Is this the End for Will?

[Struggle]

I'm sure the whole AFL would sacrifice no Minson until round 22 if that means he splits Lindsay Thomas in half.

I think someone in round 9 might be a better target

 

[_Mike_]

Sat with a certain half backs parents on Sunday, when asked what's going on with Will I was told that he has been told he is not doing near enough work around the ground. His role of ruckman is not just to take cetre bounce contests. Makes sense, cordy covers the ground well

That is along the lines of what he said to me last night.

 

[lachy]

The issue with Wil, and the Wil v Cordy debate is when the discussion falls into absolutes, such as Wil must play so we do not get killed at the stoppage, challenged by no Wil must not play as he is no good around the ground.

The truth lies somewhere in between. Wil in his AA year won the most hit outs in the league, we won 8 games in total. What does this show, merely winning hit outs does not guarantee wins, therefore those who say Wil plays against the Dockers and we win are blatantly wrong, we may have we may not have.

Those who say Wil is a liability and use the West Coast game as the example of where he broke down the zone by not working hard enough are also wrong, it may have been Wil. Freo got a goal from a kickout by having a free 40 meters from our goal on the weekend. It may have been Boyd T who had not worked hard enough as he was the chaser of the free man or it may have been another player he was covering for.

Point is the coach and match committee have identified this issue with Wil, as have quite a few supporters.

He will never be able to play this role fully, but if he busts his guts and works hard at trying to do it, despite his weaknesses he will provide a lot more than Cordy. For the rest of this year the question is whose weaknesses are the easiest to cover and allow the development of the team, and can any of the rucks severely reduce their weaknesses by playing AFL as apposed to VFL.

Frankly, still do not rate Cordy but would like to see Wil dominate the VFL playing the role that is now expected then be given the opportunity to translate that to the AFL. Therefore, if Wil can dominate the VFL playing the expected role he is our best option in the AFL.

Either way year end we need to top up our mobile ruck stocks.

 

[_Mike_]

Wills game changed with Bev. The McCartney game plan was based on having more stoppages to set up the ground around where the stoppages were based. Will stated that under that game plan he was spending most of his time around stoppages and not doing much else.

Bev has moved us away from the stoppage style of footy to a more free flowing and zoning game and that's where Wills game at the moment struggles. We know Will is capable of working through form, give him some time. Physically he says his body is fine and not carrying injuries

 

[lachy]

Wills game changed with Bev. The McCartney game plan was based on having more stoppages to set up the ground around where the stoppages where. Will stated that under that game plan he was spending most of his time around stoppages and not done Ng much else.

Bev has moved us away from the stoppage style of footy to a more free flowing and zoning game and that's where Wills game at the moment struggles. We know Will is capable of working through form, give him some time. Physically he says his body is fine and not carrying injuries

What is good about the discussion you had with Will Mike is it is clear to him with what he has to do which means it has been well communicated by the coach.

Clearly Macca's style suited Will, and he is still only 30 so has the time to get back. It may however take a few more weeks, until then he knows what he needs to do and Bev will keep coaching to our strenghths

 

[yebiga]

I confess that for a long time I didn't rate minson and suspected he was part of the problem under macca
Since than I was impressed by his loyalty.
After further thinking I think under Eade minson was taught to suppress his aggression to avoid giving away free kicks
Under macca his role was pivotal because on the contested stoppage style
Under bev his deficiencies are exposed
I think he can change and become the perfect ruck man for us

I watched him closely on Saturday v geelong
Backmen routinely step in his path when he goes for a mark and unbalance his approach causing him to be out of position time after time

I remember sometime ago he would body them first and clear his own path - taking an easy mark. He has stopped doing it and I suspect because he can be too exuberant and give away a free that he has to his own detriment given up his greatest weapon

Similarly, in his early days he would surprise teams by running with the ball. I think under eAde he got penalized once or twice received a spray and again to his own detriment stopped developing a real weapon - it is difficult to tackle a man of his size if he keeps his two Hands in the ball he will almost always get a handball out during a tackle with the right technique

Wilbur can be clumsy when tackling
Also giving away frees
But here too he has subdued his aggression so much and given away a huge strength. Rather he needs to be careful sure but still crunch those bodies hard and fair

What Crameri did to Ballantyne on Sunday, Wilbur can do to a Fyfe and that is worth it's weight in gold

That's the Wilbur we need

Also when he was younger he would far more often just thump the ball in the ruck 15 -20 meters our way
Here is another strength he has given up

Release the kraken Wil
Rediscover your native beast - control it and release it

 

[Sharkey66]

Thanks guys for taking the time to talk to Will when the opportunity presented. Some much needed clarity.

 

[Floridog]

I love the guy but as a ruck there has never been much structure to his taps/punches. I don't rate his AA award although I'm sure a statistician may prove me wrong. Just seems like it's always been utterly random where his taps go (to the dogs or the oppo) so where is the value of first touch if it's not being directed to his teammates advantage? I could certainly live with a trade if it was to our advantage and it was something Will wanted to do. Rocket seems the perfect fit as he always rated him. No point staying on our list if he can't get game time and he can somewhere else.

I'm inclined to favor the random chance with Wil over the slim chance we've been seeing lately.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

IMO, Minson should perfectly fit with the Bulldogs' gameplan and style of play. See Matthew Lobbe at Port Adelaide, Shane Mumford at GWS, Nic Naitanui at West Coast, and even (young, still developing) Brodie Grundy at Collingwood. Minson is the same type of "bash and crash", clear the way, clearance/tackling ruckman that will not only be competitive in the tap, but clear space for the mids to operate at ground level too, and provides physicality and presence around the stoppages. A ruckman like this gives his midfield more time and space to operate and deliver the ball up forward, or contain the ball if the opposition gets it. Minson averaged 4.7 tackles, 3.0 clearances and 4.7 1%ers over the first three games, so he was doing the hard stuff and the defensive stuff very well for a ruckman before being dropped.

I think people misunderstand the role of the ruckman and what effective ruckwork actually is, in relation to a functioning midfield. It's not gathering possessions on the wing or being a "tall midfielder". It's primarily a sacrificial role, providing opportunity and space for your midfield to get the ball, doing the dirty work and using your greater size and physicality to positive effect. If you can get possessions, marks and goals out of it too, that's a bonus. Cordy doesn't provide any of it to any sort of great level and any sort of consistency.

I feel like the Bulldogs' coaching staff have identified a on-field "problem" that isn't really there, and have come up with an inferior replacement to "solve" it. If anything, Minson needed the support of a second ruckman (to combat tandems), rather than being replaced.

Couldn't disagree more.

Beveridge's game style puts less emphasis on the stoppage situation and more in general play. Without the ball we utilise a high press, an air-tight zone and a very maniac, defensive pressure type game style. With the ball we aim to run-and-gun a bit with players like Wood, Jong, JJ and Murphy playing very direct, trying to get the ball into an open forward line with players who can play multiple positions due to the fast-paced nature and flexibility that requires.

All the strengths that you stated about Minson is in the stoppage situation and the stoppage situation alone. He wins tap outs but most importantly led all ruckmen in clearances in the last two years. It's just that all of his strengths are made redundant in a team not necessarily sacrifices, but concedes clearances in order to emphasise a very strong and effective "open-play" style of defensive footy. Minson might very well clear space out and provide physicality, but that means stuff all in general play and the game style we're utilising.

Cordy covers the ground more, can play forward better than Minson, could even pinch hit as a key defender if need be, has better agility, below-knee level skills, and quick-decision making (Minson very often just throws it on the boot), and is more "dynamic". I love Minson as much as the next bloke but in a team that's not longer emphasising stoppages and contested ball, but emphasising having a flexible and mobile 18 players on the field in order to utilise high-intensity and flexible systems, his skillset is pretty much made redundant.

I don't mean to be rude but your suggestion that he has a "problem" using quotation marks suggests that you think the coaches have found something that you don't. You're wrong and the coaches are right - why else are we playing a lot better under our current coaches than last year? The big difference is that our current coach is now explaining and emphasising general play positioning, movement and structure a lot better than our old one, who simply told 15 blokes to get to the contest and that they'd have to "crack in". Minson was perfect at that. His "problem" is that he doesn't provide flexibility, a dynamic aspect, good positioning in transition and his big size means that he's naturally poor in a high zonal press defensive system in a new tatical scheme which is already finding success at our club.

 

[Damon_3388]

Couldn't disagree more.

Beveridge's game style puts less emphasis on the stoppage situation and more in general play. Without the ball we utilise a high press, an air-tight zone and a very maniac, defensive pressure type game style. With the ball we aim to run-and-gun a bit with players like Wood, Jong, JJ and Murphy playing very direct, trying to get the ball into an open forward line with players who can play multiple positions due to the fast-paced nature and flexibility that requires.

All the strengths that you stated about Minson is in the stoppage situation and the stoppage situation alone. He wins tap outs but most importantly led all ruckmen in clearances in the last two years. It's just that all of his strengths are made redundant in a team not necessarily sacrifices, but concedes clearances in order to emphasise a very strong and effective "open-play" style of defensive footy. Minson might very well clear space out and provide physicality, but that means stuff all in general play and the game style we're utilising.

Cordy covers the ground more, can play forward better than Minson, could even pinch hit as a key defender if need be, has better agility, below-knee level skills, and quick-decision making (Minson very often just throws it on the boot), and is more "dynamic". I love Minson as much as the next bloke but in a team that's not longer emphasising stoppages and contested ball, but emphasising having a flexible and mobile 18 players on the field in order to utilise high-intensity and flexible systems, his skillset is pretty much made redundant.

I don't mean to be rude but your suggestion that he has a "problem" using quotation marks suggests that you think the coaches have found something that you don't. You're wrong and the coaches are right - why else are we playing a lot better under our current coaches than last year? The big difference is that our current coach is now explaining and emphasising general play positioning, movement and structure a lot better than our old one, who simply told 15 blokes to get to the contest and that they'd have to "crack in". Minson was perfect at that. His "problem" is that he doesn't provide flexibility, a dynamic aspect, good positioning in transition and his big size means that he's naturally poor in a high zonal press defensive system in a new tatical scheme which is already finding success at our club.

So how, then, do Port Adelaide succeed over the last couple of years (obviously faltering a bit at the minute) with a similar game style led by a similar style ruckman to Minson in Matthew Lobbe? Same can be asked of GWS and Shane Mumford, too.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

So how, then, do Port Adelaide succeed over the last couple of years (obviously faltering a bit at the minute) with a similar game style led by a similar style ruckman to Minson in Matthew Lobbe? Same can be asked of GWS and Shane Mumford, too.

Lobbe and Mumford are a lot more mobile than Minson even if their apparent strengths around the stoppage are the same.
The similar game style yiu refer to also is with ball in hand, not without it. We get our goals from forcing forward half turnovers at a higher proportion than any other club in the league and that results out of having a very high 18-man flexible, dynamic and mobile zonal press of which Minson isn't suited. That isn't exactly the style that GWS or Port play.

 

[SupercededMan]

Couldn't have said it better myself. Great post. BTW, I'm a big fan of Wil.

Couldn't disagree more.

Beveridge's game style puts less emphasis on the stoppage situation and more in general play. Without the ball we utilise a high press, an air-tight zone and a very maniac, defensive pressure type game style. With the ball we aim to run-and-gun a bit with players like Wood, Jong, JJ and Murphy playing very direct, trying to get the ball into an open forward line with players who can play multiple positions due to the fast-paced nature and flexibility that requires.

All the strengths that you stated about Minson is in the stoppage situation and the stoppage situation alone. He wins tap outs but most importantly led all ruckmen in clearances in the last two years. It's just that all of his strengths are made redundant in a team not necessarily sacrifices, but concedes clearances in order to emphasise a very strong and effective "open-play" style of defensive footy. Minson might very well clear space out and provide physicality, but that means stuff all in general play and the game style we're utilising.

Cordy covers the ground more, can play forward better than Minson, could even pinch hit as a key defender if need be, has better agility, below-knee level skills, and quick-decision making (Minson very often just throws it on the boot), and is more "dynamic". I love Minson as much as the next bloke but in a team that's not longer emphasising stoppages and contested ball, but emphasising having a flexible and mobile 18 players on the field in order to utilise high-intensity and flexible systems, his skillset is pretty much made redundant.

I don't mean to be rude but your suggestion that he has a "problem" using quotation marks suggests that you think the coaches have found something that you don't. You're wrong and the coaches are right - why else are we playing a lot better under our current coaches than last year? The big difference is that our current coach is now explaining and emphasising general play positioning, movement and structure a lot better than our old one, who simply told 15 blokes to get to the contest and that they'd have to "crack in". Minson was perfect at that. His "problem" is that he doesn't provide flexibility, a dynamic aspect, good positioning in transition and his big size means that he's naturally poor in a high zonal press defensive system in a new tatical scheme which is already finding success at our club.

tter

 

[dergert]

Can players still play whilst being under investigation for drug use etc?

Just a thought, doesn't seem the type stupid enough to do it.

 

[Syrah]

Couldn't disagree more.

Cordy covers the ground more, can play forward better than Minson, could even pinch hit as a key defender if need be, has better agility, below-knee level skills, and quick-decision making (Minson very often just throws it on the boot), and is more "dynamic".

I get that Minson has limitations and I can sort of understand your arguments about where how he fits in with the structure and game plan (but don't totally agree). What I can't agree with is your rating of Cordy. He's generally been terrible up forward. His ruck work and contested marking is below average. His skills and decision making aren't anything special, although it's hard to make an accurate assessment given how little of the ball he gets. Most of all, what he lacks and what Minson has in spades is competitiveness and aggression. Give me Minson anyday.

 

[VitalDread]

Its a tough thing
keep Minno in the seconds to help win back-back flags or bring him in and hinder development of our young ruckman but be able to "win" games due to hitouts

 

[House_of_Dahl]

Seems a bit odd the development story just put on the Dogs website makes no mention of Minson.

 

[VitalDread]

 

[SWest75]

Can players still play whilst being under investigation for drug use etc?

Just a thought, doesn't seem the type stupid enough to do it.

I think they can play VFL until the B sample is tested, although I'm not sure. I've been open minded about the rucking debate but now I'm starting to think something untoward is going on. This is a long stint in the twos.

 

[Reptilia]

Remember how many goals we conceded over the top against West Coast ? Since then when have we done the same ?

 

[Unnamed1]

Can players still play whilst being under investigation for drug use etc?

Just a thought, doesn't seem the type stupid enough to do it.

Worst post of the year. I don't want to attack a poster personally, but this sort of junk should not be permitted

 

[goodcop badcop]

Remember how many goals we conceded over the top against West Coast ? Since then when have we done the same ?

Since Redpath is out of the side. Hurn played on him for a fair bit of that game and he destroyed us in the 1st half. I don't buy the argument that Will was the main culprit. Once Redpath was subbed, West Coast struggled to break through our zone after that. Even Richmond couldn't break through our zone when Will was playing.

I agree Will needs to work on his defensive side, but I'm not sure it's as bad as what people are saying. Cordy would still have him well covered though.

 

[_M_16_]

I know many fans of Minson use the raw stat of hit outs alone to justify why he should be in the team, and that our one sided hit out count against Fremantle cost us the game. I strongly believe the hit out stat alone is misleading and overrated. Its hit outs to advantage that you want to look out, the ones where your ruckman directly feeds it towards your midfielder.

On paper if Ruckman A had 40 hitouts to Ruckman B's 20. But ruckman A only had 12 hitouts to advantage to 10 from B, you could argue that the battle was pretty even. All of those hitouts in between are 50/50 and almost always decided by your midfielders ability to read the ball

 

[womble54]

I know many fans of Minson use the raw stat of hit outs alone to justify why he should be in the team, and that our one sided hit out count against Fremantle cost us the game. I strongly believe the hit out stat alone is misleading and overrated. Its hit outs to advantage that you want to look out, the ones where your ruckman directly feeds it towards your midfielder.

On paper if Ruckman A had 40 hitouts to Ruckman B's 20. But ruckman A only had 12 hitouts to advantage to 10 from B, you could argue that the battle was pretty even. All of those hitouts in between are 50/50 and almost always decided by your midfielders ability to read the ball

And that is most of my issue with the way Minno rucks. He just pounds the ball any which way. Was watching the game Tutt iced v Melbourne last year yesterday and Will did one fist smash tap behind his head randomly that summed up his tap downs to me. I have always felt Wills tap work seemed to suggest a mentality of "if I hit/touch it first I win the contest" rather than "if I can try to clear each tap to advantage we win". I'm sure it's not that simplistic and it's not what's in his head but geez sometimes he makes you think it is. The number of times he goes up on a boundry throwin though and smashes it straight back over the umpires head to where he threw it in....I just scratch my head... I have had nothing but positive encounters with Will - passionate, articulate, wants the team to win etc. I find I don't miss him at all on the field though, despite the many short comings of the Ayce.

 

[Optimistic Dog]

I have looked at the pro Will posts and anti Will posts. There is a lot of good points however the only thing that counts are:

Wins and losses

Using this measure the results in 2015 are 2 from 2 with Will in - 100% and 2 from 5 with Will out 40%.

The stats do not lie Will should be playing unless there is something we do not know.

 

[TBOW]

This week will tell me whether its true what i heard has happened.

Sooooo....?