SA Footy

After viewing the replay I want to forward my opinions
North were simply to tenacious and disciplined for ST who appeared to be down on skills
North might be implementing a different style of footy in 2007
Looks like they are becoming more man to man and more accountable in defence.
Sturt to be fair had an off day, and might improve

BEST PLAYERS
-----------------
PAPER NA : Allen...Ohara....Howard
MAL.........: Allen...Sporn.....Motlop

PAPER ST : Evans..Sheedy..Crane
MAL.........: Crane..Evans....Chambers


I think Allen was outstanding and will poll 2 or 3 votes in the Medal
I think Crane was absolutely sensational and clearly Sturts best and maybe best on ground

The controversy from a post I put in the Jeremy Johncock thread :
I posted that CHAMBERS was 3rd best on ground
This statement DOES appear outlandish
BUT
In my opinion he was double + triple teamed on many occasions and had no hope of posession
This was a tactical ploy by JARMAN to limit CHAMBERS and it worked
BUT it did leave ST players free as well
On the odd occasions he got one out with his opponent he won some possessions
I think his effort of 3-2 in a losing team against multiple opponents at the contests was outstanding

What was anyone elses views ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Is this a stupid statement ?
OR
A statement with merit ?

Also was CRANE best for Sturt ? [I reckon by a country mile]

Kicking 3.2 when 'double, triple, quadruple teamed' whatever you like to call it hardly makes him deserving of being 3rd best on ground considering North completely dominated the game apart from that 15 minute burst by Sturt in the 3rd term. I hope you don't get given the job of handing out Magarey votes this year mal.

RoosterMarty wrote:Kicking 3.2 when 'double, triple, quadruple teamed' whatever you like to call it hardly makes him deserving of being 3rd best on ground considering North completely dominated the game apart from that 15 minute burst by Sturt in the 3rd term. I hope you don't get given the job of handing out Magarey votes this year mal.

3 CRANE
2 ALLEN
1 SPORN

Thats my official votes after viewing this game
But the umps might give it to Allen who played in a winning team.

CHAMBERS wont get a vote
But for mine he was 3rd best because NA had to flood him and that
left other players free to create [but they obviously didnt]

RM what are your best players ?

I am no good at awarding best players as I rarely notice what opposition players are playing well as I only care about the North lads who are performing. I also don't mind a few I wouldn't be able to tell you what Sturt players were good but I don't think Chambers was anything special. They only had 1 up to half time, that's obviously not all Chambers' fault but a 3rd best on ground FF wouldn't have allowed that. I thought Gallman was excellent on Saturday, the Crows have made a very good selection.

RoosterMarty wrote:I am no good at awarding best players as I rarely notice what opposition players are playing well as I only care about the North lads who are performing. I also don't mind a few I wouldn't be able to tell you what Sturt players were good but I don't think Chambers was anything special. They only had 1 up to half time, that's obviously not all Chambers' fault but a 3rd best on ground FF wouldn't have allowed that. I thought Gallman was excellent on Saturday, the Crows have made a very good selection.

RM, I'd put Schubert in the top three for his great work manning up. If you follow my meaninig.

FFS I onlt listened on line and even I wouldn't rate Chambers on the top 1/2 dozen. Sturt didn't goal until 24 mins into the 2nd qtr and only enjoyed 15 mins of good footy in the whole game.
O'Hara, for winning 16 taps to Sturts entire 18
Gallman for his work on Chambers (after only is 2nd game for the Cocks IIRC and so young)
Cubillo, as expressed by many others, a real star again on Sat
Motlop, Ladhams, Alleway
Need I go on. and not just using red tinted glasses, but honestly, wasn't just about how poor Sturt played or whether they turned up for, as much as how the Chooks played. They never gave the DB's a second on the ball, forced errors and then made the most of the turnovers.

3rd best Mal, come on.

Sheedy is a magnificent player but the Sunday Mail always has him in the top 3 regardless of whether he played a shocker. They seem to choose their best from stats not impact on a game sometimes.
I thought Chambo would have been in Sturt's top 7 or 8 just for perseverance. In a more consistent club (ie can consistently deliver the ball effectively) he really could be anything.

I agree Mal Chambers was good and worthy of being in the best players...

from listening to the game i doubt any sturt player could be given votes in the top 7 or 8 let alone top 5

we played shithouse and were lucky not to get done by more.

You can expect to win by giving the team a 7 goal head start

Had CHAMBERS played one out on GALLMAN he would have scored between 6 to 10 goals
To expect a 2nd gamer to compete with a seasoned Full Forward is and was not on.
This is not being disrespectful of GALLMAN, its more CHAMBERS being a star forward
Jars understandably had to assist GALLMAN
GALLMAN looked good as a rebounding defender.
The only full back I would expect to compete with CHAMBERS one on one is AHCHEE

Mal just because a guy has the ability does not mean he was in the best players. Regardless of how he was shut out of the game he still was. Just because there was 2, 3 or 18 players on him it doesn't change the fact that he had little impact. Sure he was double and even triple teamed at times but going on this basis you'd put Franklin for Hawthorn in the best players last Sunday against Fremantle and that simply was not the case.

It is difficult to gauge the impact of some players by watching on TV. O'Hara was named in the best players mainly because of his efforts off the ball. A lot of his work wasn't captured by the cameras but it doesn't make it any less valuable. Many of the one percenters and chases etc. are missed but are very important to a teams success or failure.

rod_rooster wrote:Mal just because a guy has the ability does not mean he was in the best players. Regardless of how he was shut out of the game he still was. Just because there was 2, 3 or 18 players on him it doesn't change the fact that he had little impact. Sure he was double and even triple teamed at times but going on this basis you'd put Franklin for Hawthorn in the best players last Sunday against Fremantle and that simply was not the case.

It is difficult to gauge the impact of some players by watching on TV. O'Hara was named in the best players mainly because of his efforts off the ball. A lot of his work wasn't captured by the cameras but it doesn't make it any less valuable. Many of the one percenters and chases etc. are missed but are very important to a teams success or failure.

Having watched ONLY the replay there is no way OHARA will get votes from this game
He spent a fair bit of time helping GALLMAN in the backlines

RR Hypothetically speaking without the assistance given to GALLMAN how many goals do you
reckon CHAMBO would have kicked ?

Chambo still kicked 3-2 [a lot better contribution than Franklin]

PS KP V WI tomorrow night

mal wrote:

rod_rooster wrote:Mal just because a guy has the ability does not mean he was in the best players. Regardless of how he was shut out of the game he still was. Just because there was 2, 3 or 18 players on him it doesn't change the fact that he had little impact. Sure he was double and even triple teamed at times but going on this basis you'd put Franklin for Hawthorn in the best players last Sunday against Fremantle and that simply was not the case.

It is difficult to gauge the impact of some players by watching on TV. O'Hara was named in the best players mainly because of his efforts off the ball. A lot of his work wasn't captured by the cameras but it doesn't make it any less valuable. Many of the one percenters and chases etc. are missed but are very important to a teams success or failure.

Having watched ONLY the replay there is no way OHARA will get votes from this game
He spent a fair bit of time helping GALLMAN in the backlines

RR Hypothetically speaking without the assistance given to GALLMAN how many goals do you
reckon CHAMBO would have kicked ?

Chambo still kicked 3-2 [a lot better contribution than Franklin]



PS KP V WI tomorrow night

Had Franklin kicked straight it would have been different. 0.4 plus at least one out on the full. He also had more of the ball than Chambers and pushed further up the ground.

Hypothetically if Chambers was one out all day he probably would have kicked a bag and been in the best players. He didn't though so i don't see how he gets in the best players based on the assumption if he was left one out he might have kicked a bag of goals.

Mal - after Weatherley went off injured North only had one tall fwd in Alleway. He managed to win his position over the whole course of the game. Even prior to Owen going off Alleway had his direct opponent Macleay (who did a pretty good job overall but still lowered his colours on the day) plus the Sturt ruckman dropping back not to mention Luke Ivens opponent contesting against him from time to time so Chambers wasn't the only double/tripled fwd.

Re Ivens "supposed" opponent who played the whole game as a loose man in Sturts defence from the opening bounce which was IMO an "I concede type" move by MacGowan by trying to get extra numbers in defence. All that did was make it harder for Sturt when they went fwd not having another player available to stretch North's defence (albeit a flanker) and it gave North an extra man to go over and assist in contests and the tape shows the number of times North ran the ball out of defence easily because Sturt were one player short fwd of centre!

BPBRB wrote:Mal - after Weatherley went off injured North only had one tall fwd in Alleway. He managed to win his position over the whole course of the game. Even prior to Owen going off Alleway had his direct opponent Macleay (who did a pretty good job overall but still lowered his colours on the day) plus the Sturt ruckman dropping back not to mention Luke Ivens opponent contesting against him from time to time so Chambers wasn't the only double/tripled fwd.

Re Ivens "supposed" opponent who played the whole game as a loose man in Sturts defence from the opening bounce which was IMO an "I concede type" move by MacGowan by trying to get extra numbers in defence. All that did was make it harder for Sturt when they went fwd not having another player available to stretch North's defence (albeit a flanker) and it gave North an extra man to go over and assist in contests and the tape shows the number of times North ran the ball out of defence easily because Sturt were one player short fwd of centre!

hopefully rick can afford to promote coad or herring as another key forward to help out chambo but we have certainly missed a stephen white type of player to take the focus off brant.

and btw the mal, brant bagged a lazy 8 on ahchee a few weeks back

BPBRB wrote:Mal - after Weatherley went off injured North only had one tall fwd in Alleway. He managed to win his position over the whole course of the game. Even prior to Owen going off Alleway had his direct opponent Macleay (who did a pretty good job overall but still lowered his colours on the day) plus the Sturt ruckman dropping back not to mention Luke Ivens opponent contesting against him from time to time so Chambers wasn't the only double/tripled fwd.

Re Ivens "supposed" opponent who played the whole game as a loose man in Sturts defence from the opening bounce which was IMO an "I concede type" move by MacGowan by trying to get extra numbers in defence. All that did was make it harder for Sturt when they went fwd not having another player available to stretch North's defence (albeit a flanker) and it gave North an extra man to go over and assist in contests and the tape shows the number of times North ran the ball out of defence easily because Sturt were one player short fwd of centre!

Moral of the story anybody who has to compete against 2 or more players is doing it hard.

RYSWYK played a blinder in the first half
Was tagged by one player at about half time and this nullified him
Imagine if he stood 2 players

Hypothetically, if Chambers was left all on his own in the goalsquare, with no opponent in the 50, with a gale blowing into his face and Sturt getting every centre clearance would he hear a tree falling in the woods?

mal wrote:Had CHAMBERS played one out on GALLMAN he would have scored between 6 to 10 goals
To expect a 2nd gamer to compete with a seasoned Full Forward is and was not on.
This is not being disrespectful of GALLMAN, its more CHAMBERS being a star forward
Jars understandably had to assist GALLMAN
GALLMAN looked good as a rebounding defender.
The only full back I would expect to compete with CHAMBERS one on one is AHCHEE

...... And he kicked a lazy 8 without a miss on him too.

mal wrote:
RYSWYK played a blinder in the first half
Was tagged by one player at about half time and this nullified him
Imagine if he stood 2 players

If he did he probably wouldn't have got much of the footy and therefore wouldn't have been in the best players.

Grahaml wrote:Hypothetically, if Chambers was left all on his own in the goalsquare, with no opponent in the 50, with a gale blowing into his face and Sturt getting every centre clearance would he hear a tree falling in the woods?

LMAO

1 CRANE
2 ALLEN
3 SPORN

Thats my verdict, 3rd was a lottery
____________________________________________________________
I will resurface this post after MAG MEDAL just to show if the umpires
did there jobs properly
____________________________________________________________
I will have to agree with the concensus that CHAMBO is not 3rd best
BUT
I reckon it was the 3rd best effort in the game under trying circumstances.