Henry Slattery Effect

The House

Club Legend
Joined
Mar 24, 2008
Posts
1,826
Likes
183
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Pelicans
And it begins....................

What is stopping Hank from doing a Davey/Dyson type turn around in form?

Perhaps a footy brain??


Morris is a spud and the only thing that makes him look less like one is becasue people are distracted by his stupid hair colour.

come Saturday night, Morris will be exposed as the plodder he is.

He is no better than Hank.
Strongly disagree....and I'm not distracted by his hair colour!

Remembering that Hank has also had 8 or so years of top level coaching and physical preparation to get this "good", and Morris has had 6 months.

Morris is clearly better with his defensive acts, and makes less errors with and without the footy.

Anyways, stupid argument now......Jimmy and co clearly don't rate him, at all, even as a depth player, and I don't think it's an issue anymore.

I wish him well with Bendigo and beyond. :thumbsu:

.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

The House

Club Legend
Joined
Mar 24, 2008
Posts
1,826
Likes
183
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Pelicans
Yeah House, you were suggesting nothing of the sort. ;)
Hahahahaha, so your example of who was arguing that all our improvement was due to Hank was actually me!! :D:D:D

I said it makes a hell of a lot of difference when you replace a weak link (with a significantly stronger link, particularly in defense).....

.....i certainly never inferred that you'd go from a bottom side to a top side though (although i suspect you do already know that ;)).
 

The House

Club Legend
Joined
Mar 24, 2008
Posts
1,826
Likes
183
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Pelicans
There are a minority who blame/blamed hank for everything...minority.
Thank you for that piece of information that has no relevance to me whatsoever :)

Anyone who's read my posts over the journey should be well aware that I look a bit deeper into what we're doing right and wrong that that. I saw him as one of our problems, and I'm happy to say Jimmy and the boys have been rectifying most of these problem areas, Hank included. :cool:
 

Slappery

Senior List
Joined
Mar 7, 2009
Posts
218
Likes
0
Location
Adelaide
AFL Club
Essendon
Thank you for that piece of information that has no relevance to me whatsoever :)

Anyone who's read my posts over the journey should be well aware that I look a bit deeper into what we're doing right and wrong that that. I saw him as one of our problems, and I'm happy to say Jimmy and the boys have been rectifying most of these problem areas, Hank included. :cool:
Correct...can't be arsed deleting it. Not putting you in that category:D
 

lamaros

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Oct 15, 2007
Posts
7,229
Likes
2,984
Location
Sydney
AFL Club
Essendon
Hahahahaha, so your example of who was arguing that all our improvement was due to Hank was actually me!! :D:D:D

I said it makes a hell of a lot of difference when you replace a weak link (with a significantly stronger link, particularly in defense).....

.....i certainly never inferred that you'd go from a bottom side to a top side though (although i suspect you do already know that ;)).
Slattery played 21 games in 2009, when we made the finals. I was not suggesting you said that Henry was the difference between a 'bottom' and a 'top' side, but you have explicitly said that replacing him would make a "huge difference", "a hell of a lot of difference" and that it's "amazing how much better a side can function".

How can Slattery be both a "huge difference" not that big a deal, for a side that was already on the fringes of the 8?
 

rines

Norm Smith Medallist
Suspended
Joined
Sep 28, 2007
Posts
8,340
Likes
9,310
AFL Club
Essendon
Don't think the thread needed a bump. I hope we don't see Hank back because that would only happen as the result of a series of really bad things happening.

I don't think even Slattery's most ardent supporters (BTG anyone?) would think there is a role for him ATM in our fully functioning back line. However talk that our improvement is down to his omission is rude and just plain wrong. What his omission does mean though is that a number of our younger guys have stepped up and become better footballers.. thus we have a better side.

I wish Hank all success in the future and I believe he always gave his best for team and club. True clubman/role player.
 

Slappery

Senior List
Joined
Mar 7, 2009
Posts
218
Likes
0
Location
Adelaide
AFL Club
Essendon
Don't think the thread needed a bump. I hope we don't see Hank back because that would only happen as the result of a series of really bad things happening.

I don't think even Slattery's most ardent supporters (BTG anyone?) would think there is a role for him ATM in our fully functioning back line. However talk that our improvement is down to his omission is rude and just plain wrong. What his omission does mean though is that a number of our younger guys have stepped up and become better footballers.. thus we have a better side.

I wish Hank all success in the future and I believe he always gave his best for team and club. True clubman/role player.
Well said:thumbsu:
 

Slappery

Senior List
Joined
Mar 7, 2009
Posts
218
Likes
0
Location
Adelaide
AFL Club
Essendon
We have Surjan and Paul Stewart who play the same role as Slattery and do it 5 times better. Tom Logan is a back-up who rarely gets a game and he's better than Slattery too. Our defence is the only competent part of our team right now, Slattery wouldn't be anywhere near getting a gig there.
Think you will find Slattery will be be getting a gig in there. Port enquired about him last year and were told he was required (as was everyone else on the list). Port have asked again this year........think there will be a different outcome this year.
 
Joined
Mar 25, 2007
Posts
34,705
Likes
18,586
Location
Bottom of the pack
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Arsenal
And he can read the ball in the air without misjudging it so badly that the opposition fans spontaneously burst into laughter too.....and he doesn't turn it over and put his team mates under extreme pressure anywhere near as regularly, nor does his direct opponent kick anywhere near as many goals.

He has many aspects to his game that are more reliable than Hank's....overall Morris is afl standard (probably just), Hank is not.
Hahaha, you can't let it go, can you? These invented flaws. ****, he's not that great a player, you've got plenty of flaws to pick out, why invent some more?

Don't think the thread needed a bump. I hope we don't see Hank back because that would only happen as the result of a series of really bad things happening.

I don't think even Slattery's most ardent supporters (BTG anyone?) would think there is a role for him ATM in our fully functioning back line. However talk that our improvement is down to his omission is rude and just plain wrong. What his omission does mean though is that a number of our younger guys have stepped up and become better footballers.. thus we have a better side.

I wish Hank all success in the future and I believe he always gave his best for team and club. True clubman/role player.
Who's arguing there is? Hibberd and Hardingham weren't on the list when most of the Hank bashing took place so it's a pretty facile argument to make.

Having said that, I'd like to see him get a crack in the team at this stage, because he'd perform pretty well the way the team's going.
 

Walesy

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jul 2, 2007
Posts
8,855
Likes
3,457
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Care to provide the stats rather than some meaningless rankings.
My apologies- I was doubling up the Gold coast game in my figures.

This year we're 2nd for inside50's and 4th for goals against.

2012: 79 goals kicked from 301 inside 50's - or 1 goal for every 3.8 entries.
2011: 327 goals kicked from 1149 inside 50's - 1 goal for every 3.5 entries.
2010: 409 goals kicked from 1319 inside 50's - 1 goal for every 3.2 entries

That said, looks like you're right- so I dug a little deeper into the stats to see exactly where the goals were coming from.

Code:
2012

defenders	5.06%
Midfielders	44.30%
Small Forward	7.59%
Med Forward	11.39%
Tall Forward/Ruckman	31.65%

2011	
	
defenders	12.23%
Midfielders	44.95%
Small Forward	9.17%
Med Forward	16.21%
Tall Forward/Ruckman	17.43%
Now, I'm not too sure how to interpret this- either a better job is being done on the small, or the talls are clunking more marks, giving them less of a chance.
 

The House

Club Legend
Joined
Mar 24, 2008
Posts
1,826
Likes
183
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Pelicans
Hahaha, you can't let it go, can you? These invented flaws. ****, he's not that great a player, you've got plenty of flaws to pick out, why invent some more?



Who's arguing there is? Hibberd and Hardingham weren't on the list when most of the Hank bashing took place so it's a pretty facile argument to make.

Having said that, I'd like to see him get a crack in the team at this stage, because he'd perform pretty well the way the team's going.

Can't let it go???
1. You jumped on this bumped thread before me....and you've had AT LEAST equal keeness to comment on all things Hank as I have over the journey. Pot, kettle, etc. ;)
2. Everything I've said over the last 3 years has turned out to be spot on....he wasn't up to afl standard and didn't develop into someone that was, we know that now....and as soon as we've got ourselves a competent coaching panel, they agreed and won't pick him even when we're out of options and are desperate.

I would say the fact that Hibberd and Hardingham weren't on the list when all this Hanksteria began (you can use that if you wish :)) is THE argument to make/exactly what I was saying the whole time...

...I said all along that Hank wasn't up to it and that we need only look as far as the vfl, sanfl or wafl and we'd find far better options that we'd get virtually for free - turns out 100% spot on - i'm not sure how you figure that to be a "facile argument to make" now that it's been proven to be true??!!
Interesting over view, I must say :D


Anyways Benjamin, I've both been frustrated and enjoyed with the whole debate over the years, and whilst we obviously disagree regarding Hank, unlike a lot on here who have ignored the argument and just played the man (usually a sign that they lack content or articulation skills), you've played fair and have been one of the few that has provided an actual argument as to why Hank was "so highly rated".

It's been a blast, but let's both be honest....the argument is done.
Hank is at the age where he should be at his physical and mental peak, yet after all these years of top line advise and coaching, physio, diet/nutrition, conditioning, tuition, skills training etc, etc, etc, he can't break into the top 30-35 players at a club that squeezed into the 8 last year after missing the year before.

I know we're on the improve and things are looking positive, but it's not like he was trying to break into Brisbane of 01-03 or Geelong of 07-10...

It's not about me inventing flaws because of some secret hatred, it's about the fact that I saw a long way before you did that this guy is not good enough to play afl footy, and felt strongly enough about it to argue the point - simple as that.

Ps, love your last sentance.....definitely gave me a giggle....I wonder how McAlister or Bolton would go in a team going this well??? - maybe Henneman might be worth a look??!! :D


Anyways guys, no matter which way you look at it, the argument has reached it's inevitable conclusion.....Hank wasn't good enough to make it (who woulda thunk it?).


I for one am glad this is done and dusted.
.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Posts
58,343
Likes
47,426
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
LFC, Demons, Melb City, Bears
We're 2nd on the ladder
Playing the best football we have in years
Promising youngsters
Team working well together

And you've thought..."LOL Henry Slattery. What a **** prick"

Priorities. You have them.
 

yaco55

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jul 25, 2007
Posts
35,514
Likes
11,931
Location
hong kong
AFL Club
Essendon
Have no problem with the thread being bumped - It gives people the opportunity to see how Slattery is performing - All player threads will be bumped at some stage in 2012.

Think a few are too precious !
 
Joined
Jul 8, 2003
Posts
2,918
Likes
636
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Man Utd, LA Lakers
It's simple really. He was clearly never going to be a part of our next flag tilt. Limited players like Slattery do not generally play for a premiership winning team.

Now that we look to be developing a team, and a backline, that is nearing it's window of opportunity, it's hardly surprising he's outside the best 25-30 on the list
 
Joined
May 30, 2011
Posts
13,798
Likes
19,303
Location
Avenue by Radio City
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Our Lady of the Worthless Miracle
We're 2nd on the ladder
Playing the best football we have in years
Promising youngsters
Team working well together

And you've thought..."LOL Henry Slattery. What a **** prick"

Priorities. You have them.
Clearly the best advantage of going well is the demise of Hank!

The joyous trumpeting of an Essendon player not getting a gig because we're going well as some sort of vindication is pretty miserable given the context we're in, I'd say.

Still, whatever floats peoples boats.
 
Joined
Mar 25, 2007
Posts
34,705
Likes
18,586
Location
Bottom of the pack
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Arsenal
I don't want to drag this out because you summed it up perfectly: the argument is done.

Hardingham, Dyson and Hibberd are ahead of him. Heppell and Dempsey could play there but are better served slightly further up the ground. He's not best 22 or best 25 anymore. We could argue about why, we could argue about whether he'd have taken the chance Dyson has been given but at the end of the day it achieves nothing.

But what I don't like is the revisionism.

He is/was a limited player. His offensive game is practically non-existent. He's a decent enough stopper, and it's unjustified for anyone to suggest otherwise, but unfortunately if you want to play in a top 4 team (which we're building towards very quickly) you have to either be an excellent stopper with little attacking play (see Steven Baker) or a decent stopper with decent attacking play (all of our back pockets atm). Hank had to improve one aspect of his game to keep up and for whatever reason (lack of opportunity, lack of talent, mismanagement by coaches, injuries, whatever) he didn't.

But to suggest that everyone is vindicated because he's not in the team while we're doing well (and I'm not directing this solely or even mainly at you) is patently untrue. The argument through 2008, 2009, 2010 was that he wasn't best 22. Hindsight has proven that argument to be false. Look at the other alternatives - McVeigh was in the other pocket so wouldn't have kept Hank out. Houli's gone to Richmond and still can't defend. Atkinson is ... well, put it this way. I'm considering going to a shrink to try and suppress any memories of his career :D. Hibberd wasn't on the list. Hardingham was a forward for the year that overlapped that period. Dempsey was playing on a flank when he wasn't injured. There were no better options at the time. There are now.

I look back at his Essendon career and it's amazing what a thankless task he had. I wouldn't want to have been a back pocket behind a Matthew Knights defence with absentee defenders like Dempsey (at the time) and Atkinson playing alongside me. I wonder how many times he had 4 or 5 kicked on him but stopped 8 more.

I also hope he gets 4 games this year, even if just a token effort as we rest players towards the finals. He gave everything he had for the EFC, and even though it ultimately wasn't enough to be a part of a top 4 team, he deserves to be a 100 game player at the club.
 

EFC 1871

Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 11, 2007
Posts
30,294
Likes
11,542
AFL Club
Essendon
We're 2nd on the ladder
Playing the best football we have in years
Promising youngsters
Team working well together

And you've thought..."LOL Henry Slattery. What a **** prick"

Priorities. You have them.
My thoughts exactly.

How anybody could be negative minded about our footy right now is beyond me.

Jesus. Enjoy it, it might not last.
 

Slattery_20

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 16, 2006
Posts
23,386
Likes
2,303
Location
My house
AFL Club
Essendon
Code:
2012

defenders	5.06%
Midfielders	44.30%
Small Forward	7.59%
Med Forward	11.39%
Tall Forward/Ruckman	31.65%

2011	
	
defenders	12.23%
Midfielders	44.95%
Small Forward	9.17%
Med Forward	16.21%
Tall Forward/Ruckman	17.43%
Now, I'm not too sure how to interpret this- either a better job is being done on the small, or the talls are clunking more marks, giving them less of a chance.
It seems counter-intuitive that our small forwards have kicked less goals than last year - but it checks out.
Perhaps it's because this year it's only been the two, in pretty consistent form, whereas last year there was 4 or 5 who played forward at different points, and kicked goals.
 

lamaros

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Oct 15, 2007
Posts
7,229
Likes
2,984
Location
Sydney
AFL Club
Essendon
Limited players like Slattery do not generally play for a premiership winning team.
Mark Blake, Nathan Ablett, Steven Armstrong, Luke Ablett, etc, etc etc?

Premiership winning teams are not defined by the last couple of guys in the team, but by the champion players.

Do you really think that a Geelong side playing Slattery wouldn't have won in 07, 09, and 11?
 

brendan84

Club Legend
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Posts
1,689
Likes
1,863
Location
Sydney
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Dolphins, Bulls, Red Sox, Arsenal
Mark Blake, Nathan Ablett, Steven Armstrong, Luke Ablett, etc, etc etc?

Premiership winning teams are not defined by the last couple of guys in the team, but by the champion players.

Do you really think that a Geelong side playing Slattery wouldn't have won in 07, 09, and 11?
The real question is would the Saints have won with Slattery in the side? :eek: *ponders*
 
Top Bottom