Autopsy Round 3, 2021: Essendon v St.Kilda *STEELE 100TH* *CLARK 50TH* *CROUCH DEBUT*

[BrutThough]

AFL media in Australia is absolute garbage, even basics like sub-editing are done in an extremely slipshod manner than leads me to suspect that no formal education in writing has been undertaken. Most run with the latest buzzwords and trends and provide little of substance. When was the last time you read anything on the official AFL site that was actually well written? Most 12 year olds could write to that level on a platform with a half decent autocorrect.

Case in point, one of the main reoccurring issues we keep bringing up in here is about multiple players being played out of position for long stretches. Yet you won't hear a single person in the media bring this up in any of their criticisms or even notice it is occurring since it would require actual analysis.

 

[LiterallyNobody]

Case in point, one of the main reoccurring issues we keep bringing up in here is about multiple players being played out of position for long stretches. Yet you won't hear a single person in the media bring this up in any of their criticisms or even notice it is occurring since it would require actual analysis.

To be fair it’s easier for us because we live and breathe the team. The media has to focus on all eighteen teams. So it’s difficult to notice if a relatively unknown player like Battle or Coffield is playing out of position.

not sticking up for the media either. Just saying I can understand why it’s so hard to analyse.

then again I watch a lot of footy and focus on a lot of teams and how they are structured. And I don’t have the advantage of the Lab or other analysis tools that Fox footy does.

 

[BrutThough]

To be fair it’s easier for us because we live and breathe the team. The media has to focus on all eighteen teams. So it’s difficult to notice if a relatively unknown player like Battle or Coffield is playing out of position.

not sticking up for the media either. Just saying I can understand why it’s so hard to analyse.

then again I watch a lot of footy and focus on a lot of teams and how they are structured. And I don’t have the advantage of the Lab or other analysis tools that Fox footy does.

That's fair.

But if the media is going to promote that their doing scathing reviews of a team and spend the entire time just saying certain players are overpaid and it was a mistake recruiting them without mentioning how they weren't played in the best position for a majority of the game, then I am going to question if they actually watched any of the game.

Hill's output hasn't matched his contract yet. But if they are going to talk about him being overpaid, then there needs to be a conversation on why we are paying this much for a specialist wing to play him deep in the backline for half the game so a key forward can start their instead, rather than just saying he's no good.

 

[stfan]

Case in point, one of the main reoccurring issues we keep bringing up in here is about multiple players being played out of position for long stretches. Yet you won't hear a single person in the media bring this up in any of their criticisms or even notice it is occurring since it would require actual analysis.

While true, and I may have missed it as I am away camping, but all the talk from the coaches too has just been on the playing group. Nothing about the direction from the coaches being wrong, which was also of note in the Dees loss.

We can go in with 100% effort, but if roll out again the odd positioning and 2020 gameplan then it is still going to be ugly.

 

[pebblesofsand]

That's fair.

But if the media is going to promote that their doing scathing reviews of a team and spend the entire time just saying certain players are overpaid and it was a mistake recruiting them without mentioning how they weren't played in the best position for a majority of the game, then I am going to question if they actually watched any of the game.

Hill's output hasn't matched his contract yet. But if they are going to talk about him being overpaid, then there needs to be a conversation on why we are paying this much for a specialist wing to play him deep in the backline for half the game so a key forward can start their instead, rather than just saying he's no good.

I wouldn't be too fussed by much the media has to say.

Its been proven over and over again that most of them have very little idea about what is actually going on - wasn't Ben Dixon our specialist goal kicking coach a couple of years ago when we could barely hit the side of a barn?

David King has an obligation to provide a quota of "filler" material on a media channel and its painfully obvious that providing 24 hr saturation coverage does not guarantee a commensurate increase in the quality of coverage.

 

[triggering bro]

I wouldn't be too fussed by much the media has to say.

Its been proven over and over again that most of them have very little idea about what is actually going on - wasn't Ben Dixon our specialist goal kicking coach a couple of years ago when we could barely hit the side of a barn?

David King has an obligation to provide a quota of "filler" material on a media channel and its painfully obvious that providing 24 hr saturation coverage does not guarantee a commensurate increase in the quality of coverage.

I know we like to bag King but he’s actually one of the better footy commentators. At least he attempts to break the game down & use a bit of critical analysis. Same with Joey. Probably a reflection of the state of the industry though.

 

[luca77]

I know we like to bag King but he’s actually one of the better footy commentators. At least he attempts to break the game down & use a bit of critical analysis. Same with Joey. Probably a reflection of the state of the industry though.

I never liked him, but I feel like he's really improved a lot and become really dedicated in the area you mentioned. He's definitely better when working with Joey than that flatulent sack of hot air McClure.

 

[Mikka84]

Have you watched West Coast when Nic Nat’s on fire?

Does almost nothing around the ground and doesn’t know what a mark is, but his ruckwork alone makes them about a 4 goal better team.

I think it’s important and I held it in more regard until I read the stats book ( forgot what it’s called now ) after Grundy had literally every single hit out against Brisbane. When hit outs are win and hit out to advantage, it’s a 51% win strike rate over history.

 

[AirWinmar]

It was in other threads, and does it take you 30 attempts to get your POV across?

Sorry, didn't realise they were moved from other threads

 

[bird_man]

This is the 2nd time in the space of about 6 matches that Ross has had one of his poor efforts broadcast through the media. The other being his efforts on Josh Kelly in our embarrassing loss last year.

It's not a great sign for one of our leaders and being at the game he was definitely one that stood out to me to not be working defensively.

 

[bird_man]

I know we like to bag King but he’s actually one of the better footy commentators. At least he attempts to break the game down & use a bit of critical analysis. Same with Joey. Probably a reflection of the state of the industry though.

I was about to say the same thing. Can't stand the bloke but he clearly spends hours of time going over vision and numbers to back up anything he has to say.

 

[phantom13]

Hill played his own modified version of wingman against Melbourne, essentially patrolling one side of the field.

I wasnt there on Saturday to watch his positioning and running patterns.

I have absolutely no love for Hill, truthfully i shuddered when we recruited him and i bash him more than just about anyone BUT we know hes not gonna win his own ball, we know hes only really good with time and space and were not creating that for him at all.

I dont think with Hill is a workrate thing, he runs hard (even defensively) to cover ground, hes just not good at actually defending, hes 27 so fair to say that is unlikely to change now.

 

[pebblesofsand]

Can we get one thing straight - Bradley Hill is not and has never been a contested ball winner. Bagging him for not winning contested ball is as meaningless as bagging Lonie for not winning hitouts.

He was recruited to provide outside run and delivery. His main problem atm is that our midfield is not good enough and not quick enough (in action) to give him
or any other outside runner clear air to operate in.

It staggers me the way the Doggies, the Tiges and other clubs can manage to handball multiple times in a telephone booth and eventually create space while we continually go with one handball, then a mad panic followed closely by a rushed long kick.

Lots of time we seem to get the numbers around the ball, but then give up the advantage that creates by going with the rushed kick. No wonder our forwards are reluctant to lead.

 

[phantom13]

Can we get one thing straight - Bradley Hill is not and has never been a contested ball winner. Bagging him for not winning contested ball is as meaningless as bagging Lonie for not winning hitouts.

He was recruited to provide outside run and delivery. His main problem atm is that our midfield is not good enough and not quick enough (in action) to give him
or any other outside runner clear air to operate in.

It staggers me the way the Doggies, the Tiges and other clubs can manage to handball multiple times in a telephone booth and eventually create space while we continually go with one handball, then a mad panic followed closely by a rushed long kick.

Lots of time we seem to get the numbers around the ball, but then give up the advantage that creates by going with the rushed kick. No wonder our forwards are reluctant to lead.

I think the criticism is that Brad gives you nothing when its not going well, added to the fact that his kicking game (which is essentially all he has) has been awful.

Not too many in here are saying he needs to win more contested ball BUT unless hes getting 15-20 kicks a game and slicing up oppo defenses then he needs to be doing more than he currently is defensively and otherwise.

 

[Roddy Grant]

Can we get one thing straight - Bradley Hill is not and has never been a contested ball winner. Bagging him for not winning contested ball is as meaningless as bagging Lonie for not winning hitouts.

He was recruited to provide outside run and delivery. His main problem atm is that our midfield is not good enough and not quick enough (in action) to give him
or any other outside runner clear air to operate in.

It staggers me the way the Doggies, the Tiges and other clubs can manage to handball multiple times in a telephone booth and eventually create space while we continually go with one handball, then a mad panic followed closely by a rushed long kick.

Lots of time we seem to get the numbers around the ball, but then give up the advantage that creates by going with the rushed kick. No wonder our forwards are reluctant to lead.

Whilst I agree with this, when it's your turn to go, you go.

So many times he is in a position when a player runs towards him with the ball and he puts on a half arsed tackle with his head up in the air trying not to get hurt. Opposing player either shrugs him off or disposes of it easily.

Not asking him to make 10 or even 5 tackles a game, just asking at the very least that he puts a bit of effort in when he has the chance to lay a tackle.

 

[Tyrian Lonestar]

I think the criticism is that Brad gives you nothing when its not going well, added to the fact that his kicking game (which is essentially all he has) has been awful.

Not too many in here are saying he needs to win more contested ball BUT unless hes getting 15-20 kicks a game and slicing up oppo defenses then he needs to be doing more than he currently is defensively and otherwise.

We knew Hill was pure outside run with good disposal when we were chasing and recruiting him.

The team and game strategy need to play to his strengths on the outside at least.

 

[Saintbloke]

Can we get one thing straight - Bradley Hill is not and has never been a contested ball winner. Bagging him for not winning contested ball is as meaningless as bagging Lonie for not winning hitouts.

He was recruited to provide outside run and delivery. His main problem atm is that our midfield is not good enough and not quick enough (in action) to give him
or any other outside runner clear air to operate in.

It staggers me the way the Doggies, the Tiges and other clubs can manage to handball multiple times in a telephone booth and eventually create space while we continually go with one handball, then a mad panic followed closely by a rushed long kick.

Lots of time we seem to get the numbers around the ball, but then give up the advantage that creates by going with the rushed kick. No wonder our forwards are reluctant to lead.

He may be an outside running type, but any type of player needs to make the contest to get their own ball when it's required for the team. Playing Hill is almost like playing one player down IMO. Our forwards are reluctant to lead because they are lazy and don't put the effort in to get front position...Membrey the exception.

 

[phantom13]

We knew Hill was pure outside run with good disposal when we were chasing and recruiting him.

The team and game strategy need to play to his strengths on the outside at least.

But his not showing good disposal at the moment.

If youre not doing one of the two things you have, you need to do something else.

 

[LiterallyNobody]

He may be an outside running type, but any type of player needs to make the contest to get their own ball when it's required for the team. Playing Hill is almost like playing one player down IMO. Our forwards are reluctant to lead because they are lazy and don't put the effort in to get front position...Membrey the exception.

Harsh on King. I wouldn’t call him lazy. He’s trying hard. He needs to be further up the ground. To me he’s not an old style full forward he’s a CHF. Put him there and plonk Members at FF

 

[Enclosed_Animal]

I agree with P66, the gameplan would be so complex nobody outside the club would know what it is.

There is a lot to unpack in hundreds of posts in this thread, and I have probably contributed enough of my own 2 cents. I just wanted to make one last comment on exactly this point.

I don't for a second believe this is true. Between being able to watch live again this year, watching replays, seeing other games, football media commentary and reports from training, surely a good number supporters on a forum like this can figure out the outline of a gameplan, structure, rotations, plan B etc. There is also some great analysis pieces out there (just usually not on AFL media, and definitely not from ex players).

However, IF our gameplan is in fact so complex that nobody outside the club can figure it out, for me that should be a MASSIVE MASSIVE red flag. Remember also, the average AFL footballer usually has the functioning IQ of a tree stump. FFS one of our old coaches moved into the wrong house!

Richmond's defensive structures / positioning / rotations are actually really easy to identify (live or on tv) and follow. Pretty confident it is also the best one out there. What Sydney is doing is not that massively complicated. Its just new and most importantly, plays to the strengths of their personnel AND the new rules. What Bevo did with the Dogs was again not that complex. Was just really effective for a brief period until it got worked out.

This is not the same game it was 12 months ago. Is our structure and ball movement adapting to a new season with new rules? Or are we stubbornly sticking with a foundational methodology (read plan A), that got figured out 12 months ago? Things don't have to be complicated or complex to be good. In my experience, oftentimes the opposite it true. But solutions do have to be rooted the the present, and not the 80s, 2009 or even 2020. Game has moved on. Is it really that complex though? Or does it just seem that way because things really aren't working for us?? Hence the 20 bang on comments from Narkles about needing fresh eyes / new IP for this year...

 

[saintsrfreak]

Whilst I agree with this, when it's your turn to go, you go.

So many times he is in a position when a player runs towards him with the ball and he puts on a half arsed tackle with his head up in the air trying not to get hurt. Opposing player either shrugs him off or disposes of it easily.

Not asking him to make 10 or even 5 tackles a game, just asking at the very least that he puts a bit of effort in when he has the chance to lay a tackle.

It's actually embarrassing the lack of commitment he has when he gets close to an opposition player who has the footy.

What's the point of putting on 'pressure' if you're just going to hit them with a wet lettuce leaf and let them run around you?

You just know that when a player squares Hill up for a one on one contest they must be thinking "phew, it's only him"

 

[BrutThough]

But his not showing good disposal at the moment.

If youre not doing one of the two things you have, you need to do something else.

He went at 100% last week.

 

[phantom13]

He went at 100% last week.

8 kicks, 1 inside 50 and i cant recall one kick that was "creative".

I just had this exact discussion somewhere else.

 

[BrutThough]

8 kicks, 1 inside 50 and i cant recall one kick that was "creative".

I just had this exact discussion somewhere else.

The 1 inside 50 reflects more of his positioning rather than his disposal being poor.

100% of his disposals were in the backline in the first half. The 2nd half was a 60/40 split forward and back.

 

[leph]

To be fair it’s easier for us because we live and breathe the team. The media has to focus on all eighteen teams. So it’s difficult to notice if a relatively unknown player like Battle or Coffield is playing out of position.

not sticking up for the media either. Just saying I can understand why it’s so hard to analyse.

then again I watch a lot of footy and focus on a lot of teams and how they are structured. And I don’t have the advantage of the Lab or other analysis tools that Fox footy does.

Probably the league’s own media should have at least a dedicated team to watching and analysing each club, the way we do as supporters. In fact I think that’s probably a bare minimum for a professional sport’s premier league.

But there are much better places to consume quality footy media than the AFL website. The ABC often puts out very high quality analysis, and other sites like the Mongrel Punt are good value too.