Player Watch #44: Shaun McKernan - Out for 6 to 7 weeks with a high grade hamstring tear - 6/4

(Log in to remove this ad.)

60sbomber

Club Legend
Joined
Jul 4, 2011
Posts
1,732
Likes
1,868
Location
Frankston
AFL Club
Essendon
He kicked 2 and the umpires robbed him of 2 more. He had his arm blatantly pulled away from the ball while attempting to mark 30 out straight in front in the 3rd, and should have got 50 when tackled after his opponent anticipated the umpire calling play on after he marked 65 out in the last.

Unfortunately, good as he was today in a side that has no clue how to deliver the ball to a forward, you can't rely on Smack keeping up the standard consistently. For his sake, I hope he can keep up the good form.
 

Doss

Super Moderator
Joined
Aug 1, 2011
Posts
70,943
Likes
96,293
AFL Club
Essendon
Admin #1,861
Unlike soft**** TBC Smacks has a dip crashes packs gets physical and is an influence up forward. Id give him a run the rest of the year. If hes no good 2019 becomes Drapers for the taking.
Dero has nailed it above though; he's not a great ruck and is therefore not a viable alternative for TBC.

Smack's best work is as a forward.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

yaco55

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jul 25, 2007
Posts
35,436
Likes
11,847
Location
hong kong
AFL Club
Essendon
I will be the contrarian - McKernan should never have been selected this week and his performance today supports my opinion - Picking McKernan avoided EFC making touch decisions with certain players and getting a more effective structure - The better option would have been to move Hooker forward which would have lead to possible three outcomes - Stewart has found it difficult in the last few weeks because instead of getting the third best tall defender, he is now getting the best tall defender, because clubs will play their second best defender on McKernan, while if Hooker played forward he would get the number one defender, therefore reducing the pressure on Stewart - the second benefit is that it would force Hurley to play as the number two tall defender, instead of the third defender and more importantly we could have PLAYED Ridley who can play as the third tall defender but can match up on smaller players - Some may think McKernan played a decent game but i am confident Hooker could have played this role to the same level or better - This week was a missed opportunity from the selectors.
 

Darealrath

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Jul 6, 2002
Posts
11,299
Likes
2,338
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Arsenal, Pacers
I will be the contrarian - McKernan should never have been selected this week and his performance today supports my opinion - Picking McKernan avoided EFC making touch decisions with certain players and getting a more effective structure - The better option would have been to move Hooker forward which would have lead to possible three outcomes - Stewart has found it difficult in the last few weeks because instead of getting the third best tall defender, he is now getting the best tall defender, because clubs will play their second best defender on McKernan, while if Hooker played forward he would get the number one defender, therefore reducing the pressure on Stewart - the second benefit is that it would force Hurley to play as the number two tall defender, instead of the third defender and more importantly we could have PLAYED Ridley who can play as the third tall defender but can match up on smaller players - Some may think McKernan played a decent game but i am confident Hooker could have played this role to the same level or better - This week was a missed opportunity from the selectors.
This makes a lot of sense and I agree that our forward line probably works better with Hooker forward instead of McKernan. My worry is that Ambrose and Hurley are too small to work effectively as a combination of key defenders. Hooker is so good at killing contests in the air and even if he doesn't mark it, he's surprisingly good at then mopping up at ground level. Without him it's a lot easier for the opposition to bomb it in without worry that they'll be outmarked, allowing them to score more frequently off crumbs or lock the ball in there more often (see the Dogs game).

I think ideally you have Hooker and Hurley as the key defenders with Gleeson or Francis instead of Ambrose to give a bit more drive from defence.
 

JayJ20

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Aug 28, 2016
Posts
8,418
Likes
11,779
AFL Club
Essendon
The biggest issue with Smack is that he plays well one game, then completely messes it up the next 2.

It's why he is still "potential" at his age.
 

BrunoV

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
May 5, 2009
Posts
14,837
Likes
18,187
AFL Club
Essendon
I will be the contrarian - McKernan should never have been selected this week and his performance today supports my opinion - Picking McKernan avoided EFC making touch decisions with certain players and getting a more effective structure - The better option would have been to move Hooker forward which would have lead to possible three outcomes - Stewart has found it difficult in the last few weeks because instead of getting the third best tall defender, he is now getting the best tall defender, because clubs will play their second best defender on McKernan, while if Hooker played forward he would get the number one defender, therefore reducing the pressure on Stewart - the second benefit is that it would force Hurley to play as the number two tall defender, instead of the third defender and more importantly we could have PLAYED Ridley who can play as the third tall defender but can match up on smaller players - Some may think McKernan played a decent game but i am confident Hooker could have played this role to the same level or better - This week was a missed opportunity from the selectors.

My thoughts are mostly the same though I'd say that I'm happy for him to show that it might be worth persisting with him as a depth KPF.

We're no really at the point that we need to be playing depth players to maintain a structure. If we were 5 and 2 and things were working that'd be the time for McKernan, whether it would be for 1 game or 15.

I'm not really sure that he can be dropped, though. Team selection has been enough of a mockery.
 

Zach Package

Kyle Langfourd
Joined
Sep 21, 2012
Posts
23,591
Likes
31,770
Location
Parish, Francis
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Piggy Smith, SFG, Heat, Raiders
Persisted with him for way too ****ing long when it looked like there wasn't a chance in hell that it was going to work and now we've been rewarded through dumb luck more than anything else. If Richmond was a person it would be Shaun.

Absolutely minced them
 
Top Bottom