Opinion When Hill has 10 possessions and Ratten says “We don’t drop Hill...” What message does that send?

Remove this Banner Ad

Journey

Rookie
Jun 16, 2019
41
84
AFL Club
Essendon
Last week after Brad Hill had 10 possessions after previous poor performances, Ratten when asked if he should be dropped, clearly at stated ..” we don’t drop hill..”. What message does that send to the playing group, supporters, sponsors etc. Obviously 10 possessions for s $800k player is not acceptable and needs to be addressed, not ridiculed through such a statement.

When going gets tough its, “All players are on Notice”. However at St Kilda it’s all players on notice unless your on $800k per year.

How is Ratten going to ‘own’ his players in threatening being dropped when he has made this statement about the ‘untouchable’ Hill.


If Hill is Rattens protected species then he will also be the catalyst of the demise of St Kilda and will cause his 2nd sacking as a senior coach.
 
Well Gary Rohan has averaged less than 10 possessions across his whole career but he still gets picked every week.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Hill
giphy.gif
 
Classic example of looking on fanfooty and listening to Malthouse makes you clueless

Yeah Brad Hill hasn't been at his best, But il'd drop 12 other saints before Hill. Output and role isn't simply defined by touching the football. Hill plays a role of playing outside, logging the most KM and often running patterns to help pull midfielders out of space for the saints to operate in, because he's the best runner and still one of the quickest in the comp. Ild pay Hill 900k over whatever the hell Jones and Crouch are being paid

nd plus his team-mates are that s**t they are probably robbing him of 5-7 handball recieves and meters gained a game
 
Last edited:


Last year I thought the Saints players didn't give it to Hill because they weren't used to where he'd be.

This year I'm on the fence that either it's because they don't rate him at all or they are just going that poorly they can't execute simple handballs.

Classic example. Unless Hill is going to judge the type of Shank the saints midfielder is going to hit, hes not being helped by anyone not named Steele being absolutely useless on that team right now
 
aussierulesrules , Remember 1 or 2 years back, you said Freo traded Lachie Neale and got Reece Conca was a massive downgrade?

Conca is a mid or a back pocket. Also we didnt pay $900,000 a year for him. Not to mention trading picks and players for him lol
 
aussierulesrules , Remember 1 or 2 years back, you said Freo traded Lachie Neale and got Reece Conca was a massive downgrade?

Conca is a mid or a back pocket. Also we didnt pay $900,000 a year for him. Not to mention trading picks and players for him lol
No, I don’t remember saying it, but if I didn’t then I’ll say it now, just for you.

Conca is a massive downgrade on Neale.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

What was the actual question and response quotes?

Without seeing the interview, I think it's more likely his inference would have been they won't drop Hill at this stage and are backing him in, basically giving a mulligan to the performance which is not uncommon with coaches when big named players are out of form.
 
Classic example of looking on fanfooty and listening to Malthouse makes you clueless

Yeah Brad Hill hasn't been at his best, But il'd drop 12 other saints before Hill. Output and role isn't simply defined by touching the football. Hill plays a role of playing outside, logging the most KM and often running patterns to help pull midfielders out of space for the saints to operate in, because he's the best runner and still one of the quickest in the comp. Ild pay Hill 900k over whatever the hell Jones and Crouch are being paid

nd plus his team-mates are that sh*t they are probably robbing him of 5-7 handball recieves and meters gained a game
You just wouldn’t play Jones ever !
 
It sends a message that Luke Dunstan is next in line.

Who are you dropping him for?
 
fu** freo made out like bandits in the trade too, they got a rising star winning mid and Acres who has been half decent.

And Frederick

Essentially the trade is:

Lose: Brad Hill and pick 22 (on-traded several times, ended up Deven Robertson)
Gain: Acres, Aish, Pick 8 (Serong), Pick 49 and 58 (both used to match for Henry), Pick 69 (unused)
And we had pick 61 to pick up Frederick who is going well thus far :)
 
You just wouldn’t play Jones ever !
Yeah he's been a generally a great pick up for you guys but this year, if your going to argue Hill has been Average, Jones would be getting beaten at VFL level. You guys have a lot of guys out of form and being dragged along by Jack Steele. Who has been absolutely elite and a top 10 midfielder since midway though last year.
 
This could be combined with the other thread about Hill.

But a serious question.....

Say we drop him. Who replaces him? Luke Dunstan? We have no depth right now. Who comes in for Zak Jones if we drop him. What about Billings. We're lacklustre across the board right now. Unless we are now supposed to play the kids and tank completely?

Ludicrous thread.
 
Last edited:
aussierulesrules , Remember 1 or 2 years back, you said Freo traded Lachie Neale and got Reece Conca was a massive downgrade?

Conca is a mid or a back pocket. Also we didnt pay $900,000 a year for him. Not to mention trading picks and players for him lol

I'm not sure what you thought you were writing, but whatever it was, what you did write, is a very strange argument.
 
I'm not sure what you thought you were writing, but whatever it was, what you did write, is a very strange argument.
Well I was chatting to aussierulesrules on another thread as that poster said replacing Neale for Conca was a massive downgrade.

Only positive is we ain't paying $900,000 a year for Conca and we didn't trade a lot to get him as he was a free agent
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top