Round 6: North v Norwood - Saturday 4 May @ Prospect Oval

North v Norwood

Saturday 4 May
Prospect Oval

Reserves: 11:25am
League: 2:10pm

North are coming off a decent win over South, while Norwood overran West, but have the coach up before the tribunal. Which side will continue their winning way?

i think North are the real deal & i believe they'll win this in a close one, they'll need both Johnson & Stewart playing up forward though, looking forward to attending this match

Hearing Sam Baulderstone could be out for up to 6 weeks due to a work incident. Big loss for the legs if true as I thought he was extremely good last week.

BloodnTars wrote:Hearing Sam Baulderstone could be out for up to 6 weeks due to a work incident. Big loss for the legs if true as I thought he was extremely good last week.

He is an apprentice plumber, by trade. Have you heard what he might have done to himself?

Big Phil wrote:

BloodnTars wrote:Hearing Sam Baulderstone could be out for up to 6 weeks due to a work incident. Big loss for the legs if true as I thought he was extremely good last week.

He is an apprentice plumber, by trade. Have you heard what he might have done to himself?

You've heard right, mate...

Expect to see Sam listed as an OUT for the Redlegs, due to a hand injury...

News is correct but according to the NFC Web page Big Sam was injured at training last night. possibly out for 4-6 weeks.

Still we have a very strong line up all over the ground.
http://www.norwoodfc.com.au/News/LATESTNEWS/ROUND_6_-_NORWOOD_VS_NORTH_ADELAIDE.aspx

Liam Davis to play his first game for Norwood in the seniors, congratulations Liam, remember the journey started with the famous Red & Blue.

Norwood by 28 points

Go Legs wrote:Liam Davis to play his first game for Norwood in the seniors, congratulations Liam, remember the journey started with the famous Red & Blue.

Was Liam the lad that Bass noticed when playing a one off game up at Houghton? Liam looks a solid size and can clunk a mark. Good luck to him...

Not absolutely certain BP but you have described him well so I guess so.

North

F: Campbell, Stewart, Ryswyk
HF: Anderson, Langford, Gordon
C: Blee, Moore, G. Thring
HB: Clinch, Miles, Keller
B: C. Craig, Dalwood, Thompson

R: J. Craig, Shannon, M. Thring
INT: Amato, O’Sullivan, Thiele, Hill, Armstrong

IN: Armstrong, Hill, Clinch
OUT: Johnston (Crows)

Norwood

F: Davis, Panos, Phillips
HF: Murphy, Warren, Pfeiffer
C: Grigg, Zorzi, C. Evans
HB: Fuller, Jefferies, McGuinness
B: Kirwan, Georgiou, Jesse Aish

R: Dawe, M. Thomas, Suckling
INT: Roocke, Smart, M. Evans, Dumont, Hughes
IN: M. Thomas, Jesse Aish, Davis, Hughes, M. Evans
OUT: Donohue (hamstring), Bode (suspension), Baulderstone (hand)

Norwood by 2-3 goals.

Naturally any of the 3 possible results wouldnt be a surprise here. But Norwood just. Maybe.

Close game to me--North to win.

North were far too good today. They would have won just about every position, We are 4 - 2 now so no need to panic. We are not playing well in particular in the midfield which is putting extra pressure on our defence and making it hard for our forwards.

Some guys to come back in like Webber, Bode, Donahue, Newton, Campbell, Baulderstone, Chippendale and Aish will help but I wouldn't expect the AFL clubs to allow Grigg and Thomas to play a finals game so some of the above are just replacements.

I thought North looked very fast and their strong marking forwards made the most of their opportunities. They are going to be very hard to beat

As for our Coach not appearing on the ABC, to be honest I couldn't care less. As long as the club supplies someone of some note thats all that can be expected in my opinion.

Bassett imposed a media ban on himself so didn't talk to the media after the game . Seriously ? Pop ............head out of a..e Nathan.

enjoyed the game & bar for the first half of the second quarter when Norwood fully controlled the game but didn't kick straight it was North who were in control & total control in the second half, we learnt one thing today if Norwood are behind they are so well drilled there is no plan 'B' like play on at all costs (which North did particuarly early) & interesting to read the coach put a ban on himself because i thought he'd say ''they (North) were lucky'' like he did last year

does anyone know the reasoning of North wearing white shorts for home games ?

bayman wrote:does anyone know the reasoning of North wearing white shorts for home games ?

Because North have reverted to their traditional white shorts as their usual uniform. The only time they wear red shorts now is if they play Central at Elizabeth. I guess similarly Central will have to wear blue shorts at Prospect.

North changed to red shorts in 1980 and for some time I hated the all red look. Then this year when they reverted to white shorts, I struggled with that look for a while, but I am now used to it.

Matt Campbells superb left foot disposal was some of the best Ive seen for quite a while in the SANFL and for NA , very Bronte Mumfordesque

Is Matts kicking usually as good as he showed against NW ?

Scrappy wrote:Matt Campbells superb left foot disposal was some of the best Ive seen for quite a while in the SANFL and for NA , very Bronte Mumfordesque

Is Matts kicking usually as good as he showed against NW ?

His disposal was actually a bit below his best on Saturday. If you look at the highlights from last week's game against South you see a couple of classic Campbell runs and goals, whereas he didn't finish well when he had a couple of chances to goal yesterday.

robranisgod wrote:

bayman wrote:does anyone know the reasoning of North wearing white shorts for home games ?

Because North have reverted to their traditional white shorts as their usual uniform. The only time they wear red shorts now is if they play Central at Elizabeth. I guess similarly Central will have to wear blue shorts at Prospect.

North changed to red shorts in 1980 and for some time I hated the all red look. Then this year when they reverted to white shorts, I struggled with that look for a while, but I am now used to it.

thank you

All I have to say is that North played in grand form of football and beat us at every aspect of the game.

We have to go back to the drawing board on that effort.

bayman wrote:

robranisgod wrote:

bayman wrote:does anyone know the reasoning of North wearing white shorts for home games ?

Because North have reverted to their traditional white shorts as their usual uniform. The only time they wear red shorts now is if they play Central at Elizabeth. I guess similarly Central will have to wear blue shorts at Prospect.

North changed to red shorts in 1980 and for some time I hated the all red look. Then this year when they reverted to white shorts, I struggled with that look for a while, but I am now used to it.

thank you

a thought came to me today when it was just black or just white shorts which color shorts did North wear at Prospect, from memory i thought home teams wore black & away teams wore white

bayman wrote:

bayman wrote:

robranisgod wrote:

bayman wrote:does anyone know the reasoning of North wearing white shorts for home games ?

Because North have reverted to their traditional white shorts as their usual uniform. The only time they wear red shorts now is if they play Central at Elizabeth. I guess similarly Central will have to wear blue shorts at Prospect.

North changed to red shorts in 1980 and for some time I hated the all red look. Then this year when they reverted to white shorts, I struggled with that look for a while, but I am now used to it.

thank you

a thought came to me today when it was just black or just white shorts which color shorts did North wear at Prospect, from memory i thought home teams wore black & away teams wore white

That was the VFL rule. In the SANFL North, Torrens, South, Central, Woodville and West all had white shorts as their home uniform and Port, Sturt, Glenelg and Norwood had black shorts. We used to have the ludicrous situation at Richmond of West in red and black with white shorts and North red and white with black shorts.

interesting that, funny how the memory gets it wrong, although i was a kid so i wouldn't have known it was a ''VFL rule'' thanks again much appreciated