Opinion The I Was Wrong thread- Where Tom Atkins posts go to die

[Gunf]

Qualifying final player ratings: From the villain of the night, to Geelong’s next-generation stars

A well-oiled Geelong machine pummeled the reigning premiers into the ground at the MCG. We run the rule over every player and rate their performances after an action-packed night.

www.theage.com.au

Judging on the scores these two 'experts' handed out, you've got to wonder if they actually watched the game or just assessed the stat sheet.

Atkins a 6, Mannagh 7, Guthrie a 5, Miers a 5.5, O'Connor 6.5. Utterly ridiculous.

Holy **** those are bad

 

[iameviljez]

Qualifying final player ratings: From the villain of the night, to Geelong’s next-generation stars

A well-oiled Geelong machine pummeled the reigning premiers into the ground at the MCG. We run the rule over every player and rate their performances after an action-packed night.

www.theage.com.au

Judging on the scores these two 'experts' handed out, you've got to wonder if they actually watched the game or just assessed the stat sheet.

Atkins a 6, Mannagh 7, Guthrie a 5, Miers a 5.5, O'Connor 6.5. Utterly ridiculous.

Just a harsh marker is all. 5/10 is their “did nothing wrong” kind of score

 

[Generalissimo]

Marking MOC down for that free kick seems harsh since the whole footballing world agrees paying the free was an error on the umpire's part.

 

[iameviljez]

Marking MOC down for that free kick seems harsh since the whole footballing world agrees paying the free was an error on the umpire's part.

I agree. Zac Guthrie was the one where a markdown is probably more warranted, because he already had fair warning that Rayner flopped like he needed a blue pill, but O'Connor was real harsh.

Otherwise, I agree with all the ratings/comments with the exception of Miers, who I think was better than he's given credit for here.

 

[dudusmaximus]

You should go listen to Atkins on 3aw today.

He was asked a question about the teams of offensiveness and his role (something like that)
And he said 'I'm a bit of a pessimist so I set up to defend first. If we are being offensive the ball usually sails over my head'.

More from The Age referencing that 3AW interview..

Geelong midfielder Tom Atkins did not see the Rayner incident, but said the Cats had to regroup after a “pretty costly two minutes”.

“We had to re-centre ourselves and get focused on the next contest,” Atkins told 3AW on Saturday.

“I think we’re able to do that after half-time. I feel like the way Mark O’Connor especially handled himself after the free kick was really symbolic of how we as a team want to be.

“He had every right to go back at Rayner after Rayner was getting in his face. So, yeah, that’s sort of the way we want to be. We want to be cold and aggressive.”

 

[And_ROOS]

Just a harsh marker is all. 5/10 is their “did nothing wrong” kind of score

Some of those are wild scores. Like I would say Henry or Humphries were 6.5/10 games, they did their jobs and the minimum expected but didn't have any "moments". Too good to be a 6, not enough to be a 7.
Marking Zuthrie down a point because Rayner is a diving cheat is insane, but even then marking down O'Connor for giving away the first of the diving free kicks is absolute dogshit "journalism".

A 5/10 would be a Neale, who was beaten by Andrews but still got some contests split, still managed a goal and laid some tackles inside 50.
Anything 4/10 or under is a bad game, and in the case of Clark for when he came on he really should have gotten an N/A because he was barely on long enough to rate. Dude had 2% time on ground.

At least the journo was a wee bit more accurate with Brisbane, gave McCluggage a 3 (have they removed him from Mullin's pocket yet?), Morris a 2 who honestly I forgot he even played, Sam Day a 2 who I thought was the sub who came on, and Cameron a 1, which is probably harsh.
A 1 would be for a player who is so bad they cost their team the game, Cameron was awful but still managed a goal so he should be at least a 1.5 or a 2.
Yes he got 2 disposals, which is horrendous, but a 1 would be a player who gives away multiple goals, or does something that gets themselves suspended, or gives away multiple 50s at key moments.

 

[iameviljez]

Some of those are wild scores. Like I would say Henry or Humphries were 6.5/10 games, they did their jobs and the minimum expected but didn't have any "moments". Too good to be a 6, not enough to be a 7.
Marking Zuthrie down a point because Rayner is a diving cheat is insane, but even then marking down O'Connor for giving away the first of the diving free kicks is absolute dogshit "journalism".

A 5/10 would be a Neale, who was beaten by Andrews but still got some contests split, still managed a goal and laid some tackles inside 50.
Anything 4/10 or under is a bad game, and in the case of Clark for when he came on he really should have gotten an N/A because he was barely on long enough to rate. Dude had 2% time on ground.

At least the journo was a wee bit more accurate with Brisbane, gave McCluggage a 3 (have they removed him from Mullin's pocket yet?), Morris a 2 who honestly I forgot he even played, Sam Day a 2 who I thought was the sub who came on, and Cameron a 1, which is probably harsh.
A 1 would be for a player who is so bad they cost their team the game, Cameron was awful but still managed a goal so he should be at least a 1.5 or a 2.
Yes he got 2 disposals, which is horrendous, but a 1 would be a player who gives away multiple goals, or does something that gets themselves suspended, or gives away multiple 50s at key moments.

I get where you're coming from, but I actually prefer The Age's way of marking out of ten (it's the same as the Inside Football scoring system, if you remember that). IMO, the best /10 marking systems are ones where, for a normal game, the average score across all 44 players is a '5' - that way, there is more leeway at the top and the bottom for exceptional performances.

Hence, I think Humphries' game was the perfect '5' - no glaring errors, but no huge influence - and Cameron's game was absolutely a '1', in that it was probably the worst game Charlie has ever played.

I'm firmly on the Neale bandwagon, but I think you're being a bit generous - he was given an absolute and total bath by Andrews for three quarters, and Andrews also managed to get off him to affect other contests as well. Three is more than appropriate.

 

[Seeds]

Qualifying final player ratings: From the villain of the night, to Geelong’s next-generation stars

A well-oiled Geelong machine pummeled the reigning premiers into the ground at the MCG. We run the rule over every player and rate their performances after an action-packed night.

www.theage.com.au

Judging on the scores these two 'experts' handed out, you've got to wonder if they actually watched the game or just assessed the stat sheet.

Atkins a 6, Mannagh 7, Guthrie a 5, Miers a 5.5, O'Connor 6.5. Utterly ridiculous.

Which parts are ridiculous? Maybe give mannagh an 8. Guthrie and oconnor both get penalised for those dumb own goals.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

That 2m pass to Close that he adapted under pressure, who handballed to Smith for a running goal as well. I'd love to see a package of all of his 16 or so touches because I think he made the smart play basically every time.

When we first got him I said he may be able to replace Duncan on the wing and while he will never get to Mitch's level, playing the role as he did last night was kind of what I had in mind.

Ask and you shall receive. The app will show you every stat he racks up within the passage of play it's in. Make sure you select extended rather than highlights to get the 11 minute video not the 2:20 one

Check out Jack Bowes's Highlights from GEEL v BL, FW1 2025

AFL Stats - AFL.com.au

Share

www.afl.com.au

 

[Cataholic]

Which parts are ridiculous? Maybe give mannagh an 8. Guthrie and oconnor both get penalised for those dumb own goals.

MOC was dumb because Rayner bluffed the ump and flopped like an epileptic fish?

Right.

 

[joe444]

In general I think both here and elsewhere Jack Henry

38

Jack Henry

Age

27

Ht

192cm

Wt

96kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

10.3

3star

K

7.3

3star

HB

2.9

3star

M

4.0

4star

T

2.2

4star

MG

142.6

2star

D

8.6

2star

K

6.7

3star

HB

1.9

1star

M

3.9

4star

T

2.1

3star

MG

142.6

3star

D

9.6

3star

K

7.0

3star

HB

2.6

3star

M

3.6

4star

T

2.0

4star

's performance on the night has been massively overlooked / underrated.

 

[iameviljez]

MOC was dumb because Rayner bluffed the ump and flopped like an epileptic fish?

Right.

Agree on MOC. Guthrie was guilty of being a bit dumb.

 

[iameviljez]

In general I think both here and elsewhere Jack Henry's performance on the night has been massively overlooked / underrated.

I agree with you, Henry wasn't just in the "did nothing wrong" category. Some of his overhead work and courage was excellent. I'd give him a 6.5 on the Harsh Marking Scale.

 

[joe444]

I agree with you, Henry wasn't just in the "did nothing wrong" category. Some of his overhead work and courage was excellent. I'd give him a 6.5 on the Harsh Marking Scale.

More than that, he's a Reason For Optimism in my increasing sense that this may be our year. Everyone is in good form.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

Qualifying final player ratings: From the villain of the night, to Geelong’s next-generation stars

A well-oiled Geelong machine pummeled the reigning premiers into the ground at the MCG. We run the rule over every player and rate their performances after an action-packed night.

www.theage.com.au

Judging on the scores these two 'experts' handed out, you've got to wonder if they actually watched the game or just assessed the stat sheet.

Atkins a 6, Mannagh 7, Guthrie a 5, Miers a 5.5, O'Connor 6.5. Utterly ridiculous.

The one here that makes me put a line through everything else said is the Atkins rating. I'm actually offended

 

[Cataholic]

Agree on MOC. Guthrie was guilty of being a bit dumb.

Perhaps, in light of the umps idiocy with MOC, but still every bit as soft as the first free by Rayner and the ump.

 

[Spearman]

More from The Age referencing that 3AW interview..
“We had to re-centre ourselves and get focused on the next contest,” Atkins told 3AW on Saturday.

“I think we’re able to do that after half-time. I feel like the way Mark O’Connor especially handled himself after the free kick was really symbolic of how we as a team want to be.

“He had every right to go back at Rayner after Rayner was getting in his face. So, yeah, that’s sort of the way we want to be. We want to be cold and aggressive.”

Right after the second free kick when Stewart came back to sort things, Merrick gave him a little hand sign that was like..'we're good'. Totally unflappable.

 

[iameviljez]

Perhaps, in light of the umps idiocy with MOC, but still every bit as soft as the first free by Rayner and the ump.

Every bit as soft, yes, but doing the same thing and expecting a different result was daft.

 

[Cataholic]

Every bit as soft, yes, but doing the same thing and expecting a different result was daft.

Yeah, that's true.

Emotion in the moment, but credit to the group they quickly restrained themselves.

There was a moment when they were walking off the ground after that incident where Cameron said something to the boys with a determined look in his face and I thought 'yep, the boys have got the motivation to bring this home now'.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

I was wrong to pinpoint Mullin for criticism.

What was frustration at the bad performances in foreign roles was misplaced. It should have been directed to Scott and the coaches for not using him in the role he excels at, rather than getting frustrated at the player.

Brilliant match winning role on McCluggage. Would be sending him to either Dawson or Newcombe next game.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

I was wrong to pinpoint Mullin for criticism.

What was frustration at the bad performances in foreign roles was misplaced. It should have been directed to Scott and the coaches for not using him in the role he excels at, rather than getting frustrated at the player.

Brilliant match winning role on McCluggage. Would be sending him to either Dawson or Newcombe next game.

I love this post. Thanks

 

[Mr Meow]

I was wrong to pinpoint Mullin for criticism.

What was frustration at the bad performances in foreign roles was misplaced. It should have been directed to Scott and the coaches for not using him in the role he excels at, rather than getting frustrated at the player.

Brilliant match winning role on McCluggage. Would be sending him to either Dawson or Newcombe next game.

I didn't love Mullin being used in defence some games either. The Brisbane game at GMHBA can only be looked at as saving it for a final now. There are a couple of other examples, but I remember him tagging in the following games:

Port vs Butters (twice)
Collingwood vs Daicos
Bulldogs vs Richards
Gold Coast vs Miller
Sydney vs Gulden
Melbourne vs Pickett
West Coast vs Reid
Essendon vs Merrett (twice)
Richmond vs Prestia (lol)

Not every role was completely successful, although most of those opposition players weren't in the best players on the ground.

I think they wanted him to continue training as a defender at the same time so that he has another position he can play longterm, or if we went for an attack-heavy midfield.

 

[And_ROOS]

I didn't love Mullin being used in defence some games either. The Brisbane game at GMHBA can only be looked at as saving it for a final now. There are a couple of other examples, but I remember him tagging in the following games:

Port vs Butters (twice)
Collingwood vs Daicos
Bulldogs vs Richards
Gold Coast vs Miller
Sydney vs Gulden
Melbourne vs Pickett
West Coast vs Reid
Essendon vs Merrett (twice)
Richmond vs Prestia (lol)

Not every role was completely successful, although most of those opposition players weren't in the best players on the ground.

I think they wanted him to continue training as a defender at the same time so that he has another position he can play longterm, or if we went for an attack-heavy midfield.

The thing with Mullin which is the opposite to O'Connor has been that Mullins worst performances came against guys like Papley for example, who knew due to his inexperience they can drag him forward and score on him because he would get lost in the congestion and how teams train f50 set plays especially from stoppages.

But when he is in the midfield, up the field where its less set plays and more instinct or chaos and against pure mids, not forwards who push up the field, he has been ridiculously successful.
I don't know what the development plan for Mullin is but I hope they seriously realise that being a deep defensive 50 defender isn't his jam.
Keep him in the middle and let him become the next Ling, who can blanket an opponent but then also hurt going the other way which was what he did against Brisbane.

Meanwhile O'Connor is the opposite, he has now gloved Heeney and Rayner as a shut down player on forward/mids.

Hopefully this means should we get Hawks in the PF we see Mullin tagging Newcombe who is both their best mid and best finals performer so far, and O'Connor gets Ginnivan and we don't see them putting Mullin on Watson who would likely kick goals on him.

 

[dudusmaximus]

..
Meanwhile O'Connor is the opposite, he has now gloved Heeney and Rayner as a shut down player on forward/mids.
..

Mullin is also not as good a contested mark (yet*) as MOC. Contested marking helps in D50 and F50. MOC being taller helps with his contested marking.

Until Mullin improves his contested marking, the midfield is his happy hunting ground. Mullin's focus, defensive nous, speed, agility, pinpoint kicking, field marking etc. make him a unique weapon in the midfield. Tagging is his accelerated course to midfielding (made-up word).

* Gaelic Football highlights have him prodigiously marking over others. Currently, he is religiously going for the spoil.

 

[Gunf]

I didn't love Mullin being used in defence some games either. The Brisbane game at GMHBA can only be looked at as saving it for a final now. There are a couple of other examples, but I remember him tagging in the following games:

Port vs Butters (twice)
Collingwood vs Daicos
Bulldogs vs Richards
Gold Coast vs Miller
Sydney vs Gulden
Melbourne vs Pickett
West Coast vs Reid
Essendon vs Merrett (twice)
Richmond vs Prestia (lol)

Not every role was completely successful, although most of those opposition players weren't in the best players on the ground.

I think they wanted him to continue training as a defender at the same time so that he has another position he can play longterm, or if we went for an attack-heavy midfield.

Training him defence also helps his ability to follow those mids forward instead of handing off so he just sits on them 100% of the time he is on ground.

A lot of taggers switch to another target if the player they are targeting goes forward.

E.g some teams put effort into Daicos but when he goes forward they hand the role over, whereas we want Mullin to keep on his ass all day long