As I understand it conventional wisdom is now to tag the best player on the opposition team who is most susceptible to tagging and effects the scoreboard the most either directly or with assists..
Or, alternatively to tag the player whose effective disposals are the greatest.
Seems like this results in strange things , like opposition taggers tagging Stanton, rather than Heppell. because Stanton will hit the scoreboard more than Heppel, at least in 2014, Heppel can break a tag, Stanton cannot.
Isnt it time to relieve Hocking from this sacrificial duty?
He is a great team player, but I believe he finally needs to be given a go in his own right.
That means increasing accountability across the whole group, but not assigning specific tagging role to anyone, except in special cases, and then, only as a tactical move during a game.
The good thing about hocking as a tagger is that he is dangerous when he gets the ball. Which places accountability on the player he’s tagging. I don’t think you can make a whole team accountable for the other teams best player unless you change the philosophy of the team. And we’re not good enough to not tag players.
The good thing about hocking as a tagger is that he is dangerous when he gets the ball. Which places accountability on the player he's tagging. I don't think you can make a whole team accountable for the other teams best player unless you change the philosophy of the team. And we're not good enough to not tag players.
Yes I agree our midfield has not been good enough, and some might say that now, we have 2 Brownlow quality Midfielders and one aspiring Brownlow quality midfielder , we will have arguably a top 4 midfield in 2015 . That means that we will have the luxury of playing Hocking in his own right, in at least 50% of games. theres the distinct possibility he could increase his own possessions from the 15 average to the 20-25 average. Its not a matter of possessions, per se, but what each player does with his possessions.
What I am saying is, he deserves to be given more of a chance in his own right. Sure, cut him back into the run-with role if it doesnt work out,
I am suggesting a different mindset : Not who do we tag? at the selection table, but should we shut down player X , as a move from the box during the game?
Collingwood’s midfield was so dangerous in 2010 that they never even bothered tagging opposition players. The likes of Swan, Pendles, Beams, Sidebottom, Ball and Wellingham would get a heap of it and over-class the oppo’s mid.
Don’t think we’re at that stage yet. Zaka and Myers need to consistent for Hocking to be released from the role IMO.
Collingwood's midfield was so dangerous in 2010 that they never even bothered tagging opposition players. The likes of Swan, Pendles, Beams, Sidebottom, Ball and Wellingham would get a heap of it and over-class the oppo's mid.
Don't think we're at that stage yet. Zaka and Myers need to consistent for Hocking to be released from the role IMO.
At a certain point we have to weigh up whether we go for the Collingwood scenario or do the conservative thing, and designate Hocking as a tagger only. This is moving more towards the "shootout" style of play that typified Sheeds attitude to play and certainly the "shootout " all out attack game plan did not work for Knights. Maybe as you say, only bona fide top 4 sides probably can back themselves to go into a game with this mindset.
Think about it. The best of Murphy/Cotchin/Gaff/ (insert any player from opposition team who is tag-able) is more damaging than Hocking's best. Or if you're the doggies, better than Liam Picken's best or if you're Freo, Crowley's best etc. It is a net gain for your team.
Whether they should tag the likes of Ablett and Pendlebury who seem to be almost immune to a tag is a debate but generally the opposition will have someone in their team like the names I mentioned above who is worth tagging.
Hocking has done a reasonable job on Ablett before that being said.
Think about it. The best of Murphy/Cotchin/Gaff/ (insert any player from opposition team who is tag-able) is more damaging than Hocking's best. Or if you're the doggies, better than Liam Picken's best or if you're Freo, Crowley's best etc. It is a net gain for your team.
Whether they should tag the likes of Ablett and Pendlebury who seem to be almost immune to a tag is a debate but generally the opposition will have someone in their team like the names I mentioned above who is worth tagging.
Hocking has done a reasonable job on Ablett before that being said.
Houli Douli, I agree that is conventional thinking. maybe its mandatory in todays game.
The thing is, Hocking is REALLY tough, and will get in and under and will win the hard ball. These players are very valuable, to get first use and get it out to the likes of Zacka, Cooney, Zerret, Its a bit hard to do that if you are following someone else around.
Think about it. The best of Murphy/Cotchin/Gaff/ (insert any player from opposition team who is tag-able) is more damaging than Hocking's best. Or if you're the doggies, better than Liam Picken's best or if you're Freo, Crowley's best etc. It is a net gain for your team.
Whether they should tag the likes of Ablett and Pendlebury who seem to be almost immune to a tag is a debate but generally the opposition will have someone in their team like the names I mentioned above who is worth tagging.
Hocking has done a reasonable job on Ablett before that being said.
I agree with Chris that Hocking has more to offer than tagging. I rate him as an attacking mid, actually. The fact that he's so tough, and also good at tagging, makes him look single-dimensional. Unfairly so, I think.
Regarding the bold'ed bit -
It's not a simple matter of 1=1 in that case.
Let's say, Hocking limits Murphy to 50% of his (Murphy's) value in the game. In doing so, how far is Hocking limiting himself (and Murphy limiting him, Hocking)?
is Murphy's 50% worth more than Hocking's 80%?
Those figures are obviously out of my bum, but you get the point. It's not a '100 cancels 100' scenario. And there is, of course various players/outputs/effects/replacements/suitabilities/etc to consider.
I’d have to say a couple of Hocking’s highlights excited me the most this year (other than J.D’s 2 marks in R1 v North & J.D’s goals in the final)! His mark & goal r. 14 vs Crows and his hanger and blind handball r. 21 vs W.C especially as it was during our comeback surge).
Just love it when his hardwork goes noticed by doing something special and goes rewarded by kicking a beauty. I might be biased though as he is one of my favs.
As for being relieved of tagging - this year I was really hoping we would see him taking on Jobe’s role (in his absence) and be (primarily) an inside ball winning midfielder (simultaneously giving Ambrose the tagging role to see what he is capable in the midfield). Hocking has a couple of the required attributes and body type but thought his disposal (especially handballs under pressure) seemed to go astray and had a lack of composure also. Seemed to me like he plays with blinkers on and im not sure if you can develop the most important attribute of all; peripheral vision.
We probably need one tagger in the middle. We don’t have the firepower to reliably win an attacking shootout.
But I want to raise a tangential bugbear…I have an allergic reaction whenever I hear the phrase “defensive forward”. Forwards should be picked primarily to create goals IMO. If they do that well enough, then the only way it comes back out of the forward line is in the hands of an umpire.
I too shudder when I hear people say “play him as a defensive forward” - it basically means his not good enough to play mid, doesn’t create enough to play forward but too good to leave out of the 22! Guess that’s what tends to happen when you struggle for talent on your list which is not the case for 2015! (cough lid off)
But big holes in your argument grizzly; where would the likes of Balantyne, Betts, J. Green, puopolo etc. be playing if it wasn’t for their defensive pressure that often results in goals scored? Defensive pressure wins games and it starts from the front.
We probably need one tagger in the middle. We don't have the firepower to reliably win an attacking shootout.
But I want to raise a tangential bugbear...I have an allergic reaction whenever I hear the phrase "defensive forward". Forwards should be picked primarily to create goals IMO. If they do that well enough, then the only way it comes back out of the forward line is in the hands of an umpire.
Then you need to get over it, or find some VHS games from the 80s.
Ablett is not immune to Crowley.
He's one of the best players in the league, imo.
Massive respect.
As a game we're pretty immature about defensive players. He's been one of the most influential head-to-head players in the game for about 4 years. Should be noticed, should be rewarded. I bet the coaches appreciate him and his ilk.
I disagree pretty strongly. For a start, we need a tagger and he’s our best option. Besides that I just don’t think he has the attributes to be the attacking midfielder you speak of. A couple of years back he had a run playing as a non- tagging midfielder, and was ordinary. IMO he’s one of those players who need a job to focus on to get the best out of himself. That’s his personality type, and why he’s effective.