MEMO to MICK. RE: Heath Shaw

[DaVe86]

I'd also like to add one more thing.


Let's not reveal all our hands just yet.

Last year, we put Didak and Davis onto the ball early in the year. They were fantastic, but ran out of puff in the finals. After a few rounds, teams started tagging them and working out that they were playing predominantly midfield.


Whilst we are sitting 3rd on the ladder, no need to rush our moves. If we lose this week, we might need to try something to give our midfield a spark. And Heath Shaw could be the man to do it.


But for now, let's save the Heath Shaw midfield card for more desparate times, of as a plan B in the finals.

 

[Stifler's mom]

Yes, he also posts, under the username TheClokes.

Does Eddie post under the username TraDEDrafT?

 

[Bay Pie]

Does Eddie post under the username TraDEDrafT?

Does Bucks post under the username Bay Pie?

 

[mdc]

let's save the Heath Shaw midfield card for more desparate times, of as a plan B in the finals.

I'd say it's more of a Plan D

Heater's had some quarters in the midfield of the last few years, and almost without exception he's looked terrible there. Or at least significantly worse than he does in the backline.

I think people are stressing over this idea of a forward "tag" way too much. Shaw's played some terrific games against good opponents, even when they've dragged him deep. He just had a bad game on the weekend - partly because Brisbane were very good with their ball use going inside 50, which didn't allow him to peel off and rebound.

He'll be fine.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

I wholeheartedly agree with the idea of freeing up Heath when he is copping a heavy tag.

The part I bolded is where I see your hypothetical set play breaking down. Heath delivering it long and hard inside 50 is more likely to land on the chest of a defender, or to go over the forwards head and trickle through for a point. Pinpoint delivery into the forward 50 is not a great strength of his.

This post is win.

 

[Optimax]

Has anyone considered being dragged away from the play is often not helped by Heath himself?

When he gets a tagger he always starts offering them zero respect, is then cut up in a five minute period where his opponent gets the ball funneled through him, this results in heath going into his shell and then giving far too much respect to his player and he forgets to attack.

Moving him upfield wont necessarily change this either, he'll still get tagged and we'll still be lacking drive from defense. We even swap players in defense more this year and it hasn't helped any, Harry is still defensively good and provides attacking rebound, Maxwell the same, it only really ever falls down on Heath.

In short if heath plays shit kicker taggers, as he would Brad johnsons of this world (some respect but plays his natural game, instead of no respect until he is badly burnt and goes hard defensive shut down), we wouldn't have this issue. None of that can be doen by a coach either, its between the players ears

 

[dswan]

Well Mick is past it does not use the corridor, lies, does not take anyones advice. Heath has alcohol problems... Not a good combination for success.
Problems are ingrained in our club.

 

[Greening Magic]

Has anyone considered being dragged away from the play is often not helped by Heath himself?

When he gets a tagger he always starts offering them zero respect, is then cut up in a five minute period where his opponent gets the ball funneled through him, this results in heath going into his shell and then giving far too much respect to his player and he forgets to attack.

Moving him upfield wont necessarily change this either, he'll still get tagged and we'll still be lacking drive from defense. We even swap players in defense more this year and it hasn't helped any, Harry is still defensively good and provides attacking rebound, Maxwell the same, it only really ever falls down on Heath.

In short if heath plays shit kicker taggers, as he would Brad johnsons of this world (some respect but plays his natural game, instead of no respect until he is badly burnt and goes hard defensive shut down), we wouldn't have this issue. None of that can be doen by a coach either, its between the players ears

Agree mostly with this. Also:

Every time Shaw gets beaten by a forward tag it's Mick's fault?

So let's change our whole defensive structure cos Heater is struggling?

When Didak or another midfielder gets beaten by a tag everyone carries on about how they are mentally weak and can't handle it, but if Heater gets rolled by a forward tag we cry for MM to help him.

I'm pretty sure there would be discussions going on in the box about who's got him and what they're trying to do. But what if all your other defensive match-ups are going well and Heaters opponent isn't going to hurt you on the scoreboard? Do people really think that the defensive coach and MM just sit there and say 'stuff him, it's good for the side if he doesn't touch it today'. I think not and surely you don't either.

 

[soreplums]

Agree mostly with this. Also:

Every time Shaw gets beaten by a forward tag it's Mick's fault?

So let's change our whole defensive structure cos Heater is struggling?

When Didak or another midfielder gets beaten by a tag everyone carries on about how they are mentally weak and can't handle it, but if Heater gets rolled by a forward tag we cry for MM to help him.

I'm pretty sure there would be discussions going on in the box about who's got him and what they're trying to do. But what if all your other defensive match-ups are going well and Heaters opponent isn't going to hurt you on the scoreboard? Do people really think that the defensive coach and MM just sit there and say 'stuff him, it's good for the side if he doesn't touch it today'. I think not and surely you don't either.

We don't need to change the whole defensive structure. Move someone like Macaffer back to take Heath's Opponent so he can take the one playing up the ground, freeing him up and providing more run to support Harry and Maxy. Three palyers running hard from the backline shares the workload and still leaves them a little extra in the tank nearing the end of each quarter.

Our whole game plan is based around breaking from half back, run and carry and then kick long when we get just past the centre. Shaw is one of those players that provides lots of this as it is his strength.

Not saying that MM says "stuff him," but he did say that moving him wouldn't teach him anything. Well it's been two years and he isn't learning- give him a hand. A hard running Shaw provides much more than one stuck punching the ball from goal line.

 

[Optimax]

It's not that heaths opponent is dangerous though, it's waste to move caff off a quality small in the opposistion onto heaths tagger (who will likely follow Heath anyway).

Heath gets dragged away from the play because he lacks all respect to his opponent until burnt, then goes too far the other way. It's too simplistic to say move him onto a wing, swap opponents, yes Heath is nominally q defender but when he has a tagger on him it's not his choice, so moving Heath forward, mid where ever doesn't mean the tagger goes away he just gets tagged in a different part if the ground.

What Heath has too learn, and it's a pain he diesbt know it, is if he plays the defensive forwards of this world, as he does the johnsons, akers, etc (ie attacking but respectful defence) instead of utter disdain until he is burnt into sulking he will never get tagged out of it.

 

[G.O.B]

Bucks and Neeld are the reason we were winning games before Malthouse let them have their way for awhile and then stepped in and resumed the reins.Back to his one dimensional game plan that all teams can work out.
The malthouse rot started from the geelong game.

I cant say I'm all that familiar with your posting style but please tell me that this nonsense is sarcasm.

God help us all if Bucks 'aint the savior so many are making him out to be.

 

[daics cousin]

I cant say I'm all that familiar with your posting style but please tell me that this nonsense is sarcasm.

God help us all if Bucks 'aint the savior so many are making him out to be.

What you have to remember is that Malthouse although the senior coach
allowed Buckley and Neeld to instruct the players over the past 6-7 weeks before the Geelong game.

Remember the incident when Bucks was talking to quite a few of our forwards and Malthouse quickly came in and took over during a quarter time break ?

Last week Malthouse was quick to point out in the media that our Forward line was terrible indirectly having a dig at Buckley.But Malthouse was in charge wasn't he and we lost.We weren't playing that hard tough lockdown footy we were before the Geelong game.Its called read between the lines,Call it scarcasm if you want.

All i know is this.No Buckley won't be our saviour but what he will do is
make changes to the game plan when required,whereby Malthouse doesn't.
Buckley will make the hard call on players who are not performing,where Malthouse doesn't to his own detriment.Both these factors have lost us premierships in the past.If you want to see the value of MALTHOUSE,look
back at the last 10 years,surely that will tell you something.
For years we needed to address our 2 main problems the Ruck and the midfield.It has only just been adddressed,only cause MALTHOUSE knows the time clock is ticking for him,but still he persists in his usual manner that will cost us again.Wait and see.

Buckley has got a great understanding on the way the modern game is played.Malthouse hasn't.Malthouse persists with the same game plan week in week out.He cannopt stand change.We had change a few weeks ago,playing hard tough footy and multiple goal scorerers, even attacking through the cntre corridor.Since the Geelong game we have not played the same type of footy.Malthouse has since been in complete control during all the breaks,the assistants have stepped back.

So with Buckley at the helm,sure the guy will make mistakes but he will roll the dice in fact he will take us to more than one flag,something he should have won as a player but that's ok he'll do it as a coach.

 

[THATSGOLD]

I don't think he has fully recovered from the injury he got after/during the melb game. He was then given a spell, played well for one or two weeks and now is back to the same. Thats one reason he is not playing on the ball. to me he doesn't look 100 per cent.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

This is Shaw's problem, not Malthouse's.

Shaw has to be capable of playing one-on-one deep in defence. Once he gains those capabilities, the opposition has no incentive to force him back there.

He has to improve as a footballer. Its as simple as that.

 

[hellfire]

Shaw should definitely be played up the ground more when he is having little offensive influence. The problem is that he is one of our best small defenders, and taking him up the ground, whilst beneficial offensively in the sense that he might shake a tag, could force us to play someone like Wellingham as a small defender.

Besides, if he keeps kicking the ball the way he has in the last few weeks, I don't want him to bloody get it.

 

[Nardz]

What you have to remember is that Malthouse although the senior coach
allowed Buckley and Neeld to instruct the players over the past 6-7 weeks before the Geelong game.

you're just purely speculating here. has the club released a statement to say that mick will be kicking back in the first 6-7 rounds while bucks and neeld do all the work? or are you just drawing your own conclusions, because you liked what you saw in the first 6-7 weeks therefore it must be attributed to buckley and neeld, and you don't like what you've seen since so therefore it must be mick back at the helm?

Remember the incident when Bucks was talking to quite a few of our forwards and Malthouse quickly came in and took over during a quarter time break ?

that incident was a media beat up. even so, malthouse is the senior coach, he has every right to take over from buckley if he feels the need to do so during the quarter time huddle. we wouldnt even be raising this point if that assistant coach was caracella or someone else..

Last week Malthouse was quick to point out in the media that our Forward line was terrible indirectly having a dig at Buckley.But Malthouse was in charge wasn't he and we lost.We weren't playing that hard tough lockdown footy we were before the Geelong game.Its called read between the lines,Call it scarcasm if you want.

again people are drawing a massive conclusion here. a coach isn't allowed to criticise a part of his team without that being interpreted as a indirect insult at the coach in charge of that team?

buckley has only had 6 months to work with the forward line, and he can only work with the cattle he has at his disposal. he's not expected to completely rejuvinate this part of the ground, even if it is what bigfooty expects.

once again i dont think mick has done anything wrong here. that was a message to the players and not to buckley.

 

[Dawson]

Well Mick is past it does not use the corridor, lies, does not take anyones advice. Heath has alcohol problems... Not a good combination for success.
Problems are ingrained in our club.

I agree, I've always thought Mick should just take a moment to consider your well thought out reasoning in your posts.

Why you are not employed as his coaching adviser is something that I have never been able to figure out.

 

[Bay Pie]

Heater will play on Gia, towel him up and rebound very well and this thread will not be spoken about until Heater gets a tag on him again.

If Heater gets a tag, move him next to the oppositions main target, creating a 2 on 2. He'll get tagged by a lessor type player who's generally not as dangerous as many others and Heater could help out on say, Barry Hall this week, as the 3rd man to the contest.