Posted this in the autopsy thread but I want to expand on it so I'll put it here:
Played as an inside mid and was at the bulk of stoppages when he was on the ground. Had less contested disposals than Cale Hooker.
Was on the ground for only 80% of the game. The only players with less (besides the two vested players) were Chapman, Hocking and Howlett. Was consistently stationary when he needed to push to create an option.
Ran around all night seemingly not accountable for anyone, at one point I saw him telling Melksham to get on Deledio rather than doing it himself.
2 tackles.
1 mark.
2 inside 50's, 1 rebound 50.
Doesn't get the ball in close. Doesn't provide an option on the outside. Doesn't provide physical pressure. Doesn't have a tank. Doesn't have any defensive side to his game. He doesn't actually do anything.
He's done.
And what was Robert Shaw saying on SEN this morning?
"bal, bla, bla, Essendon came out of the blocks and were harder at the contest lead by Hocking, Heppell and young O'Brien."
I am very quickly coming to the view that football analysis is almost exclusively theoretical. The experts, and I suspect this extends to coaches, see only what they want to see whether it is good or bad.