SA Footy

In wet and general crap conditions, here were the numbers by my count for those interested:

Norwood on left, North on right
Long Kicks: 55-61
Short Kicks: 55-81
Kicks: 204-225 (Eff 62%-70%)
H/Bs: 123-94 (Eff 84%-74%)
Disposals: 327-319 (Eff 70%-71%)
Cont Poss: 129-123
Uncont Poss: 176-175
Cont Marks: 6-14 (from opp kicks: 4-6)
Uncont Marks: 55-87 (from opp kicks: 12-16)
Marks: 61-101 (from opp kicks: 16-22)
Play on from Mark: 49%-39%
Hardball Gets: 48-42
Looseball Gets: 57-50
H/B Receives: 97-69
Inside 50s: 50-41
Rebound 50s: 29-42
Centre Breaks: 7-8
Throw In Clear: 17-21
Ball Up Clear: 21-9
Total Clearances: 45-38
Hit Outs: 43-41
Hit Outs to Adv: 5-4
Knock Ons: 11-13
Spoils: 30-25
Smothers: 3-1
Shepherds: 12-4
Free Kicks: 18-17
Clangers: 59-48
Disposal Turnovers: 32-27
Kicks OOF: 6-4
25m/50m Pen: 1-4
Game Time: 111 mins

Norwood had 27 inside 50s to 12 in the second half, yet could only score 4.6 to 3.5 in the third and final quarters.

There was a total of 108 stoppages, consisting of 21 centre restarts, 47 throw ins and 40 ball ups. The average is roughly 85-90 per game. There was 62 in the second half.

The Legs had 28 clanger kicks to 23 (as in they kicked the ball straight down their opposition's throat).

Goals by Receive(Norwood-North)
From Marks: 2-6
(Cont Marks: 1-3)
From Frees: 2-3
General Play: 3-2

Goals by Zone (Norwood-North)
0-15m: 1-2
15-30m: 2-3
30-50m: 3-3
50m+: 1-3

looking at that norwood should have won or got closer, but as we all know footy isnt played on paper, with teams, stats etc.......

good work on the stats!!!!!

scott wrote:In wet and general crap conditions, here were the numbers by my count for those interested:

Norwood on left, North on right
Long Kicks: 55-61
Kicks: 204-225 (Eff 62%-70%)

Norwood had 27 inside 50s to 12 in the second half, yet could only score 4.6 to 3.5 in the third and final quarters.

mt79, I reakon that's where the game was won and lost; this is only going on by the stats though.

From what I saw on TV, North had far more efficient use of the ball into their forward line while Norwood repeatedly muddled things up going forward. Prob some credit due to North's defence there.

North did enough in two bursts to win the game and that's all.

The weather kept Norwood in it as well as their ability in the first half to find free North men when they went into attack. North also went to sleep after kicking away early in the second and never looked like being headed.

The fact that Nwd got all 3 of their goals in the first half all in time on and two from basic North mistakes tells the tale of the game.

BPBRB wrote:The fact that Nwd got all 3 of their goals in the first half all in time on and two from basic North mistakes tells the tale of the game.

Whereas all of North's goals were as a result of Robran-esque brilliance and not down to the umpiring or Norwood's ineptitude.

Pfft.

Hey Topsy, what position is K McGuiness supposed to be playing?
By the way you'd been pushing his wagon I assumed he was a key position player (and maybe a half decent one at that), I thought at the game today when Ladhams was outmarking him and he and his girly headband got dragged that I must have misinterpreted you.
Apologies for that.

Seriously though I talked to a few Norwood supporters today and all agreed it was only the conditions that kept Norwood from being flogged by 15 goals.

And North's desire to do the flogging

Wedgie wrote:Seriously though I talked to a few Norwood supporters today and all agreed it was only the conditions that kept Norwood from being flogged by 15 goals.

So what team was that I saw at Thebarton four weeks ago?

BPBRB wrote:North did enough in two bursts to win the game and that's all.

The weather kept Norwood in it as well as their ability in the first half to find free North men when they went into attack. North also went to sleep after kicking away early in the second and never looked like being headed.

The fact that Nwd got all 3 of their goals in the first half all in time on and two from basic North mistakes tells the tale of the game.

My impressions exactly. Think may have said it on the scores thread. BPBRB how did Allan do today. Thought he was quiet. Didn't get too many mentions on the old squak box.

topsywaldron wrote:

BPBRB wrote:The fact that Nwd got all 3 of their goals in the first half all in time on and two from basic North mistakes tells the tale of the game.

Whereas all of North's goals were as a result of Robran-esque brilliance and not down to the umpiring or Norwood's ineptitude.

Pfft.

Ha ha - you are pathetic topsy and your post smacks of being a sore loser but I suspect it must really annoy you that it was North that beat you because clearly you have a deep set hatred for our club???

Be thankful it wasn't dry as you would have got flogged. As for blaming your ineptitude - which part of the 120 minutes are you referrring to as that occured for the bulk of the game as far as Nwd went and as for the umpiring - it was deplorable both ways at times and the free kick count was 22-22 each so that's smacking of desperation raising the umpiring.

Maybe you should face the fact that this year Nwd are not as good as North or is that just too common sense for you to work out?

As for Robran-esque brillance - what would Nwds equivalent be?

BPBRB wrote:Ha ha - you are pathetic topsy and your post smacks of being a sore loser but I suspect it must really annoy you that it was North that beat you because clearly you have a deep set hatred for our club???

More than happy to be called pathetic by you. Anything else and I'd worry.

Sure I was f**ked off we didn't win however I readily accept that we were beaten by the better team. But your intial post that indicated Norwood's goals only came from North's mistakes and 'in time on' (whatever the hell that means) just indicate to me exactly what a poor winner you are. Still getting used to it I suppose.

As for this nonsense about 'my deep set hatred' of North. Unless you failed to notice the SANFL is what's known as a 'competition' and I haven't seen any ruling that indicates I have to do anything other than support my club. There's a few clubs who've earned respect over the years due to their continued dominance, Eagles, Port and Centrals but unless your club actually does something radical like win a flag soon North aren't one of them.

Now you let me know which part of that bottom paragraph you don't agree with?

Hey, we don't even respect our club so I wouldn't expect you to!

I think Norwood's problem was that the game was televised. They never win when its match of the day

topsywaldron wrote:

BPBRB wrote:Ha ha - you are pathetic topsy and your post smacks of being a sore loser but I suspect it must really annoy you that it was North that beat you because clearly you have a deep set hatred for our club???

More than happy to be called pathetic by you. Anything else and I'd worry.

Sure I was f**ked off we didn't win however I readily accept that we were beaten by the better team. But your intial post that indicated Norwood's goals only came from North's mistakes and 'in time on' (whatever the hell that means) just indicate to me exactly what a poor winner you are. Still getting used to it I suppose.

As for this nonsense about 'my deep set hatred' of North. Unless you failed to notice the SANFL is what's known as a 'competition' and I haven't seen any ruling that indicates I have to do anything other than support my club. There's a few clubs who've earned respect over the years due to their continued dominance, Eagles, Port and Centrals but unless your club actually does something radical like win a flag soon North aren't one of them.

Now you let me know which part of that bottom paragraph you don't agree with?

Watch the tape topsy - your first three goals all came in the "time on" period and the first two as a direct result of North mistakes - that is fact and nothing to do with being a poor winner/loser. You must surely be running out of straws to clutch by now?

As for calling you pathetic - that was probably uncalled for so I apologise for that - more I mean the tone of your post.

Is a goal scored at the 25 minute mark suddenly worth less than one kicked at the 8 minute mark?

topsywaldron wrote:Is a goal scored at the 25 minute mark suddenly worth less than one kicked at the 8 minute mark?

To answer your question no.

From my point of view North go to sleep in time on after controlling a quarter for 90 percent of them more often than not and certainly the first half yesterday they did the same. We give up too many goals late in quarters as evident by the fact that Nwds only goals in the first half were in time on. Nwd just couldn't score when they needed to e.g. in the bulk of the quater not going scoreless for 40 mins of the first half. I would think that would be a worry for any team or coach.

hondo71 wrote:From what I saw on TV, North had far more efficient use of the ball into their forward line while Norwood repeatedly muddled things up going forward. Prob some credit due to North's defence there.

Despite not being at the game I think you're %100 spot on with that call Hondo ... North's skill level was well above that of a Norwood side which displayed good endeavour, but is clearly lacking in structure and ability (particularly by foot).

I saw enough in North to suggest they should be a challenger of sorts for the Dogs .. They are similarly quick, strong, desperate and skilled, but will need to play 100 minutes .. I know thats cliched but we know the Dogs will, so North need to ensure they can aswell .. If they can I reckon it should be a pretty interesting final game of the season.