Players must step up quickly, says Scott

[The Other Dean]

http://www.kangaroos.com.au/season2010/news/newsarticle/tabid/4912/newsid/95334/default.aspx

By Chris Pike
9:03 PM Sun 30 May, 2010

NORTH Melbourne coach Brad Scott has challenged every Kangaroos player to stand up after the side's disappointing 61-point loss to Fremantle on Sunday.

North was blown away in the third quarter as Fremantle piled on 10 goals to open up a 78-point advantage.

Ryan Bastinac, Levi Greenwood, Jack Ziebell and Andrew Swallow were among the Roos' best in the heavy loss, along with Lindsay Thomas, who kicked five goals.

"We've got some terrific players who stand up under pressure, but there's too few of them," Scott said.

"The acid's got to come on the coaching staff and on the 22 who were out there representing North Melbourne because at the moment it's extremely disappointing.

"We were outpointed in the contested possession and that's really disappointing, even more so for our supporters. To sit there and watch that must be just heartbreaking. The players are shattered, but we've got to stem this flow very quickly otherwise our season is going to get away from us."

Scott brought in Drew Petrie, Hamish McIntosh and David Hale to join fellow big man Todd Goldstein in the Kangaroos' line-up. While it didn’t work on this occasion, he was happy with Petrie's return.

"Hindsight is a wonderful thing and if we marked the ball and kicked goals I would have looked like a genius. We didn’t mark it and we couldn’t get enough ground-level ball. We had Lindsay Thomas who was good for us as a small forward, but he was a lone hand down there," he said.

Brent Harvey hurt his elbow and was restricted to 10 possessions by Fremantle's Jay van Berlo, but Scott expects him to face the Brisbane Lions on Saturday night at Etihad Stadium.

"He's a little bit sore, but we will have the doctors have a good look at him and potentially get a scan. He could have come back on but I just didn’t want to risk him," Scott said.



No concession that the game plan is crap at this stage, sorry, Roosurgence. Musn't read BigFooty.

 

[The Beer Man]

He might want to start by picking the right players. Im not saying having Cruize and Lower play would have won us the game but by christ it might have helped

 

[Mav]

"If we marked the ball"...when's he going to learn that Hale can't mark.

 

[RooHooDoo]

This setup (playing ruckmen as forwards) has never worked and never will. The only player out of the lot who might scratch out a decent living as a forward is Petrie and personally I still think his best position is in the ruck.

I honestly cannot fathom why they persist with it after all this time. Laidley failed and now Scott is heading down the same path.

Crazy stuff.

 

[1jasonoz]

Over the past few years we have always looked a much better side when we moved the ball fast down field, with players running and carrying the ball or taking possession and then kicking long to a leading player.

My understanding is that this was Crockers message to the players when he filled in as coach, and is a better style of football than what we are currently serving up. Unfortunatley our current structure-going ultra tall is not supportive of a fast moving style of football, we need fast ball carriers not stagnant talls who can't seem to take a mark-pace is what we need.

 

[drewey10]

For you guys who get to training, do they do much work on contested marking at all?. We have no one at all these days who seems to be able to take a contested mark.

I will say it agian, when you have perhaps the best contested marking player in the history of the game, living in melbounre as an ex player, why wouldn't he be asked to help out????. Even if it was just one night a month.

You can't tell me he couldn't help these guys with leading and how to use your body.

 

[Brad Roo]

Over the past few years we have always looked a much better side when we moved the ball fast down field, with players running and carrying the ball or taking possession and then kicking long to a leading player.

Bingo.

Watch the game again and watch how Freo move the ball in to the forward 50 then watch how we do it.

We are currently doing the same crap going forward under Bon that we did under Dean. We are overcooking the thing.

More Pagan, less Malthouse.

 

[KangaMatt]

The thing that frustrated me the most yesterday was it appeared some players simply stopped working hard enough when Freo started to pull away. We were beaten by bigger margin by the bulldogs, yet I thought we fought it out and had a dip from start to finish. We just didnt convert our opportunities.

Yesterday I lost count of the times freo ran in waves, with our players seemingly trailing behind not working hard enough to get to the next contest. This happened from the first bounce.

As been mentioned before, whatever gameplan we have, it will fail with our current skill level. Brad and the list needs time. He is a smart coach, we have some smart young players that will get better. But it will take time. The future is bright.

But the one thing I think cant be comprimised is our attitude to work hard at every contest. Pressure and fight out games. Sadly there have been a couple of games now that it looks like we have given up the contest far too early. I accept and understand we are going to get some beltings from the better more experienced teams. Id just like to see an attitude that when you pull on the North Melbourne jumper you play hard till the end regardless of age or ability.

 

[Roosurgence]

http://www.kangaroos.com.au/season2010/news/newsarticle/tabid/4912/newsid/95334/default.aspx

By Chris Pike
9:03 PM Sun 30 May, 2010

NORTH Melbourne coach Brad Scott has challenged every Kangaroos player to stand up after the side's disappointing 61-point loss to Fremantle on Sunday.

North was blown away in the third quarter as Fremantle piled on 10 goals to open up a 78-point advantage.

Ryan Bastinac, Levi Greenwood, Jack Ziebell and Andrew Swallow were among the Roos' best in the heavy loss, along with Lindsay Thomas, who kicked five goals.

"We've got some terrific players who stand up under pressure, but there's too few of them," Scott said.

"The acid's got to come on the coaching staff and on the 22 who were out there representing North Melbourne because at the moment it's extremely disappointing.

"We were outpointed in the contested possession and that's really disappointing, even more so for our supporters. To sit there and watch that must be just heartbreaking. The players are shattered, but we've got to stem this flow very quickly otherwise our season is going to get away from us."

Scott brought in Drew Petrie, Hamish McIntosh and David Hale to join fellow big man Todd Goldstein in the Kangaroos' line-up. While it didn’t work on this occasion, he was happy with Petrie's return.

"Hindsight is a wonderful thing and if we marked the ball and kicked goals I would have looked like a genius. We didn’t mark it and we couldn’t get enough ground-level ball. We had Lindsay Thomas who was good for us as a small forward, but he was a lone hand down there," he said.

Brent Harvey hurt his elbow and was restricted to 10 possessions by Fremantle's Jay van Berlo, but Scott expects him to face the Brisbane Lions on Saturday night at Etihad Stadium.

"He's a little bit sore, but we will have the doctors have a good look at him and potentially get a scan. He could have come back on but I just didn’t want to risk him," Scott said.



No concession that the game plan is crap at this stage, sorry, Roosurgence. Musn't read BigFooty.

Hindsight is a wonderful thin Bon, let's hope you don't have to rely on hindsight to declare that the gamestyle you employ wasn't working and it's time to take a new direction.

Clearly doesn't have time to read Big Footy as he is still busy trying to decypher Clarkson's 2008 playbook.

 

[Mr Reliable]

The thing that frustrated me the most yesterday was it appeared some players simply stopped working hard enough when Freo started to pull away. We were beaten by bigger margin by the bulldogs, yet I thought we fought it out and had a dip from start to finish. We just didnt convert our opportunities.

Yesterday I lost count of the times freo ran in waves, with our players seemingly trailing behind not working hard enough to get to the next contest. This happened from the first bounce.

As been mentioned before, whatever gameplan we have, it will fail with our current skill level. Brad and the list needs time. He is a smart coach, we have some smart young players that will get better. But it will take time. The future is bright.

But the one thing I think cant be comprimised is our attitude to work hard at every contest. Pressure and fight out games. Sadly there have been a couple of games now that it looks like we have given up the contest far too early. I accept and understand we are going to get some beltings from the better more experienced teams. Id just like to see an attitude that when you pull on the North Melbourne jumper you play hard till the end regardless of age or ability.

Yep, the Bulldogs beat us because they are a very good side and we kicked badly early.

The Pies beat us because they are a very good side and played better than us over 4 quarters (2-3 goals per quarter).

I didn't feel like crap after either of those games.

Freo beat us because they are a better side and we were non-competitive and uninterested.

I felt like crap watching that rubbish.

 

[Sandgroper35]

The marking wasn't the issue, it was the kicking. Our talls had position countless times but either the ball wasn't kicked there quick enough or it wasn't to advantage.

Kicking is the most basic skill of the game - the namesake of the game. You can look at zones and sports science all you like but if you can't kick you will lose.

 

[Twinkletoes]

I felt like crap watching that rubbish.

At least Bon acknowledges that too. If he was acting like the West Coke coach he'd be in total denial.

 

[MagooTheRoo]

Step up quickly? Yesterday we did nothing quickly which is why we were flogged. Freo ran harder off the ball and delivered the ball quickly to an option when they got it. We looked slow in all aspects. Too many times we were under pressure because we were taking too long to move the ball on. It was bloody hard to watch.

I also noticed a number of times where our blokes weren't sheperding or helping out the guy with the ball, preferring instead to jog along and look to get a soft possession.

Freo definitely made us look top heavy with good ball movement and got greater numbers to most contests. No good having extra talls if the opposition just spoil the marks and then regularly win the ball at ground level.

Third quarter was a disaster and this on top of me not being able to get a pie at half time. All in all, a really crap day.

 

[snrub]

The marking wasn't the issue, it was the kicking. Our talls had position countless times but either the ball wasn't kicked there quick enough or it wasn't to advantage.

Kicking is the most basic skill of the game - the namesake of the game. You can look at zones and sports science all you like but if you can't kick you will lose.

Yes but if we go man-on-man then... ummmm... our kicking errors and turnovers particularly inside defensive 50 won't be such an issue.... ummmm... somehow.

 

[Roosurgence]

Yes but if we go man-on-man then... ummmm... our kicking errors and turnovers particularly inside defensive 50 won't be such an issue.... ummmm... somehow.

Ummm maybe we could actually give our midfield options some space instead of everyone playing Bon's cluster**** and congesting the midfield? Then maybe ummm our players might have a chance of delovering the ball to advantage on the way out instead of having to pinpoint players. Ummm and if by chance they actually hit that midfield target they will then have an option to go to in our forward line? Ummm maybe that might ummm work?

Nah **** it let's zone up and create a cluster****, because it's much more enjoyable to turn the ball over constantly and lose by 10+ goals

 

[The Other Dean]

Yep, the Bulldogs beat us because they are a very good side and we kicked badly early.

The Pies beat us because they are a very good side and played better than us over 4 quarters (2-3 goals per quarter).

I didn't feel like crap after either of those games.

Freo beat us because they are a better side and we were non-competitive and uninterested.

I felt like crap watching that rubbish.

Thank you, Mr R. This is one of the few posts over the last 24 hours that has kind of touched on a point I was trying to make in the "Wtf" thread.

I'll probably get shot down for saying this, but who gives a.

Obviously the whole zone/gameplan subject is a polarising issue, and once again BigFooty has divided itself along over-simplified "for" or "against" lines. Is there no middle ground ? I'm not sure this choosing sides business is terribly productive in cutting to the heart of analysing our performances on a week-by-week basis.

For argument's sake, I'm firmly in Scott's corner, I realise these overhauls take time, and I'm patient enough to give the man a genuine chance to produce the results. Like you, Mr R, I was fine with the losses to the Bulldogs and Pies. However, I felt that Sunday's performance, rebuild or not, was several rungs below acceptable. And I think it's wrong to simply lump it in along with the Pies and Dogs' thrashings. There are levels of insipidness, and the masterplan shouldn't be used as a one-stop excuse for every loss.

Scott is still in his infancy as head coach and he will make mistakes. It is unrealistic to expect otherwise. And I don't think it helps anyone to casually whitewash some of the errors he makes or, more importantly, some of the tweaking that is currently required. (Disclaimer - this is not an endorsement of Roosurgence's take on things, and I disagree with his position on the subject.) A good example would be something along the lines of questioning the wisdom of last week's Ins which, on the surface of it anyway, seemed a little confusing at best.

Surely, there are enough intelligent folk on this forum to break our losses down in more detail than either "we're young, learning a new game plan, shit happens", or at the other end of the scale "gameplan is crap, sack Scotts". I'd like to hear more from them.

 

[Roosurgence]

Thank you, Mr R. This is one of the few posts over the last 24 hours that has kind of touched on a point I was trying to make in the "Wtf" thread.

I'll probably get shot down for saying this, but who gives a.

Obviously the whole zone/gameplan subject is a polarising issue, and once again BigFooty has divided itself along over-simplified "for" or "against" lines. Is there no middle ground ? I'm not sure this choosing sides business is terribly productive in cutting to the heart of analysing our performances on a week-by-week basis.

For argument's sake, I'm firmly in Scott's corner, I realise these overhauls take time, and I'm patient enough to give the man a genuine chance to produce the results. Like you, Mr R, I was fine with the losses to the Bulldogs and Pies. However, I felt that Sunday's performance, rebuild or not, was several rungs below acceptable. And I think it's wrong to simply lump it in along with the Pies and Dogs' thrashings. There are levels of insipidness, and the masterplan shouldn't be used as a one-stop excuse for every loss.

Scott is still in his infancy as head coach and he will make mistakes. It is unrealistic to expect otherwise. And I don't think it helps anyone to casually whitewash some of the errors he makes or, more importantly, some of the tweaking that is currently required. (Disclaimer - this is not an endorsement of Roosurgence's take on things, and I disagree with his position on the subject.) A good example would be something along the lines of questioning the wisdom of last week's Ins which, on the surface of it anyway, seemed a little confusing at best.

Surely, there are enough intelligent folk on this forum to break our losses down in more detail than either "we're young, learning a new game plan, shit happens", or at the other end of the scale "gameplan is crap, sack Scotts". I'd like to hear more from them.

Very good post

The heading of my post probably was oversimplifying the issue. But like others on here my real intention is to point out that sometimes being one dimensional just doesn't cut it, especially in an ever evolving game like football. All I ask a a member and supporter is that Scott try to be flexible in his gamestyle, rather than the stubborn approach he has taken so far. I for one take no perverse pleasure in watching these abysmal thumpings and get frustrated by the fact that our coach seems quite happy to continue with something that is clearly not working.

 

[Jebus]

our coach seems quite happy to continue with something that is clearly not working.

How can you tell so early? The game plan Scott is teaching the players will be infinately more effective in a year or 2 when they have built up their stamina, strength and learned the way each other play.

We could either play man on man footy and scrape into the 8 every second year as we did under Laidley, or we can take a year or 2 to learn a game plan that will have us winning the majority of the time against good opposition.

It seemed like we used to play to the oppositions weaknesses instead of playing to our own strengths, sometimes that would work. But under Scott it seems like he wants us to play to our strengths.


With such an inexperienced team the only time our strengths are getting us over the line is against other inexperienced teams. For the first time in years I feel that we are beating teams because we are genuinely better than them and losing against teams because we are currently worse than they are. Lucky wins are going to be less of an occurrence in years to come.

EDIT: I could be delusional though....

 

[Roosurgence]

How can you tell so early? The game plan Scott is teaching the players will be infinately more effective in a year or 2 when they have built up their stamina, strength and learned the way each other play.

We could either play man on man footy and scrape into the 8 every second year as we did under Laidley, or we can take a year or 2 to learn a game plan that will have us winning the majority of the time against good opposition.

It seemed like we used to play to the oppositions weaknesses instead of playing to our own strengths, sometimes that would work. But under Scott it seems like he wants us to play to our strengths.


With such an inexperienced team the only time our strengths are getting us over the line is against other inexperienced teams. For the first time in years I feel that we are beating teams because we are genuinely better than them and losing against teams because we are currently worse than they are. Lucky wins are going to be less of an occurrence in years to come.

EDIT: I could be delusional though....

Your not delusional.

Just a person with an opinion, which may be wrong or right? As they say only time will tell. At least you had the decency to outline your points without resorting to childish personal attacks like some on here.

 

[The Other Dean]

Just culled a few rubbish posts. Stay on track and cut out the personal crap.

That is all.

 

[Jisse W Smuth]

Just culled a few rubbish posts.

You sure dud, bro They're did, eh?

 

[Event Horizon]

Zones or man on man, footy is still a game which is very much about intensity and contested ball. Without these two, any gameplan, by definition can be thrown out the window.

As loyal supporters we have every right to demand 100% effort and intensity. Why it simply isn't there at the moment, is a hard question. Can it be that some players are pretty much still "at sea" over the new game plan? Or is it simply an excuse and they are out of form?

It's an absolute no brainer that we went into the game horribly unbalanced due to the 22 that we picked to play. And we are carrying several out of form players, who would definitely be out of the side had our number 1 aim not been player development this season.

Will be really interesting to see how we bounce back against Brisbane, intensity wise. If we can't, we may have to bite the bullet and drop as much as 6-7 players and bring in some kids like Speight, Norris etc. But next two home games, we simply can't afford to play like this, Friday night against Carlon especially.

 

[The Other Dean]

Very good post

The heading of my post probably was oversimplifying the issue. But like others on here my real intention is to point out that sometimes being one dimensional just doesn't cut it, especially in an ever evolving game like football.

No offense, mate, but you'd be hard pushed to find someone on this forum that isn't aware of your stance on this issue.

All I ask a a member and supporter is that Scott try to be flexible in his gamestyle, rather than the stubborn approach he has taken so far. I for one take no perverse pleasure in watching these abysmal thumpings and get frustrated by the fact that our coach seems quite happy to continue with something that is clearly not working.

By definition, "clearly not working" is an assessment that holds no water if you subscribe to that "this stuff takes time" long-view. Surely you can appreciate that.

As Horizontal Event points out, regardless of gameplan, the intensity and hardness have to be there. (And with a name like Horizontal Event, he should know.) So, too, the skills. At the moment, we seem to be lacking a little in those departments. And we will continue to struggle while that is the case, regardless of our chosen set-up. I just don't see an ability to revert back to man-on-man footy - at this point in our development - to be the magic solution that some people seem to think it is.

I have no problem with our current gameplan or the concept of drilling it into our players. And as I have said a few times, I'm patient enough to give Scotty a chance to produce. 10 weeks, IMO, is nowhere near long enough to make that call. But within that framework of an adherence to a new gameplan, I still want to see the side, and the coaching panel, do everything it can to get us over the line.

Again, just in my opinion, last week Ins/Outs were rubbish, and turned a 'going to be hard to win' game into Mission Freaking Impossible. Getting the balance right in a 22-man side is a tricky proposition, but there has to be some clarity and consistency, that runs alongside the vision. For example, comparatively speaking, Leigh Harding is one of our more seasoned players. If the goal is to get games into young, talented players, why is Bon letting Leigh Harding go out there and stink it up each week ? I think it's reasonable to ask these questions.

In essence, my point was that I hope we don't just merely continue to group all these thrashings together in a basket marked "Re-build", because that would suck.

(Apologies for the Tas-esque length of these posts. Maybe should have just posted the last sentence.)

 

[The Chiefton]

How anybody could say that they didn't feel like crap after walking out of the game against the Western Bulldogs last week seriously staggers me.
I felt like absolute shit and was livid at our performance, skills, intensity etc. I was disappointed againt the Pies but not as much as the last two weeks and the St Kilda game.
Sunday's performance was not acceptable and I hope the players get a good kick up the arse this week and come out raring to go against the Lions on Saturday night. Sadly I think it will be a blow out and will end up like the corresponding game last year.
Brad Scott has inherited a list that he knew not alot about, and obviously he has to be cut a lot of slack, but the buck does stop with him and patience will wear thin if we cop a lot more 70-100 point drubbings. He will know a lot more by seasons end and I think we will see what the real BON is all about and where he thinks we are at by seasons end, when he culls a few more blokes and has a real idea of who will be the ones to take our football club forward. You cannot do that in your first year of coaching because you haven't seen a whole lot of them first hand.
Damian Hardwick is in the same situation, he delisted a lot of players after the 09 season, and will probabaly delist another 4-5 in a couple of months time because he has a much better knowledge of how the club/players function.

 

[Urmoe]

We just need to be patient.

About 10 or 11 months ago when we were both looking for new coaches the popular view from any non NM supporter was that Richmond probably had an equal list to ours, if not better. We might like to argue it but lets just say they are correct.

As I think we are at the same level of rebuilding/development we should probably use Richmond to track our progress this year. We have a similarly developed team, similar first year coaches trying to implement a new game plan and as a list we are pretty similar ages.

At this point in the season we have had 4 solid wins (a couple have been close calls but we looked fairly comfortable for the majority of the game)and they managed to jag a win in attrocious conditions with a few port players out. We have had important players missing this season and so have they.

With 16 teams at fairly different stages of their development I think it is only right that we track progress against teams with similar development levels. If Richmond and Melbourne are our baseline, I think we are going ok. I think teams like Fremantle, Essendon, Port and West Coast might have a year or two ahead of us and teams like Carlton probably 3 or 4 years. Hard to guage where Hawthorn is in all this.

It may look bad getting smashed against the current stronger teams but if we can hold our own against those at similar development levels then I think there is no need to panic at this stage.

When we are ready to challenge for top 4 teams like collingwood, st.kilda, bulldogs, geelong will be on their decline. Swans, Lions, Adelaide have started their decline so we need to hope they dont rebuild quicker than we do.

So the way i see it the test for us is to:
- Play well consistently and beat teams like Melbourne, Richmond, Essendon, Port, West Coast at home and away
- Break even with teams in decline Swans, Lions, Adelaide and the unknown level of Hawthorn (maybe win home and concede away)
- Be competitive and jag wins against Fremantle, Carlton
- Try and compete but not worry too much if we get blown out of the water this year and early next year against collingwood, st.kilda, bulldogs, geelong

I know its hard rocking up to games knowing we wont be competitive but we just need to cool our heels for a little until we get some pre-seasons into the young blokes.

The proviso in all this is we want to see improvement from month to month, not from game to game as kids are inconsistent. We just cant get smashed by a team and not learn from it. Im not saying come out and belt them next time we play them, just want to see signs of improvement at least for the remainder of this year and even to the half way point of next season.