Remove this Banner Ad

Hannath why?

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

The Anchorite said:
Clarke needed a rocket but did he really need a double rocket? It's rocket science I guess. Lucky it didn't cost us tonight.
Click to expand...

I think it is more a case of sending him a message than anything else.
 
gaskin said:
I think it is more a case of sending him a message than anything else.
Click to expand...

It wasn't like for like though, so a lot of the clubs mantras were thrown out the window, not certain big Jack has done any better than Griiff or even lurch in the last 6 to 8 weeks.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

ydraw said:
Is sending a message worth jeopardising a top 2 spot? I don't think so.
Click to expand...
Well, not sending that message could jeopardise a top 2 spot as well. Hard to say what was case in the end even with hindsight.

rodney hoo said:
It wasn't like for like though, so a lot of the clubs mantras were thrown out the window, not certain big Jack has done any better than Griiff or even lurch in the last 6 to 8 weeks.
Click to expand...
I'd say Hannath is more in need of a game or two for development and motivation reasons. Griffin is like a already fully ready replacement for times of great need. And I think he knows that as well...
 
Lyon has spoken about his intention to expose the list as much as possible. Jack got a run and Clarke has been able to regain some form. Win-win really.
 
jedi mind tricks said:
Simple put Zac in he's better than Hannath. Hannath has still done nothing.
Click to expand...

Of course Clarke is better, there's no argument you can make where Jack is the better player. But he's inconsistent. He needed the kick I reckon, and I like that he didn't come straight back in. If he plays well tomorrow I can't see him not coming in. If we get a more desparate Zac Clarke for the rest of the year it will have been worth it.
 
rodney hoo said:
Sort of I suppose, did we learn anything exposing Jack, and if so when do we start exposing Weller, & a few others.
Click to expand...
Yeah we learnt that Jack still ain't ready and Jack got another taste of what's required. He will go back to Peel under no illusions. Dare say we will see Blakely in the next couple of weeks.
 
I would rather they play Moller than Hannath.....he is to slow for AFL fullstop.Please let one of Blakely,Weller,Gray or Ballard get a game in the next few weeks,we need an injection of youth and enthusiasm..bog ordinary tonight was Sheridan,Suttcliffe,, D.Pearce,Hannath and even Clancey wasnt his best
 
TheMcManusNose said:
Of course Clarke is better, there's no argument you can make where Jack is the better player. But he's inconsistent. He needed the kick I reckon, and I like that he didn't come straight back in. If he plays well tomorrow I can't see him not coming in. If we get a more desparate Zac Clarke for the rest of the year it will have been worth it.
Click to expand...
Could have easily backfired......Zac should have been playing last night
 

Remove this Banner Ad

bruzaar62 said:
I would rather they play Moller than Hannath.....he is to slow for AFL fullstop.
Click to expand...

You seen Moller before? If you reckon Hannath is too slow then you'll be disappointed with Moller. He's no better. He also has a sub par tank.
 
gaskin said:
You seen Moller before? If you reckon Hannath is too slow then you'll be disappointed with Moller. He's no better. He also has a sub par tank.
Click to expand...
couldnt be any worse surely,Hannath gets out rucked,has no leap or pace and is ordinary below the knees...not sure about his tank. and I have only seen Moller play the once, against the saints and he wasnt the worst out there
 
gaskin said:
You seen Moller before? If you reckon Hannath is too slow then you'll be disappointed with Moller. He's no better. He also has a sub par tank.
Click to expand...

I see him play regularly & he is quick , I also spoke to one of the development coach & he told me Moller was one of the fasted on their list, he has agility big Jack dreams of IMO. His tank needs work but ain't that far of the mark, look at some of the other younger rucks in the league even Witts last night they all fade.
 
bruzaar62 said:
couldnt be any worse surely,Hannath gets out rucked,has no leap or pace and is ordinary below the knees...not sure about his tank. and I have only seen Moller play the once, against the saints and he wasnt the worst out there
Click to expand...

He was good against the saints, go back and see how fast he was, got a few raps that day all round. Maybe RTB has a thing against dreads, lol ;)
 
I think the answer boils fown to internal consistency.

IIRC, RTB has never stated it outright, but it seems like Ross's message is that team success is neither an aim or a goal - it is only ever a side effect of performance.

I assume Zac was dropped cause the brains trust thought he was underperforming and lacked commitment, much as many BF regulars do. Whether Hannath is a better ruck/forward than Zac is immaterial - zac wadn't performing so out he went... and if Hannath didn't perform at the required level then he's out too and we go to the next best option and so on (hence the recent mentions of Griff as a possible in). It is the STANDARD that is important, not the player.

This would explain why ballaz, sutty, sherro et. al. stay in each week despite indifferent performance... while promising replacements exist, if the wafl player's performance is not closer to the expected standard than ballaz etc have managed, then they stay out.

I've said previously that Suban must have certain kpi that have nothing to do with his possession-based stats. I now think this is true for the whole team. RTB never seems too concerned by possession stats in his post-game interviews, he talks instead about ball movement, positioning, transitions and pressure acts.

Quite clearly ross is working off of an entirely different set of performance yardsticks than we are. Through decades of habit (and through the AFL STILL only feeding us / releasing possession-based stats every week) we gague our players performance through increasingly irrelevant measures, such as how many times they disposed off the ball, how effectively they did it, and which particular piece of their body they used in the process.

If we really want to understand RTB's thinking, we need to measure a whole different side of the game, things like the number of times a player was late in filling in space, the number of times they found an unmarked team-mate, the number of times they were out of position plus the amount of time it took them to correct the error.

When you look at a game, or at an individual player's performance this way, you get an entirely different perspective on things. It shifts your focus away from the number of times an individual happened to touch the footy, and towards the degree to which the players followed the game plan, did what they were told, and thereby played in a manner that their other team-mates were able to predict.

I would find it utterly fascinating to know exactly which KPIs and stats matter the most to Ross so I could see the game through his eyes... But i'm sure opposing coaches would love to have that info even more. No wonder he keeps these measures of team performance such a closely guarded secret.
 
Last edited:

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Gekko71 said:
I think the answer boils fown to internal consistency.

IIRC, RTB has never stated it outright, but it seems like Ross's message is that team success is neither an aim or a goal - it is only ever a side effect of performance.

I assume Zac was dropped cause the brains trust thought he was underperforming and lacked commitment, much as many BF regulars do. Whether Hannath is a better ruck/forward than Zac is immaterial - zac wadn't performing so out he went... and if Hannath didn't perform at the required level then he's out too and we go to the next best option and so on (hence the recent mentions of Griff as a possible in). It is the STANDARD that is important, not the player.

This would explain why ballaz, sutty, sherro et. al. stay in each week despite indifferent performance... while promising replacements exist, if their performance is not closer to the expected standard than ballaz etc have managed, then they stay out.

I've said previously that Suban must have certain kpi that have nothing to do with his possession-based stats. I now think this is true for the whole team. RTB never seems too concerned by possession stats in his post-game interviews, he talks instead about ball movement, positioning, transitions and pressure acts.

Quite clearly ross is working off of an entirely different set of performance yardsticks than we are. Through decades of habit (and through the AFL STILL only feeding us / releasing ossession-based stats every week) we gague our players performance through increasingly irrelevant meadures such as how many times they disposed off the ball, and how effectively they did it. If we really want to understand RTB's thinking, we need to measure a whole different side of the game, like the number of times a player was late in filling in space, the number of times they found an unmarked team-mate, the number of times they were out of position plus the amount of time it took them to correct the error.

When you look at a game, or at an individual player's performance this way, you get an entirely different perspective on things. It shifts your focus away from the number of times an individual happened to touch the footy, and towards the degree to which the players followed the game plan, did what they were told, and thereby played in a manner that their other team-mates were able to predict.

I would find it utterly fascinating to know exactly which KPIs and stats matter the most to Ross so I could see the game through his eyes... But i'm sure opposing coaches would love to have that info even more. No wonder he keeps these measures of team performance such a closely guarded secret.
Click to expand...

Bugger me that makes too much sense for BF.
 
Just put the pitchforks and flaming torches down for a moment, people...Hannath will be out of the side in favour of Clarke soon enough, but to try and run him permanently out of the team is a mistake.

He certainly didn't have much impact last night, but none of the talls on the ground really did - and as often happens with Taberner, the second tall is so often ignored by the mids when kicking inside 50.

Jack gives Sandi a decent chop out in the ruck, this area has improved (off a low base) at AFL level, and I also have to say that I just can't see this huge problem with his mobility everyone has. His position in the structure is supposed to be the stay at home tall and relieving ruckman, and I never thought to myself last night "Gee, if only he could have got to that contest". In fact, his presence at the packs opened the door for Walters and he also had a hand in the team goal to Neale at the start of the 4th.

He's no star, and unlikely to ever become one, but a solid depth option in the right age bracket. I just don't get the hate!
 
FFC4ME said:
He's no star, and unlikely to ever become one, but a solid depth option in the right age bracket. I just don't get the hate!
Click to expand...

Nobody hates him. They just don't see the value in playing him over a much better player in a must-win game against a top 4 side.
 
FFC4ME said:
Just put the pitchforks and flaming torches down for a moment, people...Hannath will be out of the side in favour of Clarke soon enough, but to try and run him permanently out of the team is a mistake.

He certainly didn't have much impact last night, but none of the talls on the ground really did - and as often happens with Taberner, the second tall is so often ignored by the mids when kicking inside 50.

Jack gives Sandi a decent chop out in the ruck, this area has improved (off a low base) at AFL level, and I also have to say that I just can't see this huge problem with his mobility everyone has. His position in the structure is supposed to be the stay at home tall and relieving ruckman, and I never thought to myself last night "Gee, if only he could have got to that contest". In fact, his presence at the packs opened the door for Walters and he also had a hand in the team goal to Neale at the start of the 4th.

He's no star, and unlikely to ever become one, but a solid depth option in the right age bracket. I just don't get the hate!
Click to expand...
He is not a solid depth option. He is an average WAFL player.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom