Yeah I had the same thoughts actually. Particularly the JL one. Wouldnt pass much heed on Young he is just regurgitating that the media handlers tell him to say like the rest of them across the comp his age.
Mega Thread 2024 Media & Miscellaneous Thread
- Thread starter Snuffaluphagus
- Start date
- Tagged users None
wakojako
Norm Smith Medallist
- Nov 15, 2020
- 6,314
- 10,173
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Begun, the onion wars have.
7west is going hard at Jackson. Would of liked to have seen Longmuir defend him harder like a Lyon, Bevo or a Clarko. Hearing the old "West is a lot thinner than it used to be" comment would of been fitting".
Our disposal numbers and marks are the highest in the competition. This strongly suggests to me we are moving the ball slowly. Watching the game tells me that too.
I wouldn't mind seeing how we went if we were less fumbly. More one touch plays and more hitting targets by hand and foot would help free up play and buy more space for us to move into up the field (ie more direct footy).
Snuffaluphagus
Moderator
- Sep 10, 2015
- 21,249
- 71,613
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #757
I think the loss of Lobb is being underestimated significantly by JL. Our forwardline is not a contested marking one, you can’t move it in there slow anymore, no one in there is clunking marks like him
Either way, someone definitely needs to start clunking them down there. A bit of calm.
Well those are the issues tbh. Our pace was no where near as bad last week as it was in round 1 tbh. Even with the ball movement we had we still had 5 more scoring shots. And that’s including getting absolutely smashed in the midfield. The main problem is that all our i50s are generating from our back half bc the mids are getting smashed.
We can either:
a) change our game plan to be more Collingwood like (unrealistic after a whole pre season of training) or
b) improve our contest, marking, clearances and generate repeat i50s/front half entries.
Improve our marking and our scoring improves too. Improve our marking and when we kick long down the line it isn’t crumbed by an opposition player. Or improve our contest and we get the crumb and can deliver inside 50.
Lot of aspects go into it. We’re not gonna be magically better just because we play faster.
Corbett averages more marks per game than Lobb
Wonderful , I’d hazard a guess not many of them happen in the fwd line or he would of cost 2 x 1sts
Can I just say that the inside 50 palaver is also very familiar?
Taylor
Community Leader
- Moderator
- #763
Good point.
2022 Marks inside fifty averages:
Lobb - 2.3
Amiss - 2
Taberner - 1.5
Fyfe - 1.4
Schultz - 1
Walters - 0.8
Banfield - 0.7
Frederick - 0.7
Darcy - 0.6
Logue - 0.6
Top Ten total = 11.6
2023 Marks inside fifty averages:
Henry - 1.5
Switkowski - 1.5
Aish - 1
Frederick - 1
Fyfe - 1
Walters - 1
Darcy - 0.5
Jackson - 0.5
Schultz - 0.5
Taberner - 0.5
Top Ten total = 9
Our talls have been completely taken out of the game.
Our talls have taken themselves out of the game with dropped marks
- Aug 20, 2010
- 5,022
- 9,663
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Manchester City
Hooray, someone that has a clue
Agreed. It's easy for us to say that slow ball movement is the problem (I've said it myself), but the truth is more likely that it's not the problem but a symptom of something else — a consequence of poor execution of basic skills, for example, which would be the real problem, or at least one of the problems.
My memory of the North game is that there was actually quite a bit of fast ball movement. It's just that it ended up coming undone by dropped marks, poorly directed handballs, fumbled loose ball gets, etc. And it was also less frequent than it could have been because the mids weren't getting first hands on the ball. That's not to say that there weren't plenty of ignored leads and other overlooked attacking options, but the idea that the "game plan" is to allow the opposition to flood the forward line by deliberately employing a strategy well known to allow it seems a bit oversimple.
- Jul 13, 2012
- 1,741
- 3,306
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Like many other Western Australians, I woke up Tuesday morning to a newspaper back page that made my skin crawl a little. I felt some anger, I felt some empathy but, overall, I actually felt embarrassed.
It featured a full page of newly recruited Fremantle Docker Luke Jackson. Attached to a picture of the young ruck was a price tag – pricing his marks-per-game at a high figure – under the headline ‘No action Jackson’. The piece focused on the lack of return Fremantle have had on their investment in Jackson after the first two rounds.
Jackson hasn’t played well in his first two games but nor has Fremantle. They have started the season at 0-2 and go into this weekend’s Western Derby in a must-win situation.
They have their issues. They’ve been beaten around the ball, their ball movement has seemed stale at times and their forward-mid connection has been poor. Their new ruck combination of Sean Darcy and Jackson hasn’t clicked either, yet.
But Jackson is just 21 years old.
Ruckmen often fully develop well into their 20s.
And has played only two games at a new club.
He is far from Fremantle’s biggest on-field issue.
No player is immune from criticism. In fact, that’s very much a part of the job. You should expect it as a player, especially if you aren’t performing to standard. Footy is a performance industry, one which holds huge public interest and investment, and if you aren’t at your best people and the media should have an avenue to speak about that.
The issue I have with the back page in question is the targeted, dehumanising focus on such a young player. The price tag, which portrays him as a commodity and not a person. The belittling headline. All directed at a player barely out of his teens and based on a minute sample size of games.
I know there is a potential mental health impact on young players in this regard, but I don’t like to overdramatise this aspect. There is a level of criticism you need to be able to deal with as a player. It’s a part of the game we love.
This is an industry wide issue, not just a solitary incident. In my experience, athletes don’t have great levels of trust in the media generally. Of course there are some great operators working with athletes in Australia; people who treat all with respect, don’t abuse the access and operate in good faith. But the actions of some others have left a lot of athletes with a sour taste when it comes to media interaction.
This is a generalisation, just like the one that gets made about players when a scandal emerges or an indiscretion is revealed. In both cases, you can’t paint all with the same brush, but people do anyway.
I’ve had plenty of great experiences with the media.
I’ve also been door stopped, ambushed, misquoted and misrepresented. I have had opinions aired about me personally from individuals who wouldn’t know the slightest thing about me or my life.
Back in my playing days, I became close with a journalist who was on a similar journey to me. They moved to Perth around the same time I did. I respected their writing, focusing on in-depth pieces. And, above all, he was a good bloke (and still is, for the record.)
Ahead of my 100th game, I promised this journalist a sit-down interview to talk about the milestone – an achievement I was extremely proud of at the time. It meant a lot to me, personally, and my family. We spoke about all things football, my journey and the battles I’d had along the way.
To finish the interview, the journalist asked about an incident from the season prior. I was out with friends in my hometown of Geelong and king hit in an unprovoked attack, fracturing both my eye sockets and cheekbone. I was knocked unconscious. It could have easily been the worst possible result. An individual was charged and prosecuted.
I was happy to speak about the incident. I’ve always been an open and honest person when dealing with the media. There’s never been a question I haven’t answered. But given the milestone and my families interest in the piece, I was keen to keep the interaction out of the article. I made it clear that I wanted the article to focus on football.
To my surprise the next day, I opened the newspaper to read the headline along the lines of: “Schofield survives one punch attack to reach milestone.” The article then went on to describe the attack at length, with my footballing journey a very distant focus.
The first call I got was from Mum, who was in tears. A casualty nurse, Mum calls a spade a spade. She was with me in Geelong when the king hit happened and knew all about the incident. She also knew how much my 100th game, and football generally, meant to me.
It was disappointing to say the least.
I was shattered.
I felt like something that I thought was about footy had instead become focused on an off field incident. I called the journalist, who blamed his editor at the time. Maybe it was the bosses fault. Maybe it wasn’t. I’ve always been taught to take responsibility for your own actions and to live by your decisions. I felt I had been betrayed. These sorts of incidents aren’t isolated.
The Jackson back page is something many footy players past and present have experienced.
Their legacy is to further erode the trust between media and athletes.
In the end, I think we have to be better as a media industry covering the sport. It’s an elite environment, a performance-based environment, but we must always remember that everyone involved is, above all else, a human being.
A final point: I find myself in quite a unique position.
Now working in the media, Will Schofield has experienced both sides of the ledger.
I have been the subject of a back page story. It didn’t feel good. And I’ve been the author of a story that ended up on the back page of papers nationally. And that didn’t feel good either.
So, just like I am calling for some sensitivity around targeting young players, the same should apply to individual journalists and writers when appropriate. Readers invariably pin the responsibility for an article on the journalist in the byline field, but headlines and images often fall outside of their control.
In the Jackson case, some criticism has been directed at the journalist which, like the player, is warranted to an extent. But I think the back page speaks more about the publication than the writer. In a city like Perth, if you are a sportswriter, there aren’t many alternative avenues for work than the main paper in town. If you want to write about sport, that’s pretty much your only option.
I have empathy for the journalist in this situation, too.
Contested marks comparison doesn't fare quite as well for Josh, unfortunately.
damn is that really how he ends the article lol
Like many other Western Australians, I woke up Tuesday morning to a newspaper back page that made my skin crawl a little. I felt some anger, I felt some empathy but, overall, I actually felt embarrassed.
It featured a full page of newly recruited Fremantle Docker Luke Jackson. Attached to a picture of the young ruck was a price tag – pricing his marks-per-game at a high figure – under the headline ‘No action Jackson’. The piece focused on the lack of return Fremantle have had on their investment in Jackson after the first two rounds.
Jackson hasn’t played well in his first two games but nor has Fremantle. They have started the season at 0-2 and go into this weekend’s Western Derby in a must-win situation.
They have their issues. They’ve been beaten around the ball, their ball movement has seemed stale at times and their forward-mid connection has been poor. Their new ruck combination of Sean Darcy and Jackson hasn’t clicked either, yet.
But Jackson is just 21 years old.
Ruckmen often fully develop well into their 20s.
And has played only two games at a new club.
He is far from Fremantle’s biggest on-field issue.
No player is immune from criticism. In fact, that’s very much a part of the job. You should expect it as a player, especially if you aren’t performing to standard. Footy is a performance industry, one which holds huge public interest and investment, and if you aren’t at your best people and the media should have an avenue to speak about that.
The issue I have with the back page in question is the targeted, dehumanising focus on such a young player. The price tag, which portrays him as a commodity and not a person. The belittling headline. All directed at a player barely out of his teens and based on a minute sample size of games.
I know there is a potential mental health impact on young players in this regard, but I don’t like to overdramatise this aspect. There is a level of criticism you need to be able to deal with as a player. It’s a part of the game we love.
This is an industry wide issue, not just a solitary incident. In my experience, athletes don’t have great levels of trust in the media generally. Of course there are some great operators working with athletes in Australia; people who treat all with respect, don’t abuse the access and operate in good faith. But the actions of some others have left a lot of athletes with a sour taste when it comes to media interaction.
This is a generalisation, just like the one that gets made about players when a scandal emerges or an indiscretion is revealed. In both cases, you can’t paint all with the same brush, but people do anyway.
I’ve had plenty of great experiences with the media.
I’ve also been door stopped, ambushed, misquoted and misrepresented. I have had opinions aired about me personally from individuals who wouldn’t know the slightest thing about me or my life.
Back in my playing days, I became close with a journalist who was on a similar journey to me. They moved to Perth around the same time I did. I respected their writing, focusing on in-depth pieces. And, above all, he was a good bloke (and still is, for the record.)
Ahead of my 100th game, I promised this journalist a sit-down interview to talk about the milestone – an achievement I was extremely proud of at the time. It meant a lot to me, personally, and my family. We spoke about all things football, my journey and the battles I’d had along the way.
To finish the interview, the journalist asked about an incident from the season prior. I was out with friends in my hometown of Geelong and king hit in an unprovoked attack, fracturing both my eye sockets and cheekbone. I was knocked unconscious. It could have easily been the worst possible result. An individual was charged and prosecuted.
I was happy to speak about the incident. I’ve always been an open and honest person when dealing with the media. There’s never been a question I haven’t answered. But given the milestone and my families interest in the piece, I was keen to keep the interaction out of the article. I made it clear that I wanted the article to focus on football.
To my surprise the next day, I opened the newspaper to read the headline along the lines of: “Schofield survives one punch attack to reach milestone.” The article then went on to describe the attack at length, with my footballing journey a very distant focus.
The first call I got was from Mum, who was in tears. A casualty nurse, Mum calls a spade a spade. She was with me in Geelong when the king hit happened and knew all about the incident. She also knew how much my 100th game, and football generally, meant to me.
It was disappointing to say the least.
I was shattered.
I felt like something that I thought was about footy had instead become focused on an off field incident. I called the journalist, who blamed his editor at the time. Maybe it was the bosses fault. Maybe it wasn’t. I’ve always been taught to take responsibility for your own actions and to live by your decisions. I felt I had been betrayed. These sorts of incidents aren’t isolated.
The Jackson back page is something many footy players past and present have experienced.
Their legacy is to further erode the trust between media and athletes.
In the end, I think we have to be better as a media industry covering the sport. It’s an elite environment, a performance-based environment, but we must always remember that everyone involved is, above all else, a human being.
A final point: I find myself in quite a unique position.
Now working in the media, Will Schofield has experienced both sides of the ledger.
I have been the subject of a back page story. It didn’t feel good. And I’ve been the author of a story that ended up on the back page of papers nationally. And that didn’t feel good either.
So, just like I am calling for some sensitivity around targeting young players, the same should apply to individual journalists and writers when appropriate. Readers invariably pin the responsibility for an article on the journalist in the byline field, but headlines and images often fall outside of their control.
In the Jackson case, some criticism has been directed at the journalist which, like the player, is warranted to an extent. But I think the back page speaks more about the publication than the writer. In a city like Perth, if you are a sportswriter, there aren’t many alternative avenues for work than the main paper in town. If you want to write about sport, that’s pretty much your only option.
I have empathy for the journalist in this situation, too.
Schofield making it harder and harder to use the fact that he was once a West Coast player as good grounds not to like him.
Like many other Western Australians, I woke up Tuesday morning to a newspaper back page that made my skin crawl a little. I felt some anger, I felt some empathy but, overall, I actually felt embarrassed.
It featured a full page of newly recruited Fremantle Docker Luke Jackson. Attached to a picture of the young ruck was a price tag – pricing his marks-per-game at a high figure – under the headline ‘No action Jackson’. The piece focused on the lack of return Fremantle have had on their investment in Jackson after the first two rounds.
Jackson hasn’t played well in his first two games but nor has Fremantle. They have started the season at 0-2 and go into this weekend’s Western Derby in a must-win situation.
They have their issues. They’ve been beaten around the ball, their ball movement has seemed stale at times and their forward-mid connection has been poor. Their new ruck combination of Sean Darcy and Jackson hasn’t clicked either, yet.
But Jackson is just 21 years old.
Ruckmen often fully develop well into their 20s.
And has played only two games at a new club.
He is far from Fremantle’s biggest on-field issue.
No player is immune from criticism. In fact, that’s very much a part of the job. You should expect it as a player, especially if you aren’t performing to standard. Footy is a performance industry, one which holds huge public interest and investment, and if you aren’t at your best people and the media should have an avenue to speak about that.
The issue I have with the back page in question is the targeted, dehumanising focus on such a young player. The price tag, which portrays him as a commodity and not a person. The belittling headline. All directed at a player barely out of his teens and based on a minute sample size of games.
I know there is a potential mental health impact on young players in this regard, but I don’t like to overdramatise this aspect. There is a level of criticism you need to be able to deal with as a player. It’s a part of the game we love.
This is an industry wide issue, not just a solitary incident. In my experience, athletes don’t have great levels of trust in the media generally. Of course there are some great operators working with athletes in Australia; people who treat all with respect, don’t abuse the access and operate in good faith. But the actions of some others have left a lot of athletes with a sour taste when it comes to media interaction.
This is a generalisation, just like the one that gets made about players when a scandal emerges or an indiscretion is revealed. In both cases, you can’t paint all with the same brush, but people do anyway.
I’ve had plenty of great experiences with the media.
I’ve also been door stopped, ambushed, misquoted and misrepresented. I have had opinions aired about me personally from individuals who wouldn’t know the slightest thing about me or my life.
Back in my playing days, I became close with a journalist who was on a similar journey to me. They moved to Perth around the same time I did. I respected their writing, focusing on in-depth pieces. And, above all, he was a good bloke (and still is, for the record.)
Ahead of my 100th game, I promised this journalist a sit-down interview to talk about the milestone – an achievement I was extremely proud of at the time. It meant a lot to me, personally, and my family. We spoke about all things football, my journey and the battles I’d had along the way.
To finish the interview, the journalist asked about an incident from the season prior. I was out with friends in my hometown of Geelong and king hit in an unprovoked attack, fracturing both my eye sockets and cheekbone. I was knocked unconscious. It could have easily been the worst possible result. An individual was charged and prosecuted.
I was happy to speak about the incident. I’ve always been an open and honest person when dealing with the media. There’s never been a question I haven’t answered. But given the milestone and my families interest in the piece, I was keen to keep the interaction out of the article. I made it clear that I wanted the article to focus on football.
To my surprise the next day, I opened the newspaper to read the headline along the lines of: “Schofield survives one punch attack to reach milestone.” The article then went on to describe the attack at length, with my footballing journey a very distant focus.
The first call I got was from Mum, who was in tears. A casualty nurse, Mum calls a spade a spade. She was with me in Geelong when the king hit happened and knew all about the incident. She also knew how much my 100th game, and football generally, meant to me.
It was disappointing to say the least.
I was shattered.
I felt like something that I thought was about footy had instead become focused on an off field incident. I called the journalist, who blamed his editor at the time. Maybe it was the bosses fault. Maybe it wasn’t. I’ve always been taught to take responsibility for your own actions and to live by your decisions. I felt I had been betrayed. These sorts of incidents aren’t isolated.
The Jackson back page is something many footy players past and present have experienced.
Their legacy is to further erode the trust between media and athletes.
In the end, I think we have to be better as a media industry covering the sport. It’s an elite environment, a performance-based environment, but we must always remember that everyone involved is, above all else, a human being.
A final point: I find myself in quite a unique position.
Now working in the media, Will Schofield has experienced both sides of the ledger.
I have been the subject of a back page story. It didn’t feel good. And I’ve been the author of a story that ended up on the back page of papers nationally. And that didn’t feel good either.
So, just like I am calling for some sensitivity around targeting young players, the same should apply to individual journalists and writers when appropriate. Readers invariably pin the responsibility for an article on the journalist in the byline field, but headlines and images often fall outside of their control.
In the Jackson case, some criticism has been directed at the journalist which, like the player, is warranted to an extent. But I think the back page speaks more about the publication than the writer. In a city like Perth, if you are a sportswriter, there aren’t many alternative avenues for work than the main paper in town. If you want to write about sport, that’s pretty much your only option.
I have empathy for the journalist in this situation, too.
Purple Jesus
not jess
The issue I see is that Lobb marking the ball more just papered over the cracks that were already there. It's been a serious issue for 3 seasons or more now.
royale with cheese
Abnormal
- Mar 19, 2023
- 1,351
- 1,813
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Banned
- #774
Likely Lobb was a stop gap who had a good year, and had he stayed would have returned to previous form and we’d still be tearing our hair out.
Our game plan/ball movement relies too much on contested marks. I think it was the last year of Ross Lyon Taberner and Lobb at one point ranked no.1 and no.2 in the competition for contested marks.
I saw it more to do with poor ball movement meaning we had the need/opportunity for more contested marks than the ability of Lobb and Taberner tbh.
Thought we’d move away from this given we’ve recruited HBFs that can kick well to really well. Unfortunately we haven’t and now Lobb is gone and Taberner looks a shadow of his former self. Getting exposed massively for sh**e game style we play.
Similar threads
