News Paul Chapman

[meto]

Hmm, maybe. While they're developing perhaps. But consider these names:

Scarlett - specialist full back
Enright - specialist half back flanker
Milburn - specialist half back flanker
Ablett - specialist onballer
Bartel - specialist onballer
Corey - specialist onballer
Hawkins - specialist key forward
Taylor - specialist key defender

And so on. It's great that young guys get experience in different roles, but eventually they do have to settle on a particular position and make it their own.

I get the point, loud and clear, but versatility is a good thing you'd have to say!.......helps keep Scottie in a job.

 

[Partridge]

I get the point, loud and clear, but versatility is a good thing you'd have to say!.......helps keep Scottie in a job.

Yep no doubt. I think it's more while they are developing. Once they become established players they tend to find a position they are very good at.

 

[footscore]

Yep no doubt. I think it's more while they are developing. Once they become established players they tend to find a position they are very good at.

unless you are an exception to that case such as Kelly, Lonergan & Bartel who all played various years in a very different position on the ground.

Kelly in particular, I remember him playing across half back flank early on and seeing him link up with David Johnson and James Rahilly but then he'd go into the middle of the ground and gather 17-20 touches and he played across forward flank for a season if I remember correctly didn't he?
Certainly found his niche smack bang in the middle of the ground though

Champion midfielder!

 

[DanA]

Hmm, maybe. While they're developing perhaps. But consider these names:

Scarlett - specialist full back
Enright - specialist half back flanker
Milburn - specialist half back flanker
Ablett - specialist onballer
Bartel - specialist onballer
Corey - specialist onballer
Hawkins - specialist key forward
Taylor - specialist key defender

And so on. It's great that young guys get experience in different roles, but eventually they do have to settle on a particular position and make it their own.

I don't agree that the days of a permanent role are completely gone but I think there's definitely a trend towards playing multiple roles. I'd argue Bartel and Ablett are classic examples of this. Bartel plays everywhere and has done so in a premiership year, won a norm smith as a forward while Ablett has spent plenty of time as a forward. Really at Geelong there's probably only 6-8 out of the 22 that are specialist that play exclusively in their position.

From last years team i'd classify Lonergan, Taylor, Scarlett, Enright, Podsiadly, Hawkons and J.Hunt as specialists.

 

[Partridge]

I don't agree that the days of a permanent role are completely gone but I think there's definitely a trend towards playing multiple roles. I'd argue Bartel and Ablett are classic examples of this. Bartel plays everywhere and has done so in a premiership year, won a norm smith as a forward while Ablett has spent plenty of time as a forward. Really at Geelong there's probably only 6-8 out of the 22 that are specialist that play exclusively in their position.

From last years team i'd classify Lonergan, Taylor, Scarlett, Enright, Podsiadly, Hawkons and J.Hunt as specialists.

It's interesting that really the only time in the last 6 years Ablett has spent much time forward was 2010, and although he kicked 44 goals he was criticised on a fairly frequent basis around here. Still averaged 30 plus possessions a game as a midfielder too.

 

[LifeSpan-Void]

It's interesting that really the only time in the last 6 years Ablett has spent much time forward was 2010, and although he kicked 44 goals he was criticised on a fairly frequent basis around here. Still averaged 30 plus possessions a game as a midfielder too.

I thought Ablett did quite well as a forward in 2010, my criticism of his playing from that year was that he became notably less direct in his play when he was playing as a mid. whether this was a conscious thing or not I guess is moot now, but it sure played into the hands of several teams that year including (and especially) Collingwood, who let him get his 35-40 possessions a game predominantly in the back half while killing the chain of possessions on whoever Ablett passed to. Had he sacrificed an accumulation style of play (as putting him forward was doing) for a more immediate and direct style, Geelong may have gone deeper into 2010. Watching Ablett play with GC now, it is exactly the same as how he played in 2010. watching Ablett play in 2007-2009 he would often have less than 30 possessions but be far more devastating.

 

[FredLeDeux]

I thought Ablett did quite well as a forward in 2010, my criticism of his playing from that year was that he became notably less direct in his play when he was playing as a mid. whether this was a conscious thing or not I guess is moot now, but it sure played into the hands of several teams that year including (and especially) Collingwood, who let him get his 35-40 possessions a game predominantly in the back half while killing the chain of possessions on whoever Ablett passed to. Had he sacrificed an accumulation style of play (as putting him forward was doing) for a more immediate and direct style, Geelong may have gone deeper into 2010. Watching Ablett play with GC now, it is exactly the same as how he played in 2010. watching Ablett play in 2007-2009 he would often have less than 30 possessions but be far more devastating.

Do you think the change is solely in Ablett's style, or in opponents moving from a direct tag to a "corralling" approach, forcing him to play more laterally? Or both?

 

[LifeSpan-Void]

Do you think the change is solely in Ablett's style, or in opponents moving from a direct tag to a "corralling" approach, forcing him to play more laterally? Or both?

I think it was a bit of showmanship combined with the corralling tactic, but that he still plays in this fashion knowing that it doesn't win games suggests that he doesn't mind a possession or 50.

 

[Partridge]

I thought Ablett did quite well as a forward in 2010, my criticism of his playing from that year was that he became notably less direct in his play when he was playing as a mid. whether this was a conscious thing or not I guess is moot now, but it sure played into the hands of several teams that year including (and especially) Collingwood, who let him get his 35-40 possessions a game predominantly in the back half while killing the chain of possessions on whoever Ablett passed to. Had he sacrificed an accumulation style of play (as putting him forward was doing) for a more immediate and direct style, Geelong may have gone deeper into 2010. Watching Ablett play with GC now, it is exactly the same as how he played in 2010. watching Ablett play in 2007-2009 he would often have less than 30 possessions but be far more devastating.

I thought it showed incredibly selective amnesia from an awful lot of fans, Geelong ones included. It was openly stated at the start of 2007 that the players were told to give the ball to Ablett, as he brought others into the game. This didn't change for the remainder of his time at Geelong. Pretty logical policy - you want the ball with your best players.

I'm far from convinced that Ablett had any say at all in where he played. In fact I'm pretty sure like all players he had no say at all. It looked pretty clear at times he wanted to be on the ball but the apparently upright and honourable coach in Thompson left him up forward. It's a credit to Ablett he still played so well. To average over 30 possessions a game and still kick 44 goals is an incredibly good year. Imagine the hype if Judd or Rioli did that.

I've never understood the "team loses, criticise best player" mindset. If Ablett is good enough to get the ball often, which he was, how is it his fault when his teammates stuff up? There were a couple of vivid moments in that Prelim where howling errors were made (Lonergan dropping a sitter handpass from Chapman comes to mind), but to this days the woes of that season (and there were many) seem to stop and start at "Ablett became possession happy (he was anyway), he gave off lots of 1-2 handpasses (was doing that before too); we lost (that was the bit people had trouble dealing with)".

Geelong were never going to get any further than they did; bear in mind making a preliminary final is still a decent effort. By comparison it's much better than last year. The biggest single problem was players were selected when not fit ahead of youth because they were Thompson's favourites; and the gameplan had been worked out by Collingwood and St.Kilda (we went 1-4 against those teams that year). I can't see Ablett getting 30 touches in the prelim instead of 40 making much difference.

 

[LifeSpan-Void]

I thought it showed incredibly selective amnesia from an awful lot of fans, Geelong ones included. It was openly stated at the start of 2007 that the players were told to give the ball to Ablett, as he brought others into the game. This didn't change for the remainder of his time at Geelong. Pretty logical policy - you want the ball with your best players.

No argument from me but this is not a pertinent point.

I'm far from convinced that Ablett had any say at all in where he played. In fact I'm pretty sure like all players he had no say at all. It looked pretty clear at times he wanted to be on the ball but the apparently upright and honourable coach in Thompson left him up forward. It's a credit to Ablett he still played so well. To average over 30 possessions a game and still kick 44 goals is an incredibly good year. Imagine the hype if Judd or Rioli did that.

Leaving aside any opinions of Thompson's character (again not pertinent) he wanted to win games of footy and he could see that the "give the ball to Ablett" strategy was becoming a noose around his gameplan's neck. It was pretty high profile when Ablett had his on-air dummy spit mid-game about being left in the forward line and the week after that happened, Ablett was back on the ball and the same exploitation utilised by teams who had the personnel to control the rest of Geelong's mids. Ablett had plenty of say by this point. As for the "It's a credit to him" well, not really. There was another Brownlow to be won and Ablett enjoyed his 2009 taste of personal accolade, no doubt. My steadfast opinion is that Ablett now believes the only way he will be remembered as even an equal of his dad's career is to do the things that Snr never did - win flags (check), win Brownlow (check), win another Brownlow (TBC), win multiple B&Fs (as of 2012, check). To play Ablett as a forward now is to invite comparison between himself and his dad, and I don't think he likes that at all. Nothing you can say will change my mind on this point.

I've never understood the "team loses, criticise best player" mindset. If Ablett is good enough to get the ball often, which he was, how is it his fault when his teammates stuff up? There were a couple of vivid moments in that Prelim where howling errors were made (Lonergan dropping a sitter handpass from Chapman comes to mind), but to this days the woes of that season (and there were many) seem to stop and start at "Ablett became possession happy (he was anyway), he gave off lots of 1-2 handpasses (was doing that before too); we lost (that was the bit people had trouble dealing with)".

I've never blamed Ablett for Geelong losing the 2010 prelim, but his role as the go-to mid was tactically exploited by Collingwood. They were happy for him to rack up possessions in the defensive half knowing that to tackle him directly would kickstart the chain of possessions leading to Geelong goals, but instead they did the thing you have said, by putting pressure on lesser players in the team to force the error. Ablett's role to be where the ball was, instead of where the ball was going reduced his actual real effectiveness to a storm in a teacup, while Collingwood were able to pick off other players and kill us on the rebound. Now that we are seeing Ablett play these "awesome individual performances" on a weekly basis while getting routinely pounded on the scoreboard, my opinion is that Ablett knows that currently GC aren't up to pushing for finals or a flag and he's playing for more individual accolades. If they snatch a win then it's a happy bonus.

Geelong were never going to get any further than they did; bear in mind making a preliminary final is still a decent effort. By comparison it's much better than last year. The biggest single problem was players were selected when not fit ahead of youth because they were Thompson's favourites; and the gameplan had been worked out by Collingwood and St.Kilda (we went 1-4 against those teams that year). I can't see Ablett getting 30 touches in the prelim instead of 40 making much difference.

I doubt that Geelong would have won the flag, but had we not fallen for the old Malthouse boundary line box scrimmage shit, we could have at least made the GF to be knocked over by the saints (although maybe getting done in the prelim is more merciful?). As Scott showed in 2011, the minimalist approach destroyed Malthouse's plan and not a single Geelong midfielder made the AFL top 20 for disposals. You must not read into my opinion that I am blaming Ablett, but you must look at it as events that happened within which Ablett's role was exploited. I don't doubt that he tried his best, whether that best was for team reasons or personal ones is irrelevant in that respect.

As for Thompson the "apparently upright and honourable coach", he's just as culpable as anyone for allowing the playing group to dictate terms to him. Yes he played his favourites, and yes it did seem like players would be dropped from the team if Thompson had an axe to grind with them on a personal level (Andrew Mackie?). On that you will get no argument from me. But up until his big falling out with Ablett he genuinely wanted to win the 2010 flag. As I understand it - and this is second hand information, but I believe the source - Thompson's relationship with the playing group as a whole was tumultuous at the best of times. He had his loyal favourite guys who always spoke well of him, and then there were others on the list who couldn't stand him and others again who he wouldn't ever speak to, their coaching came exclusively from the assistants. His time was definitely up at the club, and it was almost fitting that he departed in such bizarre and controversial circumstances since most of his tenure was littered with bizarre controversies that were mostly kept in-house, some leaked.

 

[Crispy_]

I don't know if I believe all these speculative accounts that "some players didn't talk to Thomo". Sure some may not have approached him as often as others but some would have you believe players never spoke a single word to him? C'mon now!

His time was up but thats because he needed to reinvent himself and his tactics, not because players hated him.

 

[Farmer2Goggin]

As for Thompson the "apparently upright and honourable coach", he's just as culpable as anyone for allowing the playing group to dictate terms to him. Yes he played his favourites, and yes it did seem like players would be dropped from the team if Thompson had an axe to grind with them on a personal level (Andrew Mackie?). On that you will get no argument from me. But up until his big falling out with Ablett he genuinely wanted to win the 2010 flag. As I understand it - and this is second hand information, but I believe the source - Thompson's relationship with the playing group as a whole was tumultuous at the best of times. He had his loyal favourite guys who always spoke well of him, and then there were others on the list who couldn't stand him and others again who he wouldn't ever speak to, their coaching came exclusively from the assistants. His time was definitely up at the club, and it was almost fitting that he departed in such bizarre and controversial circumstances since most of his tenure was littered with bizarre controversies that were mostly kept in-house, some leaked.

We must have similar sources LSV !!

> 2010 - If I recall the Ablett falling out was mid season? This is consistent with him phoning Essendon June/July to sound them out about him coming back. I got this from a very informed source.
> "non speaking" - did not speak to an automatic member of our 22 now who played quite a few games in 2010 - I found this astounding when I was told.

We should all be forever grateful for what he achieved but the 2010 season and the manner of his departure took a lot of that gloss away IMHO
Interesting the predicament he now finds himself in - " Oh what a tangled web we weave when we first we practice to deceive"

 

[LifeSpan-Void]

I don't know if I believe all these speculative accounts that "some players didn't talk to Thomo". Sure some may not have approached him as often as others but some would have you believe players never spoke a single word to him? C'mon now!

His time was up but thats because he needed to reinvent himself and his tactics, not because players hated him.

Like I said, I believe the person who told me that by virtue of their relationship with the club. If you don't want to believe it that's up to you, but don't be naive as to how problematic Thompson became for the club, especially after the review at the end of '06. The team was winning in spite of Thompson at times.

 

[Vdubs]

I thought Ablett did quite well as a forward in 2010, my criticism of his playing from that year was that he became notably less direct in his play when he was playing as a mid. whether this was a conscious thing or not I guess is moot now, but it sure played into the hands of several teams that year including (and especially) Collingwood, who let him get his 35-40 possessions a game predominantly in the back half while killing the chain of possessions on whoever Ablett passed to. Had he sacrificed an accumulation style of play (as putting him forward was doing) for a more immediate and direct style, Geelong may have gone deeper into 2010. Watching Ablett play with GC now, it is exactly the same as how he played in 2010. watching Ablett play in 2007-2009 he would often have less than 30 possessions but be far more devastating.

I would suggest it was Geelong that was more devastating in 07-09. Ablett continues to do what he does and did best, get the ball and use it. He was our best and still is the AFL best at doing it. In 2010, Geelong could not have the wherewithal to capitalise on his prowess, for whatever reason, ie Pies working US out etc. Just like GC now. He is but one player in 22, but does and did the work of 2 or 3 players regularly. Because he can. I foresee him going forward more this year as his groins play up, and hope he is still devastating there.

 

[LifeSpan-Void]

I would suggest it was Geelong that was more devastating in 07-09. Ablett continues to do what he does and did best, get the ball and use it. He was our best and still is the AFL best at doing it. In 2010, Geelong could not have the wherewithal to capitalise on his prowess, for whatever reason, ie Pies working US out etc. Just like GC now. He is but one player in 22, but does and did the work of 2 or 3 players regularly. Because he can. I foresee him going forward more this year as his groins play up, and hope he is still devastating there.

I've always maintained that Ablett's effectiveness is maximised when he runs forward of play. Whenever he is at the start of the chain of possessions he is effectively nullified if the next guy turns it over. Most of our drive from half back came from the half backs in 07-09 - notable example of Ablett getting a ton of ineffective possessions in this time was the '08 GF, along with SJ. In 2010, Ablett's absence from the midfield forced Geelong to play more direct, which would then result in Ablett kicking several bags of goals. When it came to it and Ablett got himself shifted back into the midfield, then the blocking of the corridor circus began again and Ablett was forced to retreat and retreat and handball 1m to someone, get the quick receive and fire off another 1m handball to someone who the opposition would tackle and force the turnover. In short, they saw him coming a mile off and choked the space around him accordingly. Ablett-centric gameplan dead in the water, Geelong with no plan-b also dead in the water.

 

[Vdubs]

I've always maintained that Ablett's effectiveness is maximised when he runs forward of play. Whenever he is at the start of the chain of possessions he is effectively nullified if the next guy turns it over. Most of our drive from half back came from the half backs in 07-09 - notable example of Ablett getting a ton of ineffective possessions in this time was the '08 GF, along with SJ. In 2010, Ablett's absence from the midfield forced Geelong to play more direct, which would then result in Ablett kicking several bags of goals. When it came to it and Ablett got himself shifted back into the midfield, then the blocking of the corridor circus began again and Ablett was forced to retreat and retreat and handball 1m to someone, get the quick receive and fire off another 1m handball to someone who the opposition would tackle and force the turnover. In short, they saw him coming a mile off and choked the space around him accordingly. Ablett-centric gameplan dead in the water, Geelong with no plan-b also dead in the water.

Fair points.
The key seemed to be if Ablett's first give away was ineffective.
Can't argue with what you say there.

 

[Partridge]

I've always maintained that Ablett's effectiveness is maximised when he runs forward of play. Whenever he is at the start of the chain of possessions he is effectively nullified if the next guy turns it over. Most of our drive from half back came from the half backs in 07-09 - notable example of Ablett getting a ton of ineffective possessions in this time was the '08 GF, along with SJ. In 2010, Ablett's absence from the midfield forced Geelong to play more direct, which would then result in Ablett kicking several bags of goals. When it came to it and Ablett got himself shifted back into the midfield, then the blocking of the corridor circus began again and Ablett was forced to retreat and retreat and handball 1m to someone, get the quick receive and fire off another 1m handball to someone who the opposition would tackle and force the turnover. In short, they saw him coming a mile off and choked the space around him accordingly. Ablett-centric gameplan dead in the water, Geelong with no plan-b also dead in the water.

Mostly agree, with one point not mentioned as just as relevant:

21 teammates not up to it under finals pressure. That isn't Ablett's fault.

 

[footscore]

if Menzel doesn't make it (god forbid) reckon we see Jnr back at the club at age 31 and will take over where Chappy left us.

He'd be so bloody awesome even at that age, he's got a compact body which has been hammered over the years but has not sustained any major injuries and he's likely to keep going well in into his 30's, he could be capable of replicating his father's exploits but to a lesser degree...something like 50-60 goals a year until he retires.

 

[_Me_]

if Menzel doesn't make it (god forbid) reckon we see Jnr back at the club at age 31 and will take over where Chappy left us.

He'd be so bloody awesome even at that age, he's got a compact body which has been hammered over the years but has not sustained any major injuries and he's likely to keep going well in into his 30's, he could be capable of replicating his father's exploits but to a lesser degree...something like 50-60 goals a year until he retires.

We don't need decision
Have a look at what stuffed up essendon

Ablett has a home
No need to invite division back

 

[footscore]

We don't need decision
Have a look at what stuffed up essendon

Ablett has a home
No need to invite division back

Ablett only comes around once every 20 years, we'd be silly to pass if he wanted to return but yeh can see there will always be half who will forever hate him and another half who can see him helping the club win

 

[Vdubs]

We don't need decision
Have a look at what stuffed up essendon

Ablett has a home
No need to invite division back

Are your 2 points connected?

 

[AM]

Ablett only comes around once every 20 years, we'd be silly to pass if he wanted to return but yeh can see there will always be half who will forever hate him and another half who can see him helping the club win

And to think we've had two in that time.

 

[_Me_]

Are your 2 points connected?

Nope just getting some peds