What do we do with Suckling?

[play2win]

Don't know why anyone would think suckling cost us a goal when McVeigh marked in the goal square. 'Twas a perfectly weighted kick from Goodes to mcveighs advantage, all he needed to do was hold his ground. If there was any 'error' it was with the uncontested high ball Goodes marked at the f50. There was plenty of time for someone to make a contest out of that or at last hold up the play a bit.

 

[spudmaster]

Would like to see both him and Breust focus on training with the oval shaped football this week, rather than filming more nonsense, penis-measuring contest videos about who is better at other sports, because at the minute, neither are overly great at the one they're being paid to play.

 

[The Cryptkeeper]

Not hitting KPIs most likely

Then it is fair to say that his KPI's are a lot more stringent than Suckling's.

 

[TheFourPillars]

Is he injured?

Late to training?

Gave Clarko a bad haircut?

Injured

 

[H2F]

Injured

Thank you... Why did it say omitted everywhere during the week.
Bit unfair on him if injured.

 

[extractasam]

Sucklings ball drop in 2011




It's changed a s**t load, how far he drops from his opposite side of the body now is significant

Is it just me or does he not look as scrawny here as he does now? Maybe I wasn't paying him enough attention, but I do believe he was a better player 2010-12 than 13-14.

 

[badgrill]

Is he injured?

Late to training?

Gave Clarko a bad haircut?

How embarrassment that made me laugh out loudly on the train

 

[Blaze Storm]

Look, I agree, he needs some time at Box Hill.

Let's not forget that people were howling for Poppy to be traded after his mid-air attempted goal-of-the-year that ended in a loss to Geelong. He just needs to screw his head back on and come back his 2014 self.

 

[Davo23]

You just keep accepting mediocrity! Ifyou seriously think he belongs in the best 22 with the way he is going about it this year (his piss poor attitude and performances) then u seriously have no idea. And its just not one particular kick or handball, it's all the f..ken time lately. Can i remind you of his bullshit dribble kick 15 metres out last week? Ye it was against melb, but that crap cost us games against the good sides.

But keep accepting mediocrity...

Wow, it's the Suckling Haters Club here.

Okay, I'll say it: Matt Suckling has an important role in the team and did some good things on Saturday.
He made a couple of errors in the game. Cyril, Gunston, Breust, Burgoyne, Ceglar, Mitchell, Hill, Roughie and others made bad errors at critical times in the last quarter, all of which could have resulted in goals and won us the game.



And don't start the "you accept mediocrity" stuff, mate, I've seen 11 "mediocre" premierships!

 

[Bumps"N"Grins]

Wow, it's the Suckling Haters Club here.

Okay, I'll say it: Matt Suckling has an important role in the team and did some good things on Saturday.
He made a couple of errors in the game. Cyril, Gunston, Breust, Burgoyne, Ceglar, Mitchell, Hill, Roughie and others made bad errors at critical times in the last quarter, all of which could have resulted in goals and won us the game.



And don't start the "you accept mediocrity" stuff, mate, I've seen 11 "mediocre" premierships!

Well he's going well enough for blaze storm to change his avatar.

 

[The Cryptkeeper]

Wow, it's the Suckling Haters Club here.

Okay, I'll say it: Matt Suckling has an important role in the team and did some good things on Saturday.
He made a couple of errors in the game. Cyril, Gunston, Breust, Burgoyne, Ceglar, Mitchell, Hill, Roughie and others made bad errors at critical times in the last quarter, all of which could have resulted in goals and won us the game.



And don't start the "you accept mediocrity" stuff, mate, I've seen 11 "mediocre" premierships!

Come on mate. He is playing like a millionaire at the moment and needs to be sent a message. The issue is that, yes all of the above players made mistakes on Saturday night but the salient differnece is that all of those guys bring more than one weapon to the table. Suckling has exactly ONE weapon and when it misfires, usually due to his lairising, then he becomes a liability. The other guys you mentioned have more than one string to their respective bows.

 

[kolchak]

I'm not a Suckling supporter but I thought he did some decent physical things on Saturday night, which is generally my knock on him, step in the right direction for mine.

 

[Ugottabjokin]

A bit too vitriolic from some loyal Hawks supporters here for my liking.

Suckling is a 2 times premiership player and whilst I was as upset as most about that ridiculous kick in the last quarter I think we need to have a look at a few others if we are starting to play the blame game.

First up bad kicking is bad football. The forwards were pretty woeful.

Roughy Goals 0 points 3 Goal efficiency 0%. (3 clangers)

Gunston Goals 1 points 3 goal efficiency 20% - not hearing a lot about that set shot at the start of the second quarter to register our 5th point and that was before we had kicked a goal. Was just a bad a kick as Sucklings in the last. (3 clangers)

Bruest goals 1 points 1 effiency 50% better but the one point he scored was a bit of a costly miss wouldn't you say?(clangers 4) - and that off the ground kick and Out on the full was a pretty ordinary kick as well.

Team total clangers 47. So our 3 key forwards account for 21.28% of our total team clangers.

My Call Langford needs to go before Suckling

Official AFL stats - on disposal efficiency and where that ranked in the Hawthorn team for that week

Round Team D/E Rank

1 Geel 57.9% 20th
2 Ess 60.0% 20th
3 WB 80.8% 8th
4 PA 60.0% 18th
5 NM 64.7% 22nd (last)
6 GWS 41.7% 22nd (last)
7 Melb 53.8% 22nd (last)
8 Syd 50.0% 22nd (last)

So let me ask you who deserves to be out of the side first Suckling or Langford?

 

[dipper86]

Don't know why anyone would think suckling cost us a goal when McVeigh marked in the goal square. 'Twas a perfectly weighted kick from Goodes to mcveighs advantage, all he needed to do was hold his ground. If there was any 'error' it was with the uncontested high ball Goodes marked at the f50. There was plenty of time for someone to make a contest out of that or at last hold up the play a bit.

If that was Stratton in that position....do you think he would have been out marked ?

 

[dipper86]

A bit too vitriolic from some loyal Hawks supporters here for my liking.

Suckling is a 2 times premiership player and whilst I was as upset as most about that ridiculous kick in the last quarter I think we need to have a look at a few others if we are starting to play the blame game.

First up bad kicking is bad football. The forwards were pretty woeful.

Roughy Goals 0 points 3 Goal efficiency 0%. (3 clangers)

Gunston Goals 1 points 3 goal efficiency 20% - not hearing a lot about that set shot at the start of the second quarter to register our 5th point and that was before we had kicked a goal. Was just a bad a kick as Sucklings in the last. (3 clangers)

Bruest goals 1 points 1 effiency 50% better but the one point he scored was a bit of a costly miss wouldn't you say?(clangers 4) - and that off the ground kick and Out on the full was a pretty ordinary kick as well.

Team total clangers 47. So our 3 key forwards account for 21.28% of our total team clangers.

My Call Langford needs to go before Suckling

Official AFL stats - on disposal efficiency and where that ranked in the Hawthorn team for that week

Round Team D/E Rank

1 Geel 57.9% 20th
2 Ess 60.0% 20th
3 WB 80.8% 8th
4 PA 60.0% 18th
5 NM 64.7% 22nd (last)
6 GWS 41.7% 22nd (last)
7 Melb 53.8% 22nd (last)
8 Syd 50.0% 22nd (last)

So let me ask you who deserves to be out of the side first Suckling or Langford?

First off Suckling is a 1 time premiership player.

Secondly if you actually understood the differences between Langford and Suckling in terms of disposal efficiency you would come to the realization that the majority of possessions by Langford all come from in close contested football, which means a higher rate of error. 14 contested possessions on the weekend, 4th in clearances and equal third in tackles. So what you're effectively saying is to not get the pill in our hands or first use and allow the opposition to control the contested side of the game whilst also adding to a deficiency in our midfield by not having a contested ball winner with dash. he was one of the reasons why we had so much of the pill. It was our outside game/execution which helped us lose this match.

These Langford calls are killing me.

 

[Furn2]

If that was Stratton in that position....do you think he would have been out marked ?

So where was he ?

Suckling one out in the square is a structural breakdown, he's not a full back.

We kicked 1 goal in qtrs 1 and 4 combined that's why we lost,

we kicked 1 goal for every 7 inside 50s. (14%). Yet Sucklings 4 I50s resulted in 2 goals (50%). You think Stratton can make those kicks.

There's about 12-15 players who aren't playing as well as they need to consistently, Suckling is just one of them.

 

[Ugottabjokin]

First off Suckling is a 1 time premiership player.

Secondly if you actually understood the differences between Langford and Suckling in terms of disposal efficiency you would come to the realization that the majority of possessions by Langford all come from in close contested football, which means a higher rate of error. 14 contested possessions on the weekend, 4th in clearances and equal third in tackles. So what you're effectively saying is to not get the pill in our hands or first use and allow the opposition to control the contested side of the game whilst also adding to a deficiency in our midfield by not having a contested ball winner with dash. he was one of the reasons why we had so much of the pill. It was our outside game/execution which helped us lose this match.

These Langford calls are killing me.

Sorry my error 1 premiership.

The Langford call is just though. He is not the only player who's majority of possessions come from in close contested footy but he is the worst performing player for the last 4 weeks in the entire Hawks side for D/E. Not much good him getting his hands on the ball when half the time he is giving it back to the opposition.

Different players yes but I was reading some pretty vitriolic things about Suckers and yes I was pretty upset with him as well. I think he needs a good kick in the ass. But my point is that there are some other players that need to be highlight as well and I don't believe ignoring such poor D/E stats no matter what role a player plays is a wise move.

Yes 14 contested possessions but at least 50% of those he gave to a Swans player.
Actually equal 7th in clearances equal with 2 other players. 3 clearances the same amount as Bruest a forward and Hartung who played a quarter of footy as the sub.
Equal 3rd in tackles with 5 which another 6 players managed as well.
How about Clangers 4 the top amount equal with 3 other players.

 

[dipper86]

So where was he ?

Suckling one out in the square is a structural breakdown, he's not a full back.

We kicked 1 goal in qtrs 1 and 4 combined that's why we lost,

we kicked 1 goal for every 7 inside 50s. (14%). Yet Sucklings 4 I50s resulted in 2 goals (50%). You think Stratton can make those kicks.

There's about 12-15 players who aren't playing as well as they need to consistently, Suckling is just one of them.

I don't know where he was, either dialing 13116 or he was on Parker somewhere. Suckling wasn't out of position he's a defender, he was't out marked by a full forward in Tippett, he was out marked by Mcveigh another small. I personally thought it was a sh8t effort at holding his ground and was easily nudged by the slightest of contact.....I was hoping like he had improved this side of his game.

 

[seysearles]

What does Suckling offer that Duryea doesn't? Thats the question that I ask myself. Duryea is a beautiful penetrating left foot kick and he can commit his body to a contest. Why have him languishing in the reserves. Suckling should go to Box Hill under the instruction to work on his contested efforts and kicks under pressure. If/when he proves himself in this area he can be considered for selection.

I know he has become the focus of much of our ire and we notice his errors more than we probably do other players but i must have seen 4 major clangers from Suckling that directly resulted in Sydney goals. Surely Clarko sees these also and realises the cost of these mistakes.

 

[striker]

So where was he ?

Suckling one out in the square is a structural breakdown, he's not a full back.

We kicked 1 goal in qtrs 1 and 4 combined that's why we lost,

we kicked 1 goal for every 7 inside 50s. (14%). Yet Sucklings 4 I50s resulted in 2 goals (50%). You think Stratton can make those kicks.

There's about 12-15 players who aren't playing as well as they need to consistently, Suckling is just one of them.

No interest in debating whether he is a hawthorn champion as one poster put it last week, but on this point. So you have to be a full back to be able to beat an opponent who's the same size as you? This whole notion people have been throwing up for years. Whether its Shoenmakers, Or Murphy, suckling etc. well why were they left one out they cry. Why wasn't gibbo or lake or stratts there to help the poor things they cry!!! Im only guessing but id say theyre usually busy with other opposition players at the time. Just a guess though as im no expert.
God forbid someone is called upon to win a contest all by their wittle selves.

 

[StillAtLarge]

Langford is an inside ball-winning battering ram, better off comparing apples with apples.

•Suckling is averaging 21 disposals @74% with an average of 6 score involvements.
•Duryea is averaging 19 disposals @77% with an average of 4 score involvements.
•Both average 2 tackles a game and 4 inside 50s.
•Suckling averages 2 rebound 50s with 3 clangers a game, Duryea 3 rebound 50s and 2 clangers.

So statistically these two are neck and neck, I'd lean toward Duryea if I was picking the side as I think he's a more competant defender but I guarantee you that Suckling will be more effective when Hodge returns.

Overall I'd say Suckling, Roughead & Breust have been the three regulars that have regressed the most from last year's form, let's hope they turn the corner soon.

 

[Furn2]

No interest in debating whether he is a hawthorn champion as one poster put it last week, but on this point. So you have to be a full back to be able to beat an opponent who's the same size as you? This whole notion people have been throwing up for years. Whether its Shoenmakers, Or Murphy, suckling etc. well why were they left one out they cry. Why wasn't gibbo or lake or stratts there to help the poor things they cry!!! Im only guessing but id say theyre usually busy with other opposition players at the time. Just a guess though as im no expert.
God forbid someone is called upon to win a contest all by their wittle selves.

How many contested marks did the Swans take ? How many were against Suckling ?

 

[ScoobySnacks]

A bit too vitriolic from some loyal Hawks supporters here for my liking.

Suckling is a 2 times premiership player and whilst I was as upset as most about that ridiculous kick in the last quarter I think we need to have a look at a few others if we are starting to play the blame game.

First up bad kicking is bad football. The forwards were pretty woeful.

Roughy Goals 0 points 3 Goal efficiency 0%. (3 clangers)

Gunston Goals 1 points 3 goal efficiency 20% - not hearing a lot about that set shot at the start of the second quarter to register our 5th point and that was before we had kicked a goal. Was just a bad a kick as Sucklings in the last. (3 clangers)

Bruest goals 1 points 1 effiency 50% better but the one point he scored was a bit of a costly miss wouldn't you say?(clangers 4) - and that off the ground kick and Out on the full was a pretty ordinary kick as well.

Team total clangers 47. So our 3 key forwards account for 21.28% of our total team clangers.

My Call Langford needs to go before Suckling

Official AFL stats - on disposal efficiency and where that ranked in the Hawthorn team for that week

Round Team D/E Rank

1 Geel 57.9% 20th
2 Ess 60.0% 20th
3 WB 80.8% 8th
4 PA 60.0% 18th
5 NM 64.7% 22nd (last)
6 GWS 41.7% 22nd (last)
7 Melb 53.8% 22nd (last)
8 Syd 50.0% 22nd (last)

So let me ask you who deserves to be out of the side first Suckling or Langford?

Apples and oranges. Langford plays a completely different role to Suckling, so his disposal is less of a concern.

Suckling can't hold his spot. Birchall and Gibbo are our rebounding defenders, Duryea needs to come in based on his pure defensive ability over what Suckling can do.

 

[ScoobySnacks]

I miss Guerra

 

[play2win]

If that was Stratton in that position....do you think he would have been out marked ?

it was a perfectly weighted kick to mcveigh's advantage, the odds were in his favour irrespective of who was on him at the time. sometimes you just have to accept that the opposition played well and deserved to kick a goal.