Remove this Banner Ad

Wisbey on Tim Walsh (long)

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

scooter600x

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Aug 14, 2003
Posts
9,200
Reaction score
2,786
Location
Behind the goals, Geelong Rd end
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
I was looking to see if Colin Wisbey's profiles were out yet (they aren't) and found this piece on Tim Walsh from last year. I get the impression Colin thinks Tim lacks a little intensity.



Tim Walsh (Northern Knights)

194+/81 bottom-age right-footer (dual-sided). Style like early Chris Grant.

Bottom-age athletic, stylish versatile tall. So much to offer but very seriously lacking in intensity.

U18 CHF and part-time ruck who can run, jump, catch, kick both feet, and pick-up like a rover ..... but is too often a spectator. Has good character, good ability. If he had half-decent intensity he would be worthy, in a draft like this, of a top 10 pick as many suggest. I’ve seen players conquer a host of weaknesses but I can’t recall too many players turning around a distinct lack of instinctive intensity. Tim’s almost complete lack of intensity scares me to the extent that, for that reason ALONE, I rate him worthy of no higher than a 2nd round pick at best. Some will argue that I’m putting too much emphasis on his intensity but its the one problem he has in which I am not confident of him being able to make sufficient improvement to allow him to fully utilise his otherwise impressive attributes.

As with Johnson, I acknowledge that this puts me out of sync with mainstream thinking. He seems a great kid and certainly has a lot of very appealing attributes and I hope he proves me wrong, but to be honest I would not be in a rush to draft him as a potential key position player. He will definitely get drafted and definitely early. I think that is a shame as I suspect another year of U18s would have helped him learn to take more responsibility during a game and stamp his authority on a game.

I first noticed him in a game against Dandenong last year and I instinctively formed the opinion that “this kid could be anything – he has the lot”. I posted the same on the internet at the time. Subsequently, however, I have become more and more uneasy and disappointed in his continuing lack of intensity.

Broke collarbone early in game 1 of the 2002 U18 Champs and ran out of time to be ready for 2002 finals.

? Athleticism, Mobility:
Has a huge leap, even from a standing start, but particularly when he has a run-up. He’s a bird.
He does move very stylishly – smooth running style, nicely-balanced. Generally looks agile.
Sometimes looks to have quite good pace but occasionally looks a bit slow. I have trouble getting a handle on his pace. I am not sure about his stamina either, despite his athletic appearance. Sometimes he appears to run out of puff (and when he does he can look a bit slowish).

? Marking:
Can take a very big grab, especially over the top. Can mark from in front also but his best is possibly on a lead (his leads are good and tend to be quick, direct and purposeful) or coming from behind. Generally has good hands overhead. Can rise high enough to take a chest mark where others might have to mark it overhead.

? Hands:
Very clean hands generally but exceptional off the carpet for one so tall.

? Disposal:
Is dual-sided.
Is excellent with the hands – quick spotting, quick reaction, sharp decision-making, excellent accurate powerful feeds short or long, clear air or through traffic. As soon as he hears the call, he usually spits it out straight to the caller – even if the caller is not in his line of vision. (Is primarily a right footer but seems to handball mainly with his left?) In general, I would describe his kicking as a mixed bag. I definitely believe it does need work but I am confident it can be improved and that ultimately he can become a reliable kick.
Has nice style kicking on the run. His kicking often looks quite good off the boot but his kicks too often drop short – especially attempted passes less than 30m.
For set kicks, sometimes tends to get too close to man-on-mark or try a too-cute dinky pass off virtually just one step. With some of his set shots for goal, he tends to have a stuttering run-up – almost like a medium-pacer in cricket who runs 20m to the wicket then virtually stops before bowling the ball off virtually one step. (He can look on such occasions almost as if he is kicking off the wrong foot, although he isn’t).
He is also capable of fairly regular pin-point passes and some long kicks. Some of his short passes that drop too short tend to be stabbed.

? Intensity:
Woeful. Often he just doesn't seem to really want to make the ball his own or even go for it – all too often he seems to adopt a wait and see attitude.
If he contests a mark and the ball spills free, he too often just stands there and spectates.
If he is bumped off a contest, he too often just stands there and spectates.
He too often stands back leaving a small team-mate to go in for the ball while he spectates..
If he doesn’t think he will be able to mark the ball he too often just stands there and spectates while an opponent takes the uncontested mark under no pressure.
If he is forced to the ground he too often just stays there and spectates instead of quickly getting back to his feet and involving himself.
He very often fails to commit his body to an awkward marking contest or oncoming pressure.
He will feed to a team-mate but then spectate when he should instead move on to lay a block for the team-mate.
He often doesn’t chase.
In fairness, every so often I get a pleasant surprise. Eg in a trial game, I had been noting (for not the first time that day even) his lack of intensity. Shortly after, he put in a big effort to keep chasing Brennan and throw himself at him and effect the spoil. (However, soon after, he was easily bumped off the ball and he then just stood there).

? Work ethic:
Other than the above, he actually has quite good on-field work ethic in some ways. He always presents as a target for his team-mates. As a CHF, he straightens the team up as they go forward.
Covers a lot of ground.

? Poise under pressure:
When he happens to find himself in traffic or under great pressure or even outnumbered or any combinations of these, he typically shows good poise, evasion skills and traffic management skills generally – he doesn’t panic, he does look for options. He moves very well through traffic. Ironic, and frustratingly so, given his general lack of intensity.
Occasionally he lacks a bit of awareness and seems to think he has more time than he actually does. On these occasions he can be inclined to not know what to do – but he is probably smart enough to get on top of that in time with more experience in games at a predictable tempo.

? Ruckwork:
Can do some part-time ruck work. Some of his hitouts are very well targeted. A fair few are Stynes-like though i.e. where he gets clear purchase but just taps it to his feet thus not giving a team-mate an advantage. Has genuine potential as a 6’5” -ish part-time ruck though.

? Versatility, build:
Handy height (nudging 6’5” and possibly still growing). Only 81kg but is bottom-age and has a frame which should furnish into a really nice footy build.
Has the height for a key and at least adequate enough pace and agility for a wing/flank. Frankly, the latter is where I suspect his AFL future may lie – as a tall, hard-to-match up “HFF” (although most would presumably argue that he is suited to CHF instead). Technically he even has a lot to offer as a “ruckrover” but, unless he can completely turn around his lack of intensity, his traffic management attributes are likely to be more than offset by failure to pressure the opposition when he doesn’t have the ball.

Query:
- Intensity (!!!!!)
- Hard to gauge his physical strength because of the way he currently plays. I’ve no reason to be overly concerned. I just don’t have a handle on it.
- Doesn’t yet take a game by the scruff of the neck. Sometimes threatens to but can then go missing.
- Stamina? Occasionally looks like he is unduly puffed-out. In such circumstances he can look surprisingly slow. I don’t have a handle on whether this is even a pattern or whether I just noticed a couple of random occurrences that don’t mean much. Regardless he is naturally athletic so, at worst, he probably just needs some conditioning.

Some TAC stats:
8 games 2001, 4 2002, so not statistically a great sample for this season. FWIW though, double-digit disposals in only 4 of those 12 games, and nothing over 16. Max marks 6.

Other stuff:
- Son of Geoff Walsh (Kangaroos Football Mgr).
- I think he was also a basketballer until recently when he decided to concentrate on footy.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Remember reading it and its pretty damming.
Couldn't really notice the lack of intensity when he played for Werribee this year.
Surely Doc,Old School and Clayton himself saw it differently?

I know some talent scouts don't like to publicly criticise potential draftees and from this I can see why.
 
wiggy

how could anyone be more intense than wiggy... how could you forget that goal against melbourne, or those courageous runs along the boundary line!
wiggy for captain!

[if anyone would like to help create a wiggy fanclub please reply]
 
not to mention the intensity in that double fist pump celebration- almost blew the roof off.
 
thats funny I was reading the exact same thing yesterday scooter.

Ps. I am pretty sure Colin isnt doing the draft thing this year, he said on the extreme black n white site thathe is very busy with work until just after the draft date. hope he does though.
 
Originally posted by scooter600x
I was looking to see if Colin Wisbey's profiles were out yet (they aren't) and found this piece on Tim Walsh from last year. I get the impression Colin thinks Tim lacks a little intensity.



Tim Walsh (Northern Knights)

194+/81 bottom-age right-footer (dual-sided). Style like early Chris Grant.

:D :D :D :D CHRIS GRANT DI KICK 51 GOALS AS A 17 YEAR OLD COULD BE GOOD TIMES A HEAD
 
I think Tim is going to be a very good player in the future and will be a wise choice to have taken him at #4 and he will develop into a strong marking leading CHF.
 
Originally posted by Ching
Remember reading it and its pretty damming.
I know some talent scouts don't like to publicly criticise potential draftees and from this I can see why.
Whilst Wiseby goes into great detail about players, and I can understand why people love reading his profiles, you are right that some of his commentary can be (un) fairly damning.
What people have to realise is that Walsh was in year 11 when on a public forum someone with obvious excellent football knowledge questions his character in a, at times, strongly worded analysis. I don't think it is fair to 'call out' what one person believes to be a 17yo weaknesses.
Surely Wiseby could have re-worded some of his phrases to come across "that he would like to see Walsh attack the ball with a bit more vigour" or "He needs to stay focused for the full game because occasionally there are some lapses with his concentration" rather than "Tim’s almost complete lack of intensity scares me" type phrases.
If he was to say these things about a player already on an AFL list then fair enough but to put a report card out like that about a 17yo on public forum imo is very wrong.
There is a massive interest now days with junior football and the potential draftees and there are a lot of experts on forums offering their opinions about these kids. IMO it is worth considering how the youngster might feel if he was to read what is written about him. The junior players are now warned about the profile they have and are even counselled about it but at 17 some might not be ready to see that type of report written about them.
 
Originally posted by OldSchool
Whilst Wiseby goes into great detail about players, and I can understand why people love reading his profiles, you are right that some of his commentary can be (un) fairly damning.
What people have to realise is that Walsh was in year 11 when on a public forum someone with obvious excellent football knowledge questions his character in a, at times, strongly worded analysis. I don't think it is fair to 'call out' what one person believes to be a 17yo weaknesses.
Surely Wiseby could have re-worded some of his phrases to come across "that he would like to see Walsh attack the ball with a bit more vigour" or "He needs to stay focused for the full game because occasionally there are some lapses with his concentration" rather than "Tim’s almost complete lack of intensity scares me" type phrases.
If he was to say these things about a player already on an AFL list then fair enough but to put a report card out like that about a 17yo on public forum imo is very wrong.
There is a massive interest now days with junior football and the potential draftees and there are a lot of experts on forums offering their opinions about these kids. IMO it is worth considering how the youngster might feel if he was to read what is written about him. The junior players are now warned about the profile they have and are even counselled about it but at 17 some might not be ready to see that type of report written about them.

I don't want to read the sugar coated version, I want it given straight.

While it's unlikely that he would actually read this, if he was to, I'd hope he would use it to make a serious effort to fix the problem, much like Robbins did.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Originally posted by scooter600x
I don't want to read the sugar coated version, I want it given straight.

While it's unlikely that he would actually read this, if he was to, I'd hope he would use it to make a serious effort to fix the problem, much like Robbins did.
So a 17 year old 'potential' draftee is fair game ?
Where does someone draw the line on what they write about an untried kid ?

I'm not saying that Walsh should not be assessed in a warts and all manner now because he is on an AFL list but as 17yo junior footballer there must be some consideration given.

Not sure of the Robbins comparision you are referring to but he has been in the system a long time and should be assessed accordingly.
 
Originally posted by OldSchool
Whilst Wiseby goes into great detail about players, and I can understand why people love reading his profiles, you are right that some of his commentary can be (un) fairly damning.
What people have to realise is that Walsh was in year 11 when on a public forum someone with obvious excellent football knowledge questions his character in a, at times, strongly worded analysis. I don't think it is fair to 'call out' what one person believes to be a 17yo weaknesses.
Surely Wiseby could have re-worded some of his phrases to come across "that he would like to see Walsh attack the ball with a bit more vigour" or "He needs to stay focused for the full game because occasionally there are some lapses with his concentration" rather than "Tim’s almost complete lack of intensity scares me" type phrases.
If he was to say these things about a player already on an AFL list then fair enough but to put a report card out like that about a 17yo on public forum imo is very wrong.
There is a massive interest now days with junior football and the potential draftees and there are a lot of experts on forums offering their opinions about these kids. IMO it is worth considering how the youngster might feel if he was to read what is written about him. The junior players are now warned about the profile they have and are even counselled about it but at 17 some might not be ready to see that type of report written about them.
One of the things that he's quite big on with these profiles is that he puts nothing forward that he wouldn't feel comfortable saying to the player's face, and maintains that philosophy when talking about any player publicly (which is a lot more than can be said for people here regarding comments on some senior players).

I'm not sure that he'd be as upfront in person with this particular analysis (probably his most critical profile over the past three years) and I agree that he could have worded it a lot better, but having read a lot of his work, I reckon that the forthright manner in which he went about this profile would be more out of his disappointment (that a fantastic underage talent may not get the best out of his career because of one facet of his game) rather than just wanting to have a go.

I agree that kids should be protected from savage criticism, especially when it's just for the sake of it, but I'm also sure that most 17 year olds who were playing elite level underage sport and had a talent scout (of sorts) say to them that in order to become a great player they'd need to raise their intensity levels would take the advice under their wing.
 
Westy, I'm 100% sure Colin was not having a go and he may very well have just been frustrated by what he believed was one area that was letting down a very talented player but it did not come over well.
Having not read much of his work, I will take your advice on the fact it was one out blue.
The critical difference in what a talent scout might say to a 17yo and Colin's profile is what the scout says is in a one on one situation and is not out on a public forum for other other people to interpret. Imagine how a kid might feel if his peers at school are pointing out perceived dificiencies that they have read about on the internet ?
It's a tough enough test for these kids just to get drafted without having to read negative things about themselves on the internet.
 
Originally posted by OldSchool
So a 17 year old 'potential' draftee is fair game ?
Where does someone draw the line on what they write about an untried kid ?

I'm not saying that Walsh should not be assessed in a warts and all manner now because he is on an AFL list but as 17yo junior footballer there must be some consideration given.

Not sure of the Robbins comparision you are referring to but he has been in the system a long time and should be assessed accordingly.

Not that they're "fair game", it's just I hate the way some people (commentators mostly) give everyone the biggest wraps, all the time.

If I'm looking at drafting Justin Murphy and he is a complete softc*ck, I want to be told "he's a softc*ck".

I have no problem calling it like it is. These kids have already achieved an enormous amount to get to this stage, if they aren't good enough to go any further, so be it.
 
Originally posted by scooter600x

If I'm looking at drafting Justin Murphy and he is a complete softc*ck, I want to be told "he's a softc*ck".

Scooter, Justin Murphy is a professional player, an undrafted 17yo is not.
Are you saying that it is OK by you for someone to describe a 17yo on a public forum in the manner you detailed above ?
If so, do you think it would also be OK to describe a 15yo or 16yo in the same manner ? 13yo or 14yo ?
Would it be fair for someone in the know to detail the same players school report card on the internet ?
Details about their family situation ?
Where do we draw the line ?

This is one persons assessment about the player and not necessarily the fact yet because most people don't go to the junior football it is regarded as gospel.

I draw the line with junior players because it is hard enough for them to be concentrating on their school work whilst still trying to give themselves the best chance to be drafted without being made aware that someone on the internet has seriously questioned their character.
 
Originally posted by OldSchool
Scooter, Justin Murphy is a professional player, an undrafted 17yo is not....etc...

Extremely well put OldSchool. And there is no need to sugar coat a report on a 17yo completly but some different word choice wouldnt go astray. Saying "I Question his intensity" or "He needs to show more intensity" would have gotten the exact same response across to everyone.

Although Westy_Boy is right, this was pretty much a one off from all the stuff I have read from Wisbey.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Interesting debate guys. I tend to agree with old school.

In writing most of my profiles this year I tried not to write anything that I couldn't say to the kid's face. I know it's more likely TAC players will be checking out websites and therefore opinions will actually be read, unlike most AFL players.

That's not to say if a player has a weakness I won't bring it up. After all the whole reason I started watching underage footy was because I was sick of reading the ridiculous profiles in the paper that suggested every club had picked up 5 future Brownlow winners.

But you have to remember these kids are just that. Kids. They aren't getting paid a dime yet for their performances, they are just like most of us and want to play AFL football, but they are lucky enough to have the ability to possibly do so.

So while I'm quite happy to call Damien Cupido soft as butter, I'd prefer to say something like "needs to work on the defensive side of his game" or "dislikes physical contact" for an underage kid.

I'm sure a lot of the weaknesses have been pointed out numerous times by coaches and possibly even recruiting staff already, but I do think CW might have worded the Walsh one a little differently.

Shame he isn't doing his stuff this year until later on - it will be missed. Not only does he analyse a player well, he is also an entertaining author.
 
Originally posted by Ching
Does Walsh really lack intensity? If so why was he recruited at 4?
His style of play is always going to suffer those sort of raps.He is very smooth moving and athletic so its only natural.Chris Grant got the same treatment when he was young but if anything he is too serious at times.It will take some time yet before we know whether he was worthy of a top 4 pick but I am willing to back Clayton in over Wisbey.
 
Originally posted by GOALden Hawk
But you have to remember these kids are just that. Kids. They aren't getting paid a dime yet for their performances, they are just like most of us and want to play AFL football, but they are lucky enough to have the ability to possibly do so.

So while I'm quite happy to call Damien Cupido soft as butter, I'd prefer to say something like "needs to work on the defensive side of his game" or "dislikes physical contact" for an underage kid.

I'm sure a lot of the weaknesses have been pointed out numerous times by coaches and possibly even recruiting staff already, but I do think CW might have worded the Walsh one a little differently.


Thats how I see it.
If you see Damien Cupido in the manner described above, then you should say however, if it is an underage footballer then you need to word it in a manner that takes into account their age.
 
Originally posted by Ching
Does Walsh really lack intensity?

It is only one person's opinion and it doesn't mean it is the correct one.

Wisbey's view's are terrific. They are well balanced, thoughtful and contructive but not always accurate in my opinion. He is like many other junior football watchers who sees things in a certain way and commentates on it. It doesn't always mean they have got it spot on everytime.

Even the professionals get it wrong as can be witnesssed by players chosen with high draft picks not making the grade or players who have been overlooked until the later stages of the draft and going on to make it. Among these examples almost all recruiters have made incorrect judgements.

One of the fascintaing things about watching junior football is the analysis of a player. Making a judgement as to whether you think a guy can play at the higher level or not. What tools does he have in his kit and which ones does he need to find? You will rarely find people being in total agreement about them. This is the beauty of watching junior footy.

I agree with Old School as well about the nature of comments. There are better ways to deliver a criticism or point out a weakness than being blunt or downright crass about it. But let's face it. This is the internet and almost anything goes. A lot of teen bravados who watch a few games and think they know it all come in here and sledge away at a player's weaknesses or persona. How do you stop them or those that actually don't know anything but claim they do (because they heard it from someone else on here)?

THe aspiring footballer who comes in here and reads some of this stuff won't know who is genuine in their knowledge or not. But they will still see a lot of disparaging remarks and will have to learn to deal with it regardless. I would think the afl should better prepare the youngsters who are playing at the elite level on how to deal with their names being tossed about on footy forums such as this. THey will become the focus of increasing attention in the years to come as elite junior football takes on an even higher profile and their abilities are dissected, discussed and critised more than ever.

It can't be avoided unless someone switches off the internet power button.
 
Originally posted by The Doctor
But let's face it. This is the internet and almost anything goes. A lot of teen bravados who watch a few games and think they know it all come in here and sledge away at a player's weaknesses or persona. How do you stop them or those that actually don't know anything but claim they do (because they heard it from someone else on here)?

It can't be avoided unless someone switches off the internet power button.
If I was a mod of the draft forum, or any other for that matter, I would spell out what is acceptable to all the contributors regarding commentary of junior players and delete any post that did not comply to the rules. It's not hard to follow.
I contribute to another sporting forum and they have some strong base rules in place and I think all stay within them.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom