A good off season will freshen Hill’s body. His experience is a valuable asset.Yeah, his kicking is a little off atm but he still moves in that beautiful Stephen Hill Way, sidestepping, bouncing and leaping like a gazelle through congestion, and I've actually been surprised with some of his defensive efforts, getting spoils in and pumping for a ground ball. I remember I think 2018 when we played Richmond at the G and he was in the backline, he got spanked on the lead so the fact that he's now a proficient defender shows he's still improving. At the start of this season I thought it'd be his last but he could easily have a couple of golden years to see out his career.
I think we enter 2021 with the clear expectation that we play finals. In that context players like Hill are incredibly valuable.I agree Hill's current predicament is not his fault and he has perfectly valid excuses for not being able to perform consistently. But success in literally anything requires a bit of pragmatism. Life isn't fair and we should definitely look after Hill post footy because yeah we screwed him, but the only questions that are ever relevant when picking a best 22 is 1. What do they provide for the team now and 2. What may they provide down the line when we're competing. I'll only be onboard personally if Hill satisfies either of these premises but we don't have to agree it's all good. I do love Hill and it would make me happy to be proved wrong.
Barlow will go down as one of my favourite Dockers ever. Love him to death.I just rewatched this game recently, forgot how awesome Michael Barlow was with 3 goals and why was Lachie Neale relegated to emergency sub after this game?
Yeah, Lyon admitted he made a mistake in that Triple M interview he did recently. He said he started Matt de Boer instead because he was a senior player, which ironically reinforces those negative views around him regarding his inflexibility with team selections and playing youth on merit.Barlow will go down as one of my favourite Dockers ever. Love him to death.
Neale being a sub I think every man and his dog (including Ross Lyon) know was a mistake to have as a sub.
From memory it was team balance?
De Boer was fine. At the time it wasn’t on rank. But balance. The team we had was good enough. Neale shouldn’t have be sub. Someone like Sutcliffe should’ve. Clarke was needed due to height, he had a mare though.Yeah, Lyon admitted he made a mistake in that Triple M interview he did recently. He said he started Matt de Boer instead because he was a senior player, which ironically reinforces those negative views around him regarding his inflexibility with team selections and playing youth on merit.
He didn't pick the team with the best chance of winning the Grand Final, he picked the team on rank.
I don't get why we would be dropping him?
his name is ben the donkey for a reason lmaoI don't get why we would be dropping him?
We have been desperate to see him string some footy together for 3 years, now he finally is we are calling for his head? I actually thought he played well on the weekend.
He has clearly lost a step of pace which i don't think the rest of his game has caught up with yet but hes going to be extremely valuable next year if he can stay fit.
And not to mention his defensive efforts have been low key underrated since he returned.
We are talking about a 25yo who has shown he can transform an area of our game we have the biggest weakness in versus a 30yo who is a playing a role in which we have a fair bit of depth available.
With Hill it's a debate of experience and leadership or the development of a younger player. I've taken the less popular position because I think our young players are self driven and confident already that Hill is not really needed. But doesn't actually bother me which choice we make it's apples or oranges but I doubt that if we do actually win a flag on grand final day Hill won't be there, while Hogan could be the difference. Completely different situations.