Review Good/Bad vs North Melbourne, R7 2024

Remove this Banner Ad

  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #27
Good: not attempting to recruit Dylan Stephens
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Good its a win, all we can take from it.

Same stuff did show up and one of our main score drivers was from defensive transition which means we were heavily reliant on counter attack

We halved centre clearances and North Melbourne were not far away from halving clearances and stoppage clearances. Which means the difference between the teams was not as big as the score line makes it seem.

North also scored one of their highest scores for the year and had their most scoring shots. So this magical all out defence first didn't restrict a side that is one of the worst scoring sides in the competition.

So its important to keep this into perspective. Basically we did what a side full of mature bodies should do against a majority of kids and inexperienced players.
 
The Good
We looked like we knew we were better
Our defence is going to be ok

The Bad
I decided to nap after half time
Actually that should be in the good

The Ugly
Pedlars shoulder. I argued I could still see glimpses of a good player but now he takes a step back again

There will be posters we havent seen in a while return

It doesnt matter how this one is pumped up we beat a team that is 10x worse than us

Take the W and be happy
 
Good: that NM is so bad.

Bad: the NM non-pressure that made Sholl and McHenry look like footy players.
Both will get mauled next week.

Ugly: a passage of play near the end of the third quarter in NM's attacking 50 that made both teams look comical; worse than schoolboys. No-one could get the ball cleanly, fumble-fumble as if the ball was made of ice.

Ridiculous: the happy-clappers who'll claim that all is well, we're back on track, Nicks is the man.
 
Bit of a no-win situation seeing the whole 1-5 coming into the game scenario we've found ourselves in, but the job got done and probably should have been 20 or so points more, if not for some late defensive lapses.

Some comments, seeing there is no point bothering with the GBU format. After all, the only real negative is Pedlar got injured:

Probably the most encouraging thing today was Cook. Goals, link play and most importantly for someone with Cook profile, he looked committed defensively and was willing to put in 2nd and 3rd efforts. Especially well timed with Pedlar going down with a shoulder which should take him off the hotseat and gives him a game to build some confidence - this is the crossroads in his career, after all.

I had a lot of time for Nankervis game and a good bounce back after what I thought was an awful game against Essendon. Having a pretty good start to his career and building into that number 2 half back flanker.

Tex, fantastic, but there are certainly the odd moments here and there creeping into his game now that indicate the end
as the main key forward is not that far off anymore. Some of those frees against in the 2nd against Comben in particular stand out as someone who is just starting to lose a bit of an edge physically.

Keane is really breaking out into a top tier CHB. Respectable job against Larkey and is being productive interceptor on top of that. Story of the season so far for me.

Worrell, Michaelanny and Borlase also held down the fort well in defense. Odd defensive lapse here or there (i.e. missed spoil and the Keane tap back in) but all showed a fair bit of willingness to cover each other and get in the hole.

Midfield wise, all did well. Soligo keeps building into a breakout campaign. I'm glad we didn't shunt Rankine back to being a permanent forward after Essendon and he bounced back well. Rachele had some bright moments throughout and good to see him get some minutes in the inside as the game went on. Laird and Dawson were back to their best etc. Of course the caveat is it is North Melbourne.

Fogarty is in such an odd place at the moment as a footballer. Doing a lot right but can't generate a lot in regards of scoring chances. Fair chance that he gets 3-4 one game sometime in the next month and goes on a bit of a run.

But yeah, job done and we move onto Port.
 
Last edited:
I’m certainly relieved that both Walker and Dawson returned to some good form. Worrel, Michalanney, Borlaise and Keane look really good together. Still not convinced about Himmelberg and Fog as a tandem forward. Midfield is starting to look okay. Will be good test next week.
 
Not much to say other than Hamill is an easy delist end of season, so just blood Curtin next week in the Showdown and stop giving this guy games. Curtin easily our best in the SANFL today playing up the field, the decision should be very easy to make.

I would soon go back to Brodie Smith than wanting to see Hamill ever again.
Huh? Not sure he did much wrong today. Weird choice
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #39
I'm not sold on Cook but the amount of game time given to him has been criminal. How come McSpudley and Murphy have over 150 games between them but Cook has 16 games?
Cook doesn't know about shape. Gets confused by circles and squares.

Murphy though. He's a rhombic dodecahedron master
 
80 points scored against. We need to defend better. Smith straight back in. Also murphy for defensive pressure.
 
Huh? Not sure he did much wrong today. Weird choice

He didn't do much of anything. Took a couple of nice marks but that's it. Seven touches for the whole game, least on the ground other than injured Pedlar.

I always think it's instructive to see who fails to contribute even in a good win. Hamill top of that list, with McHenry and Jones close behind. Fogarty with a decent second half but invisible in the first.

Himmelberg is obviously not the answer long-term, but he is head and shoulders above both Burgess and Gollant in the "keeping the spot warm for Thilthorpe" role.

Nice to see Cook play a good game. Against pathetic opposition of course, but he strikes me as a confidence player so hopefully it does him good.
 
I'm not sold on Cook but the amount of game time given to him has been criminal. How come McSpudley and Murphy have over 150 games between them but Cook has 16 games?

Murphy performs at a good click in a very difficult role and performance when you have the best 22 spot is 9/10ths of the law - after all, 7th forward is a position you get dropped from if you breath wrong. Even McHenry had multiple good games in the graveyard shift and has been able to double up with some solid performances out of the sub, however he's been relegated to injury depth as of late. As per always, the only thing that matters with selection - and this applies for every club in every sport - is today.

The other side of the coin is we've been rather eager to develop Cook as a wing instead of a forward and really, he's probably been a tad unlucky our outside core has been as healthy as it has been in the last two years + McAdam also healed up around the time Jones dropped + getting shuffled out by Nankervis. That said, this has also been a kid who has been overtaken by others a few times, whether it's Jones or Soligo shifting to wing or Nankervis in that wing/half back spot.

I think the "not sold on Cook" is a fair indicator as to why he shouldn't be seen as someone who has needed game time in the last few years.
 
Last edited:

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top