Captain Vandenberg; Vice Mitchell

[Mr.Likeable]

2006 Captain: Richie Vandenberg
Vice Captain: Sam Mitchell

http://hawthornfc.com.au/default.asp?pg=news&spg=display&articleid=240766

 

[Katthawk]

I still love Ritchie but um he wasn't my first choice.

Good luck and prove me wrong mate.

Good on ya Sammy Do your best. Get well.

 

[Grendel]

Astute and sensible move.

Hodge while being pumped up (correctly) by 'us' supporters as the next Captain lacks a few things that Sam has brings to the role of on-field leader.

And it's mainly related to off-field stuff in nature as well. Sam has a work ethic to training that is up with Crawford, it's a great pointer for a young list (and a young leader) that the 18/19/20y/o's can look as what hard work and dedication can achieve. Also Sam is far more relaxed with media (important) duties than Luke is.

Hodge will come into leadership (he's an on-field leader already regardless of any official naming as such) calculations later. For now, Two hard working, not naturally gifted types for the appointed roles of leading the HFC is a good path to have taken.

 

[swift24]

Would have preffered vanders out of the captaincy role..but cant just give a captain a year with the role unless your stkilda, good to give him another chance and lets hope he can step up!! Wrapt bout sammy tho!!

 

[Mr.Likeable]

I think St.Kilda is close to a good model for developing leaders (though I'll take AC over GT any day).

I like the idea of a new VC every year, to take all on-field preparation and execution duties. Once you've been a VC, you'd be in the leadership group permanently, and the leadership group would elect a captain each year to look after all of the off-field team coordination and representation roles.

In this way, you'd generally have a good half-dozen or more in your leadership team, with new blood coming in every year and lots of support for each other at the top.

I'm happy to see both Vanders and Mitchell at the top, with Crawford and Smith both ex-C/VCs there to help and support.

 

[B-Rock]

I never did understand why Vandenberg became capatain in the first place, solid player dont get me wrong but surely you guys would rather someone like hodge, everitt or bateman? Theres many players i would put before Vandenberg..

 

[Beckers]

I never did understand why Vandenberg became capatain in the first place, solid player dont get me wrong but surely you guys would rather someone like hodge, everitt or bateman? Theres many players i would put before Vandenberg..

Someone posted this on another thread and i have to say that i agree totally.
And, Luke Hodge should be captain:


Look at Hawthorn's captain's over the years:

Arthur: Good enough...some would say very.
Crimmins: Champion gone too soon.
Parkin: More than just good.
Scott: Champion.
Matthews: Icon.
Tuck: Champion.
Ayres: Very good.
Dunstall: Very good.
Crawford: Respected.

Vandenberg pales into insignificance of the above names.

 

[Mr.Likeable]

I never did understand why Vandenberg became capatain in the first place.

Vandenberg was - and still is IMO - the right man at the right time. It's hard to deny the assertion that Hawthorn had become soft. Vanders is hard, disciplined, mature and smart. No, I wouldn't put him straight into the class of some of Hawthorn's recent silk, and I don't think Vanders would place himself there either. But he's clearly doing the right things around the club or he would not have been re-appointed. If you were AC, in the "final" year of your contract, and still basing decisions on long-term impact (good on you AC!), would you seriously persevere with a captain who wasn't getting the right job done in the right way?

I think it's pretty obvious that Mitchell (23 y.o.) and Hodge (21) are in line as future leaders - and a few others as well. Clarke may surprise (not many have tackled Barry Hall on the burst and taken him to ground - of those who have, most would weigh more than 65kg). Brown has attributes - and an obvious streak of indiscipline. Bateman? Yeah! But none of these blokes has played even 70 games.

Crawford has said he doesn't want the captaincy - he may have changed his mind, and noone holds anything against Crawf, but he did hand it back at a time when things were really tough... Everitt asked to be traded - sure, we'll forgive him, but it's not the sort of thing you want your captain to have done. Smith is clearly in the leadership group - but captain?; Dixon? Barker? Jacobs? Croad has attributes for sure, and he's headed in the right direction, but probably still needs a little more consistency in his outlook. And that's it for guys with over 100 games.

Right now, Vanders (29, 121 games) is the man. Back him folks. He may not hold a premiership cup aloft in a brown and gold jersey, but he'll have every right to be part of the celebrations as an ex-Hawthorn Football Club Captain when we do earn our next piece of silver. These have been tough years, and while Vanders may not have challenged for a Brownlow, he's certainly flown the flag for the Mighty Fighting Hawks.

On yer Vanders.

 

[GoHawks!!]

Mr Likeable - 10/10!!!

After hearing Richie speak and just observing the way he carried himself at the recent Christmas Day at G/Ferrie - he deserves a second year in the role.

Luke Hodge will always probably be our best player on the field, and will make a fantastic premiership captain (hopefully soon), but he is not ready IMO.

Let him become the player we all hope he can be, and then in a few years, give him the ultimate honour of the captaincy of our GREAT club.

 

[Binxy]

Vandenberg was - and still is IMO - the right man at the right time.

Excellent Post Mr.L - everything you've said is true - it gets a bit tougher when you're watching him play (poor disposal/no sheperding etc.) but on the whole you are correct - it's a tough time and he seems to be the right man for the job.

 

[CyberKev]

Excellent Post Mr.L - everything you've said is true - it gets a bit tougher when you're watching him play (poor disposal/no sheperding etc.) but on the whole you are correct - it's a tough time and he seems to be the right man for the job.

For me this is the main problem with letting him keep the captaincy.

Forget all the crap you take from opposition supporters; his poor profile compared with past captains, and the promise of several younger options in the group...

The biggest worry with Vandenburg is that the captaincy has resulted in a massive drop in form, which should have seen him dumped from the top 25 this season.

The captain should, at the very least, be a player who can be relied upon to maintain a form level that makes him an undisputed regular part of the top 18.

Across 2003-04 he'd worked hard to turn himself into a solid footballer and a worthy member of the top side, but all that was undone badly during 2005 and I'm not sure he can turn his form around as leader (although I obviously hope I'm wrong).

I'd have named Mitchell captain without hesitation.

 

[HAWKS HEROES]

Richie will have a better year at it now that he has learnt a few things about the job in the first year at it and Sam will be good too well done

 

[Grendel]

Arthur: Good enough...some would say very.

According to some (i.e one, one J.Kennedy snr) Arthur was the equal of Matthews. A bit better than 'good enough'.

Re Vanders in relation to the rest, we all realise that he's not in the same league. What's it matter if as others have pointed out, the majority of the team also pales when compared to what all the other captains have had as quality footballers to support them?

Arthur - Edwards, Peck, Law, Browne, Young
Crimmins, Scott and Matthews - Tuck, Moore, Knights, Eade, Wallace, Hudson, Keddie, Martello
Tuck, Dunstall and Langford - Platten, Mew, Buckenara, Jarman, Brereton,

The only other captain we've had that's had a poor playing group (and still better than what Vanders has had to lead) has been Crawford.

Don't look to what quality he is a a player (average) but look at what qualities he brings to a side needing to find a direction for a playing group of youngsters that we'd hope (well, I hope) will follow the example of hard work, commitment to the contest, dedication to training to being the best they can, and gracious in their manner and speech towards our supporters.

Vanders fits all of that to a 'T'.

He's the right choice for right now, given the state of the playing group, he's the only choice for right now as well.

 

[Beckers]

According to some (i.e one, one J.Kennedy snr) Arthur was the equal of Matthews. A bit better than 'good enough'.

I quoted that from someone else on another thread. I would also rate Dunstall a bit better than very good.....more like ********en champion!
I cannot defend Vanders at all and i hope that he proves me wrong this year.
Even at his best, he is a very average footballer. At his worst, he is barely a VFL footballer. He seems to have lost his kicking ability and pace(the little he had). He cannot break a tackle these days or kick over a jam jar and is a liability on the field.

 

[cs61]

I would have given Mitchell captain now to be honest.

As Cyberkev said, Vanders form wasn't up to it last year, and its a problem when his form barely warrants his selection in the side.

I feel at his best he definately warrants selection, but he wasn't anywhere near that last season, probably due to the combination of a new game-plan, extra responsibility, and a back problem which was apparently causing some concern, but who knows how much that really affected him.

I'd feel that Mitchell could do the job fine, very well in fact, and Vanders could do without that responsibilitiy, and the club without the attention it will draw if his form again pushes him outside the best 22, which could quite feasibly happen.

Regardess of that, Vanders does a great job in how he conducts himself and he obviously has the respect of his peers, I just hope his form lifts dramatically.

 

[Gary Shadforth]

Firstly, I say as a critic of Richie, I sincerely hope he sticks it up me and has a boomer 2006 season as a captain leading our team with form we all expect.

I may offend several posters here in this place, and after all it is Christmas and I don’t wish to be Scrooge, but there is an element of softness permeating through this thread finding excuses for a Hawthorn captain. When in our living memory have we ever had cause to do that?

There are some who love stats. Has anyone observed our leader’s clangers figures for last season. If Rich continues his poor performances and examples into season 2006 will we supporters continue with a soft attitude and tolerate a captain who he is immune from being dropped?

What does this mean, we take the field with 21 in form players ******ed week after week with a captain not setting an example to the youngsters. It will be nothing but a continuation of having a disadvantage against top form teams with 22 performing players - we can not afford passengers!

It’s all very well to be a great inspirational speech-maker at an AGM or in the club-house but the great Hawthorn captains who have gone before us have done their talking out on the field with torso, arms and legs weaving magic.

I don’t believe Richie’s form of ‘05 will be tolerated by one JK as the latter is so frank with his deliberations - he is one who doesn’t pull punches irrespective of whether he is a member of the selection committee. It spells trouble for our club if Rich continues his poor form of ‘05.

This is the place where one can speak one’s mind and that’s exactly what I’m doing.

As I said, I hope Rich answers me out on the field ... if he doesn’t, well, as one paid up and passionate supporter, I will come down on him like a load of bricks.

Goodnight all, I’ve got that off my chest.

 

[Mr.Likeable]

In '05, Richie was:
12th for disposals at Hawthorn
11th for errors
7th for tackles
7th for 1%ers
15th for contested possessions
10th for long kicks
all averages per game
That certainly puts him in the 1st 18 on anyone's terms.
The players and the coach are behind him.
I think those who've said he doesn't warrant selection are not supported by the stats.

 

[Gary Shadforth]

In '05, Richie was:
12th for disposals at Hawthorn
11th for errors
7th for tackles
7th for 1%ers
15th for contested possessions
10th for long kicks
all averages per game
That certainly puts him in the 1st 18 on anyone's terms.
The players and the coach are behind him.
I think those who've said he doesn't warrant selection are not supported by the stats.

With all due respect, MrL, those stats to my mind are pretty ordinary for a Hawthorn captain. He certainly wouldn’t want to be anything less considering that half the team around him are kids learning the trade. So, therefore, if some people want to see it as some kind of competitive edge over others to get a game it simply doesn’t wash. Figures are all very well but its how one’s physical performance is perceived by the greater majority of supporters. Rich is certainly tops for being hard at it down and under and dedication but we need more from him as captain in the mould of all those who have gone before him in that role. Simply, there are too many outcries about Richie's captaincy. As I have said, in my living memory as a Hawthorn supporter (and at one time a volunteer worker) we have never had captains that are copping the volume of criticism Richie did last season.

And again I say I sincerely hope he turns it around and has a boomer season. Of course we wish that on every Hawthorn player if we are going to complete a U-turn upwards in our endeavours for a long overdue return to the top of the ladder.

We cannot afford passengers or simply just one player week-in-week-out putting in ordinary on the field performances no matter what his personal stature and popularity.

Stats are for duty persons pressing buttons off the field. And really, as a button is being hit how effective is it for what it represents out on the paddock?

 

[CyberKev]

In '05, Richie was:
12th for disposals at Hawthorn
11th for errors
7th for tackles
7th for 1%ers
15th for contested possessions
10th for long kicks
all averages per game
That certainly puts him in the 1st 18 on anyone's terms.
The players and the coach are behind him.
I think those who've said he doesn't warrant selection are not supported by the stats.

These are very mediocre stats for a midfield player. 12th for disposals, 15th for contested possessions and 7th for tackles for a player who should be around where the ball is much of the time.

You've just provided firm support for him NOT warranting a place in our best side and thus NOT warranting the captaincy.

 

[CyberKev]

I may offend several posters here in this place, and after all it is Christmas and I don’t wish to be Scrooge, but there is an element of softness permeating through this thread finding excuses for a Hawthorn captain. When in our living memory have we ever had cause to do that?

Well said, Gary.

I'm worried by the number of Hawk fans meekly excusing our continuation with a captain who (for the first time in memory, if not in our entire history) does not warrant a spot in the top side.

Its almost as bad as those fans who seem to be longing for another poor year (results wise) just so that we can get one of the top ranked youngsters on offer in the so-called "superdraft".

Forget common perceptions that we're following the so-called "St Kilda model" in the noughties... One wonders if we're not, as a general supporter base, becoming enamoured of the "St Kilda model" of the eighties?! "Never mind the on-field results and the steadily accumulating bottom four finishes, just as long as we keep getting a few cult youngsters each year and Plugger can get us off by kicking a few goals most weeks", seemed to be the catchcry. For us, the equivalent seems to be "never mind the accumulating bottom four finishes as long as our captain is well-liked by the players off the field and we keep getting high picks to get us off on draft day!"

Its truly appalling!

 

[Grendel]

For a tagger (and that's what he is) those stats are acceptable (nothing to write home about I'll grant you).

But they have to be given in context of what type of player he is and how he plays. Negative midfielder first and foremost. If he can stop an opposition 'star' midfielder from dominating (and he's done that to a fairly consistent level for the last three/four seasons) then he's doing his job within the side.

I guess the final word is that AC and co should know more about it than 'us' as to who is in the best position and who is most suitable for the role of Captain of the HFC right now than what we do. They've gone with Vanders for at least one more season. For mine, I'm pretty certain they had reasons, good reasons at that, for doing so.

 

[CyberKev]

You're a very, very soft marker, Grendel.

 

[OneEyedHawk]

I think people are a tad harsh on Vanders. He did have a relatively poor year, particularly the beginning, when it appeared he struggled early with the demands of the position, and also carried a back injury. But let's not forget what Vanders does bring to the table, a consumate professional, (crucial in a developing team), and preparation & attitude second to none. Less naturally gifted players, who need to rely moreso on work ethic and professionalism, often make the better leaders.
No doubt, he pales in comparison to some of our other great leaders, but right now, for this time, in this place, he is the right man for the job IMO. Most probably only for another year, but until there is a candidate who literally demands the job (in all areas and facets, on and off the field), I don't see the need to make hasty decisions.

FWIW, I think there is more downside involved in prematurely burdening a Hodge or Mitchell, than by appointing Vanders for one more year.

 

[Grendel]

FWIW, I think there is more downside involved in prematurely burdening a Hodge or Mitchell, than by appointing Vanders for one more year.

Ditto.

 

[cs61]

I'm not sure it is premature to give it to Mitchell though. He's 23, handles himself perfectly in the media, and his performances are good.

I think it would be too early to give it to Hodge, andI'd prefer to give Mitchell the pressure of doing it and the responsibility, rather than having Vanders who seems to be struggling with it.

I like Vanders, but we are trying to rebuild the side around fixing our footskills and he is arguably our worst offender. I just think things like this make it awkward to watch him as our captain. Love him as a bloke, player, leader, but I don't think he's the right fit.

I'd love him to prove me wrong.