PDA

View Full Version : Round 14 Opposition Player Profile - Lance Franklin - Hawthorn



Cyberdoggie
01-07-2009, 05:49 PM
This weeks Opposition Player Profile is Hawthorn's Lance Franklin:



Personal Details
#23 Hawthorn Hawks
Age: 22yr 5mth Games: 94 Born: January 30, 1987
Height: 196cm Weight: 101kg Position: Forward
Last Drafted: Round 1, Pick #5 2004 National Draft


Season Highlights

*17 disps (12 kicks 5 hballs), 9 marks and 3 goals in Rd 11 11-pt win over Sydney at the MCG (7 Jun 2009)

*19 disps (9 kicks 10 hballs), 8 marks and 3 goals in Rd 4 30-pt loss to Port Adelaide at the MCG (18 Apr 2009)

*13 disps (12 kicks 1 hballs), 8 marks, 5 tackles and 5 goals in Rd 1 8-pt loss to Geelong at the MCG (27 Mar 2009)


Season Averages

Kicks: 8.2
Handballs: 4.5
Disposals: 12.6
Tackles: 2.1
Goals 3.2


Why Lance Franklin?

Lance Franklin was chosen for two basic reasons. The first is that he is one of the most talented and damaging forwards in the AFL. The second and most importantly is because he absolutely destoroyed us in the Second Qualifying final last year. In that match Lance kicked 8 goals. The majority of which were kicked on Dale Morris, before Brian Lake was eventually sent to Franklin, but by that time the game was as good as over.

Buddy is a strong, leading forward with outstanding athletic ability for a tall player. Lance is also a proven match winner and can do freakish things with the football.

2008 was a career best year for the Hawthorn forward, in which he amassed 113 goals for the season and was a key player in the Hawks premiership campaign.

While Hawthorn has a few other stars in Luke Hodge and Sam Mitchell. Franklin, despite his slightly less impressive season so far looms as the danger man for the dogs due to previous encounters and possible match up's.

Possible Match up's?

In the qualifying final last year Dale Morris started the game on Franklin, although it was soon very clear that his lack of agility, height, and strength compared to Franklin were key factors in the miss match. While the Dogs appeared to have stage fright and were poor all around, the inability to control Lance Franklin quickly turned the game to the Hawks.

Brian Lake eventually went to Franklin and seemed to match him better for strength and marking ability in the contests, however the damage was done.

The previous meeting to this the Dogs had a strong win down at Aurora stadium. A key component of this victory was the game of Tom Williams on Lance Franklin. Williams kept Franklin to 5 goals, however Tom was quite successful in the contests, beating him on several occasions.

This week's game finds the two teams in different situations to last year.
The Bulldogs are flying in 3rd spot, while the Hawks have struggled and are in 9th and on a 2 game losing streak.

For the match up's this week the Western Bulldogs have a few options.
Brian Lake: Possible first choice. Seemed better suited than Dale Morris in the Qualifying final, however Brian likes to play out of the goal square and generally play's poorly on the leading forwards. If Lake goes to Franklin expect to see Buddy draw him out to the 50 and then they will look for Roughead in the goals square.

Dale Morris: Was well beaten as the first choice on Buddy last time they met. Dale Doesn't have the height or agility to match it. It would be a brave move by Eade to assign the job to Dale this time around, even if he did just have a bad night out last time they met.

Ryan Hargrave: Ryan can play on just about anyone. His strength is his ability to pressure his opponent with his proximity and his spoiling ability. Ryan is not the strongest backman in marking contests and isn't the quickest but he's a good all-rounder. In terms of a potential match up with Franklin, you would have to say it is less likely as Ryan tends to play better on the smaller to mid sized forwards and may struggle for strength.

Tom Williams: Tom is the player with the attributes that is best suited to play on the Hawks danger forward. He has shown previously that he can perform on Franklin, however his injuries, form and absence from the team make it less likely that he will play.
Tom played his first game back from injury last week with Williamstown, unfortunately it may not be enough for him to find his way back in the side.

Damage Control
What will be our plan to stop Buddy and who will match up on him?
Theoretically there has been nothing wrong with our plans on previously encounters.
Our basic plan is to use Morris or Williams on Franklin and have them try and compete with him on the leads and hope that he gets most of his marks well outside 50. Around the goal square Lake will assist as the loose man and 3rd in the contest to help out our other defenders. This plan is satisfactorily sound, unfortunately Roughead and Franklin are that good that if they get enough opportunities and the ball fed well enough to them then they will ultimately succeed.

Conclusion

The key for us isn't so much on the match ups on Buddy, rather the pressure upfield. As we showed in Tasmania, if we win most of the ball and put significant pressure on the hawk ball movers we will limit their supply and the quality to Franklin and we will win the game. If we play this way it won't matter so much even if Franklin kicks 5 odd goals, we should still outscore them.

For me it's a simple equation. If we run and tackle, take risks and play on quickly we win games. If we hesitate, play backwards and second guess our selves, we make mistakes and lose.

bornadog
01-07-2009, 06:11 PM
This weeks Opposition Player Profile is Hawthorn's Lance Franklin:

Conclusion

The key for us isn't so much on the match ups on Buddy, rather the pressure upfield. As we showed in Tasmania, if we win most of the ball and put significant pressure on the hawk ball movers we will limit their supply and the quality to Franklin and we will win the game. If we play this way it won't matter so much even if Franklin kicks 5 odd goals, we should still outscore them.

For me it's a simple equation. If we run and tackle, take risks and play on quickly we win games. If we hesitate, play backwards and second guess our selves, we make mistakes and lose.

Good Choice Cyberdoggie. Your conclusion has hit the nail on the head. In Tassie, Buddy still kicked 5 (I think), but the key was the ball hardly went into the forward 50 for the game, due to the midfield pressure.

This year with a few injuries, the Hawks cluster has been exposed, and Buddy has not had the ball in there as much as last year, however, between him and Roughhead they have still kicked 80 odd goals for the year. As you say, If we can stop the delivery to Buddy, won't matter who is on him.

Sedat
01-07-2009, 06:19 PM
Good Choice Cyberdoggie. Your conclusion has hit the nail on the head. In Tassie, Buddy still kicked 5 (I think), but the key was the ball hardly went into the forward 50 for the game, due to the midfield pressure.
There are terrific 5 goal performances, and then there are Steve McCann-handball-over-the-top-gimmee 5 goal games - this was one of those. In Tassie, Williams out-pointed him on 4-5 occasions when isolated one-out in key contests in the 2nd half.

Having said that, his QF was as destructive, commanding and brilliant a performance on the big stage of finals football from a key forward as you could see - even if he had something like 13 clangers on the night (most of which were frees against). He is an absolute enigma.

Does anyone think that his ego might have been pricked last week with the arrival of the Naitanui, the so-called 'new Buddy'? He might not have appreciated being fish'n'chip paper this week.

Rocco Jones
01-07-2009, 06:24 PM
Great write up mate.

I would have Morris on Buddy and Lake on Roughead.

I know Buddy killed Morris and he was quieter when Lake moved onto him in QF but I think a huge part of that was that the game was over. To me at least, it seemed Buddy was a bit over it and just trying to have a bit of fun.

It's funny, when a forward owns an opponent for strength it is so much more noticeable then when one gets owned for pace. I really believe closing speed is taken for granted.

A big part of the decision of who to play on Buddy is whether the other option is suited to Roughead. I think Morris' main asset is his closing speed, which suits playing on Buddy more than Roughead imo.

lemmon
01-07-2009, 06:50 PM
Do you think we will see us drop a man back in front of Buddy and Roughy's space or play one on one?
I would prefer to see us stay on the front foot and go one on one, the prospect of having Hodge float across the backline doesnt fill me with confidence.

Rocco Jones
01-07-2009, 07:00 PM
Do you think we will see us drop a man back in front of Buddy and Roughy's space or play one on one?
I would prefer to see us stay on the front foot and go one on one, the prospect of having Hodge float across the backline doesnt fill me with confidence.

I think you answered your own question very well. If we drop a man back that will set up Hodge to do the same at the other end, which would be a very bad idea imo.

Mantis
01-07-2009, 07:16 PM
Do you think we will see us drop a man back in front of Buddy and Roughy's space or play one on one?


We tried it in the finals using Cross in this role and it backfired big time because rather than dropping a player behind the ball, Hawthorn elected to allow Jordan Lewis to play across the middle of the ground and he was very effective.

I hope we roll the dice and go one on one, but I would still think that our defenders will try and clog the space for Roughead and Franklin to lead into.

Onto Franklin as others have noted he just doesn't seem to have the same spring in his step this year, but is a player we will need to keep in check if we are to win. His performance against us in the QF was simply awesome so let's hope we don't see a repeat. Hopefully Morris has better luck this time as he was almost unstoppable last time around.

The Pie Man
01-07-2009, 08:59 PM
There are terrific 5 goal performances, and then there are Steve McCann-handball-over-the-top-gimmee 5 goal games - this was one of those. In Tassie, Williams out-pointed him on 4-5 occasions when isolated one-out in key contests in the 2nd half.

Agreed, he got some real cheapies running off the contest - I still remember one Williams spoil on the wing, just stayed with him on a long lead and punched it out of bounds. Not spectacular, but it just showed the athletic ability of the man, and I still want to see how he will go on Reiwoldt too.

I'd be surprised if he's not named at least as an emergency. He was't great for Willy last week, but I'd like to think he's ready to play a purely defensive role on Buddy.

Cyberdoggie
02-07-2009, 11:23 AM
Another fact i dug up in my investigation was that on round 21 2007 Luke Hodge kicked 6 goals against us, 34 disposals, amassing 196 supercoach points. Sewell also had 39 disposals and Mitchell 38 that day in an 84 point thrashing.

This also highlights the role our midfield will have to play Saturday night.

Mantis
02-07-2009, 12:30 PM
Another fact i dug up in my investigation was that on round 21 2007 Luke Hodge kicked 6 goals against us, 34 disposals, amassing 196 supercoach points. Sewell also had 39 disposals and Mitchell 38 that day in an 84 point thrashing.

This also highlights the role our midfield will have to play Saturday night.

I am pretty sure his opponent for large chunks of this game was Sam Power.

LostDoggy
02-07-2009, 12:48 PM
The bonus for us this time around is no Williams and no Rioli. Hawthorn now almost totally relies on Buddy and Roughhead to kick their goals. Asuming they both kick 6, that will not be enough.

I would bring Williams in for Buddy and play Lake on Roughhead then allow Hargrave, Gilbee and Harbrow to attack from the back

Rocco Jones
02-07-2009, 12:54 PM
I would bring Williams in for Buddy and play Lake on Roughhead then allow Hargrave, Gilbee and Harbrow to attack from the back

No doubt a fit Williams would be great for us, especially when we are coming up against a side with 2 quality KP forwards but the obvious question is whether he would benefit from more time at Willy.

Without trying to think forward too much we will probably need him even more next week with Collingwood's forward line depth.

LostDoggy
02-07-2009, 03:54 PM
No doubt a fit Williams would be great for us, especially when we are coming up against a side with 2 quality KP forwards but the obvious question is whether he would benefit from more time at Willy.

Without trying to think forward too much we will probably need him even more next week with Collingwood's forward line depth.

I would agree that Willliams on paper at least is our best match up on Franklin, assuming he won't be playing then we should start Lake on Buddy.

If you isolate five attributes that make a forward dangerous in a contest, Height, Strength, Speed, Agility and abilty to read the ball in flight Lake would match Buddy in three, lacking in only in Speed and Agility. From what I have seen Buddy is not reading the ball as well as last year so is not as able to take the ball at full sprint and stretch.

Dale would be down in four if not all five of these factors matched up on Buddy. In comparision Dale is closer to Roughead in Height, Speed and Agility and probably not too far off in terms of strength and reading of the play. What Dale can't do is Let Roughead get hip contact on him, the man has legs the size of tree trunks.

Where we match up better then last year is the development of Harbow as a small defender. His pace on the deck is a real asset down back and should help us lock up the ball once it has been brought to ground, especially in the absence of Williams and Rioli. The possible inclusion of Addison might help there as well.

On the point raised about Collingwood I would agree, while their best forwards like ours or all small to mid sized, they will try to exploit us by rotating Leigh Brown and Fraser down there if Williams is not back, if he is then Williams can stand Cloke with Lake taking the resting tall.

Cyberdoggie
02-07-2009, 06:38 PM
I am pretty sure his opponent for large chunks of this game was Sam Power.

That explains everything :cool:

boydogs
02-07-2009, 08:14 PM
The bonus for us this time around is no Williams and no Rioli. Hawthorn now almost totally relies on Buddy and Roughhead to kick their goals. Asuming they both kick 6, that will not be enough.

I would bring Williams in for Buddy and play Lake on Roughhead then allow Hargrave, Gilbee and Harbrow to attack from the back

Big call, they will still have 22 players out there to kick them even though some of their best are out

AndrewP6
03-07-2009, 11:53 PM
[/B]

Buddy sure doesn't seem to be the same player as he was last year - I'm going to be controversial here, but people keep saying to me....."no drugs, no Hawthorn". Not sure how true it is, but the rumour I hear is that Buddy is (allegedly) one of the players on his 2nd positive drug test. I don't know that much about drugs, but I'm thinking some of them make people feel invincible and oh so confident. :D) Morris surely will be itching to make up for the QF last year?

Controversial indeed...

LostDoggy
05-07-2009, 02:11 AM
I think Franklin is still picking up his pants, from around his ankles.

The Coon Dog
05-07-2009, 09:50 AM
You fixed him up Alex!

Can you do this every week now, starting with Dane Swan? ;)

Sockeye Salmon
05-07-2009, 12:12 PM
In round 21, 2006, I sa Chris Grant have 20+ possessions and 12 marks playing CHB on Stuart Loewe. Loewe had 4 touches for the night and his only mark and goal came late in the game when Grant did the team thing and covered for a teammate.

This was the best game I had ever seen from a defender in my life.

Until tonight.

Has a 100 goal a year FF ever been owned so comprehensively before?

Mantis
05-07-2009, 12:28 PM
Not taking anything from the brain fade who was fantastic, but Buddy looked bloody ordinary last night. Seemed lethargic in his efforts and looked a shadow of the player that tore us apart in the finals last year.

boydogs
05-07-2009, 02:20 PM
Not taking anything from the brain fade who was fantastic, but Buddy looked bloody ordinary last night. Seemed lethargic in his efforts and looked a shadow of the player that tore us apart in the finals last year.

He hasn't been in the same form all year but I think we made him drop his head and lose it completely last night. The one time he got two metres on Lake for an uncontested mark he couldn't believe it and put it down because he was expecting Lake to spoil again. He was sent to defense and was being outmarked not just spoiled, completely dominant performance from Brian and well done to Eade for getting the match ups right

LostDoggy
05-07-2009, 03:34 PM
I think Franklin is still picking up his pants, from around his ankles.

Ahh, poor Buddy!

hujsh
05-07-2009, 09:00 PM
In round 21, 2006, I sa Chris Grant have 20+ possessions and 12 marks playing CHB on Stuart Loewe. Loewe had 4 touches for the night and his only mark and goal came late in the game when Grant did the team thing and covered for a teammate.

I think the date's a bit wrong since he was retired and we were smashed

Sockeye Salmon
05-07-2009, 09:36 PM
I think the date's a bit wrong since he was retired and we were smashed

Ha ha!

That was round 21, 1996.

I missed by a decade!!!!!

bornadog
05-07-2009, 09:40 PM
Ha ha!

That was round 21, 1996.

I missed by a decade!!!!!

Your getting old SS:D

alwaysadog
05-07-2009, 10:52 PM
Not taking anything from the brain fade who was fantastic, but Buddy looked bloody ordinary last night. Seemed lethargic in his efforts and looked a shadow of the player that tore us apart in the finals last year.

Absolutely correct, in fact I'm not sure the team turned up at all in the first half. It looked to me like they had the trainers running round with cardboard cut outs. No even the trainers would have put up a better showing. Injuries can't explain a performance like that they were so uncompetitive and as for the big media sensation I can't explain it at all unless Buddy is keen on becoming the next Larry Donoghue.

comrade
05-07-2009, 10:59 PM
Was last year a flash in the pan for Buddy?

Yes, he's obviously blessed with some outrageous talent, but was his season purely built on the dominance of the Hawk midfield and their rolling zone?

Now teams have worked them out and they've lost some firepower through the middle, will we see the same performances from him again?

Rocco Jones
05-07-2009, 11:08 PM
Was last year a flash in the pan for Buddy?

Yes, he's obviously blessed with some outrageous talent, but was his season purely built on the dominance of the Hawk midfield and their rolling zone?

Now teams have worked them out and they've lost some firepower through the middle, will we see the same performances from him again?

Anyone remember this guy?

http://www.theage.com.au/ffxImage/urlpicture_id_1059084260039_2003/07/26/adrian_mcadam.jpg

No seriously though, I think he can definitely return to greatness but it will involve a lot of hard work. He needs to keep on evolving. Big pre-season to increase his tank so he can get more marks as a lead up is a must.