Tim English - What Price do you pay?

[jeemak]

The whole Tim English concept falls down if he's not offering huge amounts outside of stoppages and inflicting maximum damage on opponents elsewhere.

I personally think too much is made of his shortfalls at the stoppages, and at the same time not enough is made of his good work at the stoppages (HO to advantage - dare I say it).

But with that in balance, he just can't have shit days outside of stoppage work because having good days outside of stoppage work is the key reason he exists.

[1eyedog]

The whole Tim English concept falls down if he's not offering huge amounts outside of stoppages and inflicting maximum damage on opponents elsewhere.

I personally think too much is made of his shortfalls at the stoppages, and at the same time not enough is made of his good work at the stoppages (HO to advantage - dare I say it).

But with that in balance, he just can't have shit days outside of stoppage work because having good days outside of stoppage work is the key reason he exists.

It's all about ceiling Jee everyone knows to add one year per inch for big men. Tim will ripen in 2027 when Bont is totally cooked and Libba is long gone.

[macca]

Goldy looked alright for an almost 36yo on the weekend. Rucks can go well into their mid 30's.

Probably all a moot point with English more than likely staying on very big money. I hope he can finally find that week to week consistent strength and willingness to body his opponent at 27yo. If Lethal's scathing commentary about him on the weekend doesn't sting him into action, I'm not sure anything will - not everyday that an AFEL legend openly questions your courage and competitive spirit.

Goldy is a atheltic freak, I reckon he will keep going until 40.

The legendary Great beard, went to 3 clubs, retired and then got rookied at Collingwood at age of 33! I can't recall if he retired twice at Collingwood.

You could say the same for Shane Mumford.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Hudson

[ledge]

King gave English the 3 votes last night, then Bont then Steele . i couldnt possibly have heard that right could i ?

[jeemak]

King gave English the 3 votes last night, then Bont then Steele . i couldnt possibly have heard that right could i ?

I think the four presenters pick a player each and those players are then rated 3-0 best to worst on the ground, and they tally up their picks over the year. So English getting three votes only meant he was the best of the players picked by the production team.

3 - English
2 - Bont
1 - Steele
0 - Wanganeen-Milera

[jeemak]

I found some of the commentary around the rucks baffling last night. I viewed the actual ruck contest as relatively even, with Marshall being a bit more effective at times in terms of getting his hands to the hitout, but with English clearly being more effective around the ground and in secondary phases.

The commentary said English was more effective because our mids were more effective, which was a bit weird. Like, just because we won our ruck was good instead of us winning because our ruck was dominant.

Perhaps this is what vexes me about the position and how view its importance. A lot of qualitative reasoning instead of quantitative goes into judging how a ruck performed.

[ledge]

I think the four presenters pick a player each and those players are then rated 3-0 best to worst on the ground, and they tally up their picks over the year. So English getting three votes only meant he was the best of the players picked by the production team.

3 - English
2 - Bont
1 - Steele
0 - Wanganeen-Milera

Oh ok I just caught the end of it , thanks.

[azabob]

I wonder with West Coasts mini resurgence reignites their interest in English and vice versa?

[ledge]

I wonder with West Coasts mini resurgence reignites their interest in English and vice versa?

I have no problem English going to WC as long as we get Ginbey or Reid.

[bornadog]

[jeemak]

Yeah but that only shows that Tim is excellent in hit outs to advantage*. What it doesn't show is all the intangibles he isn't good at because they're not able to be defined.

Tim will only be one of the best rucks in the AFL when he can deliver the intangibles that can't be defined on a regular basis.



*I'm aware this stat is barely tangible.

[comrade]

Just as important to show the opposing ruck?s numbers against if you?re really trying to judge efficiency.

Ruck is probably the most nuanced position in terms of evaluating performance. Hitouts to advantage is meaningless in isolation.

[bulldogtragic]

So we can get two lesser type rucks for the price of English and nearly be effective as Tim?

Is that the stat?

[Dogs 24/7]

We've invested too much in English to not back him in now. He's got some faults but we have to work around that now and with Lobb signed for a couple of years and the development of Darcy and it sounds like Lachlan Smith is a long term project so we seem to have the right level of support around him. I'd vote to get a 5 year deal in front of English

[BornInDroopSt'54]

Yeah but that only shows that Tim is excellent in hit outs to advantage*. What it doesn't show is all the intangibles he isn't good at because they're not able to be defined.

Tim will only be one of the best rucks in the AFL when he can deliver the intangibles that can't be defined on a regular basis.



*I'm aware this stat is barely tangible.

Haha love it, intangibles and I agree.
So footy smarts, being aware of how you can impact in any given situation.