Round 12: North v West - Sunday 19 June @ Prospect Oval

North smacked Glenelg last week while West were smacked by Centrals the other week. Will North smack West again, or will West notch up their first win of the season.

North to win comfortably after a close first half & win running away by 10 goals

WEST
West Adelaide wingman Nick Homburg will play his first IGA League match of the year against North at Prospect Oval on Sunday.
Struck down by a nagging ankle injury throughout pre-season, Homburg racked up 40 disposals, 10 marks and eight clearances in the Reserves last round.
The hard-running midfielder has been joined in the Bloods’ 23-man squad by Chris Burgess, Tyson Slattery and possible debutant Jack Evans.
Evans, from Flagstaff Hill, has again been listed on the extended interchange bench and must survive the cut before the bounce.
Goalsneak Shannon Green will be sidelined for three weeks after accepting an early guilty plea for engaging in rough conduct with Central’s Caleb Edmead in Round 10.
Half-back Errin Wasley-black will be unavailable due to a hamstring strain.

League
F: Silverlock, Willits, Fielke
HF: Stubbs, Middleton, Haysman
C: Waite, Schiller, Homburg
HB: Burgess, Hartlett, Schmidt
B: Caire, Hardy, Agostino

R: Webb, Tuck, O’Brien
INT: Favretto, Hill, J. Evans, Slattery, K. Stevens
IN: Homburg, Burgess, Slattery, J. Evans
OUT: Green (suspended), Wasley-Black (hamstring)

Reserves
Turner, Klemke, Pillion, Munn, McPherson, L. Ryan, M. Noble, Inglis, Heitmann, Majok, Holliday, Male, Westhoff, Cameron, J. Ryan, J. Stevens, G. Hampton, Karpany, J. Noble, Crump, L. Evans.

North should win comfortably, around 5 goals I think

Cockies should win by a Cricket Score

Wouldn't be surprised if West pinch their first win of the year, but North should be too good here...

where has this version of west been all year? Desperate and good skills today but North disappointing

Hard to see the final five changing from here.

North only side in bottom half with 4 wins (rest have 3 or 1)

But only 7 games to go, and 2.5 wins plus percentage out of it.

Roosters need to win least 5/7 probably 6/7 , make up percentage and hope a top 5 has a serious form slide.

well done Westies' i gave up on them after the Central match, anyway did West play that well ? North that poorly ? or indeed did North respect West from the outset ? looking at the scores perhaps some complacency may have been there

bayman wrote:well done Westies' i gave up on them after the Central match, anyway did West play that well ? North that poorly ? or indeed did North respect West from the outset ? looking at the scores perhaps some complacency may have been there

West were too hard in the contest for most of the day. Craig dominated the taps but West hit in hard and won most of the centre breaks. North nearly pinched it in the end but it would have been grand larceny.

When I got to the ground I said to mates that this is the type of game North lose. They have always seemed to get ahead of themselves after a big win. One North barracker who stands near me backed Westies at $7.50 on the strength of North being complacent and West having a go.

A few people around me were blaming the 6 day break but if that had been an issue North would have tired instead of finishing all over the top of West.

rocket_rooster wrote:

bayman wrote:well done Westies' i gave up on them after the Central match, anyway did West play that well ? North that poorly ? or indeed did North respect West from the outset ? looking at the scores perhaps some complacency may have been there

West were too hard in the contest for most of the day. Craig dominated the taps but West hit in hard and won most of the centre breaks. North nearly pinched it in the end but it would have been grand larceny.

When I got to the ground I said to mates that this is the type of game North lose. They have always seemed to get ahead of themselves after a big win. One North barracker who stands near me backed Westies at $7.50 on the strength of North being complacent and West having a go.

A few people around me were blaming the 6 day break but if that had been an issue North would have tired instead of finishing all over the top of West.

thank you rr

Big Phil wrote:Wouldn't be surprised if West pinch their first win of the year, but North should be too good here...

Had a 'feeling in my waters' about this one...

Sounds like Trent Stubbs played one of this best games for the club?

Well done West on first up win, another Jekyll & Hyde fortnight from the Roosters...

Well done Westies.

Something of a sigh of relief I would expect.

Chambo Off To Work We Go wrote:Something of a sigh of relief I would expect.

Nah....

OK then, Yeh..

Given that we won, I can say this, but 31 frees to 21 for North seemed to be completely against the run of play, where West were often first to the ball. They were 'away' on a few occasions, only for a whistle for a free the other way.

Except for a couple of decisions, maybe that was just the way it went, however one decision in particular was flabbergasting (good word, that .

I think even North supporters would back me up on this one: a North player took possession near the centre, ran many steps with the ball at full pace, took on the tackler, was taken to ground in a great tackle and threw the ball away. Players stopped, presuming the obvious 'holding the ball' call.

None forthcoming.

Anyway, it was a great win, with a fair bit of courage.

Lee wrote:Given that we won, I can say this, but 31 frees to 21 for North seemed to be completely against the run of play, where West were often first to the ball.  They were 'away' on a few occasions, only for a whistle for a free the other way.

Except for a couple of decisions, maybe that was just the way it went, however one decision in particular was flabbergasting (good word, that .

I think even North supporters would back me up on this one: a North player took possession near the centre, ran many steps with the ball at full pace, took on the tackler, was taken to ground in a great tackle and threw the ball away. Players stopped, presuming the obvious 'holding the ball' call.

None forthcoming.

Anyway, it was a great win, with a fair bit of courage.

You are right with that free that was disgraceful. Also I thought Middleton marked prior to George Thring getting his shot for goal with about a minute to go.

On the other hand immediately after Stubbs got a free for hanging on to give him his first goal, the ball went down North's end where Harvey was clearly and blatantly held 10 metres out but no free was paid. And it was the same umpire who had paid the Stubbs free. There were a number of frees missed and one umpire seems to belong to the Laurie Argent/Ray Chamberlain school of its all about me.

I thought that the disparity in frees was mainly because West were much harder at the ball and the man with the ball, so accordingly some of their tackles infringed.

North did well to get within 4 points of the reigning premier!

Lee wrote:Given that we won, I can say this, but 31 frees to 21 for North seemed to be completely against the run of play, where West were often first to the ball.  They were 'away' on a few occasions, only for a whistle for a free the other way.

Except for a couple of decisions, maybe that was just the way it went, however one decision in particular was flabbergasting (good word, that .

I think even North supporters would back me up on this one: a North player took possession near the centre, ran many steps with the ball at full pace, took on the tackler, was taken to ground in a great tackle and threw the ball away. Players stopped, presuming the obvious 'holding the ball' call.

None forthcoming.

Anyway, it was a great win, with a fair bit of courage.

The other decision that staggered me was when Ryswyk (I think it was) handballed the ball out of bounds as he was being tacked in front of the interchange and was rightly declared by the umpire as a free kick for us only to be overruled by the boundary umpires. If that was the case it should've been declared a throw because that is the only other way the ball could get where it did. Also are the out of bounds frees counted in the count as we would have received at least 10 of those compared to only giving away 3 or 4 which would've meant the free kick count is worse.

I haven't been able to get to a game since ANZAC Day so was keen to see the improvement that I have heard about and wasn't disappointed. I was calling for O'Brien to be dropped at this stage but he has proven why he has been touted as one of the better recruits in the competition. Stubbs looks like a Beech clone and I look forward to seeing them both together if Beech unfortunately doesn't receive another contract with the crows. Very impressed with Waite, Burgess and Favretto as well.

Karpany looked out of his depth but managed to lay 8 tackles and looks like he could be OK. It was Middletons best game for the club and hopefully he can bring that sort of form every week.

Onwards and upward and a huge chance of beating the bay's next week.

Go Bloods!

BloodnTars wrote:

Lee wrote:Given that we won, I can say this, but 31 frees to 21 for North seemed to be completely against the run of play, where West were often first to the ball.  They were 'away' on a few occasions, only for a whistle for a free the other way.

Except for a couple of decisions, maybe that was just the way it went, however one decision in particular was flabbergasting (good word, that .

I think even North supporters would back me up on this one: a North player took possession near the centre, ran many steps with the ball at full pace, took on the tackler, was taken to ground in a great tackle and threw the ball away. Players stopped, presuming the obvious 'holding the ball' call.

None forthcoming.

Anyway, it was a great win, with a fair bit of courage.

The other decision that staggered me was when Ryswyk (I think it was) handballed the ball out of bounds as he was being tacked in front of the interchange and was rightly declared by the umpire as a free kick for us only to be overruled by the boundary umpires.

If it is the incident that I was thinking of it was Max Thring who handballed it out of bounds. I was standing about 10 metres from there and I heard the boundary umpire say that the ball was initially out of bounds before Max Thring handballed it. It did seem a bit strange to me but the boundary umpire had a perfect view.

I was very close to it and didn't hear anything, but I thought it might have been out before the handball too, rig.

Fair enough

NA 7-3 [45]
WA 13-4[82]
That was the score at almost 6 minutes into the last quarter

NA 12-5 [77]
WA 13-4 [82]
That was the score before George Thring scored a behind

NA 12-6[78]
WA 13-4[82]
Final score

West had 4 more disposals and won by 4 points

Decent sort of a finish by the roosters
The last Thring score , was it a easy or hard scoring opportunity ?

Scrappy wrote:NA 7-3 [45]
WA 13-4[82]
That was the score at almost 6 minutes into the last quarter

NA 12-5 [77]
WA 13-4 [82]
That was the score before George Thring scored a behind

NA 12-6[78]
WA 13-4[82]
Final score

West had 4 more disposals and won by 4 points

Decent sort of a finish by the roosters
The last Thring score , was it a easy or hard scoring opportunity ?

Man on the mark was on the 50 metre arc and at least a 45 degree angle. George Thring was about 100/1 to kick it. Lewis Hender was standing next to him and we expect him to take a handball and having a running shot. Given his longer, more powerful kick he would have been about 5/1 to kick it.

As someone else said, it would have been grand larceny.

It was from a free kick moments after Mason Middleton wasn't paid a clear mark.

It is shown on the SAMFL highlights.

rig, I wish you'd told me he was 100/1 before the kick.

Lee wrote:It was from a free kick moments after Mason Middleton wasn't paid a clear mark.  

It is shown on the SAMFL highlights.

rig, I wish you'd told me he was 100/1 before the kick.

would you have taken the 100/1 ?