Rnd 2 - Cenrtal v North Post Match Review

[Ian]

Phil, don't want to sound over critical of your commentary but when the "Dogs are only 28 points down" or the "Dogs are still in it", there was another team out there that was "28 points up" or "putting the Dogs away", I know you are a very passionate Central man but when you are commentating you need to try and make the commentary at least sound a bit neutral

[Big Phil]

Phil, don't want to sound over critical of your commentary but when the "Dogs are only 28 points down" or the "Dogs are still in it", there was another team out there that was "28 points up" or "putting the Dogs away", I know you are a very passionate Central man but when you are commentating you need to try and make the commentary at least sound a bit neutral

Fair point mate and will take your critique on board. Thanks for the feedback...

From memory, I was expanding on Darryl Smith's comment earlier who said 'the Dogs weren't out of it yet' after Central kicked a goal.

I remember after North kicked their next major, I was sure to emphasise that the Roosters were home from there...

[on the rails]

Re the discussion about playing 2 ruckman - it is always subjective and in this day and age of versatitlity can clubs afford to field a second specialist ruckman. From a North point of view for the past few years we have played only 1 specialist ruckman as a rule e.g. James Craig and used one of our talls as second ruck e.g. Stewart. Last night that was ok where we still had Langford and Johnston up fwd as the other talls. A couple if times last year and the year before we had to pinch hit with Alleway or Miles which took a key tall out with no back up. If you play 3 talls up fwd then 1 of them should be able to ruck. Works for us most times but then again theres not many Daniel Stewart types at 6-7 running around in the SANFL.

This year if Stewart is not in our team then the 2nd ruck duties would fall to the likes of Archer (once he gets on the track after his busted hand) as he fills that tall fwd / ruck role, Miles providing we have a tall defensive cover which could well be Westhoff depending on team selection re the likes of Stewart.

Whilst on Westhoff he can also ruck too if needed but he will be a week or two missing due to a slight hamstring strain in the first half of the ressies last night.

[whufc]

Re the discussion about playing 2 ruckman - it is always subjective and in this day and age of versatitlity can clubs afford to field a second specialist ruckman. From a North point of view for the past few years we have played only 1 specialist ruckman as a rule e.g. James Craig and used one of our talls as second ruck e.g. Stewart. Last night that was ok where we still had Langford and Johnston up fwd as the other talls. A couple if times last year and the year before we had to pinch hit with Alleway or Miles which took a key tall out with no back up. If you play 3 talls up fwd then 1 of them should be able to ruck. Works for us most times but then again theres not many Daniel Stewart types at 6-7 running around in the SANFL.

This year if Stewart is not in our team then the 2nd ruck duties would fall to the likes of Archer (once he gets on the track after his busted hand) as he fills that tall fwd / ruck role, Miles providing we have a tall defensive cover which could well be Westhoff depending on team selection re the likes of Stewart.

Whilst on Westhoff he can also ruck too if needed but he will be a week or two missing due to a slight hamstring strain in the first half of the ressies last night.

Great post!!!

If you have the cover in the forward lines or in defence to play a key position player who can pinch hit in ruck then by all means go for it.

In Centrals case at the moment we cant afford to have Hardy not playing in defence. When Yves Sibenaler comes back from injury then the situation changes slightly.

[on the rails]

Yes your right Benny - having Hardy pinch hit in ruck does hurt the rest of the structure and there in lies the problem. Blokes like Hardy re his versatility are rare also in the SANFL.

[whufc]

Yes your right Benny - having Hardy pinch hit in ruck does hurt the rest of the structure and there in lies the problem. Blokes like Hardy re his versatility are rare also in the SANFL.

Agree and thats why i think players like Hardy and Stewart can take a few more years to really find their feet at SANFL level due to playing so many different roles from quarter to quarter and then week to week .

The frustrating part for me is that while a lot of supporters are using the we are 'rebuilding' call i still have faith and believe we have enough talent in the side that we can make the 5 more than likely in the 4th-5th spot.

People will also say its a very inexperienced side, it is but thats due to the selections we are making and the fact we are putting most of the inexperienced players under the pump in the same defence with no experience around them. Does it do a young kid any good giving him a matchup week after week where they cant compete in size, strength or speed? That could be debated for ever.

I will never call for Roys head, he has enough credit in the bank to last a lifetime and sacking coaches midseason rarely if ever turns a side from mid range to grandfinalist within half a season. I think Roy is the man to see this new crop threw but its undeniable that the club has gone away from some things that made the club so strong through the mid 90's - now.

For me the expectation is to make the 5 and then hope your team is firing and fit come September/October and whatever happens happens.

[Big Phil]

When Yves Sibenaler comes back from injury then the situation changes slightly.

Spoke to Evil last night and he said his knee injury was a little worse than first thought and that he will be out for 8-10 weeks now...

[whufc]

When Yves Sibenaler comes back from injury then the situation changes slightly.

Spoke to Evil last night and he said his knee injury was a little worse than first thought and that he will be out for 8-10 weeks now...

Great!

Have heard the same about Potters hammy as well.

[andyw]

Agree and thats why i think players like Hardy and Stewart can take a few more years to really find their feet at SANFL level due to playing so many different roles from quarter to quarter and then week to week .

The frustrating part for me is that while a lot of supporters are using the we are 'rebuilding' call i still have faith and believe we have enough talent in the side that we can make the 5 more than likely in the 4th-5th spot.

People will also say its a very inexperienced side, it is but thats due to the selections we are making and the fact we are putting most of the inexperienced players under the pump in the same defence with no experience around them. Does it do a young kid any good giving him a matchup week after week where they cant compete in size, strength or speed? That could be debated for ever.

I will never call for Roys head, he has enough credit in the bank to last a lifetime and sacking coaches midseason rarely if ever turns a side from mid range to grandfinalist within half a season. I think Roy is the man to see this new crop threw but its undeniable that the club has gone away from some things that made the club so strong through the mid 90's - now.

For me the expectation is to make the 5 and then hope your team is firing and fit come September/October and whatever happens happens.[/quote]



Great post.
Roy definately has a few credits in the bank.
have faith people

[Dogwatcher]

It's going to be a tough season for the Dogs.
Hammers, I thought we looked a pacier side than last season and that was the general consensus among those I was sitting with. I think it's more the lack of experience than the pace that hit us during the night.
Also, is it just me or (apart from the two ruckmen debate) is that we are a really short side.
A few other things I noticed:

* Far too many passes falling short of the target forcing players to dive, many of which bounced in front of the receiver.
* I'd love to see a comparison of the inside 50s. I felt we had as many, it's just that they were ragged and didn't favour our players, also - see above.
* Cheap turnovers, including passing to the middle of the ground to a player dancing around like he was doing the YMCA. Don't pass to a stationary bloke in the middle.
* One of the now senior players, who I'm a fan of, was named in the best players but the number of ineffective kicks I saw him have was disgraceful.
* North look quick, fit and know how to use the ball. Dangerous up forward and run the ball concisely from defence.
* And...don't mind a bit of banter and indulged in some on Saturday night but the continual use of "fu**ing this and fu**ing that" from a North supporter, amongst the big group on the eastern wing near the scoreboard, was over the top. Some of you might have been amongst that group - it was the guy with the cherry red docs who, judging by his attire, is a Joe Strummer fan.

[Dogwatcher]

And yes, I'd have the same issue if it was a Dogs supporter. Particularly if it was in that area of the ground - which is heavily populated by families.

[whufc]

It's going to be a tough season for the Dogs.
Hammers, I thought we looked a pacier side than last season and that was the general consensus among those I was sitting with. I think it's more the lack of experience than the pace that hit us during the night.
Also, is it just me or (apart from the two ruckmen debate) is that we are a really short side.
A few other things I noticed:

* Far too many passes falling short of the target forcing players to dive, many of which bounced in front of the receiver.
* I'd love to see a comparison of the inside 50s. I felt we had as many, it's just that they were ragged and didn't favour our players, also - see above.
* Cheap turnovers, including passing to the middle of the ground to a player dancing around like he was doing the YMCA. Don't pass to a stationary bloke in the middle.
* One of the now senior players, who I'm a fan of, was named in the best players but the number of ineffective kicks I saw him have was disgraceful.
* North look quick, fit and know how to use the ball. Dangerous up forward and run the ball concisely from defence.
* And...don't mind a bit of banter and indulged in some on Saturday night but the continual use of "fu**ing this and fu**ing that" from a North supporter, amongst the big group on the eastern wing near the scoreboard, was over the top. Some of you might have been amongst that group - it was the guy with the cherry red docs who, judging by his attire, is a Joe Strummer fan.

Good points,

His last name doesn't have a ' in it? If so me and my mate were pulling our hair out at his use of the ball which is normall top shelf.

We are slightly quicker but that was always going to happen when you take the two Gowans out, but by no means would i say we are a 'quick' side.

At times on the weekend our defence had one player taller than 6ft which was Reichert. The only GIANTS i would consider us to have are Guilhaus, Hardy, Collier, Obst

[Dogwatcher]

Who was the bloke who slipped over on the hill near the beer van and knocked himself out?
My cousin was up there getting a beer, heard a crack and turned around and saw this bloke on the ground 'doing the motorcycle'.
Wasn't in a good way, apparently.

[whufc]

Who was the bloke who slipped over on the hill near the beer van and knocked himself out?
My cousin was up there getting a beer, heard a crack and turned around and saw this bloke on the ground 'doing the motorcycle'.
Wasn't in a good way, apparently.

Wouldnt have helped St Johns took close to 15 minutes to get to where he was, thats no exaggeration either.

[Dogwatcher]

They did take a while to waddle up there. Weren't in a rush.

[CedeNullis]

It's going to be a tough season for the Dogs.
Hammers, I thought we looked a pacier side than last season and that was the general consensus among those I was sitting with. I think it's more the lack of experience than the pace that hit us during the night.
Also, is it just me or (apart from the two ruckmen debate) is that we are a really short side.
A few other things I noticed:

* Far too many passes falling short of the target forcing players to dive, many of which bounced in front of the receiver.
* I'd love to see a comparison of the inside 50s. I felt we had as many, it's just that they were ragged and didn't favour our players, also - see above.
* Cheap turnovers, including passing to the middle of the ground to a player dancing around like he was doing the YMCA. Don't pass to a stationary bloke in the middle.
* One of the now senior players, who I'm a fan of, was named in the best players but the number of ineffective kicks I saw him have was disgraceful.
* North look quick, fit and know how to use the ball. Dangerous up forward and run the ball concisely from defence.
* And...don't mind a bit of banter and indulged in some on Saturday night but the continual use of "fu**ing this and fu**ing that" from a North supporter, amongst the big group on the eastern wing near the scoreboard, was over the top. Some of you might have been amongst that group - it was the guy with the cherry red docs who, judging by his attire, is a Joe Strummer fan.

Great post Dogwatcher.
Wouldn't mind betting your 'Joe Strummer' fan is part of the brains trust that stands down the southern end at Prospect. Probably posts on here too.
North were superbly coached by Franco and it will be interesting to see if they can maintain that standard throughout the year.
They played well late last year, then blew it when it mattered most.

[Dogwatcher]

As I said, I don't mind a bit of banter but the "effing" was a bit over the top.
Those blokes were in fine voice and so they should have been.

[Booney]

- AFL selection dramas with guess who - the selfish c#*ts at Port! Lets see what happens when it is announced another player possibly "moved" to the Magpies via the back door!

What happened with Young OTR, what were the "selection dramas"?

[wild dog]

It's going to be a tough season for the Dogs.
Hammers, I thought we looked a pacier side than last season and that was the general consensus among those I was sitting with. I think it's more the lack of experience than the pace that hit us during the night.
Also, is it just me or (apart from the two ruckmen debate) is that we are a really short side.
A few other things I noticed:

* Far too many passes falling short of the target forcing players to dive, many of which bounced in front of the receiver.
* I'd love to see a comparison of the inside 50s. I felt we had as many, it's just that they were ragged and didn't favour our players, also - see above.
* Cheap turnovers, including passing to the middle of the ground to a player dancing around like he was doing the YMCA. Don't pass to a stationary bloke in the middle.
* One of the now senior players, who I'm a fan of, was named in the best players but the number of ineffective kicks I saw him have was disgraceful.
* North look quick, fit and know how to use the ball. Dangerous up forward and run the ball concisely from defence.
* And...don't mind a bit of banter and indulged in some on Saturday night but the continual use of "fu**ing this and fu**ing that" from a North supporter, amongst the big group on the eastern wing near the scoreboard, was over the top. Some of you might have been amongst that group - it was the guy with the cherry red docs who, judging by his attire, is a Joe Strummer fan.

Yes he had a stack of disposals so it was positive that he is now finding more of it, but how many hit the target and maybe have a look around when blazing at goals.
I agree with the increased pace, not so sure on lacking height.
Being able to adjust the game when the opposition get a roll on is something that will happen as the side gels.

[Wedgie]

Add up the results of the 4 grades and the NAFC beat the CDFC by 259 points.