Review Round 9 v North Melbourne @ Coopers Stadium (Norwood)

[cmndstab]

Anyway, the silver lining in that loss is that it didn't do much harm to our percentage. Down to 179.8%, teams have certainly lost by much more than 8 points to North on average.

Unless Richmond manage to score a thumping win over Essendon, we should remain in the top 4 by the end of this round. That then puts the ball in our court to win against Geelong.

On the other side of the coin, top 2 is now mathematically impossible.

 

[Dirty Bird]

Waterhouse with their usual game, where they looked like they were going to do something, but didn't actually do anything. Two kicks, one mark, one tackle. Admittedly, with very low TOG.

Quite a few players had very low TOG today. Martin with 53%, Levy with 44%, Waterhouse with 42%, Boyle-Carr with 35%??? Why would you keep a player off the ground for 2/3 of the match?

Please don't start with Waterhouse.

I'd delist them

 

[cmndstab]

Please don't start with Waterhouse.

I'd delist them

Pretty good chance of it after this season, I reckon.

 

[Firewalker]

Anyway, the silver lining in that loss is that it didn't do much harm to our percentage. Down to 179.8%, teams have certainly lost by much more than 8 points to North on average.

Unless Richmond manage to score a thumping win over Essendon, we should remain in the top 4 by the end of this round. That then puts the ball in our court to win against Geelong.

On the other side of the coin, top 2 is now mathematically impossible.

Only positive after that loss is if the Crows also lose against Geelong and drop to 7th or 8th and avoid having to play at that absolute garbage piece of s**t ground at Norwood, only then they might have a chance.

Edit: Dammit looking at the ladder even that looks impossible that they finish without a ‘home’ final at that shithole

 

[Coopers]

Please don't start with Waterhouse.

I'd delist them

Yeah, she just can't get near it. And when she's within 5 meters of it... she still can't get near it. Just doesn't have a weapon. Not clean, not big, not fast, doesn't tackle much.

We have 3 or 4 players in the side that just aren't any good. Bit like the mens team last season. It's a problem, because everyone has to contribute. Could hvae been the difference, really.

 

[cmndstab]

So... good matches from Marinoff, Newman, Randall. Gould dominant early but faded out of the match. Ponter showed why you have to stick with her, despite how frustrating she is - and hey, we're approaching the finals which is usually her time to shine anyway. Biddell mostly good, although a couple of uncharacteristic shanks. Kelly, Mueller and Munyard all decent, although 4 frees agains Munyard sucks a bit. Prowse decent but some bad moments late.

Hatchard had some good moments, and she really uses her strength well these days, but was just a bit too fumbly at crucial moments. Ditto Charlton. Meanwhile the Allan sisters, Levy and SLT all seemed hesitant, and Goodwin had a down match.

Martin, Boyle-Carr and Waterhouse all poor, but barely played a full game between them so what do you expect?

If we were only going to give Boyle-Carr 35% TOG anyway, we might as well have just played Ballard for that time instead.

 

[cmndstab]

Only positive after that loss is if the Crows also lose against Geelong and drop to 7th or 8th and avoid having to play at that absolute garbage piece of s**t ground at Norwood, only then they might have a chance.

Edit: Dammit looking at the ladder even that looks impossible that they finish without a ‘home’ final at that shithole

Given that I still think the most likely outcome is us playing North in week 1, I'm viewing it as a "positive" that they can't knock us out of the finals and we then get to avoid them until a GF

 

[Firewalker]

Given that I still think the most likely outcome is us playing North in week 1, I'm viewing it as a "positive" that they can't knock us out of the final and we then get to avoid them until a GF

If that plays out I reckon Crows would go out in straights sets if they played Port or Melbourne again at Norwood, might even be a struggle against Richmond as they’re hard to read. Given how the Crows play that venue would only probably have Freo and Essendon as close to certainties they could beat there.

 

[cmndstab]

If that plays out I reckon Crows would go out in straights sets if they played Port or Melbourne again at Norwood, might even be a struggle against Richmond as they’re hard to read. Given how the Crows play that venue would only probably have Freo and Essendon as close to certainties they could beat there.

I'd be very confident against Port at Norwood. They'd stick with us for a while but I doubt they would get over the line. I never know what to expect against Melbourne, but I'd be tipping us.

The bigger issue is, that then leaves us having to play away twice, most likely against Brisbane and North, if we want to win a flag. Those are two damn difficult road trips.

We really need to find a way to sneak over North (or whoever it ends up being) in the first week of the finals. It would be nice if we could have one of those matches where all of our half-chances actually come off for a change.

 

[Firewalker]

I'd be very confident against Port at Norwood. They'd stick with us for a while but I doubt they would get over the line. I never know what to expect against Melbourne, but I'd be tipping us.

The bigger issue is, that then leaves us having to play away twice, most likely against Brisbane and North, if we want to win a flag. Those are two damn difficult road trips.

We really need to find a way to sneak over North (or whoever it ends up being) in the first week of the finals. It would be nice if we could have one of those matches where all of our half-chances actually come off for a change.

I’ve changed after tonight with my thoughts on that, I think the compressed ground plays right into Port’s hands especially as the Crows have shown they won’t tag so those tough in-and-under midfielders they have like Dowrick done the last game she played there would feast out at that ground.

Port’s 2 main weaknesses are outside run and lockdown defenders, Norwood makes outside run a non-factor and the Crows sputtering attack also minimises that other weakness. Not to mention last time the Crows played them Scholz had a horror show and now she’s dominating and having a huge influence on games while Jess Allan like last season is showing all the signs that she’s running out of legs again.

Not to also mention Port like Melbourne and North like to really run the ball into 50 and the Crows have shown severe signs of weakness against that game style, Port already exposed the team’s high defensive line in round 1 by getting the ball out the back against it as did North tonight.

 

[cmndstab]

I’ve changed after tonight with my thoughts on that, I think the compressed ground plays right into Port’s hands especially as the Crows have shown they won’t tag so those tough in-and-under midfielders they have like Dowrick done the last game she played there would feast out at that ground.

Port’s 2 main weaknesses are outside run and lockdown defenders, Norwood makes outside run a non-factor and the Crows sputtering attack also minimises that other weakness. Not to mention last time the Crows played them Scholz had a horror show and now she’s dominating and having a huge influence on games while Jess Allan like last season is showing all the signs that she’s running out of legs again.

Not to also mention Port like Melbourne and North like to really run the ball into 50 and the Crows have shown severe signs of weakness against that game style, Port already exposed the team’s high defensive line in round 1 by getting the ball out the back against it as did North tonight.

I agree with most of that, but even so, I'd be confident that our stellar defence would stifle their opportunities and we would wear them down and win the war of attrition in the end.

As much as there were some disappointing aspects to tonight's match, the fact is that we matched it with North and, with even just half-decent goalkicking accuracy, would have pushed them right to the line. And even with our poor accuracy, we lost by 8 points. This is a team that has beaten their opponents by 42 points on average, including beating Port by 36. They've beaten seven teams by 6+ goals this season. Eight points against us was their lowest winning margin this season (admittedly, they also had a draw back in round 2).

We're not quite at North's level this season, but we are still ahead of Port, regardless of venue. And short of shitting the bed like we did a few weeks ago, we're ahead of Melbourne as well.

 

[Firewalker]

Just had a look at the stats and it’s probably the first time this season you can really blame the midfield for the result, again like the prelim loss last year North won the contested ball and stoppage clearances - which is a killer given that is proving to be the Crows’ only real main source of scoring. Thought it was easily the worst performance by the midfield all season.

Only 47 of 60 interchanges used again with the team showing real signs of fatigue off a 5-day break (Thompson was moving like she was a 60 y/o in the last quarter), really showing Clarke doesn’t trust any of those outside his top 15, it happened again like the Melbourne game where they hopelessly ran out of legs in the last 5 minutes and were unable to break free of the rolling-maul implemented by the opposition to close out the game.

 

[Tas]

We're showing that we can match it with North in terms of generating scoring opportunities. But North convert theirs more often than not. For all of the play we've had, we've still only actually converted two goals. And many of those behinds are from set shots or plays that should be converted - Ponter hitting the post, Gould's set shot, Randall's checkside.

Convert those and we're with North. Miss them, and we're where we are.

I don't think there is much difference between Crows, Lions and my team atm. I am not sure where Hawthorn is as they have had a pretty easy draw, I guess we will find out in finals. I expected this game to be close and had Crows converted better could have won.

I do think teams like Geelong, Fremantle, Richmond and Hawthorn aren't far off and perhaps Melbourne can get back up there next season. It will be good to see more of an even top half of the board.

 

[Firewalker]

I agree with most of that, but even so, I'd be confident that our stellar defence would stifle their opportunities and we would wear them down and win the war of attrition in the end.

As much as there were some disappointing aspects to tonight's match, the fact is that we matched it with North and, with even just half-decent goalkicking accuracy, would have pushed them right to the line. And even with our poor accuracy, we lost by 8 points. This is a team that has beaten their opponents by 42 points on average, including beating Port by 36. They've beaten seven teams by 6+ goals this season. Eight points against us was their lowest winning margin this season (admittedly, they also had a draw back in round 2).

We're not quite at North's level this season, but we are still ahead of Port, regardless of venue. And short of shitting the bed like we did a few weeks ago, we're ahead of Melbourne as well.

For mine the results over the past month do show that it’s more than just poor goal kicking, there’s some more issues at play and for the past 3 seasons they’ve showed all signs of a team that does lack some drive and system.

Sure you could just say “they're still having shots at goal, don’t miss as many & they win” but taking the scoreboard out of it (hard as it is), I think there’s a real breakdown in what players are being told to do in situations and what roles individuals believe they are playing for the team.

Also think players are at times struggling to be on the same page with each other on-field, I think that actually might be the biggest difference over the past 3 seasons as even in games they dominate like the 2 cellar-dweller wins the 2 previous games this season, they still struggle to put goals on the scoreboard early by missing heaps of chances and repeatedly turn the ball over, it’s just that those poor teams don’t make them pay at all.

Some individuals do look like they are still bringing that old Clarke ‘heavily contested style’; it’s a good starting base for a strong team and is a style that brought previous success but others look a bit lost, or look to be having their natural games curbed to fit this style and are just at best halving those ground ball/contested situations. As a collective the players are having periods where they really fall away quickly in quality in-game and turn to playing an ugly, fumbly, hesitant and repeatable poor decision making mess ridden game of football.

The problem also as pointed out throughout the season is a lot of these problems in-game seem to be triggered by the opposition’s tactics they implement against them and because of that the team can be easily dragged down to low quality levels by less talented teams despite controlling the game, territory and having a number of scoring shots but also on the other side of the coin when they do come up against better teams that control just as much ball, transition the ball better and control stoppages they instead play a more reactionary style and seem to be waiting for things to happens on-ground before waiting for breaks in play and looking for Clarke to implement any solution to problems they find themselves in.

The only reason they were able to close the margins in both the North & Lions games (and hit the lead in the Lions game) was because they kicked back-to-back goals in very quick succession, take out those quick back-to-back goals and the rest of those last quarters were filled with a lot of the exact same mistakes and errors that led them to be behind in the first place.

I think Clarke is still just trying to recapture something that’s just not quite there anymore, he’s probably bought a little too much into the Crows biggest strength as a team & club seemingly being their familiarity & stability and tried to keep things overly settled, however his system is still heavily reliant on the individual brilliance (and heavy lifting) of certain stars and weight of repeated forward entries eventually breaking through and finding a way to beat down the defences of most teams in the competition. Don’t get me wrong of course given the stage the league is at it’s still more than good enough to keep them up there with the best of the best in this league but it’s just not a reliable winning methodology as it once was.

That said football is a simple game, just need to; stop missing easy goals, stop dropping easy marks and stop turning the ball over so much.

 

[Cromulant]

3 players generated shots on goal, that’s not a functioning forward line setup, until that changes it’ll just continue to be results exactly like this.

We missed simple shots on goal

That's the game.

 

[Firewalker]

We missed simple shots on goal

That's the game.

See again this is a generalisation that I think is masking further issues in the team, have they missed some poor shots at times? Yes for sure but even Clarke (who I have a lot of issues with that I’ll post about later) made comments recently that a fair few of them aren’t actually high percentage shots they’ve missed and going by the general AFLW standard % from those positions in the many, many AFLW games I’ve watched he’s right.

Last night specifically yes the two Ponter missed in the 1st half were very bad - especially the one in the 2nd quarter from a few metres out that went into the post, Randall’s set shot in the 2nd also is one that was a bad miss more specifically for her but other than that there weren’t much that were that bad or real high percent goal chances that went through for behinds. Gould’s in the 3rd quarter looked ugly but given the distance and angle it would be a lowish set shot percentage success rate at AFLW level.

So that’s 3 bad misses, if your solely blaming 3 behinds for being the main reason you lost a game of football that is very problematic.

 

[Cromulant]

See again this is a generalisation that I think is masking further issues in the team, have they missed some poor shots at times? Yes for sure but even Clarke (who I have a lot of issues with that I’ll post about later) made comments recently that a fair few of them aren’t actually high percentage shots they’ve missed and going by the general AFLW standard % from those positions in the many, many AFLW games I’ve watched he’s right.

Last night specifically yes the two Ponter missed in the 1st half were very bad - especially the one in the 2nd quarter from a few metres out that went into the post, Randall’s set shot in the 2nd also is one that was a bad miss more specifically for her but other than that there weren’t much that were that bad or real high percent goal chances that went through for behinds. Gould’s in the 3rd quarter looked ugly but given the distance and angle it would be a lowish set shot percentage success rate at AFLW level.

So that’s 3 bad misses, if your solely blaming 3 behinds for being the main reason you lost a game of football that is very problematic.

When you lose games by small margins it's the small things that matter most.

The way we play is the way that suits the players we have, it's frustrating for sure but I don't buy "we aren't working hard enough" or things to that effect. Last night was as hard as North have been pushed for almost the entire season. And we made simple errors that proved the difference.

As it did in the Melbourne game.

 

[GreyCrow]

So that’s 3 bad misses, if your solely blaming 3 behinds for being the main reason you lost a game of football that is very problematic.

Agreed. Its the we missed the 8 because a goal umpire got it wrong. There were structural problems before and after that error

If your analysis is simple we missed 3 shots you're not digging deeper

I said 1st game our forward structure seemed off . We need a taller target for play to be directed to and for Ponter and co to feed off. Yes it makes it easier for opposition to direct the energy at the tall but then you need to contain the ground fleet

The one thing I did take from the game was Norths willingness to run with numbers. There always seemed to be someone on the overlap or willing to get free

 

[Cromulant]

Agreed. Its the we missed the 8 because a goal umpire got it wrong. There were structural problems before and after that error

If your analysis is simple we missed 3 shots you're not digging deeper

I said 1st game our forward structure seemed off . We need a taller target for play to be directed to and for Ponter and co to feed off. Yes it makes it easier for opposition to direct the energy at the tall but then you need to contain the ground fleet

The one thing I did take from the game was Norths willingness to run with numbers. There always seemed to be someone on the overlap or willing to get free

I think people are digging too deep and trying to find reasons that simply aren't there.

 

[Firewalker]

When you lose games by small margins it's the small things that matter most.

The way we play is the way that suits the players we have, it's frustrating for sure but I don't buy "we aren't working hard enough" or things to that effect. Last night was as hard as North have been pushed for almost the entire season. And we made simple errors that proved the difference.

As it did in the Melbourne game.

Look I agree the Melbourne loss was the one that you can maybe blame on goal kicking - do I believe there’s a bit more to that though including poor skill execution which put teammates under pressure when having shots and very poor decision making when inside 50 sure, but last night’s game wasn’t.

Last night’s game was lost by; 1. Matthew Clarke and 2. Abysmal lazy efforts by the midfield.

If Clarke was coaching in the AFL and he was coaching against Sydney and let Heeney and Warner get 35 touches each as well as a couple of goals without putting anyone on them he would be absolutely torched in the media for that, he does the equivalent of that in the AFLW ~crickets~ .

How does he go into that match knowing what quality Garner and Riddell posses and knowing what they have done specifically in matches between the 2 teams and decide not to put anyone near them for the entire game, absolute garbage coaching from a guy phoning it in.

How’s he starts the game knowing how strong North’s midfield is and how they’d probably have to be more defensive orientated to quell that influence but in his infinite wisdom he has Hatchard and Randall playing deep forward and not being near the ball instead. I mean WTAF, you just knew within the first few minutes such little planning had gone into actually stopping the league leaders.

I suppose the only positive in the Clarke masterclass was post-game he acknowledged how poor they were at the ground balls which quite frankly looked like a lot of them didn’t want to get there knees dirty, to be out hunted by both Melbourne & North early in the game like they have been has exposed some of the softish underbelly outside of Marinoff and Randall in the team, can’t believe how many were trying to just reach in to pick it up off the ground who ended up fumbling the ball over the place or the player/s that panic handballs back inside to where the opposition have numbers whenever some body contact is coming.

Also I don’t know how North do it always against the Crows but when they turn the ball over they have a line up of multiple free players all located in the centre of the ground just on the edge of the centre square and they stand there by themselves with no Crows opponent near them, they’ve done it in all recent encounters and no Crows midfielders track back or defenders push up to stop them being fed the ball. Now you’d think a coach would notice this as some sort of set play they run but Clarke as sharp as a butter knife seems to be totally oblivious to it every time.

 

[Slime Roy]

All three losses this year were absolutely winnable

It's a common occurrence across the
whole league but we NEVER seem to be able to come back! Goals in succession late are super rare.. but points are NO problem

 

[Slime Roy]

Had a crap match, and a horrible last quarter

She couldn't get on the ground for most of it

 

[Firewalker]

She couldn't get on the ground for most of it

She still managed to fumble everything and be run off far too easy from stoppage when she was, like a few other senior players this season a number of inconsistencies have drifted into their games that weren’t there in previous years, still you take a poor Hatchard game over whatever Sarah Allan is providing this season.

 

[Slime Roy]

She still managed to fumble everything and be run off far too easy from stoppage when she was, like a few other senior players this season a number of inconsistencies have drifted into their games that weren’t there in previous years, still you take a poor Hatchard game over whatever Sarah Allan is providing this season.

*oops my bad! I thought you said Marinoff for some reason As you were.

 

[cmndstab]

I think Clarke is still just trying to recapture something that’s just not quite there anymore, he’s probably bought a little too much into the Crows biggest strength as a team & club seemingly being their familiarity & stability and tried to keep things overly settled, however his system is still heavily reliant on the individual brilliance (and heavy lifting) of certain stars and weight of repeated forward entries eventually breaking through and finding a way to beat down the defences of most teams in the competition. Don’t get me wrong of course given the stage the league is at it’s still more than good enough to keep them up there with the best of the best in this league but it’s just not a reliable winning methodology as it once was.

That said football is a simple game, just need to; stop missing easy goals, stop dropping easy marks and stop turning the ball over so much.

Look, I agree with most of what you've posted - obviously, what you're talking about is what will be needed going forward as the league matures and develops.

In 2024, however, we are poor conversion on goal away from being a genuine premiership threat - and even without that, we're top 2-3 material. If North have a slightly off day, our performance yesterday could beat them. And frankly, I think most of our issues are less tactical in nature and more based on the talent on our list. We have had scant little opportunity to replenish our list the last few seasons given Port has been able to run a dragnet on the SANFLW and we've had state-based drafts. I guess it would be rich of us to complain given we won three flags from being able to do the same thing in the years prior, but the fact remains that we have quite a few players on our list who wouldn't be there if we'd had the ability to replace them with genuine talent. The fact that Varnhagen and Waterhouse have played several matches each this year is an indictment on the state of our list, but they're far from alone. (Not that anything excuses the number of matches Mueller and Boileau have spent on the sidelines this year, or Tarlinton only being given one match... but I digress.)

I think Clarke recognises that we are, largely, running with the same list we had in 2022, warts and all, and that the style of play they are used to is sufficient to compete with any team in the league, so he's chosen to stick with it. Will he be able to evolve our team into what is required once the league matures further? Who knows. Probably not - in my experience, coaches tend to be one-trick ponies who are either suited to the moment or not. But right now, our team and game style, for all of their flaws, are still capable of winning a flag, IF we can iron out our one significant issue, which is converting I50s into goals.