Ben Mathews

[SouthSwans]

I know this thread may reek of bias from me, but Benny was great yesterday. Really hope that can kickstart his career which admittedly has ran a bit stagnant for a little while now. 24 pos, 9 marks and a couple of tackles, our defence running off half-back was sensational yesterday - Benny, Tiger, B2 - hope this can generate some hope from the Sydney faithful.

Go Benny.

 

[landers]

yea he had a good game, he always put in 100%. I dont think he his in our best 22 anymore but his experience may very important come finals times if we cant feild our best 22 because the luck we have had with injuries over last couple of years may hurt us we dont have as many 50+ gamers as most clubs.

 

[SouthSwans]

Behind Leo and MOL he's the next most experienced at the Swans. Been there since 96, MOL and Leo since 95.

 

[is2SWaNz]

Didn't watch the game but he did have a good game. Now needs to focus on playing like that every single week. He hasn't been playing consistently or above par, and from what I heard, some of his disposals were awful or not productive.

Albeit, Benny did have a good game.

 

[CharlieG]

A typical Mathews performance. Plenty of uncontested possessions, the majority of which made no contribution whatsoever. Dinky little handballs to teammates under pressure and kicks that go 30m backwards do not count.

 

[natlovestheswans]

A typical Mathews performance. Plenty of uncontested possessions, the majority of which made no contribution whatsoever. Dinky little handballs to teammates under pressure and kicks that go 30m backwards do not count.

Exactly, he may have had a few posessions but he didn't actually do anything good with the ball.

 

[Corpuscles]

A typical Mathews performance. Plenty of uncontested possessions, the majority of which made no contribution whatsoever. Dinky little handballs to teammates under pressure and kicks that go 30m backwards do not count.

Mate there are so many detractors it is silly to be obsessed with Ben demise.. and I know you are not the worse offender.

One of the things that fascinates me about the Swans since Rocket took over & especially since Roos.... is the gameplan. Do we passionate Swans fans really know exactly what a players role is in the whole scheme? ....Me neither!

If so, then should apply for Cats/ Freo/ Blues/ Roos/ 2008 coaching job because even some of the best coaches in the business can't work it out either.

Matthews would not get his spot and the respect he has from Roos or teammates if he wasn't doing it well... it is not just seniority.

Rather than me postulate straight up on what I think maintains his position.... I suggest next or at some stage in the season when you go see a live game... resist the temptation to follow the excitement of play and pay attention to what Matthews does and where he moves..... it was very enlightening to me when I did it once in both 2005 & 2006 ( Tip: there is no stat for it)

No fight intended

 

[CharlieG]

Sorry Corp. The 'Roos works in mysterious ways' argument doesn't hold water with me. What could his role possibly be?

Pace through the midfield? No, that's not it.

Tagging? If so, why is he so often a loose man behind play? Where is his opponent?

Line breaking? Kennelly is a line breaker. So is Malceski. It involves penetrating, precise disposal. Not hospital handpasses that sell a teammate into trouble. Not chip kicks that at best go sideways and more often go backwards.

 

[Corpuscles]

Sorry Corp. The 'Roos works in mysterious ways' argument doesn't hold water with me. What could his role possibly be?

Pace through the midfield? No, that's not it.

Tagging? If so, why is he so often a loose man behind play? Where is his opponent?

Line breaking? Kennelly is a line breaker. So is Malceski. It involves penetrating, precise disposal. Not hospital handpasses that sell a teammate into trouble. Not chip kicks that at best go sideways and more often go backwards.

Again watch & think outside square next (or at least one) live game you go along to! I'll give ya that watching Ben is not easy! But hospital, boundary passes , lose man, etc which we all know he does regularly ....is a specialty of the job!

He often (not always) minds the 'line breakers' man or the player rotating /losing an opponent ... often by a sliding matchup is the sacrificer covering 2, or often making sure there is a stopage (oob, b'up, etc)...esp if there is a nasty rebound. Watch even closer often seems to call (initiate/trigger) backline set plays & theres more!...shhhh!...

 

[CharlieG]

Again watch & think outside square next (or at least one) live game you go along to! I'll give ya that watching Ben is not easy! But hospital, boundary passes , lose man, etc which we all know he does regularly ....is a specialty of the job!

He often (not always) minds the 'line breakers' man or the player rotating /losing an opponent ... often by a sliding matchup is the sacrificer covering 2, or often making sure there is a stopage (oob, b'up, etc)...esp if there is a nasty rebound. Watch even closer often seems to call (initiate/trigger) backline set plays & theres more!...shhhh!...

What a load of hogwash. Why are you bothering with devil's advocacy? I know that you don't believe this rubbish anymore than I do.

 

[VanBerlo=God]

yeah, exceptional game, played very well through the middle had some key possessions, and some really good passes setting up players into space

 

[FixterFan]

Sorry Corp. The 'Roos works in mysterious ways' argument doesn't hold water with me. What could his role possibly be?



Pace through the midfield? No, that's not it.



Tagging? If so, why is he so often a loose man behind play? Where is his opponent?



Line breaking? Kennelly is a line breaker. So is Malceski. It involves penetrating, precise disposal. Not hospital handpasses that sell a teammate into trouble. Not chip kicks that at best go sideways and more often go backwards.

The role that I think Ben plays is the equivalent of the defensive midfield in football (soccer). This is different from the traditional defensive midfielder/tagger role - his role isn't necessarily to mark any one single player, but rather to sit in the area on the defensive side of midfield and harass (not tackle) anyone that looks to be on the verge of breaking our midfield lines. We all know our midfield is slower than most, and this applies not just us breaking away from them offensively but also us chasing them down defensively as well. None of Kirk, Bolton or even Fosdike are good chasers, and Ablett and Goodes are often slow to start tracking back (Goodes because he's always looking to run forward of the ball, Ablett because he has poor acceleration). What Mathews does is not to run to where the opponent is going to kick it (the loose man in defence role), but to run to where the opposition linebreaker is going to run, forcing him to kick instead of keeping on running. Ben seldom tackles said player, because he maintains a healthy distance to the linebreaker to make sure he doesn't get past him - he'lll tackle only if the linebreaker is stupid enough to run at him to try to get around him.

How useful you think that particular role is will be up to you - certainly it is almost an invisible job, and not one that has any quantifiable results in terms of how it impacts on opposition effectiveness. One side effect of this role is that because he's usually sitting just in front of where the opposition will kick it, he's one of the closest to where the contest will be and so if the ball is brought to ground he's in the sweeping position, hence why he gets so many possessions so much of the time. Alas, he's a poor decision maker and poor kick, so his sweeping doesn't generate much rebound.

There are two major weaknesses to his role:
1) he sits back and looks at the other players, so his direct opponent often gets away from him, especially if said player isn't a linebreaker but a linkman or inside midfielder instead.
2) he functions best against teams with fewer linebreakers - obviously, no matter how well you read the play there's only so much territory you can cover and defend. If the other team only has 1, 2 or maybe 3 linebreakers Mathews can get into their running space, but against a team like West Coast where pretty much every midfielder is a runner he can't predict which runner they're going to use.


His role in the past has definitely been underestimated and underappreciated except by the match commitee, the player group and a small group of supporters. Having said that, the game might be passing him by precisely because of point 2) just above - with the current (unjustified) craze about pace, run and carry and linebreaking, Mathew's strong point is not as strong any more, and his other skills are sufficiently poor that while dropping him will be detrimental to our defence against linebreakers, any extra pace (Jack, Crouch, maybe Laidlaw) or offensive capability (Schmidt, Moore, maybe Simpkin) we gain may more than offset this loss.

 

[CharlieG]

The role that I think Ben plays is the equivalent of the defensive midfield in football (soccer). This is different from the traditional defensive midfielder/tagger role - his role isn't necessarily to mark any one single player, but rather to sit in the area on the defensive side of midfield and harass (not tackle) anyone that looks to be on the verge of breaking our midfield lines.

So if his role is not to tackle, what does 'harassing' mean? Make a nuisance of himself? Perhaps a bit of sledging?

We all know our midfield is slower than most, and this applies not just us breaking away from them offensively but also us chasing them down defensively as well. None of Kirk, Bolton or even Fosdike are good chasers, and Ablett and Goodes are often slow to start tracking back (Goodes because he's always looking to run forward of the ball, Ablett because he has poor acceleration). What Mathews does is not to run to where the opponent is going to kick it (the loose man in defence role), but to run to where the opposition linebreaker is going to run, forcing him to kick instead of keeping on running. Ben seldom tackles said player, because he maintains a healthy distance to the linebreaker to make sure he doesn't get past him - he'lll tackle only if the linebreaker is stupid enough to run at him to try to get around him.

So... Mathews is there in case there's a turnover so that he can... encourage the opposition to kick it past him?

How useful you think that particular role is will be up to you - certainly it is almost an invisible job, and not one that has any quantifiable results in terms of how it impacts on opposition effectiveness.

Right. 'No quantifiable results in terms of impact on opposition effectiveness' - in others words, completely ****ing useless.

One side effect of this role is that because he's usually sitting just in front of where the opposition will kick it, he's one of the closest to where the contest will be and so if the ball is brought to ground he's in the sweeping position, hence why he gets so many possessions so much of the time. Alas, he's a poor decision maker and poor kick, so his sweeping doesn't generate much rebound.

So...
a) perhaps the opposition wouldn't have gotten the turnover in the first place if he (or his replacement in the team) had been manning up and;
b) if we must have this 'defensive midfielder who isn't a tagger' position, perhaps it should be someone that can think and kick, so we can take advantage of those cheap possessions?

There are two major weaknesses to his role:

You mean aside from the fact that he's a passenger?

1) he sits back and looks at the other players, so his direct opponent often gets away from him, especially if said player isn't a linebreaker but a linkman or inside midfielder instead.

Which is completely at odds with the fundamental principle that guides everything that the other 21 Swans on the field are supposed to live by: always play accountable footy.

2) he functions best against teams with fewer linebreakers - obviously, no matter how well you read the play there's only so much territory you can cover and defend. If the other team only has 1, 2 or maybe 3 linebreakers Mathews can get into their running space, but against a team like West Coast where pretty much every midfielder is a runner he can't predict which runner they're going to use.

So he's a liability when we play the good teams? I could have told you that.

His role in the past has definitely been underestimated and underappreciated except by the match commitee, the player group and a small group of supporters. Having said that, the game might be passing him by precisely because of point 2) just above - with the current (unjustified) craze about pace, run and carry and linebreaking, Mathew's strong point is not as strong any more, and his other skills are sufficiently poor that while dropping him will be detrimental to our defence against linebreakers, any extra pace (Jack, Crouch, maybe Laidlaw) or offensive capability (Schmidt, Moore, maybe Simpkin) we gain may more than offset this loss.

The problem with all of this is that you haven't explained how standing around and hoping that the opposition player runs towards him actually defends against linebreakers.

 

[FixterFan]

So...

a) perhaps the opposition wouldn't have gotten the turnover in the first place if he (or his replacement in the team) had been manning up and;

b) if we must have this 'defensive midfielder who isn't a tagger' position, perhaps it should be someone that can think and kick, so we can take advantage of those cheap possessions?

That sort of reading the play isn't as easy as it seems - reading where someone is going to kick the ball is relatively easier because you can be guided by knowledge of the kicker's kicking action for timing, direction and power and where the opposition forwards appear to be leading towards. With runners who change direction quickly, give rapid-fire handballs and who sometimes don't even know themselves where they are going to end up or which one of them will end up with the ball, it is devilish hard to do. Plus knowing the exact moment to break away from your man and and run into the linebreaker's space without your man becoming an immediate alternative option is very hard too.


Certainly no one in the current team seem to be able to do it - Buchanan and Ablett tend to chase the ball or closest man, Kirk just runs straight back towards our goal and Dempster, Crouch are happier marking a man and exerting physical rather than positional pressure to keep a direct opponent out of play. Schneider is the only one who seems to have the skill - he does great work with his defensive pressure around the 50m arc precisely because he reads where the linebreaking backman (not his direct opponent) are going to run. 80-90% of the time he won't get close enough to make the tackle, but he'll disrupt the kick out of defence. If the time comes he's one I want to take over the role with someone else playing small forward.

Which is completely at odds with the fundamental principle that guides everything that the other 21 Swans on the field are supposed to live by: always play accountable footy.

We love to think that every single Swan on the field is accountable, but the unfortunate fact is that even if the desire is there some are better at being accountable than others. A player like Goodes will always find it hard to stay goalside of his direct opponent. Kirk will always struggle when the ball gets to open space. Bolton will always be unable to give chase if he's gone for the ball, fallen over and is lying underneath a pack of players.

So he's a liability when we play the good teams? I could have told you that.

Not all good teams have that amount of linebreakers. Fremantle last year, for one. Collingwood, St Kilda, Geelong and Melbourne too. Things may be different this year, but last year the only teams with that amount of linebreakers were WC and the Bulldogs - and the price for the bulldogs with their predominance of linebreakers was that they were regularly smashed at the clearances (by us too, no less). The WC is unique is that many of their runners have more than enough inside ability as well, and even then when they ask their players to do both roles their ability to run the game out takes a hit.

The problem with all of this is that you haven't explained how standing around and hoping that the opposition player runs towards him actually defends against linebreakers.

There is a large difference between running forward with an open view of the forward 50 and running forward and seeing an opponent in front of you - yes, the player might still be 5-10m away and unlikely to be tackling you just yet, but 1) it cuts down the option of continuing to run with the ball, and 2) the perceived pressure has an effect on the subsequent kick or handball even if objectively, there should be absolute no influence by a man in that position in how the linebreaker kicks the ball. Football, or any sport, is just like that - just the presence of someone there influences decision-making.

 

[SouthSwans]

So if his role is not to tackle, what does 'harassing' mean? Make a nuisance of himself? Perhaps a bit of sledging?



So... Mathews is there in case there's a turnover so that he can... encourage the opposition to kick it past him?



Right. 'No quantifiable results in terms of impact on opposition effectiveness' - in others words, completely ****ing useless.



So...
a) perhaps the opposition wouldn't have gotten the turnover in the first place if he (or his replacement in the team) had been manning up and;
b) if we must have this 'defensive midfielder who isn't a tagger' position, perhaps it should be someone that can think and kick, so we can take advantage of those cheap possessions?



You mean aside from the fact that he's a passenger?



Which is completely at odds with the fundamental principle that guides everything that the other 21 Swans on the field are supposed to live by: always play accountable footy.



So he's a liability when we play the good teams? I could have told you that.



The problem with all of this is that you haven't explained how standing around and hoping that the opposition player runs towards him actually defends against linebreakers.

I'm sensing anger now... personal issues??

 

[Tuco]

I know Benny cops a lot of flak (and I've seen him put in some shockers) but there's no denying he played well on sat. And when I think over the jobs Roos has given him over the years it only goes to show how important he has been for the club. The man is an enigma. Every brain explosion performance is usually balanced by a game like the Prelim against St Kilda in 2005 where he shut down Harvey.

I want to watch the game again, but with this 5 point system in SS's player of the year I'm seriously considering chucking him a point or two.

 

[CharlieG]

That sort of reading the play isn't as easy as it seems - reading where someone is going to kick the ball is relatively easier because you can be guided by knowledge of the kicker's kicking action for timing, direction and power and where the opposition forwards appear to be leading towards. With runners who change direction quickly, give rapid-fire handballs and who sometimes don't even know themselves where they are going to end up or which one of them will end up with the ball, it is devilish hard to do. Plus knowing the exact moment to break away from your man and and run into the linebreaker's space without your man becoming an immediate alternative option is very hard too.

Again I ask, why is not better to actually stay with your opponent, than to zone off on the off-chance that he'll impede another player's run - at the cost of giving the opposition a free player to kick too?

We love to think that every single Swan on the field is accountable, but the unfortunate fact is that even if the desire is there some are better at being accountable than others. A player like Goodes will always find it hard to stay goalside of his direct opponent. Kirk will always struggle when the ball gets to open space. Bolton will always be unable to give chase if he's gone for the ball, fallen over and is lying underneath a pack of players.

Oh, come on - you know how weak this argument is. No player is as unaccountable as Mathews. He leaves the others in the shade.

There is a large difference between running forward with an open view of the forward 50 and running forward and seeing an opponent in front of you - yes, the player might still be 5-10m away and unlikely to be tackling you just yet, but 1) it cuts down the option of continuing to run with the ball, and 2) the perceived pressure has an effect on the subsequent kick or handball even if objectively, there should be absolute no influence by a man in that position in how the linebreaker kicks the ball. Football, or any sport, is just like that - just the presence of someone there influences decision-making.

If this is truly why he gets a game, it has to be the most marginal contribution that any player has ever built a career upon. I simply refuse to believe that the benefits from standing 10m in front of a running player outweigh his many turnovers and the damage inflicted by his unmanned opponents.

Drop him. Please.

 

[CharlieG]

I'm sensing anger now... personal issues??

Ah, of course I couldn't possibly want your cousin to be dropped to make way for more capable footballers. It must be a problem of my own instead.

 

[CharlieG]

I know Benny cops a lot of flak (and I've seen him put in some shockers) but there's no denying he played well on sat. And when I think over the jobs Roos has given him over the years it only goes to show how important he has been for the club. The man is an enigma. Every brain explosion performance is usually balanced by a game like the Prelim against St Kilda in 2005 where he shut down Harvey.

I want to watch the game again, but with this 5 point system in SS's player of the year I'm seriously considering chucking him a point or two.

What impact did his 24 touches have?

I'm not trying to suggest he was the worst player on the weekend, but he'd be nowhere near my top five.

 

[Tuco]

What impact did his 24 touches have?

I'm not trying to suggest he was the worst player on the weekend, but he'd be nowhere near my top five.

No worries, Charlie. I'm 2mins off finishing watching the game and he won't be in my top 5. But he will get a creditable mention.

 

[FixterFan]

Again I ask, why is not better to actually stay with your opponent, than to zone off on the off-chance that he'll impede another player's run - at the cost of giving the opposition a free player to kick too?

The idea is that the benefit from an extra person chasing an opponent is less than the benefit derived from reducing the effectiveness of the kick from the linebreaker. We often see this effect in general play when the opposition has worked it into a 2 on 1 situation running down the wing - the player will elect not to run at the ball carrier and take him out but leave the other player to streak down the wing. He will instead zone off to half-cover both players, but allow either of them to kick it forward. Running at the ball carrier might produce a turnover, say, 10% of the time due to the physical pressure of the ongoing tackle. The other times though you are left with the other player becoming a "free" linebreaker. Whereas zoning off produces a 100% chance that the opposition will have two players that are not completely free. Mathews seem to play like this but on a larger scale . Does it work, and is it more effective? The coaching staff seem to think so, but to tell the truth I can't tell myself. It did seem to be the case that when Mathews was injured/out of form our midfield defence was a little poorer. I'm love to know if our opposition kick less running goals from around or just inside 50 against us than other teams, because that'll be one of the effects if the role was being played well.

Oh, come on - you know how weak this argument is. No player is as unaccountable as Mathews. He leaves the others in the shade.

As much as we love to bash him (and I do too), how often is it that his opponent has a major influence on the match? Accountability is not just about sticking to your opponent all day, but having the footy brain to know when to leave your man to help out in another area. Mathews' main issue is with his turnovers from when he has the ball, not what his opponent does.

If this is truly why he gets a game, it has to be the most marginal contribution that any player has ever built a career upon. I simply refuse to believe that the benefits from standing 10m in front of a running player outweigh his many turnovers and the damage inflicted by his unmanned opponents.

Invisible? Yes. Marginal? No more than other types of defensive players like traditional taggers who might have a good game by reducing his opponent's disposal count by 10 or so. You seem to detest the idea, but many players have built their careers out of similar roles in other sports, especially soccer.