Middle men: Your team's centre-square stars

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Axe Man
    Hall of Fame
    • Nov 2008
    • 10866

    Middle men: Your team's centre-square stars

    Middle men: Your team's centre-square stars



    We do well to be mid-range in centre clearances when we are the worst in the league for centre square hit-outs to advantage.

    The Roughead stat doesn't surprise me but the Wallis one does. Perhaps he isn't as good a clearance player as he is widely perceived to be? Perhaps part of the reason we may not be desperate to retain him?
  • Twodogs
    Administrator
    • Nov 2006
    • 27645

    #2
    Re: Middle men: Your team's centre-square stars

    How do you get a negative hit out to advantage? But we do it 3.6 times a game.
    They say Burt Lancaster has one, but I don't believe them.

    Comment

    • Axe Man
      Hall of Fame
      • Nov 2008
      • 10866

      #3
      Re: Middle men: Your team's centre-square stars

      Originally posted by Twodogs
      How do you get a negative hit out to advantage? But we do it 3.6 times a game.
      Differential to the opposition. On average the opposition get 3.6 more centre square hit-outs to advantage than we do.

      Comment

      • soupman
        Bulldog Team of the Century
        • Nov 2007
        • 5075

        #4
        Re: Middle men: Your team's centre-square stars

        Originally posted by Axe Man
        The Roughead stat doesn't surprise me but the Wallis one does. Perhaps he isn't as good a clearance player as he is widely perceived to be? Perhaps part of the reason we may not be desperate to retain him?
        I don't particularly rate Wallis as a midfielder. His work in tight isn't particularly damaging, he is more of the Dahlhaus school of kick out of congestion, without Dahlhs ability to win the outrageous hard balls. As a comparison Mclean, Macrae and Bont all show a much better ability to work through traffic and burst into space, and Macrae and Bont in particular have demonstrated that they can find space much more effectively through handballs than Wallis can, whose handballs are typically less than 3 metres and loop slowly if forced to cover a distance.

        There is a reason Wallis has been forced to excel as a forward, decent mark for his size and a good kick to a lead when given time, the role suits him much better than an inside mid role where his lack of penetration and pace stop him from being anything more than good. Whether this is sustainable long term who knows, but i wouldn't be devastated to lose him. Indeed my main motivation for keeping him to try to keep a better age and games played balance on the list.
        I should leave it alone but you're not right

        Comment

        Working...