Does anyone support clarkson's move to leave dawson on?

Remove this Banner Ad

tommy_as_ice

Debutant
Aug 15, 2005
147
0
melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Hawks
this is the 2nd game we've lost purely because of this tactic, which i believe is disgraceful to everyone involved, especially us supporters.
 
if he continues to do this he wont have a job.

so damn stupid. i dont care about experience. thats no experience if he gets smashed. absolute joke clarkson. put croad on him straight away. and drop dawson and play boyle.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Stick with Clarkson, hawks supporters.

I actually rate him in the top 5 coaches in the league at the moment. Stick with him and let him prove everyone wrong as he becomes one of the first coaches to really develop youth continously into stars.

Just don't expect too much too quickly.
 
Unhappy with the decision, but Clarkson had no idea all day.

We looked like we were zoning up around the ground, rather than playing the man, and their skills broke the zone apart. The amount of midfield pressure the placed on us and their effective disposal made Thompson's job much easier. That being said, Dawson can't read the play or the flight of the ball...and his decision(?) to play off Thompson was crazy.
 
I don't agree with it, I like Clarkson a lot, but I don't agree with Dawson on Rocca and Thompson.

He spoke about not using Roughead and CHF too much last year so he doesn't lose his confidence, how is Dawson getting two major bags on him not smashing his confidence?

Again I support Clarkson on a two year deal, three even, but I can't understand the Dawson issue.
 
Bad mistake by AC again on this. I like his coaching, but his reasons just don't justify what it does to the team - all he keeps saying is that he's giving the kid experience, and he'll be a better player for it.

Even that is debatable - when you aren't ready to play a position and you get repeatedly spanked, it saps confidence and stops being a beneficial learning experience.

Far more importantly, it is effectively putting one kid's 'development' ahead of playing to win football games. If you have a bad match up, you change it, simple as that.

Roughead or Croad are patently better options right now on a guy like Thompson.

Question - if Buddy Franklin was doing enough to get called up, could he help by potentially freeing up one of those guys to go back, by giving us another forward option?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Just a strange thing, Jacobs sacrificed alot of his game to help out Dawson today and previous weeks. If this is the learning experience that Dawson has, he'll learn that a second tall bailing him out at FB is the norm. In a GF the opposition won't have a a poor 2nd tall to let Jacobs do that.

It makes no sense to me. Buddy left out in recent weeks despite showing more than Dawson, Roughead being a certainty to be a starting 18 player, not being given the experience at FB.

Clarkson has done everything right in my book so far, so he must have faith in Dawson. However theres a time to fold your hand and pick it up when there's reason to later.

Also, I can see this same situation happening for Boyle at CHF. They are both highly rated, without much reason.

My solution, drop Dawson, get Boyle in at FB, he was a tall defender up til he got drafted and has the body after 3 years to compete with FFs.
 
Surely beging 5 and 1 is better thatn 3 and 2!!! Why have Dawson on? He got smashed. If we'd changed him at half time the Hawks would have had a chance.

We can make the finals if we don't keep placing emphasis on triaining up our full back of the future....
 
It's kind of mystifying how Dawson is left on a man (Rocca and Thompson) who he is mismatched to play against. Surely there's more versatility in our backline than AC is using. I say start Dawson FB if that's what you want to do, but if he's so obviously mismatched then why not move him? We have plenty of other young players who would have been more suited to Thompson than Dawson and they can certainly use the experience as well cant they?
 
I like clarkson and all.. but he has to draw the line somewhere.
Yes, his done it before as an "experiment".. and we lsot, but dont you think doing once is enough??
Going off and doing it a sencond time.. thats jsut stupid! Clarkson kne how dawson went when he was on roca.. so why go doing the same thing again.. so we can lose???
 
Just like against Collingwood we lost the game because our midfield was over-run. Don't you see the similarities, TELSTRA DOME, big side - we obviously have some weaknesses and Collingwood and Kangaroos on the DOME have exposed us. We did not lose because of Zac Dawson.
 
Lukazzz777 said:
Just like against Collingwood we lost the game because our midfield was over-run. Don't you see the similarities, TELSTRA DOME, big side - we obviously have some weaknesses and Collingwood and Kangaroos on the DOME have exposed us. We did not lose because of Zac Dawson.

100% agree Lukazzz777

That tackle by I think Sinclair on Mitchell in the last quarter summed up our whole day. We were building up for something, momentum swinging our way then BANG down went Mitchell, down went Hawthorn.
 
I have no problem with leaving Dawson on Thommo, or Rocca for that matter. I didn't think that the problem was with the match-up, I reckon the problem was with Dawson's technique in playing.

Dawson is good at reading the flight of the ball off the boot, he is actually better at this than Thommo who has difficulty with depth perception. Thompson is a good mark when the ball is coming in at an angle, but will usually run under the ball if directed straight at him. Dawson's attempt to cut off Thompsons lead by standing 10-15 metres in front actually helped Thommo's game, by forcing the ball in on an angle. I can't think of why Dawson was told to stand of Thommo like this, but who-ever gave him this ridiculous advice has no knowledge of Thompsons strengths and weaknessess.

To my mind either Hardwick or Ross Smith should take the blame for this lack of preparation and poor technical coaching.


FWIW Roughead had a goal kicked on him at the first opportunity Thompson had, he also had a mark taken on him 40 metres out, slight angle which should have been a goal. In the three contest that Thommo and Rocca went to Thommo convincingly won two of them and there was a nil all draw for the third.

I doubt Roughead would have fared any better than Dawson except for the fact he would have played him tighter and may have put more physical pressure on him-if he could have kept up with Thommo on the lead, and the evidence suggests that that would be unlikely.

The only other realistic option is Croad, who despite having an ordinary game is our sole big bodied forward capable of providing a contest on the HF line. To move Croad would have conceded defeat immediately IMO.

Zac is our best option at FB, I just hope Clarkson and the footy department get some quality coaching into this kid before he develops unbreakable bad habits.
 
everyone blames dawson and clarko, but there is another 17 players for hawthorn on the ground at any oen time, if they didn't give away so many clearances, allowing the roos to blast out of the middle and give it to thomspon it would have been a way different story, and would have panned out like the geelong game, where dawson held kingsley goalless!
 
3 things.....

1. isn't the coach's primary job & responsibility to make tactical moves when there are obvious mismatches anywhere on the ground? winning the game should be the primary objective shouldn't it?
2. don't you normally blood a young defender in a back pocket or flank on the 2nd or 3rd best forward so that he can learn his craft and build up confidence? or a solid year in the VFL at the very least?
3. at the very least instruct your loose man in defence to help out zac, what exactly does Danny Jacobs do week in week out without an opponent? collect stats ?
 
RustyHawk said:
100% agree Lukazzz777

That tackle by I think Sinclair on Mitchell in the last quarter summed up our whole day. We were building up for something, momentum swinging our way then BANG down went Mitchell, down went Hawthorn.
Experience.
The reason mitch got ran down was that jordan lewsis gave a handball but didn't shepherd mitch as he did so. Sinclair continued to chase and then BANG! GONE.
A little thing that probably ended our chances of a comeback. It all comes back to experience.
Zac Dawson, just like Jordan Lewis will learn from these little things. they change games.
Get off Zac's back, he is learning just like alot of our players are.
Are we denegrating Clinton Young becasue he missed three shots at goal in a row? No
Are we sticking it into Chance Bateman for letting Wells run thruogh the centre bounces time after time unchecked? No
So cut the kid a bit of slack becasue like Lukazzz said he didn't lose us the game. He was doing a serviceable job while the ball kept coming in as quickly as it was. He may want to play a bit closer next time. We will learn.
It's all experience.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top