Robert Shirley - how does he rate as a tagger?

[The Crows Truth]

You haven't provided a single 'fact' in there. It's a bunch of opinion.

passing opinion on an internet forum

 

[just maybe]

passing opinion on an internet forum

The problem is, you prefaced it by claiming it was fact.

 

[CrowMagnum]

An opinion (if that's OK).

He's been quite a good tagger in the past but, as most taggers naturally do, he's tried to develop in other areas particularly as an inside midfielder. This has worked to some extent as he is often the one at the bottom of the pack at a stoppage, as has been noted by some. Does he give out the incisive handball and set up our plays though? Not often, and as he chases the ball more his tagging abilities have tailed off as you'd expect. He has no outside game to speak of, so you have to work out whether his progress inside the pack outweighs his reduced tagging role. Maybe, but barely I'd say.

Should we keep him? If we can't find or develop anyone better then we should, but let's not kid ourselves about him being on the top shelf of either taggers or inside midfielders.

 

[spice18]

Here is a fact for all those Shirley bashers, without Roo in the guts, take Shirley out and you have a bunch of downhill skiers.

Seeing as he is your best tagger atm would you consider a job for him on one Shaun B this showdown? Hmmmm.... knife...butter...

 

[marvin]

1. I rate shirley highly enough, to not think he should be up for discussion every week.

Thanks for your rating.

However, if you could post a list of the players you are happy for me to discuss, and those that are off limits, I'll know what threads I can and can't start in the future.

2. why do you assume you should be rating a tagging job, seeing as you, me, and almost everyone else never has a clue what jobs or roles have been given to these players. that's the domaine of the people who give them their instructions, and understand what they've been asked to do - if you don't know that, there isn't much you do know at that point. do you also try to decide whether your local thermo-nuclear physicist is doing a good job?

That's a very poor analogy, considering elsewhere you are prepared to judge whether or not Neil Craig is a good match day coach. Have you ever sat in the box? Are you on the board of the AFC?

That's what we all come on here for - to offer our opinions on the players, coaches, media, individually and collectively. Of course I don't know what instructions Shirley is given before he runs out on the ground. I also don't know what instructions Ben Rutten, Matthew Clarke and Simon Goodwin are given, but it doesn't stop me or anyone else critiquing their performance.

I also don't play money to go and watch my local thermo-nuclear physicist do his job.

3. for as long as I see Shirley continue to be last guy off the bottom of the pack, watching him throw himself around without fear, and generally do the hard yards that a number of our softer, but de rigeur players, don't, I will continue to rate him. I have enjoyed watching him develop from a guy who you could often tell who he stood, because he was standing right there on them, to a guy entrusted with enough responsibility and freedom to win his own ball.

I am full of admiration for anyone like Shirley who's done it the hard way - low draft choice, off the list, rookie, re-elevated. Anyone who gets the most out of his abilities deserves to be applauded.

He's a gutsy player, no doubt. His in and under work is up with the best in the side.

But at the end of the day, he's the sort of player who will play his career under constant scrutiny. In the same way that Ben Rutten (for one) is an automatic selection because he is clearly amongst the best full backs in the league, players who are at the league average at what they do - be it tagging, or in and under clearance work - are always going to be looked at for potential replacement.

you can only rate a tagging job, when someone is given one, and you know what it is. neither of these 2 conditions need to be satisfied on this board however.

Intriguing. He couldn't be dropped two weeks ago, because he was a tagger then apparently.

If you want to compare him to in and under midfielders, that puts Shirley into a different weight division - West, Black, Kirk, Mitchell, Judd, Harris.

 

[marvin]

Here is a fact for all those Shirley bashers, without Roo in the guts, take Shirley out and you have a bunch of downhill skiers.

What's our first choice centre bounce threesome - Goodwin, Edwards, Shirley is it not? Shirley spends more time around the stoppages than most of the team.

First possessions - Goodwin 5.8 per game, Edwards 4.4, Shirley 3.5.
Clearances - Goodwin 5.6 per game, Edwards 3.6, Shirley 1.7 (7th in Crows).

Shirley is a tough nut, no doubt - but he still gets less first possessions and clearances than either of the other first choice midfielders.

It's no more a "fact" that the rest of the midfielders are downhill skiers than it's a "fact" that Scott Thompson or Nathan Van Berlo might be better centre bounce options than Shirley.

 

[J-Train]

I know the usual suspects will take this thread to the usual conclusion, but I think there's a legitimate question to be asked.

How does Robert Shirley stack up amongst the taggers in the AFL. Top few? Average? Or poor?

I'd suggest he's mid-range at best.

The following clubs have better tagging options for mine:

WCE (Stenglein) Sydney (Crouch, McVeigh) Collingwood (Holland) Kangaroos (Rawlings) Richmond (Johnson) Boyd (Bulldogs) and Fremantle (Carr)

I would rate him on a par with the likes of Baker at St Kilda, Selwood (Brisbane), Cassisi (Port) Sewell (Hawthorn), Rooke (Geelong)

I would rate him higher than Peverill (Hawthorn), Godfrey (Melbourne) and whoever the tagger is at Carlton.

My thoughts only, and I accept tagger ratings are pretty subjective.

I rate Shirls up among the top taggers in the league and he has claimed a number of big scalps during his career. He works his ar*e off and the only bloke I have seen consistently thrash him is Simon Black from Brisbane - and we all know how hard that guy runs!

I watched the Bulldogs game and Shirls game (20 possessions, 5 tackles) was as good or better than a lot of his highly rated teammates.

Can anyone tell me what constitutes a clearance - I think the reason why Goodwins and Edwards clearance stats are so high is because they often get the little feeder handball out from shirls to free them up to "clear" the ball? Is that a clearance, or is a clearance simply the first touch at ground level that counts as a possession? Would love some clarification if anyone knows the definition.

Anyway, he's a good player that has come from obscurity to become a valued contributor in a short number of seasons from following instructions, training his ring off and working on his skills. I'm sure opposition midfielders aren't cheering when he lines up next to them because they know they are in for a tough day. He just makes a nice scapegoat for disgruntled Crows fans at the moment because the whole team is playing below their potential.

Marvin, the most notable tagger at Carlton is Andrew Walker at the moment, he runs with the better/more experienced midfielders to learn from them until he can become a regular ball winner in his own right. Houlahan also gets the odd tagging role but he is better freewheeling IMO.

Carr from Freo and Crouch from Sydney are probably the only two taggers I would rate higher than Rob.

I went to the Brissy-WC game on SUnday and Selwood also did a top job on Kerr! He'd be up there as one of the better "stoppers" in the game too.

 

[johnnypanther]

Shirley has been made somewhat of a scapegoat for our recent performances of late, and I think part of the problem for his perceived lack of form or value is that he has been utilised away from his niche-role as a pure tagger, who is there merely to negate the opposition's #1 or #2 on-baller.

This season has seen Shirley play more as a ball winning midfielder in his own right - taking a look at his numbers this season:

Games: 20
Disposals: 16.1 per game (Up 1.0 on 2005)
Kicks: 6.2 (Up 0.7)
Handballs: 9.9 (Up 0.2)
Marks: 2.6 (Up 0.3)
Tackles: 4.4 (Up 0.2)
Goals: 0.2 (Down 0.2)
1st Possessions: 3.5 (Up 0.3)
Clearances: 1.7 (Down 0.4)
Inside 50s: 1.8 (Up 0.2)
Reb 50s: 0.7 (Up 0.2)
Contested Possessions: 2.0 (Down 0.1)
Uncontested Possessions: 15.2 (Up 2.1)
One-Percenters: 3.8 (Down 0.3)
Errors: 1.4 (Up 0.1)
Bounces: 0.1 (Up 0.1)

What also isn't taken into account is, he is doing a sh#tload of gruntwork in the guts for Edwards and Goodwin - especially in the absence of Ricciuto - and I truly believe that if he was removed from the side altogether as some of you have been advocating, we'd be getting doubly annihilated in the middle as a lot of the supply our topliners receive from ball-ups would be gone.

While I'm sure Craigy would love to send Shirley back into his natural role as a 100% stopper, I just don't think he can at the moment.

Who else is going to win the ball in close? Reilly? Skipworth? Let's get real.

Ben Hudson

 

[johnnypanther]

IMHO Shirley is a good honest trier who has largely got his spot on the team as a tagger by default given our lack of them, however, i believe that as a tagger he ranks about 14 - 16 and if he was offered for trade there would be no takers.
I think that Van Berlo (and others) more than adequately can take his role and i would even suggest that Hinge could do the job.
And if Shirley is now playing more of an inside midfielder role this year then our midfield stocks are pretty low. Thompson, VB, Reilly etc are far superior in this regard.
and i can assure you that i'm not placing Shirley as a scapegoat for our recent poor form - i've had this opinion for years and i've seen nothing to alter my mind - everyone says how good he has done on Judd and others but IMO his tagging efforts have been way overrated and these blokes for the most part have killed us.

PS give me the downhill skiers anyday

 

[marvin]

I watched the Bulldogs game and Shirls game (20 possessions, 5 tackles) was as good or better than a lot of his highly rated teammates.

He wasn't our worst.

Can anyone tell me what constitutes a clearance - I think the reason why Goodwins and Edwards clearance stats are so high is because they often get the little feeder handball out from shirls to free them up to "clear" the ball? Is that a clearance, or is a clearance simply the first touch at ground level that counts as a possession? Would love some clarification if anyone knows the definition.

My understanding is that the clearance is attributed to the guy who actually "clears" the pack, be it with a handball or a kick. The "first possession" is the little feeder handball that you refer to.

He just makes a nice scapegoat for disgruntled Crows fans at the moment because the whole team is playing below their potential.

He's a scapegoat when the whole team is playing at it's potential too.

Marvin, the most notable tagger at Carlton is Andrew Walker at the moment, he runs with the better/more experienced midfielders to learn from them until he can become a regular ball winner in his own right. Houlahan also gets the odd tagging role but he is better freewheeling IMO.

Andrew Walker - of course. Thanks. The Blues have been on Foxtel so often that I haven't seen so much of them this year.

Peverill (Hawthorn) was a quality typo, too. He's not blonde enough to be a Hawk.

Carr from Freo and Crouch from Sydney are probably the only two taggers I would rate higher than Rob.

Again, thanks - despite what some will believe, I genuinely intended to get some discussion on how he rates as a tagger* relative to others in the league.

There's a diversity of opinion, which is fine.

* (although he apparently is not a tagger anymore).

 

[Crow-mo]

Thanks for your rating.

However, if you could post a list of the players you are happy for me to discuss, and those that are off limits, I'll know what threads I can and can't start in the future.

sure, I'll put it up against the list of players you DO discuss every week. i'll bet my list is a lot longer than yours? no?

That's a very poor analogy, considering elsewhere you are prepared to judge whether or not Neil Craig is a good match day coach. Have you ever sat in the box? Are you on the board of the AFC?

no, it was a perfectly good analogy you've badly misunderstood.

Because we can see the need for action, because of the state of play. I absolutely agree with you, that it would be hard to assess the quality of some moves without seeing the board in the match day box. agree 100%.
but you've gotten very wrong, is that the needs for response is obvious, as is the inactivity.

it's one thing to assess the quality or the validity of a response, it is entirely different to see the need for a response and to notice the absence of one.

That's what we all come on here for - to offer our opinions on the players, coaches, media, individually and collectively. Of course I don't know what instructions Shirley is given before he runs out on the ground. I also don't know what instructions Ben Rutten, Matthew Clarke and Simon Goodwin are given, but it doesn't stop me or anyone else critiquing their performance.

again, on the raw angle you've used I agree. the problem with shirley, is you've brought up yet another unjustified criticism in a week when he was one of our better players. as judged by the player of the round votes you've tabulated!

but those people who forget there are 22 players in a side each week, like to interpolate in the perfomance of the opposition players as well as the actual performance of the guy in question. Scott West gets 45 possessions, ah yes, but simon goodwin got 35. whereas shirley gets 20 hard fought, in and under touches, and all we here is yes, but so and so. got xyz.

apples meet oranges.

I also don't play money to go and watch my local thermo-nuclear physicist do his job.

really? I suggest you try it sometime.

but let's say the springfield reactor heads into melt down, do you need to be in the coaching box, to know one of the physicists needs to do something?

I am full of admiration for anyone like Shirley who's done it the hard way - low draft choice, off the list, rookie, re-elevated. Anyone who gets the most out of his abilities deserves to be applauded.

He's a gutsy player, no doubt. His in and under work is up with the best in the side.

and I think that's the issue some of us have, here's a guy giving us everything when plenty of guys get a free ride from the supporters. if he attracted a proportionate amount of scrutiny, no one would mind.

But at the end of the day, he's the sort of player who will play his career under constant scrutiny.

agreed. this however says something about the average supporter, more than the player. if shirley were constantly in the bottom 4 or 5 players in our side every week, I'd understand. but he's NOT.

In the same way that Ben Rutten (for one) is an automatic selection because he is clearly amongst the best full backs in the league, players who are at the league average at what they do - be it tagging, or in and under clearance work - are always going to be looked at for potential replacement.

you're right it is exactly the same way, a guy who is barely average doesn't play virtually every game whilst fit since mid 1993 without being above average. If we play at least 3 finals games this year, which we likely will regardless of results. he'll have played 10 finals games!!!

that's a helluva lot, by anyone's standards.

Intriguing. He couldn't be dropped two weeks ago, because he was a tagger then apparently.

If you want to compare him to in and under midfielders, that puts Shirley into a different weight division - West, Black, Kirk, Mitchell, Judd, Harris.

no the only weight division he is in, is our best 22 players. maybe he has a book to write:
"the first team players, and the biased supporters who can't love them"

could be a best seller no?

 

[Crow-mo]

What's our first choice centre bounce threesome - Goodwin, Edwards, Shirley is it not? Shirley spends more time around the stoppages than most of the team.

First possessions - Goodwin 5.8 per game, Edwards 4.4, Shirley 3.5.
Clearances - Goodwin 5.6 per game, Edwards 3.6, Shirley 1.7 (7th in Crows).

Shirley is a tough nut, no doubt - but he still gets less first possessions and clearances than either of the other first choice midfielders.

It's no more a "fact" that the rest of the midfielders are downhill skiers than it's a "fact" that Scott Thompson or Nathan Van Berlo might be better centre bounce options than Shirley.

you've answered your own question, he's part of our first choice on ball brigade. the next question you need to ask yourself, is why?

 

[Crow-mo]

IMHO Shirley is a good honest trier who has largely got his spot on the team as a tagger by default given our lack of them, however, i believe that as a tagger he ranks about 14 - 16 and if he was offered for trade there would be no takers.

you don't think a 1st choice on baller for the top team, couldn't make the bench for the bottom team? ok.

I think that Van Berlo (and others) more than adequately can take his role and i would even suggest that Hinge could do the job.

ok, let's be fair here. you're suiggesting a guy who hasn't played a single AFL game - and probably never will, will do a good a job as someone who has played 100 games, and every finals game we've played in recent years? c'mon. let's be fair here.

And if Shirley is now playing more of an inside midfielder role this year then our midfield stocks are pretty low. Thompson, VB, Reilly etc are far superior in this regard.

yet can't get a run in the guts in place of him, not sure what that says about them.

and i can assure you that i'm not placing Shirley as a scapegoat for our recent poor form - i've had this opinion for years and i've seen nothing to alter my mind

I see, I see, said the blind man who couldn't see at all.

Johnny, all you've said here is that you've always held him up as a scapegoat. love to see the all the delisted players in this time you've rated higher.

- everyone says how good he has done on Judd and others but IMO his tagging efforts have been way overrated and these blokes for the most part have killed us.

well looking at our record, there hasn't been too much 'killing us' going on.

PS give me the downhill skiers anyday

sure, not that there is anything wrong with that!