Atleast he’s one of few that can actually play his role and be disciplined about it. A few need to take a page out of that book
Delisted #36: Michael Hartley - Joins Hawthorne via the preseason draft - 29/11
- Thread starter Doss
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Atleast he’s one of few that can actually play his role and be disciplined about it. A few need to take a page out of that book
eth-dog
Tier 1 WW Player
I agree, but if Hooker plays back we only have room for one of Hartley/Ambrose/Brown. And Ambrose right now is favoured over the others.
Yeah the thing that let’s Hartley down is that he isn’t interchangeable like the other defenders but sometimes that isn’t a bad thing.
Least he is settled knows what he needs to do and will do it. If Hartley stays honest with himself which he will after his first chance at afl failed he will know that their will be times match ups don’t allow him to play but knows he has a spot in the team.w
Loonerty
TheBrownDog
bjisgod9
Team Captain
- Apr 8, 2015
- 318
- 255
- AFL Club
- Essendon
He seems to get lost far too often, doesn't read the play well enough and ends up out of position, I find that stat hard to believe but I guess the mistakes he makes just look really bad and have obviously clouded my judgement given that stat.
- Jun 2, 2012
- 14,625
- 24,238
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- Los Angeles Dodgers
I know you're probably quoting something you've heard from someone at CD, but there is no way this passes the eye test.
Needs to work on killing the ball. Way to often will he just stare at the contest when he should be crashing in or atleast trying to spoil or mark
I'm thinking that maybe they're having a look at Ridley.
Not much will be better for his development as a third tall defender/tall flanker than playing back with Hooker and Hurley.
The dropping of Hartley was harsh and Ambrose is only named on the bench (and hasn't exactly proven himself to be a player that is 'straight back in' after a relatively extended lay off).
Not much will be better for his development as a third tall defender/tall flanker than playing back with Hooker and Hurley.
The dropping of Hartley was harsh and Ambrose is only named on the bench (and hasn't exactly proven himself to be a player that is 'straight back in' after a relatively extended lay off).
Zach Package
Prespakis2Tsatas
Baby girl for Harts.
Godfather will either be Walla or Saad surely
Godfather will either be Walla or Saad surely
eth-dog
Tier 1 WW Player
Might be neither. But we have a father-daughter!
eth-dog
Tier 1 WW Player
Loved the 80 metre barrel down the tee from Full Back.
As an aside, whenever I watch the VFL and he's taking kick outs I have complete confidence. Always hits the 40 metre pass in the corridor without hesitation if it's on. Set up 2 goals from that today.
As an aside, whenever I watch the VFL and he's taking kick outs I have complete confidence. Always hits the 40 metre pass in the corridor without hesitation if it's on. Set up 2 goals from that today.
eth-dog
Tier 1 WW Player
I'd go so far as saying he's the best kick on our list. Yes, including Walla and Fanta.
Agreed and I don't think we're far away from seeing it. Biggest issue at this stage is the switch of Hooker back which is going to take away opportunity.
Hooker was on the list for 6 years before he strung a really good season together (2013). A lot of that was injury but he also had opportunity due to an absence of competition.
Hartley is 24-25 and that's still the time that KPPs start to hit their straps.
Playing AFL isn't the issue as far as a new contract is concerned. If Hartley is getting more of the ball, tacking contested and intercept marks, while playing VFL that's more than enough for an extension and he'll at least be good depth.
Hartley is an interesting case. He's got the size to play on any large key forward whilst being reasonable agility/pace wise. That's the major tick in his box which will probably keep him on the list even when he's not best 22.
He's a fine kick as well, although I totally disagree with Eth-dog that he's better than Walla or Merrett. The truth is that his kicking doesn't make much of a difference at AFL level because he rarely gets the ball anyway.
The downsides are that he's a poor mark for his size, so he relies on spoiling even against shorter opponents and his defensive work is fairly inconsistent at AFL level. Sometimes he's very good but other times he gets beaten in a lot of contests or gives away lots of free kicks. Plus you can't 'free him up' against lesser opponents because he doesn't do anything with that opportunity because he's not a smart player in terms of how he works offensively like Hurley. So inevitably if he's in the team you pretty much need to play him on their best tall guy.
The other issue he faces is we have a lot of different options for key back positions and the club have basically decided they prefer Hooker down back. To me this would not have happened if Hartley was commanding a spot down back. Hooker is a better player than Hartley but if Hartley was consistently good he would be in the team and Hooker would be up forward. Plus the club have shown that they tend to prefer Ambrose with Hurley/Hooker over him and sometimes even Brown, that's not even mentioning the likes of Ridley and Francis who are very close to breaking into our team on a regular basis.
I did like his last VFL performance but to be honest Francis was far more eye-catching with what he did and Ridley also played a great game.
He's a fine kick as well, although I totally disagree with Eth-dog that he's better than Walla or Merrett. The truth is that his kicking doesn't make much of a difference at AFL level because he rarely gets the ball anyway.
The downsides are that he's a poor mark for his size, so he relies on spoiling even against shorter opponents and his defensive work is fairly inconsistent at AFL level. Sometimes he's very good but other times he gets beaten in a lot of contests or gives away lots of free kicks. Plus you can't 'free him up' against lesser opponents because he doesn't do anything with that opportunity because he's not a smart player in terms of how he works offensively like Hurley. So inevitably if he's in the team you pretty much need to play him on their best tall guy.
The other issue he faces is we have a lot of different options for key back positions and the club have basically decided they prefer Hooker down back. To me this would not have happened if Hartley was commanding a spot down back. Hooker is a better player than Hartley but if Hartley was consistently good he would be in the team and Hooker would be up forward. Plus the club have shown that they tend to prefer Ambrose with Hurley/Hooker over him and sometimes even Brown, that's not even mentioning the likes of Ridley and Francis who are very close to breaking into our team on a regular basis.
I did like his last VFL performance but to be honest Francis was far more eye-catching with what he did and Ridley also played a great game.
It becomes hard as to what you include in kicking. Walla and Fantasia's ability to take on a tackler and hit a target while at pace isn't something Hartley ever has to attempt.
I'd say the best kicks at the club are: Walla, Z.Merrett, Fantasia, Hartley, Smith, McKenna. With Francis likley joining that group once he proves it at AFL.
eth-dog
Tier 1 WW Player
I wouldn't have Smith in that class honestly.
I'd like to think that he can finish this year having addressed all of the weaknesses you've identified. He doesn't have that much work to do.
If he strings a few more performances of the quality of last weekend we'll know that he's basically there.
An advantage that Ridley and Francis have on Hartley, other than being more talented players, is that Hartley is playing on the opposition's best forward each week.
As long as he's playing as he did against Box Hill he's just going to have to bide his time.
He took the one and two quarter performances where he'd shown that he was working on new things and put it into place for a whole game.
Can't really ask for more than taking aggressive positions when defending 1v1 and also taking pack and intercept marks. His failure to do this is the source of his weakness at AFL level.
He took the one and two quarter performances where he'd shown that he was working on new things and put it into place for a whole game.
Can't really ask for more than taking aggressive positions when defending 1v1 and also taking pack and intercept marks. His failure to do this is the source of his weakness at AFL level.
Depends on what you mean be reliable.
Tom Lonergan ended up a reliable mark. Ambrose has ended up a reliable mark despite not being able to hold a mark in his first few years.
yaco55
Hall of Famer
I am not worried about the attacking side of Hartley' game at AFL level - I am worried about his inconsistency in stopping the run of his opponents in contested situations - He needs to learn off Ambrose.
To me they are basically one and the same. The game against Box Hill is case in point and, I think, a bit of a watershed.
His defensive game has been one which is entirely reactive, where he basically stands behind a defender and then seeks to spoil using his reach and closing speed (and I don't think his speed is anything special). It means that he's always going to be in trouble when playing on quicker guys but he has tended to destroy guys like Josh Bruce (even when Bruce was in hot form) and from memory Drew Petrie.
If he has his attacking game sorted, and before the game against Box Hill there were maybe 4 or 5 quarters when it was good, he proactively attacks the ball which changes his positioning (and it much easier for him to try to check a forward's run or even work that forward under the ball). He not only has more success defending but he ends up taking marks because he has the better position.
- Jul 15, 2008
- 10,264
- 17,279
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- Celtics, Colts, Renegades
Similar threads
