Delisted #37: Dylan Clarke - End of the road, will not be offered a list spot in 2022

[Lore]

Contract Status: Not offered a contract for 2021
Last Game Played: Round 23, 2021 (omitted)
Injury Status: n/a

 

[DapperJong]

Let’s not forget last year, after his domination of Cripps (who was injured), he got worse and worse in each game thereafter. If he gets an opportunity he needs to produce a useful base at least.

 

[Howard Moon]

Let’s not forget last year, after his domination of Cripps (who was injured), he got worse and worse in each game thereafter. If he gets an opportunity he needs to produce a useful base at least.

I thought his inclusion coincideded with our form as a team raising significantly. Not suggesting one bloke made all the difference but perhaps the combination of a bigger body, a blocker and curtailing an opponent at stoppages may have changed our tradjdctory in a way that stats might not measure. He does team 'things' that others don't for us, we don't seem to play for each other or block or shepard or run or make space for each other

I guess it's all in the memory bank anyway, but if he comes in and we change for the better that phenomenon might be 2/2

Is his s**t kicking worse than zaka no intensity? What's the net gain/loss

 

[JayJ20]

Let’s not forget last year, after his domination of Cripps (who was injured), he got worse and worse in each game thereafter. If he gets an opportunity he needs to produce a useful base at least.

He played well on Cunnington and O'Meara as well. Happens to many players in their first proper year at AFL level. Being a tagger is something he was learning so he'll have ups and downs. Considering we gave Langford ample time to develop as a mid at AFL level, I don't see why Clarke shouldn't be afforded the same opportunity. He is actually a natural mid unlike Langford.

 

[BrunoV]

"Worsfold added that he would weigh up playing tagger Dylan Clarke for the first time this season to quell the influence of the Giants' star-studded midfield."

Time running out for Joe, will big Bomber keep his spot?

Essendon provides an update on Joe Daniher and flags numerous changes for Friday night's clash

www.afl.com.au

 

[Howard Moon]

I think the problem is, as Bruno alluded to, the days of the 100% stopper are over. You need to offer an attacking threat as well

The likes of Gayfer, Nobby Clarke, Libba, Baker, Crowley were superseded by Ling, Carazzo and co who could shut down an opponent and still get 25 going the other way.

If you look at todays 'taggers'

Adel- Keays
Bris- Lester?
Carl- Curnow
Coll- no tag
Ess- no tag
Freo- Tucker
Geel- Guthrie?
GC- Greenwood?
GWS- De Boer
Haw- Howe
Melb- Viney ...maybe
NM- Jacobs when he plays
Port- don’t think they tag
Rich- definitely don’t tag
StK- Steele in the past
Syd- Hewett, Clarke
WC- Hutchings
WB- dont think they tag either

None other than de Boer are true negative players, most are just accountable while still ball hunting.

So if we play Clarke who we fear can't kick, he's playing as a 100% negative. Is that a waste in the new world of zones and rotation? Only if the net gain is that his opponent has zero effect on the game as well I guess.

But it's not like he has no stoppage craft, he can find it , probably why he's a good tagger! He knows where to go.

Maybe he's your true wet weather player, get it and tumble it fwd like everyone else, skills lowered to his level? While also stopping a gun at the same time

 

[BrunoV]

I think the problem is, as Bruno alluded to, the days of the 100% stopper are over. You need to offer an attacking threat as well

The likes of Gayfer, Nobby Clarke, Libba, Baker, Crowley were superseded by Ling, Carazzo and co who could shut down an opponent and still get 25 going the other way.

If you look at todays 'taggers'

Adel- Keays
Bris- Lester?
Carl- Curnow
Coll- no tag
Ess- no tag
Freo- Tucker
Geel- Guthrie?
GC- Greenwood?
GWS- De Boer
Haw- Howe
Melb- Viney ...maybe
NM- Jacobs when he plays
Port- don’t think they tag
Rich- definitely don’t tag
StK- Steele in the past
Syd- Hewett, Clarke
WC- Hutchings
WB- dont think they tag either

None other than de Boer are true negative players, most are just accountable while still ball hunting.

So if we play Clarke who we fear can't kick, he's playing as a 100% negative. Is that a waste in the new world of zones and rotation? Only if the net gain is that his opponent has zero effect on the game as well I guess.

But it's not like he has no stoppage craft, he can find it , probably why he's a good tagger! He knows where to go.

Maybe he's your true wet weather player, get it and tumble it fwd like everyone else, skills lowered to his level? While also stopping a gun at the same time

And even then De Boer and Jacobs are the only specialists, who would regularly get low possession counts.

A few of those other guys like Howe have been used on occasions.

Clarke can absolutely get the ball...

 

[eDPS]

He played well on Cunnington and O'Meara as well. Happens to many players in their first proper year at AFL level. Being a tagger is something he was learning so he'll have ups and downs. Considering we gave Langford ample time to develop as a mid at AFL level, I don't see why Clarke shouldn't be afforded the same opportunity. He is actually a natural mid unlike Langford.

He smashed Cunnington aswell, it’s not just the tagging he has done, often he has won clearances of his own and has managed to win the ball and been one of the better tacklers. Hell his disposal efficiency and amount of turnovers were a lot better than someone of his kicking had any right to have .

 

[JayJ20]

He smashed Cunnington aswell, it’s not just the drooling he has done, often he has won clearances of his own and has managed to win the ball and been one of the better tacklers. Hell his disposal efficiency and amount of turnovers were a lot better than someone of his kicking had any right to have .

Yep exactly. We always lament our lack of natural mids when we have him wasting away in the twos. I'm glad Woosha is considering him. It could be a wet game so he'll be valuable.

 

[Maxabillions]

Totally agree with this. Hopefully he's named this week, Zaharakis out with Clarke in would be the absolute dream.
Out: Stale Milk, In: C.R.E.A.M

 

[Howard Moon]

Yep exactly. We always lament our lack of natural mids when we have him wasting away in the twos. I'm glad Woosha is considering him. It could be a wet game so he'll be valuable.

Dont think he's being considered

I think it's his default response to any team selection question

"We will discuss that"

 

[DapperJong]

He played well on Cunnington and O'Meara as well. Happens to many players in their first proper year at AFL level. Being a tagger is something he was learning so he'll have ups and downs. Considering we gave Langford ample time to develop as a mid at AFL level, I don't see why Clarke shouldn't be afforded the same opportunity. He is actually a natural mid unlike Langford.

Sure, but his two games after he may as well have not been on the field. My point is he needs to have a reliable base line.

His kicking is the least of my worries. His action is vomit inducing but he actually makes some ok decisions with it. If he isn’t quelling another player, or racking up some touches, then he’s bringing nothing.

 

[faible]

I think the problem is, as Bruno alluded to, the days of the 100% stopper are over. You need to offer an attacking threat as well

The likes of Gayfer, Nobby Clarke, Libba, Baker, Crowley were superseded by Ling, Carazzo and co who could shut down an opponent and still get 25 going the other way.

If you look at todays 'taggers'

Adel- Keays
Bris- Lester?
Carl- Curnow
Coll- no tag
Ess- no tag
Freo- Tucker
Geel- Guthrie?
GC- Greenwood?
GWS- De Boer
Haw- Howe
Melb- Viney ...maybe
NM- Jacobs when he plays
Port- don’t think they tag
Rich- definitely don’t tag
StK- Steele in the past
Syd- Hewett, Clarke
WC- Hutchings
WB- dont think they tag either

None other than de Boer are true negative players, most are just accountable while still ball hunting.

So if we play Clarke who we fear can't kick, he's playing as a 100% negative. Is that a waste in the new world of zones and rotation? Only if the net gain is that his opponent has zero effect on the game as well I guess.

But it's not like he has no stoppage craft, he can find it , probably why he's a good tagger! He knows where to go.

Maybe he's your true wet weather player, get it and tumble it fwd like everyone else, skills lowered to his level? While also stopping a gun at the same time

Didn't Richmond play Jack Graham as a tagger in the GF?

A lot of teams don't have a named tagger as such, but definitely use guys in negating roles. Collingwood have used Pendlebury to play a negative role before, for example.

We seem to stubbornly refuse to try to take things away from the opposition in order to play 'our way' yet most top sides make deliberate adjustments to take things away from their opposition when it's needed, and play 'their way' when they're able to take control of play.

Clarke isn't 'just' a tagger if he can also win clearances, tackle in close, create space for other midfielders (which doesn't get a stat) and limit the output of a Cripps or Cunnington along the way.

Clarke probably wouldn't be the difference between our midfield beating the Bulldogs, but sure as hell it's a lot harder for a Bontempelli or Macrae to break through his tackles which disrupts their movement.

We have an imbalanced midfield that lacks big-bodied, defensively-minded types. McGrath is probably the only one that naturally plays defensively, the rest are all offence first. Hibberd & Clarke are the opposite, along with having the size to be effective, that might help balance our midfield.

 

[JayJ20]

Sure, but his two games after he may as well have not been on the field. My point is he needs to have a reliable base line.

His kicking is the least of my worries. His action is vomit inducing but he actually makes some ok decisions with it. If he isn’t quelling another player, or racking up some touches, then he’s bringing nothing.

The point you bring up is my main concern. Why can we recognise what Dylan Clarke brings to the side (eg nothing) in his first proper year at AFL level (while playing in a different role) as a 20y/o when we have our most experienced player in Zaharakis doing exactly that?

If Clarke is struggling with a tag, then we should trial him as an inside mid which is what he is. We invent roles for Zaharakis to keep him in the side but we don't have that same level of flexibility for a player like Clarke.

It's difficult to expect a reliable base line from a young player who isn't naturally a tagger unless he gets a couple of years to hone his craft. He isn't really tagging at VFL level. The coaches have basically limited his AFL ability to that of a tagger, which is very unusual for a 20-21y/o. It goes back to my original point. This guy has to negate the best player of the opposition every week to get a game when Zaharakis can gather his 6 disposals and call it a day. It's not really how you develop a young midfielder.

That said, it's better to play him as a tagger than let him waste his talent away. It at least helps our team.

 

[DapperJong]

The point you bring up is my main concern. Why can we recognise what Dylan Clarke brings to the side (eg nothing) in his first proper year at AFL level (while playing in a different role) as a 20y/o when we have our most experienced player in Zaharakis doing exactly that?

If Clarke is struggling with a tag, then we should trial him as an inside mid which is what he is. We invent roles for Zaharakis to keep him in the side but we don't have that same level of flexibility for a player like Clarke.

It's difficult to expect a reliable base line from a young player who isn't naturally a tagger unless he gets a couple of years to hone his craft. He isn't really tagging at VFL level. The coaches have basically limited his AFL ability to that of a tagger, which is very unusual for a 20-21y/o. It goes back to my original point. This guy has to negate the best player of the opposition every week to get a game when Zaharakis can gather his 6 disposals and call it a day. It's not really how you develop a young midfielder.

That said, it's better to play him as a tagger than let him waste his talent away. It at least helps our team.

You’re addressing a bigger problem than Clarke and his ability. It’s not like we haven’t played any new players who have flourished.

 

[JayJ20]

You’re addressing a bigger problem than Clarke and his ability. It’s not like we haven’t played any new players who have flourished.

We've been much better with selection this year (except Zaharakis and TBC), but the midfield remains an area of concern for me. Great to see Draper, Ham, Cahill and Ridley get extended runs. I wish we did the same for Clarke as an inside mid to see what he can bring to our side, especially because we need his attributes in our midfield.

 

[Howard Moon]

We've been much better with selection this year (except Zaharakis and TBC), but the midfield remains an area of concern for me. Great to see Draper, Ham, Cahill and Ridley get extended runs. I wish we did the same for Clarke as an inside mid to see what he can bring to our side, especially because we need his attributes in our midfield.

Think the problem is we have changed to a system based set up (their words)

In such a set up changes are usually like for like, pull one out, plug one in to his spot.

But where does that leave the big bodied defensive mid when there is no such role in your system?

Superflous, or played out of position.

 

[JayJ20]

Think the problem is we have changed to a system based set up (their words)

In such a set up changes are usually like for like, pull one out, plug one in to his spot.

But where does that leave the big bodied defensive mid when there is no such role in your system?

Superflous, or played out of position.

Unfortunately you're right. Bolded summarises Hibberd's AFL stint, which proved to be counterproductive. I'm hoping we're not entirely modelling our system on Richmond because we have very different players.

 

[Howard Moon]

Unfortunately you're right. Bolded summarises Hibberd's AFL stint, which proved to be counterproductive. I'm hoping we're not entirely modelling our system on Richmond because we have very different players.

Funny how we modelled on the system Richmond took out of pure desperation when they had bulk injuries then immediately changed when the troops/trades arrived

 

[Lore]

Wonder who would come out for him. Our bigger mids and inside mids have all pretty much been forcibly rested over the last few weeks... Hibberd was omitted last week, Langford was suspended last week, Cutler has only just come in last week after that calf injury, Shiel was suspended the two weeks before last week, Merrett has played four since his suspension.

So either McGrath gets rested or a winger/forward rotation becomes a tagger......?

 

[quotemokc]

I would much rather Clarke tag than Langford.

 

[yodellinhank]

"Worsfold added that he would weigh up playing tagger Dylan Clarke for the first time this season to quell the influence of the Giants' star-studded midfield."

Time running out for Joe, will big Bomber keep his spot?

Essendon provides an update on Joe Daniher and flags numerous changes for Friday night's clash

www.afl.com.au

That's all well and good, but what does the coach think?

 

[Howard Moon]

Apparently there was a big cheer at training

Joining the dots it's either;

A: a debut
B: McKenna got motivated again
C: they completed 4 hand balls in a row
D: we decided to play a team orientated tagger

 

[Vander18]

Apparently there was a big cheer at training

Joining the dots it's either;

A: a debut
B: McKenna got motivated again
C: they completed 4 hand balls in a row
D: we decided to play a team orientated tagger

Multiple choice is best handled via a process of elimination Where the answer is unknown.....

Option C is clearly ridiculous, so that’s out....

 

[JT_the_Man]

Multiple choice is best handled via a process of elimination Where the answer is unknown.....

Option C is clearly ridiculous, so that’s out....

I fully expect C to be the answer now.

 

[eth-dog]

I fully expect C to be the answer now.

Same. Bryan, Crauford, Gown, Mozzie or McQuillan?