And Ruff kicked 6 goals and we lost by 8 points..
We will smash the Wegles at Tassie, i dont know why so many in here are so worried about thier forwards, they are only as good as the teams that they play let them be..
Preview Who stays, who goes? - Hawthorn vs Eagles
- Thread starter grizzlym
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
And Ruff kicked 6 goals and we lost by 8 points..
We will smash the Wegles at Tassie, i dont know why so many in here are so worried about thier forwards, they are only as good as the teams that they play let them be..
Just had a look at West Coast and Hawthorn last three rounds from a ruck point of view. They haven't been up against much in ways of opposition (Mumford and Jamar best respectively)
Hitouts:
Round 1: WCE v NM. Cox + Lynch: 47 vs. Pederson: 14
Round 2: WCE v PP. Cox + Naitanui: 53 vs. Brogan: 13
Round 3: WCE v SYD. Cox + Naitanui: 66 vs. Mumford + White: 37
Hitouts:
Round 1: HAW v ADE Renouf + Hale: 35 vs. Maric + McKernan: 28
Round 2: HAW v MELB Renouf + Hale: 16 vs. Jamar + Martin: 36
Round 3: HAW v RICH Renouf + Hale: 47 vs. Graham + Vickery: 33
So our BEST performance is equal to their worst performance (where Lynch was rucking).
However, if we look at clearances, again neither of us have played teams particularly strong in this regard, but:
Clearances:
Rd 1 HAW 37 vs. 36
Rd 2 HAW 40 vs. 30
Rd 3 HAW 44 vs. 45
Clearances:
Rd 1 WCE 39 vs. 31
Rd 2 WCE 33 vs. 40
Rd 3 WCE 34 vs. 49
So we've won clearances 66% of the time (and the other game was down by 1). Where as they've won clearances 33% of the time. To me, what this illustrates is that WCE don't have the midfield to make their ruckmen have a large impact, so we should be able to work off their taps fairly well and win out of the middle.
Lets then consider the threat of the resting ruckman up forward, from the last 3 games, WCE ruck department have kicked 5 goals, for an average of 1.66 a game. This isn't particularly scary, as NM (193cm max), PP (197cm and 195cm max, but inexperienced) and SYD(193cm max) are fairly weak backlines. If the WCE resting rucks/tall forwards were going to have a field day there's a reasonable chance it would be against these sides. Here's a final damning stat as to the danger of the resting ruckman, in the last 3 games WCE ruckmen have not taken a single mark inside their forward 50...
That leaves the impact of Cox and Naitanui around the ground, Naitanui is averaging around 14 disposals, mostly handballs and 3 marks outside 50 and around 3 inside 50s, making him more of a linking player who we perhaps shouldn't be too worried about when the ball is in his hand.
Cox on the other hand is averaging around 23 disposals a game, mostly by foot, around 3 inside 50s, and he's also pulling in 6 marks outside 50, meaning he is essentially a big midfielder. If we're going to try and minimize the impact of the ruckmen around the ground we'd be better off doing it to Cox as Naitanui isn't doing much to be honest.
In summary, I guess what I'm saying is perhaps we shouldn't be too worried about their height and ruck advantage... to date they haven't been too damaging. Not a huge threat in the ruck or up forward. They're a bit dangerous around the ground, but if they're up the ground it means they're not in the forward 50 (and apparently not much happens when they are)
Just some speculation and stat digging, make of it what you will. Nothing to stop them having a blinder against us.
Hitouts:
Round 1: WCE v NM. Cox + Lynch: 47 vs. Pederson: 14
Round 2: WCE v PP. Cox + Naitanui: 53 vs. Brogan: 13
Round 3: WCE v SYD. Cox + Naitanui: 66 vs. Mumford + White: 37
Hitouts:
Round 1: HAW v ADE Renouf + Hale: 35 vs. Maric + McKernan: 28
Round 2: HAW v MELB Renouf + Hale: 16 vs. Jamar + Martin: 36
Round 3: HAW v RICH Renouf + Hale: 47 vs. Graham + Vickery: 33
So our BEST performance is equal to their worst performance (where Lynch was rucking).
However, if we look at clearances, again neither of us have played teams particularly strong in this regard, but:
Clearances:
Rd 1 HAW 37 vs. 36
Rd 2 HAW 40 vs. 30
Rd 3 HAW 44 vs. 45
Clearances:
Rd 1 WCE 39 vs. 31
Rd 2 WCE 33 vs. 40
Rd 3 WCE 34 vs. 49
So we've won clearances 66% of the time (and the other game was down by 1). Where as they've won clearances 33% of the time. To me, what this illustrates is that WCE don't have the midfield to make their ruckmen have a large impact, so we should be able to work off their taps fairly well and win out of the middle.
Lets then consider the threat of the resting ruckman up forward, from the last 3 games, WCE ruck department have kicked 5 goals, for an average of 1.66 a game. This isn't particularly scary, as NM (193cm max), PP (197cm and 195cm max, but inexperienced) and SYD(193cm max) are fairly weak backlines. If the WCE resting rucks/tall forwards were going to have a field day there's a reasonable chance it would be against these sides. Here's a final damning stat as to the danger of the resting ruckman, in the last 3 games WCE ruckmen have not taken a single mark inside their forward 50...
That leaves the impact of Cox and Naitanui around the ground, Naitanui is averaging around 14 disposals, mostly handballs and 3 marks outside 50 and around 3 inside 50s, making him more of a linking player who we perhaps shouldn't be too worried about when the ball is in his hand.
Cox on the other hand is averaging around 23 disposals a game, mostly by foot, around 3 inside 50s, and he's also pulling in 6 marks outside 50, meaning he is essentially a big midfielder. If we're going to try and minimize the impact of the ruckmen around the ground we'd be better off doing it to Cox as Naitanui isn't doing much to be honest.
In summary, I guess what I'm saying is perhaps we shouldn't be too worried about their height and ruck advantage... to date they haven't been too damaging. Not a huge threat in the ruck or up forward. They're a bit dangerous around the ground, but if they're up the ground it means they're not in the forward 50 (and apparently not much happens when they are)
Just some speculation and stat digging, make of it what you will. Nothing to stop them having a blinder against us.
Just had a look at West Coast and Hawthorn last three rounds from a ruck point of view. They haven't been up against much in ways of opposition (Mumford and Jamar best respectively)
Round 1: WCE v NM. Cox + Lynch: 47 vs. Pederson: 14
Round 2: WCE v PP. Cox + Naitanui: 53 vs. Brogan: 13
Round 3: WCE v SYD. Cox + Naitanui: 66 vs. Mumford + White: 37
Round 1: HAW v ADE Renouf + Hale: 35 vs. Maric + McKernan: 28
Round 2: HAW v MELB Renouf + Hale: 16 vs. Jamar + Martin: 36
Round 3: HAW v RICH Renouf + Hale: 47 vs. Graham + Vickery: 33
So our BEST performance is equal to their worst performance (where Lynch was rucking).
However, if we look at clearances, again neither of us have played teams particularly strong in this regard, but:
Rd 1 HAW 37 vs. 36
Rd 2 HAW 40 vs. 30
Rd 3 HAW 44 vs. 45
Rd 1 WCE 39 vs. 31
Rd 2 WCE 33 vs. 40
Rd 3 WCE 34 vs. 49
So we've won clearances 66% of the time (and the other game was down by 1). Where as they've won clearances 33% of the time. To me, what this illustrates is that WCE don't have the midfield to make their ruckmen have a large impact, so we should be able to work off their taps fairly well and win out of the middle.
Lets then consider the threat of the resting ruckman up forward, from the last 3 games, WCE ruck department have kicked 5 goals, for an average of 1.66 a game. This isn't particularly scary, as NM (193cm max), PP (197cm and 195cm max, but inexperienced) and SYD(193cm max) are fairly weak backlines. If the WCE resting rucks/tall forwards were going to have a field day there's a reasonable chance it would be against these sides. Here's a final damning stat as to the danger of the resting ruckman, in the last 3 games WCE ruckmen have not taken a single mark inside their forward 50...
That leaves the impact of Cox and Naitanui around the ground, Naitanui is averaging around 14 disposals, mostly handballs and 3 marks outside 50 and around 3 inside 50s, making him more of a linking player who we perhaps shouldn't be too worried about when the ball is in his hand.
Cox on the other hand is averaging around 23 disposals a game, mostly by foot, around 3 inside 50s, and he's also pulling in 6 marks outside 50, meaning he is essentially a big midfielder. If we're going to try and minimize the impact of the ruckmen around the ground we'd be better off doing it to Cox as Naitanui isn't doing much to be honest.
In summary, I guess what I'm saying is perhaps we shouldn't be too worried about their height and ruck advantage... to date they haven't been too damaging. Not a huge threat in the ruck or up forward. They're a bit dangerous around the ground, but if they're up the ground it means they're not in the forward 50 (and apparently not much happens when they are)
Just some speculation and stat digging, make of it what you will. Nothing to stop them having a blinder against us.
That Melb game if Renouf didnt ruck we would of won the ruck contest with Hale alone, Hale will be our no1 by the end of the year...
Now knowing that Stratts is out for the year, it is time to think a little longer term than this week perhaps. I agree with Friar, I really think we need to blood Lisle and get some senior game time into him, at least until Shoey is fit. We might be surprised what he is capable of producing.
The ability to switch Hodge or Roughy back will see us adequately covered if it doesn't go to plan. At a minimum, Lisle's size will make him effective sitting in the hole.
Shame about Morton too, this was probably his best opportunity as a like for like replacement.
The ability to switch Hodge or Roughy back will see us adequately covered if it doesn't go to plan. At a minimum, Lisle's size will make him effective sitting in the hole.
Shame about Morton too, this was probably his best opportunity as a like for like replacement.
moginie
Brownlow Medallist
Interesting stats you quote there, Beandip.
Cox & NicNat really worked over Brogan. Worsfold had both of them in the centre square really nullified any advantage Brogan may have had. They also knew that Brogan had no support either, so they wore him down quicker than usual. It was a game altering move.
We are not in that situation. If NicNat partnered Cox in the middle this time we'd have the player to match him.
Cox & NicNat really worked over Brogan. Worsfold had both of them in the centre square really nullified any advantage Brogan may have had. They also knew that Brogan had no support either, so they wore him down quicker than usual. It was a game altering move.
We are not in that situation. If NicNat partnered Cox in the middle this time we'd have the player to match him.
Morton may have a bit of size but there the comparison ends, may be ok as a HB flank on a midsize forward. Its the judgement, leap and the long arms that make Stratton such a weapon.
Lisle seems like the only solution, even if he is only match up insurance against getting flogged by a dominant tall. Just having him sitting there as the sub would make me feel a little less concerned about the WCE match ups. Perhaps start Bruce across HB, then if things look shaky shuffle Lisle into the back half.
I liked the look of Litherland in the NAB cup, would be happy to see him given a run.
If this w/e goes like the last few then we could well blow WCE out of the water before they get the ball into their forward zone.. fingers crossed.
Funny how some sides have an abundance of tall talent, and then others have to scratch around..
Faraway Hawk
Team Captain
- Dec 10, 2009
- 352
- 1,142
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Manchester United
Why is Mitch on the injury list? Will he be ok to go?
Clarko, please bring Lisle in. We cannot have Murphy run around with Darling, Lynch or Kennedy.
As I mentioned in one of my earlier posts its sad to see what happened to Stratts. However Schoenmaker will not get a better chance to stamp himself in that back 6 of Hawthorn. Take your chance son or else Litherland will take it and runaway with it.
Clarko, please bring Lisle in. We cannot have Murphy run around with Darling, Lynch or Kennedy.
As I mentioned in one of my earlier posts its sad to see what happened to Stratts. However Schoenmaker will not get a better chance to stamp himself in that back 6 of Hawthorn. Take your chance son or else Litherland will take it and runaway with it.
My big concern isnt so much the matchups, its more that if Gilham or Gibson go down at any point in the next few months we are really going to put a lot of pressure on someone to come in who will most likely be very raw.
IMO we can afford to carry Lisle at the moment and get some experience into him while Gibson and Gilham are in good touch to switch things up if Lisle finds thing tough. It is a long season and I would rather suffer some minor pain now than have to throw Lisle in at finals time with no experience if someone goes down.
i doubt we'll blood lisle. Would seriously love us to try... but it is highly doubtful. He isn't a defender... most likely they will go with Murphy this week.
Lilse has no closing speed and will be exposed as a defender.
- Nov 21, 2010
- 13,486
- 17,338
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Chelsea, Detroit Pistons
Yes but, until Shoenmakers comes back, he is our best tall option
- Mar 23, 2007
- 34,930
- 23,534
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Man U, Canucks and 49ers
Agree we won't bring in Lisle, but I don't think we'll bring in Murphy either.
For mine, Gibson and Gilham will share Kennedy and Q.
Birchall and Bruce will then be used to play on Darling or whoever else heads down there with extra height.
We will probably play both Hale and Renouf on the ground for as much as possible, with Hale up forward taking the ruck in the forward half and Renouf taking the centre square bounces and then sitting back and helping out with some height across the back half.
If Cox or NicNat go forward, they will either send Renouf down with them, or move Gilham/Gibson to them and shift Birch or Bruce to Gilham/Gibson's man.
When Renouf needs a break as a ruckman, Hale will become the centre bounce/back half ruckman and Rough will take the stuff up forward.
When Rough needs a break, Hodge or Burgers will go to full forward, as they have all year.
I remember Whitecross doing a good job on Hunter a few years ago playing above his height. They may bring him in and keep that as an option too if Bruce/Birch struggle. Cheney also looks like the kind of player that would have a real dip against someone with more size than he has.
moginie
Brownlow Medallist
CLA, I really like your theory.
Clarko - make it happen!
Clarko - make it happen!
Agree with your post CLA, and I think this can work for most other teams too.
Without going into specifics, I'm not convinced we need to bring in a tall KPP to cover the loss of Stratts. Puopolo, Cheney, Murphy and even Milne would be more than adequate replacements given some reshuffling of the team. Players like Birch, Bruce, Laddo, and Goo will be back there for some chopouts and double-teams too.
Even Renouf and Rough, who has played back for small periods this year already, can push further down the ground to help out when needed in small bursts, thanks to Hale's versatility.
We'll be alright in the long term I think, let's just take it a week at a time and concentrate on going "horses for courses" rather than just throwing another inexperienced youngster to the wolves for the sake of going "like for like". Suckers, Shiels and Savage is more than enough inexperience at the moment.
The bigger question for me is who the hell is the second, and maybe third, out/s? For mine it has to be out of Bruce, Ellis, Ossie, Goo and the new blokes. Tough decisions at the selection table today I think.....
Off The Couch
TheBrownDog
- Oct 4, 2007
- 50,223
- 66,404
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
I think the key here is not to let them go forward right from the start - as previously stated the eagles have all season used a two ruck combo at every bounce which we can combat with Hale and Renouf but I think that Hale then has to go forward immediately to make Cox accountable right from the start. Play the game on the hawks terms not the eagles.
You are not alone Muzz - that was also my initial concern when Ben went down, decent defenders are pretty thin on the ground at Hawthorn.. we don't want any more injuries back there.
Strange to have 3 or 4 gun forwards yet struggle to find a true defender.
Historically its been easier to find a defender than a forward, less finesse required in belting the ball back forward or purely negating an opponent, as a forward you need a few more tricks.
Its been over two years since Croads injury, perhaps we should have pursued Coad when the opportunity arose last season, he looked pretty good in the air for GC on the w/e, definitely improved as the match wore on. He is going to get plenty of marking practice playing for that team..
GC look to have also landed a decent ruckman in Smith, would look great in Hawthorn colours.
I believe Riley Milne should get the nod. I believe he was recruited as a tall key defender, and should get first option. If he was getting beaten, Hodge could move back, and Milne go into the mid rotation.
Birch, also, could have presure put on him to take a key tall forward.
Just my thoughts, and probably inspired by the way SSS have developed, and performed, under a similar programme to Milne.
Birch, also, could have presure put on him to take a key tall forward.
Just my thoughts, and probably inspired by the way SSS have developed, and performed, under a similar programme to Milne.
Stratts is a loss. Confident and apart of the defensive unit. The key is the wording cohesive and unit. These days it is how the back 6 work as a group. A single player is not as important but it is the ability of the new player to work into the structure and team work aspect well. We are very quick on this forum to cain players but the previous two years we have not had the ability to rotate people through positions. This year we do. Mitch & Rioli are obvious inclusions. Stratton and Ozzie will be out with injury.
Play to our strengths to take the game away from WC. In a full strength team in the NAB we almost knocked them over and we had no height. Our game was run & carry. HIt targets and starve the opposition of the ball. When they had the ball press and close down space. We play this type of footy and we will win.
Don't be so reactive be pro active as a team and the game will take care of its self. The middle of the ground is where the game is won or lost. How will WC man up on our mid field and forwards. If you were going to bring someone in it would be pup or cheney. Hard, attacking players. No give and prepared to do the hard yards for the team. Ellis and Goo were very good last week. I though Ellis was clean and made good decisions in traffic and importantly he kicked the ball. Goo moved up forward where I think he is a very dangerous option.
Play to our strengths to take the game away from WC. In a full strength team in the NAB we almost knocked them over and we had no height. Our game was run & carry. HIt targets and starve the opposition of the ball. When they had the ball press and close down space. We play this type of footy and we will win.
Don't be so reactive be pro active as a team and the game will take care of its self. The middle of the ground is where the game is won or lost. How will WC man up on our mid field and forwards. If you were going to bring someone in it would be pup or cheney. Hard, attacking players. No give and prepared to do the hard yards for the team. Ellis and Goo were very good last week. I though Ellis was clean and made good decisions in traffic and importantly he kicked the ball. Goo moved up forward where I think he is a very dangerous option.
In theory you are correct, but I can't help to think back when Browny would compete against guys like Pavlich & Scott Lucas... sometimes its not all about height BUT how well you can read the play.
HawksLore11
Debutant
- Dec 7, 2010
- 76
- 17
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
The good news is we are better off with defenders than we were in 08 even with the Stratton injury! With players like Murphy, Schoenmakers, Milne, Bruce, Hodge and Cheney we have the options! In 08 it was primarily just Croad and Gilham with Hodgey chopping out at the business end of the season!
Okay you tell me why you would bring mitchell into the team this week
I would like to ask why you leave Ellis out and not Ozzie/Goo? Both Ozzie and Goo looked injured during last weeks game. Especially Ozzie who had to be subbed off? Ellis played a good game and if anything needs to stay in the game to consolidate that..
After some thought, i think this game is perfect to bring in some new players. I would have this weeks changes as:
OUT: Strat (inj), Goo (rested), Ozzie (rested) and Bruce (omit)
IN: Mitchell, Rioli, Poppy and Litherland (both debut)
OUT: Strat (inj), Goo (rested), Ozzie (rested) and Bruce (omit)
IN: Mitchell, Rioli, Poppy and Litherland (both debut)
spudmaster
Brownlow Medallist
I see the reasoning behind giving Bruce a run in the seconds as he hasn't exactly set the world alight. But the most likely reason for that is he is still adjusting to a new game plan and learning the ropes at a new club, and those things will only improve with game time. So if he is dropped back to the seconds, it could just stall his learning until he is brought back in to the firsts and continues to learn/adjust.
Whoever doesn't get a run this week will at least get some decent competition against Williamstown on Sunday - they're a good team and should provide a competitive hitout (to say the least) as opposed to a Frankston for example.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Sticky
