Review Good/Bad vs North Melbourne, R7 2024

[BigBoSS_Riot]

Look, ROB won the battle against Xerri (who’s been good this year), so I kinda understand it?

I’d swap Dawson and Laird around, at the least

Hitouts; 37 (out of 78) to O'Brien, 32 (out of 80) to Xerri.
Hitouts to advantage; 10 to O'Brien, 13 to Xerri.
Clearances were 2-3, disposals were 14-15, both in favour of Xerri.
4-1 in marks is a win for O'Brien, but both only took one contested.

I don't see a victory here. A draw at best.

 

[FR0GGY]

In the top 8 highest Defensive Half Pressure Acts for Crows v Kangas game, only one Crow featured, coming in at 6th Highest DHPA's for the game with 11 is Chayce Jones

It sounds silly but is it even a great stat? A team gets belted and they occupy the top 5 spots of that stat.

 

[Coopers]

It sounds silly but is it even a great stat? A team gets belted and they occupy the top 5 spots of that stat.

It just shows he's trying hard, that's all

 

[FR0GGY]

It just shows he's trying hard, that's all

Not first to the ball

 

[Stephen2]

Ugly: people who think playing well against witches hats means a single thing!

No matter which played OK, they're still a complete and this game meant less than zero. It means less than our preseason game against West Coast!

And yes, I'm thinking of Sholl & Himmelberg especially.

 

[hugecannon]

I thought Rankine and Dawson were more influential than Laird, but he did have a good game so it’s no surprise he was in the votes.

 

[DJ75]

I'm not sure our club will ever understand that number of disposals does not equal influence on game.

 

[GreyCrow]

I'm not sure our club will ever understand that number of disposals does not equal influence on game.

Yet it did with Greenwood

Allegedly

 

[DJ75]

Yet it did with Greenwood

Allegedly

That was Greenwood's complaint. Roo and the coaches thought numbers meant more than what you did with it.

 

[Slippery Pete]

That was Greenwood's complaint. Roo and the coaches thought numbers meant more than what you did with it.

I’ve posted about this before so tell me to change the record if you like…. but….

It’s abundantly clear there was a very intentional defensive objective this year.

They thought if they could keep the opponent to a low score, the offensive side would magically fall into place.

Consider that no team has yet kicked 100 points against the Crows.

Yet they are 12th on the ladder with a percentage well under 100.

Let that sink in.

 

[NSolis]

I'm not sure our club will ever understand that number of disposals does not equal influence on game.

If we're still talking about coaches votes, these are given by both teams though.

 

[BACCS]

I'm not sure our club will ever understand that number of disposals does not equal influence on game.

They’re given by Clarko too. By every metric, Laird was either BOG or just behind Dawson.

34 disposals, 450m gained, 13 score involvements, 2 goal assists, 1 goal (which was a good snap), 13 clearances, 7 inside 50s and 6 tackles is a monster game.

Can you please explain where Laird’s influence on this particular game lacked?

 

[Southerntakeover]

They’re given by Clarko too. By every metric, Laird was either BOG or just behind Dawson.

34 disposals, 450m gained, 13 score involvements, 2 goal assists, 1 goal (which was a good snap), 13 clearances, 7 inside 50s and 6 tackles is a monster game.

Can you please explain where Laird’s influence on this particular game lacked?

The stirring win over the worst team in football was enough to put the short lived 'club critic BACCS' persona in the casket

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

I'm not sure our club will ever understand that number of disposals does not equal influence on game.

McHenry disagrees with you.

 

[DJ75]

McHenry disagrees with you.

Yeh that one I have no explanation for.

 

[jenny61_99]

Happy clappers who think today marks a return to form. We may as well have played against West Adelaide reserves.

Seriously, is there ANYONE saying "we are back" after that game?

 

[Rory Walkerfield]

Seriously, is there ANYONE saying "we are back" after that game?

a couple including me…

We’re back baby.

Yes!!!!

We're back baby!

 

[cmndstab]

Seriously, is there ANYONE saying "we are back" after that game?

I had the misfortune of turning on the radio on Sunday morning and hearing that exact sentiment from KG's reanimated corpse (I assume - surely he has been dead for years by now?)

 

[jackster83]

Seriously, is there ANYONE saying "we are back" after that game?

Nicks.

 

[George Kramer]

Nicks.

We were back after losing to Melbourne so I’d believe that

 

[Sanders]

Seriously, is there ANYONE saying "we are back" after that game?

Funny thing is, sometimes all you need to do is win, however you manage it. Confidence and momentum is ineffable

An undeserved win, but a fair free kick against Essendon and we’re on a 3 game win streak and loads would be saying we’re back

Ride the hot hand against port and suddenly it’s 4 in a row and we’re a form team of the comp

Despite playing like absolute pig snot, with all the same failings and structural problems

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Funny thing is, sometimes all you need to do is win, however you manage it. Confidence and momentum is ineffable

An deserved win, but a fair free kick against Essendon and we’re on a 3 game win streak and loads would be saying we’re back

Ride the hot hand against port and suddenly it’s 4 in a row and we’re a form team of the comp

Despite playing like absolute pig snot, with all the same failings and structural problems

The interesting thing is that 11 teams stink

Some dudlinger will sneak in

As the Boston Red Sox asked, Why not us?

 

[George Kramer]

The interesting thing is that 11 teams stink

Some dudlinger will sneak in

As the Boston Red Sox asked, Why not us?

Nicks

 

[n4sir]

Well a good strong win but lets face it, North are that bad there's minimal you can take from the match. Still a few little bits and pieces we should be pleased with.

The Good:
That we aren't North Melbourne, wow they're in a world of hurt & despite signing Clarko there seems minimal light. Just wonder if there's a few Malthouse vibes here from Carlton? Clarkos end at Hawks was pretty meh. Could just be they don't have enough senior guys to help carry whilst we had Tex, Laird, Seedsman etc in good form in our earlier years. Without those guys in good form we'd have probably looked more North like at times.af

As far as players?

Cook - Was great he hit the score board but the thing that impressed me most was its the first time I've seen him bust his ass to apply defensive pressure, 2nd, 3rd efforts at times. Hopefully that performance is a bit of a light bulb moment for him, easily his best match. Need to see it against real opponents.

Worrell - Arguably his best performance for mine. Defended well, left his man to help & impacted contests, intercept marks. Has been pretty good all year but last 2-3 weeks seems to be taking better steps forward imo.

Dawson - Back in form, great to see, makes a lot of difference. BOG easily yesterday.

Rankine - Dangerous up forward & any of them difficult shots he seems to convert, it's his other set shots that are a bit iffy.

Michaelanney - Continues to be a rock solid player week in, week out.

Keays - Set up some of Rankines brilliance through sheer will, got a couple goals, some outstanding pressure at times that kept them pinned in our 50m arc.

Keane - Had one howler kick that cost us a goal but was very good otherwise, held Larkey pretty well & took some good
marks.

Laird - Really good performance yesterday, need to see it against real opposition more regularly though even if not to the level from 2-3 years ago.

Hinge - Rough start to the year for Hinge but has gotten back to looking closer to last years version.

Rachele - Not an amazing match, pretty good though & looked alright on the ball late. Frustrating we only give him a proper look when up by 50 points against a side like North.

Soligo - Pretty solid, not his best but decent enough.

Himmelberg - Probably annoy some for this one but I actually thought he played pretty well aside from a couple classic Himmelberg type moments. Just thought he worked to the right spots far better than our other alternatives for the same spot. Not sure I trust he'll do it against better sides but he has come up clutch for us at times including a showdown in recent memory so I guess he deserves another week.

Those are probably the guys I felt were the best, some others guys were ok without being amazing.

The Bad:

Jones - Playing a side like North he should be tuning up far more at this point in his career, barely sighted at times. Wasn't bad defensively but the offensive side of his game, creating play, getting involved? Not where it needs to be. Was decent the week prior but right back to almost non entity. Listing him as bad maybe is a bit harsh but it's more or less a reflection that we need more from someone like him consistently by this point.

McHenry - 3 quarters, didn't offer enough yet again. I've always tried to ignore the hate club & give credit where its due but week after week he's been completely ineffectual, should not be holding a spot with this output. If you could see him laying heaps of tackles or something maybe but "pressure acts" alone doesn't cut it.

The UGLY:

Pedlar Injury - Sucks to see him get injured, was hoping yesterday could act as a bit of a confidence booster and get him back more to last years version.

As stated at the start we were playing North so there's not lots you can take away, it doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things beyond a bit of percentage and that despite our poor year we aren't that level of bad. Best we can hope for is some of our players take a little confidence and move on.

I'll have what they said. It summed up my thoughts of the game perfectly.

 

[n4sir]

Seriously, is there ANYONE saying "we are back" after that game?

Only those who are as deluded as George Costanza...