Rnd 9 - West v Norwood @ Richmond REVIEWS & DISCUSSIONS

[redandblack]

Last night, in fact, I would say that Norwood played an extra man in defence and West had an extra man in attack at the centre bounces. That’s not defensive by West. Did any Norwood fan see that, because it happened.

Well, if West played an extra man forward, wouldn't it stand to reason to have a player covering him? :roll
So it was NORWOOD who were defensive last night? Oh I see. It must have been all those forward thrusts and inside 50s by Norwood that confused me.

AH, I think I have been accurately generous towards the way Norwood played last night and just gave my opinion about each team's set up at the centre bounces. I stand by that opinion and happily accept that you have yours, so the aggression isn't necessary. It's sometimes not easy to discuss footy tactics on here without being attacked, but I've tried to answer squawk's question as honestly as I can. I've merely said that Norwood always start with extra behind the ball. That's a legitimate opinion, and IMO, accurate.

Your statement about Norwood's constant forward thrusts merely repeats what I said. Norwood were all over West all night and were far too good, therefore constantly forcing West into defence.

AH, I know you're renowned for your unfailing sense of humour, but I think even you might accept that I haven't criticised Norwood at all and have clearly praised their game last night.

[redandblack]

AH, if it's the same incident, it was bizarre. The Norwood player was reported and Norwood were (incorrectly) given the free kick right in front of goal

If this was Nick Ramsey in the third term or so, it was indeed a very bizarre incident with an equally odd outcome. I saw the "non-officiating" (not in the direct part of play) umprre rush to Ramsey, appear to take his number, yet Norwood then got a free at the top of their square. All standing around me were equally mystified with this one.

R&B, what you say about past West v Norwood games may well be correct, but we are looking at last night's game here, and I think its fair to say that, last night, West placed massive numbers behind the ball at times, which was really befuddling given how well they played when freeflowing and attacking so far this year.

As all who were standing with me will attest, I kept waiting and expecting West to make a run at some point at Norwood, but it just never came. All of the poise and run they had used so well to this point just looked gone.

On a side note, I'll be interested to see if the reaction from West fans to Stephen Tiller when he plays his first game at Richmond for the Eagles in round 17, is similar to that for Nathan Eagleton last night.

Yes, CK, I've said that last night's game was an extremely embarrassing performance by West. My reference to past games was merely to point out that all teams tend to play the same when they're well down. I wasn't trying to justify it in any way.

As a West supporter, I've enjoyed seeing us attack this year and get disappointed when we don't. The only area of disagreement between me and some others is that I don't think it's as a result of a sudden instruction from the coach to 'go defensive'. You might agree that the centre-bounce set-up had more players in West's half than in Norwood's? I think we'd all agree that Norwood then usually won possession and West's forwards then ran into defence, which us standard practice? If you haven't got the footy, you defend.

Unlike you, though, I never felt we'd mount a challenge last night after the early stages. I just thought we were playing poorly and Norwood were playing too well and it didn't look like changing. That probably reflects our supporters' pessimism

As for Eagleton, yes, that's an interesting point. Nathan came up through West's juniors as one of three(?) brothers playing with us and got his league start with us, for a few games only before going to the AFL. It was disappointing to see him go elsewhere when he could have repaid the club a little, but that's life and he's entitled to make his decision and West supporters are entitled to give him their opinion. I haven't boo'd him.

As for Tiller, West went out of their way to facilitate his move from the west coast to Adelaide, but I would guess they're not too fussed about him going to the Eagles.

Anyway, Norwood were far too good last night and if they keep playing that way, they'll be right up there.

[Brodlach]

Great win norwood, good work we are back in the premiership run now!!!

End the evening in provisional second, will finish the round there if Glenelg beat the Eagles at home.

I'd be happy with that - it will put Centrals two games plus percentage clear on top of the ladder (assuming we beat North of course).

Why on every thread do we need a Centrals update FFS

[blackandred]

Thought if I waited until the next day I might have calmed down a bit but it hasn’t worked.
Westies were disgraceful in their worst performance of the season against a complete Norwood outfit at Richmond Oval last night. Beaten in almost every area of the game our performance was error riddled and inept and, especially embarrassing in front of the 1961 Premiership players.
Moran came into the side from the Crows and rucked for much of the game. Although he won many of the hit outs our mid-fielders could not take any advantage or were tackled hard if they did. Fielke ran with Eagleton who received a less than warm welcome from the crowd on his return to the ground where he and his 3 brothers all played their junior footy.
The game was a poor spectacle for Bloods supporters especially as the team reverted to their old flooding tactics which combined with Norwood’s creeping zone made for boring footy. Much of the game was played with 36 players in one half of the ground. While both teams play a defensive style the Legs do it so much better. They are tougher at the ball and body, faster, more skilful in their disposal and they have forwards who can kick goals. We turned the ball over with regular monotony, dropped marks and kicked poorly for goal.
Westies didn’t have best players last night but degrees of worst. That said a few can hold their heads up. Willets played in several roles, ruck, forward and back and never gave up. He is developing into one of the most important players in the team. Moran was close behind and Schmidt, Macreadie and Silvester saw plenty of the ball. Our forwards were dreadful again. Webb and Hartlett were rarely sighted and both had key roles to play. 4 gls in 100 minutes of footy is just pathetic.Morris and Caire, probably our best players all year, had poor games. Motlop had a shocker.
The stats in the paper tell the story. Norwood took 136 marks to our 67, that’s more than twice as many! Norwood had 225 kicks (many of those went backwards) to our 148. But the 64 tackles to 41 tells the story of how we were outmuscled at every contest.
The umpiring was simply shocking as they dished out countless 25m penalties for seemingly minor infringements and needlessly imposed themselves into the game.
There was a positive from the game. The last time we played Norwood, in Round 23 last year, we only kicked 2 gls so we have improved.

[Go Legs]

I have an idea!

Why don't Westies turn the lights off in their half of play at every home game, cause no one is ever there

Could save some serious dosh

Cheers,

[SDK]

The score line flattered West Adelaide .... they were smashed in every aspect of the game. Had we had Taylor Walker we would have won by 100 points again. Probably should have anyway !
A totally impressive effort especially the ball movement and tackeling pressure. Looks like it is coming together slowly and a big test next week of course.

Have to say that at night Richmond Oval does not look as bad. Lights were pretty good. Hope we only play them at night now because the atmosphere is better but where were the Westies supporters ??????

[redandblack]

Would have saved more if we'd turned them off at the other end, since they started.

[silent hour]

Thought if I waited until the next day I might have calmed down a bit but it hasn’t worked.
Westies were disgraceful in their worst performance of the season against a complete Norwood outfit at Richmond Oval last night. Beaten in almost every area of the game our performance was error riddled and inept and, especially embarrassing in front of the 1961 Premiership players.
Moran came into the side from the Crows and rucked for much of the game. Although he won many of the hit outs our mid-fielders could not take any advantage or were tackled hard if they did. Fielke ran with Eagleton who received a less than warm welcome from the crowd on his return to the ground where he and his 3 brothers all played their junior footy.
The game was a poor spectacle for Bloods supporters especially as the team reverted to their old flooding tactics which combined with Norwood’s creeping zone made for boring footy. Much of the game was played with 36 players in one half of the ground. While both teams play a defensive style the Legs do it so much better. They are tougher at the ball and body, faster, more skilful in their disposal and they have forwards who can kick goals. We turned the ball over with regular monotony, dropped marks and kicked poorly for goal.
Westies didn’t have best players last night but degrees of worst. That said a few can hold their heads up. Willets played in several roles, ruck, forward and back and never gave up. He is developing into one of the most important players in the team. Moran was close behind and Schmidt, Macreadie and Silvester saw plenty of the ball. Our forwards were dreadful again. Webb and Hartlett were rarely sighted and both had key roles to play. 4 gls in 100 minutes of footy is just pathetic.Morris and Caire, probably our best players all year, had poor games. Motlop had a shocker.
The stats in the paper tell the story. Norwood took 136 marks to our 67, that’s more than twice as many! Norwood had 225 kicks (many of those went backwards) to our 148. But the 64 tackles to 41 tells the story of how we were outmuscled at every contest.
The umpiring was simply shocking as they dished out countless 25m penalties for seemingly minor infringements and needlessly imposed themselves into the game.
There was a positive from the game. The last time we played Norwood, in Round 23 last year, we only kicked 2 gls so we have improved.

Good summation blackandred but it wasn't our worst performance this year, I would say it was on a par with the match against Port at Alberton.

[on the rails]

Still staggered why we picked up Motlop and is unbelievably now playing league ahead of guys like S Ezard, Blesing, Agars, Newton, etc.

Hmm Motlop getting a game ahead of more deserving players - now where have I heard that before? Don't say we didn't warn you!

[redandblack]

Last night, in fact, I would say that Norwood played an extra man in defence and West had an extra man in attack at the centre bounces. That’s not defensive by West. Did any Norwood fan see that, because it happened.

Well, if West played an extra man forward, wouldn't it stand to reason to have a player covering him?

So it was NORWOOD who were defensive last night? Oh I see. It must have been all those forward thrusts and inside 50s by Norwood that confused me.

Well, AH, the following excellent article by Jai Bednall has him, Nathan Bassett and Andrew Collins agreeing totally with my statement.

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/afl ... 6065042663

[Squawk]

Thanks for responding R&B -

Unfortunately Jai did not highlight how West at times had every player in their defensive half. What surprised me was this only started when you were 3 or 4 goals behind. That's why I thought it was a coaching moving designed to stop any further goals before the half time break.

Interesting that Collins would volunteer publicly that he was "outcoached" - and that Norwood is the hardest side for West to match up on. West WILL be better with a few injured players back in the fold (including Fisher and Ferguson) but it will be interesting to see what Collins tries to do differently next time around - another night game at Coopers Stadium in Rd 19!

[Squawk]

One more question - why would Eagleton be treated differently to Tiller? I dont recall Jericho getting that treatment, (or indeed De Jongh or Stephen Bailey getting it notwithstanding they were straight SANFL transfers). Perhaps it is as simple as Eagleton being a 'favourite son' throughout his long AFL career, in contrast to Tiller?

[redandblack]

Thanks Squawk.

Yes, very interesting article on a number of fronts, wasn't it. I agree, as I said before, that West had every player behind the ball on occasions, especially for a period in the second quarter. My opinion is that is a result of the flow of the game at that stage, where Norwood had a mountain of possession. I highly doubt it was a coach's insruction, as it obviously isn't a winning formula. I've often seen and noted other sides doing the same at times.

As for your question about Eagleton. I don't really know the reason, but my best guess is as follows: Tiller was relatively unknown to West supporters, having only generally played a bit of underage footy for us. We did a lot to help him, so it was disappointing he went to the Eagles, but after going through the process, I doubt West were that sorry to see him go.

I think in the case of Jericho and deJonge and to a lesser extent Bailey, fans could see it was time for them to move on for various reasons. (I happily chatted to Luke Jericjho at the game).

Nathan's case is a bit different. He was a West junior for some time, his brothers all played for us and I think the feeling is that he showed no loyalty at all. I don't know his reasons for signing with Norwood and it doesn't bother me that he did so, but I can understand some being less than impressed with him.

[Blacky]

Nathan's case is a bit different. He was a West junior for some time, his brothers all played for us and I think the feeling is that he showed no loyalty at all. I don't know his reasons for signing with Norwood and it doesn't bother me that he did so, but I can understand some being less than impressed with him.
JUDAS = MONEY

[CK]

Nathan's case is a bit different. He was a West junior for some time, his brothers all played for us and I think the feeling is that he showed no loyalty at all. I don't know his reasons for signing with Norwood and it doesn't bother me that he did so, but I can understand some being less than impressed with him.
JUDAS = MONEY

Footballers and sportspeople overall, have relatively short careers compared to many of us. The opportunities afforded to them are great, but equally, their longevity is limited.

Over 277 AFL games, Nathan Eagleton has never played in a premiership. At his age of 32, his chances of playing in one keep lessening. After how much he has put into the game, I would have thought he would have a right to chase the one thing that drives many, many footballers throughout their career, in terms of team glory.

If any of us had an opportunity to reach a pinnacle in our chosen field, most of us would take that opportunity gratefully. Few of us would choose to take an option that may mean we don't hit that height, at the expense of staying loyal to an employer that, at the time, we may not perceive as taking us to where we want to be, and what we want to achieve.

Loyalty is a two way street in football, and plenty of players have been thrown onto the scrapheap while their club has decided that player can't take them the step the team needs for a premiership. Ask Chris Thredgold, for one, about how it feels to give your all for a club through the really bad times, only to miss out on the one day when the team finally gets what they have been chasing.

If, at the time of making his decision, he decided that his best chance of playing in a premiership was with Norwood rather than West, surely he has the right to make that choice, without being booed, ostracised and called various terms. I understand entirely why some West fans are disappointed at that decision, but it is Eagleton's right to look for what he feels is best for him, in terms of his career and what he wants to look back on. Unfortunately, the perception that any player should feel obliged to put back into their old club, is not one that necessarily still holds sway in this day and age. Plenty of footballers have wanted to play in a premiership and have changed clubs to do so. I really don't see why, after all he has given to football, Nathan Eagleton shouldn't make that choice for himself, to go to a club that he felt, at the time, had a better chance of doing so.

[Adelaide Hawk]

Good post CK.

[JK]

Nathan's case is a bit different. He was a West junior for some time, his brothers all played for us and I think the feeling is that he showed no loyalty at all. I don't know his reasons for signing with Norwood and it doesn't bother me that he did so, but I can understand some being less than impressed with him.
JUDAS = MONEY

This isnt intended to be argumentative, but on one hand you say you're not sure why he signed with Norwood, but then close by intimating he was chasing the money? Furthermore, if the Bloods could afford Brad Fisher then they most certainly could have afforded Eagleton.

Btw, booing a player is no big deal and has been going on for generations, so there's no issue with that.

Without being at the game, I would imagine Westies just had "one of those nights" .. Hopefully as a result they hit back REAL hard this week vs Williamstown and get the job done!!

[redandblack]

I think you're right on all counts there, CP. I hope you're right about it being one of those nights

Good post too, CK.

Perhaps the one difference in Nathan's case is that the family all played juniors for West, hence the reception compared to some others.

I'd say West offered him what they thought was fair for a delisted AFL player of his age and were possibly wary after (correctly?) doing the same with Scott Welsh last season.

As CK says, he's entitled to go where he wants and West fans are entitled to let him know what they think of his decision.

Situation normal

[blood bath]

Maybe he was chasing the coin after his successful business deal with Lake!

[nickname]

CK, my problem with your argument is that it tends to justify any player who's given substantial service to a club that hasn't won a flag, crossing over to a top club. Why don't all the top players at the bottom 4 or 5 clubs who only have a few seasons at SANFL level left in them all cross over and play for Centrals so they can win a flag? Would that be justified?