Coach Is Hardwick now the second best coach in the league behind Clarkson?

[Duskfire]

Not sure on the dynamics of team structure, but I have heard several times over the years that Coaches don't interfere with list management and that's what list managers are paid to do. I'd say there would be a discussion between 'several' people over the 'types' of players a club drafts. So in that case, a coach MAY suggest a type of player but not the specific player. The club MIGHT dictate that they want players with a certain attitude. I remember Malthouse wanted players with a specific attitude.

Does that mean Chris Scott

Chris Scott

Age

47

Ht

182cm

Wt

89kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

16.6

4star

K

11.2

4star

HB

5.4

4star

M

5.1

5star

T

1.6

4star

G

0.4

3star

No current season stats available

D

13.2

4star

K

10.2

4star

HB

3.0

3star

M

2.2

3star

T

2.8

5star

G

0.4

3star

isn't responsible for bringing in older players?

I mostly kid, but it would probably vary from club to club. i find it hard to believe that Clarkson has no hand in recruiting at Hawthorn for instance, or Hardwick at Richmond. But maybe you are right.

 

[PJays]

Of the 18 times that a Vic team has played an interstate team in the granny, the interstate team has won 10 of them. Whilst you are convinced that a home state grand final is a massive advantage, there is absolutely no evidence to show that's the case. It's not a particularly parochial crowd due to the ticketing and players don't need the crowd to help get the best out of themselves.

A small sample size of 18 matches doesn't override the proven phenomena of home ground/home court advantage which is universal across sports and has been proven over many decades and many thousands of sports contests at all levels.

Having said that, the grand final is unique in one respect that you mention- the crowd isn't as parochial. The home ground advantage that say, Richmond enjoy on a Saturday night in Round 17 vs Adelaide, is greater than the home ground advantage they enjoy on grand final day when half the crowd is neutrals or corporates and there's also 10,000 Adelaide fans, many of whom have made the trek from Adelaide.

Nonetheless, it's still an advantage- and 18 matches does nothing to prove otherwise.

 

[sr36]

A small sample size of 18 matches doesn't override the proven phenomena of home ground/home court advantage which is universal across sports and has been proven over many decades and many thousands of sports contests at all levels.

Having said that, the grand final is unique in one respect that you mention- the crowd isn't as parochial. The home ground advantage that say, Richmond enjoy on a Saturday night in Round 17 vs Adelaide, is greater than the home ground advantage they enjoy on grand final day when half the crowd is neutrals or corporates and there's also 10,000 Adelaide fans, many of whom have made the trek from Adelaide.

Nonetheless, it's still an advantage- and 18 matches does nothing to prove otherwise.

Results in other sports with parochial home team crowds doesn't prove your point either. Early indications from the only data set that we have for home team grand finals in Melbourne is all we have to go on, other than a series of assumptions made by yourself and others. And those early indications suggest that there is nothing to see here.

 

[PJays]

Results in other sports with parochial home team crowds doesn't prove your point either.

We have thousands upon thousands upon thousands upon thousands of data points- being sporting matches across many different sports. We know the home team wins most of the time. This holds true for home & away, and finals.

But you do raise an interesting issue- what is home ground advantage? Why does the home team win more often? What influences the players to perform better or worse and changes the outcome- Is it the crowd? Is it the ground? The travel factor? Does umpiring play a role?

This is where sports differ. In most sports it must be crowd based or travel related (I'm sure it's mostly crowd). In most sports, playing area is same size everywhere.

Footy is a unique sport where the dimensions of the ground differ. "Ground knowledge" is a genuine thing. Coaches know it. This is why, for example, Essendon built two ovals at Tullamarine- one with the dimensions of Marvel and the other, the MCG. Certain playing styles are more effective at certain grounds.

By my count, there have been 16 grand finals in the AFL era played at the home ground of one of the teams. The home record is 9 wins, 7 losses. (91, 96, 98, 01-03, 08, 10, 11-15, 17-19).

So- I would have to clarify my argument here. When the Dogs or Geelong play a GF against an interstate team, they do have a home advantage with the crowd being mostly in their favour. But it's not equivalent to the home ground advantage Richmond or Hawthorn have enjoyed through recent years. When they play an interstate team they have everything - crowd, and the ground advantage of playing the MCG 14 or 15 times a year.

And when a fellow Melbourne team plays a MCG home team- say, Hawthorn vs Geelong or Collingwood vs St Kilda- Hawthorn and Collingwood retain that ground advantage. Footy is unique with so many factors at play- "home" advantage is more complicated.

 

[sr36]

We have thousands upon thousands upon thousands upon thousands of data points- being sporting matches across many different sports. We know the home team wins most of the time. This holds true for home & away, and finals.

But you do raise an interesting issue- what is home ground advantage? Why does the home team win more often? What influences the players to perform better or worse and changes the outcome- Is it the crowd? Is it the ground? The travel factor? Does umpiring play a role?

This is where sports differ. In most sports it must be crowd based or travel related (I'm sure it's mostly crowd). In most sports, playing area is same size everywhere.

Footy is a unique sport where the dimensions of the ground differ. "Ground knowledge" is a genuine thing. Coaches know it. This is why, for example, Essendon built two ovals at Tullamarine- one with the dimensions of Marvel and the other, the MCG. Certain playing styles are more effective at certain grounds.

By my count, there have been 16 grand finals in the AFL era played at the home ground of one of the teams. The home record is 9 wins, 7 losses. (91, 96, 98, 01-03, 08, 10, 11-15, 17-19).

So- I would have to clarify my argument here. When the Dogs or Geelong play a GF against an interstate team, they do have a home advantage with the crowd being mostly in their favour. But it's not equivalent to the home ground advantage Richmond or Hawthorn have enjoyed through recent years. When they play an interstate team they have everything - crowd, and the ground advantage of playing the MCG 14 or 15 times a year.

And when a fellow Melbourne team plays a MCG home team- say, Hawthorn vs Geelong or Collingwood vs St Kilda- Hawthorn and Collingwood retain that ground advantage. Footy is unique with so many factors at play- "home" advantage is more complicated.

In AFL, I'd be interested in seeing the data for all finals. It seems to me that the home ground advantage diminishes massively once finals come around.

My personal opinion on the advantage is that it generally comes from the crowd and the resulting energy levels for players, combined with the impact the crowd pressure has on umpires. Comfort, familiarity and the resulting confidence is probably also a factor. But both the bias of the crowd and the familiarity get thrown out the door on GF day. If results start mimicking the theory that it's a big factor on GF day, then I'll change my tune. But until then, let it be played on the best venue in the land. And if the data does show its a significant advantage, stuff the home grounds that some want, go with a neutral venue.

 

[My Tilly]

One aspect I find very appealing is his demeanor before and during games. He's very confident and rarely does he get flustered.
This must be a great example to his players when they have a cool, calm and collected coach.
Adam Simpson is another one who rarely gives anything away.

Clarkson is very much the opposite. Bangs the desk and throws drink bottles like he's about to go on a rampage.

 

[redglare]

Very hard for me to pick the better out of Clarkson and Hardwick. Clarkson was more the modern day innovator, and has had more influence on the game, but Hardwick has had less to work with. Have to say, did not see it coming with Hardwick - seemed to be a nice friendly guy, plodding along - and then all of sudden boom! I'm sure there was more to the transformation and he got plenty of help but its been astonishing.

 

[HTT]

A small sample size of 18 matches doesn't override the proven phenomena of home ground/home court advantage which is universal across sports and has been proven over many decades and many thousands of sports contests at all levels.

Having said that, the grand final is unique in one respect that you mention- the crowd isn't as parochial. The home ground advantage that say, Richmond enjoy on a Saturday night in Round 17 vs Adelaide, is greater than the home ground advantage they enjoy on grand final day when half the crowd is neutrals or corporates and there's also 10,000 Adelaide fans, many of whom have made the trek from Adelaide.

Nonetheless, it's still an advantage- and 18 matches does nothing to prove otherwise.

Results across AFL games also suggest it’s worth no more than two goals in favour of the home team and the narrowest margin a Victorian team has defeated a non-Victorian team in a Grand Final was 15 points - and none of the others have been even close to that.
So it hasn’t changed any premiers.

 

[PJays]

Results across AFL games also suggest it’s worth no more than two goals in favour of the home team and the narrowest margin a Victorian team has defeated a non-Victorian team in a Grand Final was 15 points - and none of the others have been even close to that.
So it hasn’t changed any premiers.

Footy doesn't work like that. Many teams have rolled over in grand finals and its about momentum (and sometimes, tactical changes). If you're 3 goals down in a GF with 5 minutes to go, you will make tactical changes that make it more likely you'll lose by 6 goals than win. But they give a better chance of winning than changing nothing, so coaches do it. And more likely to make odd changes than usual games.

You just can't use an average margin and extrapolate to wins and losses. Footy doesn't work like that. Momentum is huge also from a psychological perspective, and bigger in GFs than usual games.

Also I'd like to see the stats showing home state advantage only makes a 2 goal diff- I reckon more.

 

[BF Tiger]

When are people going to realize that the coach is just a small part of the bigger picture. You think Hardwick and Clarkson just walk up to gameday, do everything and win a premiership. I'll credit the entire club from list recruiting to the coach, ESPECIALLY when a club like Richmond has success over a number of years.

Is that a put-down or a compliment?

 

[DontArgue4]

Hardwick is a greater coach than Clarkson.

Hawthorn won 3 flags in a row, but look at their list! They had a bunch of top draft picks, all drafted around the same time (Hodge, Roughhead, Lewis, Buddy)

They nabbed a bunch of All Australians from other clubs (Lake, Burgoyne, Frawley). They got a steal of a trade for Jack Gunston

19

Jack Gunston

Age

32

Ht

193cm

Wt

86kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

15.5

4star

K

10.5

4star

HB

5.0

4star

M

5.7

5star

T

2.2

4star

G

1.9

5star

D

10.6

3star

K

8.0

3star

HB

2.6

2star

M

4.3

4star

T

1.7

3star

G

1.6

5star

D

11.2

3star

K

7.0

3star

HB

4.2

4star

M

3.2

4star

T

2.6

4star

G

0.6

3star

- a young star in the making, and a ready made replacement for Buddy.

Yes they won 3 in a row but they had the best list every year. They had no injuries. And they were lucky enough to play prelims and grand finals against interstate teams every year from 2012 to 2015. (the only exception, from memory is the 13 prelim where Chapman got suspended and Varcoe missed a shot in the last minute- Hawthorn very lucky). And what happened when Hawthorn got old- they haven't done anything in 5 years.

Look At Richmond this year- who are their star players, really? They win off the back of a great system. They're an exceptionally well drilled team, with a proven brand that holds up a finals. Oh, and one guy who steps up in every big game.

Ummmm....

Dusty, Lynch, Grimes, Vlastuin, Edwards, Prestia, Cotchin, Riewoldt

Not even mentioning guys who the general public wouldnt consider stars but are certainly seen as stars within our four walls... guys like Bolton, Balta, Short (BnF winner)

 

[PJays]

Dusty, Lynch, Grimes, Vlastuin, Edwards, Prestia, Cotchin, Riewoldt

Dusty consistently rises to the occasion and is a bone fide superstar.

But are you really comparing that group to Hodge, Mitchell, Lewis, Rioli, Roughhead, Gunston, Breust, Birchall, Lake, Gibson, Burgoyne, Frawley etc (and Buddy in 2012 - 2013).

Clarkson's Hawks had more star talent and a better overall list. They have several players who were already All Australians before even joining Hawthorn!

But Richmond has the better system and the players know it backwards. That's why I put more of Richmond's success down to Hardwick than Hawthorn's success down to Clarkson.

 

[PhatBoy]

HAHAHAH , um you forgetting the fact we are still playing away from home and still won the flag when there are teams that are able to sleep on their beds and play in their home state with crowds?

wce, freo, brissy, port, ade, gcs

3 of those in the finals, 2 in the top 4 , yet we still win lol

keep the excuses coming

if you are that offended about so called vicbias, dont watch the game, the granny will be played at mcg again for 50 more years unless we get another covid, there will again be more vic teams than interstate teams, that is just the way the comp is. deal with it, the best teams still win the flag, the crap ones dont, vicbias doesnt come into play because the best teams still win

Enough with the bed stuff. It’s overused and irrelevant.

 

[DontArgue4]

Dusty consistently rises to the occasion and is a bone fide superstar.

But are you really comparing that group to Hodge, Mitchell, Lewis, Rioli, Roughhead, Gunston, Breust, Birchall, Lake, Gibson, Burgoyne, Frawley etc (and Buddy in 2012 - 2013).

Clarkson's Hawks had more star talent and a better overall list. They have several players who were already All Australians before even joining Hawthorn!

But Richmond has the better system and the players know it backwards. That's why I put more of Richmond's success down to Hardwick than Hawthorn's success down to Clarkson.

lolll

including frawley, lake, gibson but discounting the group of players i said

Grimes, Vlastuin, Astbury is our version of Lake, Gibson, Frawley...... saying the Hawks group are "stars" but saying Richmonds arent is just hilarious. We also had Rance for 2017 who is the best defender of the lot by a street.

AA means sweet FA in the grand scheme of things, we had ONE AA this year and won the flag. Why does it matter if they had AA's before they got to Hawthorn? Its irrelevant. Houli and Grimes were AA last year, Grimes should have been again this year.

 

[romeohwho]

Yes-I’d have thought they are actually on a par now.

 

[Damon_3388]

If you think of a player's career as spanning 15 years, you have the development period (ages 19-24, 1st-6th season), prime (ages 25-29, 7th-11th season), and then decline (ages 30-33, 12th-15th season).

You could apply this to a coaching tenure too. In that sense, it appears that Hardwick has just completed his prime (11th season) as a head coach, which yielded 3 flags. Clarkson is past it (16th season done), possibly getting stale by this point, with his prime (2011-2015) netting 3 flags as well, with another flag "ahead of schedule" (2008) in there too.

Regardless of the lists they have available, both will need to learn to adapt and innovate with a changing game, to remain viable as AFL coaches. Whether Clarkson can do that remains to be seen. Hardwick obviously has a lot more recent credit in the bank before any questions will be asked of him.

 

[tigers_of_old_08]

Very hard for me to pick the better out of Clarkson and Hardwick. Clarkson was more the modern day innovator, and has had more influence on the game, but Hardwick has had less to work with. Have to say, did not see it coming with Hardwick - seemed to be a nice friendly guy, plodding along - and then all of sudden boom! I'm sure there was more to the transformation and he got plenty of help but its been astonishing.

If both were available which of the two would you want coaching your team right now? (Assuming you needed a new coach)

 

[Duskfire]

At the end of the day Clarkson has 4 flags, Hardwick 3. Clarkson also is clearly a master at training assistants, as many of his have gone on to have Premierships in their own right (Hardwick being the prime example.) With that you would have to give the nod to Clarkson. However, if Hardwick is able to get another or keep Richmond ticking a long, than they would be hard to separate.

 

[PJays]

AA means sweet FA in the grand scheme of things, we had ONE AA this year and won the flag. Why does it matter if they had AA's before they got to Hawthorn? Its irrelevant.

Ummm.... because the AA team is selected by an expert panel as the best 22 for a given home and away season? Ie the star players of that year.

(Which is the whole point we're discussing.....)

 

[RobbieGray17]

Is that a put-down or a compliment?

It's a big compliment on your whole club. Hardwick doesn't go solo.

 

[jc12]

Enough with the bed stuff. It’s overused and irrelevant.

good you finally realized you were wrong

 

[PhatBoy]

good you finally realized you were wrong

About what?

The ‘sleeping in your own bed’ bulls*** is the dumbest argument I have heard for impacting a performance in, well, ever.

 

[jc12]

About what?

The ‘sleeping in your own bed’ bulls*** is the dumbest argument I have heard for impacting a performance in, well, ever.

wrong about everything mate lolol, you guys were crowing on last year about how we cant even win a flag away from home, clutching what last bit of straws you got left as you knew at that time last year it was almost impossible for gf to move away from melbourne any time soon. so that was the last bit of ammo you could fire at us, then bang corona hit and we win the flag away from home. its as if the footy gods did this to show you nuffies that you guys are so wrong HAHAHA

cant win a flag away from home lol, we won it whilst being away from home almost all year HAHAHA, talk about salt in the wounds.

accept it mate, we are the best and win anywhere

 

[PhatBoy]

wrong about everything mate lolol, you guys were crowing on last year about how we cant even win a flag away from home, clutching what last bit of straws you got left as you knew at that time last year it was almost impossible for gf to move away from melbourne any time soon. so that was the last bit of ammo you could fire at us, then bang corona hit and we win the flag away from home. its as if the footy gods did this to show you nuffies that you guys are so wrong HAHAHA

cant win a flag away from home lol, we won it whilst being away from home almost all year HAHAHA, talk about salt in the wounds.

accept it mate, we are the best and win anywhere

Sorry when did I crow about this.

I literally have no idea what the flying f*** you’re arguing with.

You’re like a boxer trying to fight a referee or something- I’ve never argued against what you’re arguing.

Thanks in advance for the evidence you’re bound not to provide that I’ve ever debated what you’re saying.

 

[Dr Awkward]

Very hard for me to pick the better out of Clarkson and Hardwick. Clarkson was more the modern day innovator, and has had more influence on the game, but Hardwick has had less to work with. Have to say, did not see it coming with Hardwick - seemed to be a nice friendly guy, plodding along - and then all of sudden boom! I'm sure there was more to the transformation and he got plenty of help but its been astonishing.

My impression is that Clarkson was more of an on field innovator, with his clusters and zones etc. Hardwick has been more of an off-field innovator in terms of playing group bond, club culture and the development of rookies and late draft picks.