-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
shaun hampson threads [merged]
- Thread starter Ian4
- Start date
lamb22 said:
So Griff was no more effective than Hammer, except he obtained many more HOs, which CAN give your midfield the opportunity to clear it. I think you are still using your sleight-of-hand whereby you are making the ruckman responsible for both HO and CLR, which is absurd.
What these two posts of yours do is confirm what I have been arguing. A winning ruck is very useful, but ultimately it comes down to whose midfield works better at getting in and under for the clearance e.g. Ablett last match won 11 to Dusty's 6 etc. who was our best.
I think it was Gerard Healey, former top, brownlow-winning mid, who stated recently that an effective, winning ruck is always preferred, but after that it's almost better to have a clear loser because then the mids know where to move. A half-winner was the worst.
Another strong recent example was Norf whose mids are heavier, stronger and tougher than ours - only Dusty can compare - but they tag Cotch who has class, then Swallow, Cunnington and Ziebell can often counter Dusty and the rest. They are super-effective when Goldy is fit, but still can adapt well enough when a Daw is getting beaten at CBs. However, last game we beat them in CLRs 43-35. So why do you think? A winning ruckman can make all the difference for the mids.
BTW the taps near his feet usually only result in more ball-ups as the 'grabber' is jumped on and the ball seldom gets out. Always think a palm into the clear has many advantages, and risks too. That's why I want a winning ruckman. As someone else posted a little while back, I often wonder what the result would be if you set up for Hammer to actually punch the ball out of the midfield scrum, 10-15ms forward. Still fondly remember Mark Lee and Craig McKellar doing this. It puts the ball straight into attack. Another net benefit is it would force Dimma to not allow the opposition to set up with a Plus-1 across the HFL.
leon said:
Then what's the point in playing Hampson? If clearances come down to midfield, and we can play Griff or Vickery who can play as a fourth midfielder, then what purpose does Hampson serve? He's not dominant enough in the ruck for us to gain any advantage out of it, and can't do anything else on the ground.
He took one contested mark (something Maric used to do routinely, many times a game) and all of a sudden he's in a purple patch. He was terrible again on the weekend, perhaps slightly above what we expect of him, because what we expect is horrendous.
There is still no purpose in us playing Hampson. Everyone agrees that he isn't helping us in the centre, and he doesn't do anything else.
tigertim said:
I must have missed that. With the Swans you mean? I think he played 2 or 3 games where got his hand on the ball a few times and didn't stuff up. The media loves a Cinderella story, and especially love when we stuff up, so they pumped it up.
Yeah, the media beat it up back in 2014 but I liken it to Hampy circa now. When these "ugly ducklings" don't stink it up completely they get a good bit of lovin from certain sections.tigersnake said:
http://afltables.com/afl/stats/players/T/Tom_Derickx.html
See in 2014 TD had a bit of a purple patch around rds 7-11. Actually kicked 5 goals in that period. As I said Hampy has kicked 3 goals in his career at RFC ......
Coburgtiger said:
No, I'm saying H usually wins HOs which often can mean we win CLRs, but sometimes other mids rove better to him than ours - see Ablett. If you read my Norf example, H's CB dominance because Goldy was out. Daw better around the ground, yes. I wish H did more, but he may have some upside still from getting continuity. Griff is needed as a KF too; Vickery a ruckman? What have you been looking at?
Major point is he is the best and biggest CB ruck we have. And not everyone agrees with you. For one, me and others on PRE, then Dimma and RFC match committee, then several media commentators e.g. Carey. Just for starters.
But I really get sick of the circular arguments on here. My main contention is that, even if I personally didn't think he was the ideal choice at all, we have no-one better in the role as I see it ATM. But, I'll pretend to agree with you and ask:
Where is, and who is the far better replacement we can obtain for 2017? Then tell us how we obtain him e.g. our first draft pick? Also provide your confident guarantees this player will be a winner, which I'd define as at least as good as Maric, preferably needs to be taller and more speedy/athletic in my view.
leon said:
You (and Hardwick and the other experts you mentioned) just dont get it.
1. Griff, Vickery and Mcbean are all much better footballers than Hampson.(not hard, I could name about 800 more players on AFL lists)
2. Ruck those 3 and rotate them forward.
3. If the clearance numbers are similar to when Hampson rucks you are already a winner.
4. Find/poach the next Gawn, Goldy or Nicnat.(or fast track Cholly).
Someone posted that Port are last in HO and HOTA and first for scores from clearances. Err daaahhh! If you play an extra clearance player rather than specialist ruck you are likely to win more clearances. This is something you keep missing when you blame our clearance players for not winning more clearances but conveniently forget Hampson is one of those (admittedly very very poor) clearance players.
If he can just take more regular ruckman style marks around the ground then I'll be a lot happier. They don't have to be NicNac hangers.block22 said:
It's not that bloody hard. Most suburban league players can take the majority of overhead marks they get their hands to.
lamb22 said:
A bit of an anomoly as Essendon, Gold Coast and Collingwood are all bottom 4 for hitouts and clearances. At the other end 4 of the top 6 for hitouts are also top 6 for clearances. Bulldogs are interesting, 14th in hitouts and 5th in clearances but they have one of the best young midfields groups going around.
evo said:
according to B Lade he has poor depth perception with the ball coming straight toward him
They are teaching him to come across the path of the ball not straight on if that makes sense.
Without looking at the replay of his mark in the last 1/4, I seem to recall him taking the mark slightly side on ?
Apparently Hampson's eyes are a bit dodgy when it comes to field and depth of vision.
It's one of the reasons why his hands are so out of sync with the motion of the footy as it suddenly appears in his vision.
It's one of the reasons why his hands are so out of sync with the motion of the footy as it suddenly appears in his vision.
FFS someone buy the bloke a pair of glasses.taztiger4 said:
Must be an absolute superstar footballer if he can get to elite level without being able to see properly.
How the hell does it take so long for anyone to figure out what is going wrong n why the *smile* has he not been sent for the full run of specs, contacts or laser surgery?
Surely there's a way of fixing slightly dodgy visual perception, it's not like he's blind n needs a flaming woofer to find his way around.
So did I and even though he did play one of his better games it does my bloody head in when he taps it towards the other teams goals when in the 50 metre arc...I don't care if our guy looks free or not its to much of an advantage to the attaking side if we make the slightest error. He even has no idea which way we are kicking sometimes. ???tigerlove said:
