make an iota of difference on that front.

As I said, it’s not difficult to understand.

You want him gone, I get it. But it’s not happening until the list is ready.

Fast forward 12 months & we see significant strides from the younger blokes, it might be a different story.

It's ready now. There are players available now that would perform better than him.

And the double standards isn't about being hard to understand. It's about calling out some bullshit, which it absolutely is

 

[Psicosis]

Yeah nah mate. Bonar instead of Jack this week, for example, wouldn't make an iota of difference on that front.

It's ready now. There are players available now that would perform better than him.

And the double standards isn't about being hard to understand. It's about calling out some bullshit, which it absolutely is

What does Bonar (who I do rate) bring from a leadership perspective? Or are you trying to claim/hypothesise that Ziebell brings nothing from a leadership perspective also?

Aiden has not shown the consistency to prove your point. Again it’s just guessing & hypothetical.

It’s not ready. Hayden is arguably not AFL standard. It’s also common knowledge that Bonar isn’t 100% match fit.

 

[disco_cowboy]

But the argument has been that we can't drop these guys because otherwise we'd be exposing the kids to big losses. That's already happening with these much vaunted leaders in the team. We're downright setting a double a standard atm when you compare our treatment of kids to our treatment of established favourites -- yep, let's drop Jaidyn Stephenson but keep in Ziebell and Turner and co who have been an undeniable net negative to the team this year.

Do you really think we'd be worse this week than we were last week if, say, Curtis and Hayden/Bonar were playing in place of these two? Of course we ******* wouldn't, and it may in fact be a huge boon in the medium to long-term, which should be our focus atm.

This practice was a significant determining factor in Brad Scott's failings and a huge reason why we've been nothing more than distinctly average for a very long time.

And lol at Jack's Syd finish as a justification for anything. While, yes, it was equal (or maybe outright) his highest every finish, it's noteworthy that it was in a terrible side where he racked up huge possession numbers by, one, taking a lot of kick outs for the team that was scored against more than any other in the league, and two, picked up cheap uncontested marks via a style of play that saw us as one of the worst teams transitioning out of our back 50 and one of the worst teams at getting the footy inside 50.

He hasn't won more than a handful of match ups against his direct opponent in the last 3 years. The last consistently good footy he played was when we were playing finals and he was playing forward. The conversation about his contract extension has already been done, but fu** me if it doesn't look worse and worse by the week.

yeh nah

 

[Kangaroos techno]

No its also about not exposing them to big bodies.

You need players like Jack in the side to take as much of the physical punishment and protect the younger, smaller, weaker players. Its getting physically smashed as well as being smashed on the scoreboard that does the long term damage on young players minds and bodies.

What good is a big body when half the time you use it to fly into your own players? Jack has collected just as many North players this year than he has opposition. He's been a liability at times.

What does Bonar (who I do rate) bring from a leadership perspective? Or are you trying to claim/hypothesise that Ziebell brings nothing from a leadership perspective also?

It must be something given that he was added to the leadership team this year (which is the same measuring tool you used to access Jack's value to the team).

 

[The Anvil]

Wow. I’m about 50km south and it was relentless.

It hammered down the day we got here, but yesterday was ok. It wouldn’t have left me running for undercover seats.

And I’m pretty soft after more than a decade of indoor sports watching at Marvel.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Krakoueraddict]

It must be something given that he was added to the leadership team this year (which is the same measuring tool you used to access Jack's value to the team).

Pretty sure it's Corr who was added to leadership group not Bon.

 

[DunderHead]

I'm not a fan of Jack's leadership style as a communicator. He has that 'toe the line', repeat what hes been told, style of leadership which feels inauthentic. He may be different off camera. On field he does try to make things happen. He's also has had some pretty spectacular games where he leads from the front. His onfield leadership - crashing packs, taking charge of a situation, directing the team, is where his value lies.

He's slow and his skills aren't great (under pressure). When we're getting stretched he doesn't have the ability to be a one man show (he's all contest and no outside game). He relies on the team as much as the team relies on him.

Biggest mistake Melbourne made when they started their rebuild 15 years ago was getting rid of McDonald. It exposed there kids. Physically and probably mentally aswell. GWS talked about how valuable he was when he came to them. Last week we got smashed by 100 points. There would be a lot of doubt and uncertainty running through the team. How do you respond to losing a game like that? You look to Ziebell both on and off the field for direction on that response. You regain confidence through following what this guy is putting out there.

Supercoach scores only tell you part of the story when it comes to performance. And those scores probably tell us zilch about development. We're too focussed on the numbers. There's a whole other side to building a successful team, and we aren't privy to it.

Have a bit of faith in this guy. He's not perfect but we need him more now than when we're winning. The guys will be learning a lot at the moment. They'll be learning from him.

 

[Marstermind]

Round 4 v Sydney

Total: Played: 165 Won: 74 Lost: 90 Tied: 1 Last: 77 v 91 (2021)
At SCG: Played: 29 Won: 16 Lost: 13 Tied: 0 Last: 68 v 66 (2018)
In Round 4: Played: 12 Won: 4 Lost: 8 Tied: 0 Last: 91 v 48 (2014)

NMFC v Sydney in the AFL Era (1990-2021)

Total Played: 48 Won: 19 Lost: 28 Tied: 1 Last: 77 v 91 (2021)
At SCG: Played: 21 Won: 9 Lost: 12 Tied: 0 Last: 68 v 66 (2018)
In Round 4: Played: 4 Won: 1 Lost: 3 Tied: 0 Last: 91 v 48 (2014)

Highest Score: 35.19-229 (Round 6, 1993) vs 16.9-105
Lowest Score: 3.18-36 (Round 18, 2001) vs 22.11-143
Biggest Win: 124 points – 229 to 105 (Round 6, 1993)
Biggest Loss: 107 points – 36 to 143 (Round 18, 2001)
Lowest Winning Score: 9.14-68 (Round 7, 2018) vs 9.12-66
Highest Losing Score: 14.16-100 (Round 4, 2002) vs 15.13-103
Lowest Score Against: 5.11-41 (Round 13, 1990) vs 18.23-131
Highest Score Against: 24.8-152 (Round 11, 1996) vs 10.13-73
Best Quarter: 11.5-71 (1st Quarter, Round 6, 1993) vs 1.3-9
Highest Scoring Game: 334 points (Round 6, 1993) - 229 to 105
Most Goals in a Game: 10 - Adrian McAdam (Round 6, 1993)
Biggest H&A Attendance: 43,400 (Round 8, 1998) at MCG
Finals
1996 GF – NMFC 19.17-131 v Sydney 13.10-88 (MCG)
2008 2EF – NMFC 11.9-75 v Sydney 17.8-110 (Stadium Australia)
2014 1PF – NMFC 9.11-65 v Sydney 19.22-136 (Stadium Australia)
2015 1SF - NMFC 11.11-77 v Sydney 7.9-51 (Stadium Australia)
AFL Players for both teams (1990-2021)
Brett Allison, Paul Bryce, Ryan Clarke

4

Ryan Clarke

Age

26

Ht

186cm

Wt

83kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

18.8

5star

K

9.1

4star

HB

9.7

5star

M

3.4

3star

T

2.2

4star

G

0.2

2star

D

18.5

4star

K

8.8

4star

HB

9.8

5star

M

1.8

2star

T

2.5

3star

G

0.3

3star

D

19.6

5star

K

7.0

3star

HB

12.6

5star

M

2.4

3star

T

2.2

4star

G

0.0

1star

, Shannon Grant

Shannon Grant

Age

46

Ht

180cm

Wt

85kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

18.3

5star

K

12.0

4star

HB

6.3

4star

M

4.6

4star

T

1.6

4star

G

1.2

4star

No current season stats available

D

11.2

3star

K

7.2

3star

HB

4.0

3star

M

3.6

4star

T

1.2

3star

G

0.8

4star

, Mark Hepburn, Gareth John, Dean McRae, Glenn Page, Wayne Schwass

Wayne Schwass

Age

55

Ht

180cm

Wt

80kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

21.4

5star

K

14.5

5star

HB

6.9

4star

M

2.9

3star

T

2.3

4star

No current season stats available

D

16.6

4star

K

12.2

5star

HB

4.4

4star

M

2.6

3star

T

2.2

4star

 

[Arthur Cloke]

Will be watching with great interest as to how the group responds after last weeks sh*t-show.

Mahony, Walker, Zurhaar, Scott, Turner.......Just a few guys off the top of my head that need to give us something. And by giving us something, I don't mean, "He wasn't our worst" - Actually give us something that translates to a win.