For all the talk of "why Graham and not Kerridge/Thomas/O'Shea/etc?" perhaps a look at the heat maps wouldn't go astray. Graham was in the middle, Kerridge a more of a back flank/defensive wing, Thomas pretty deep backand rebounding. I've also thrown in Mullet and O'Shea for reference as their names get brought up quite often too.
Graham plays his best footy when he's on-ball, not as a flanker. He can start close to the ball at the stoppages, get his hands on it and move it on. That's his bread and butter. When he's played as a hff he lacks a few attributes that some of his colleagues have; speed, gut running ability, tackling and general pressure. Unsurprisingly he is unable to amass possessions in that role, unlike last week in the middle, and perhaps adds less than others when in that position.
Unfortunately for Nick, Ed is back this week and joined by Cuningham who will hopefully get some time in the guts too.
Given our inability to spread from the stoppage has been a major detriment to our on field performances, perhaps the club would prefer the like of Kerridge and his running ability on the outside and fringes of the contest.
Perhaps his disposal was deemed to be the culprit: he ran at 57% which isn't amazing for someone who still had 13 on the outside, considering that CD call a kick over 40m to any kind of contest to be effective (and he had an impressive 436m gained) that 57% could actually be misleading (although the same could be said for Kerridge, Thomas, etc).
Maybe he was electing to move the ball in a way that went against the coaches instructions? Maybe his off the ball work wasn't up to scratch: running patterns, defensive work, etc.
Maybe he just had a really, really **** week on the track and that was enough?
There are so many possibilities why he could have been dropped and I'd argue we won't be able to know for sure just by speaking on gut feel from watching the game and having a look at the dozen or so stats available on the afl app.
It's tough for Nick but at the end of the day I'm still pretty happy with the ins.
Graham plays his best footy when he's on-ball, not as a flanker. He can start close to the ball at the stoppages, get his hands on it and move it on. That's his bread and butter. When he's played as a hff he lacks a few attributes that some of his colleagues have; speed, gut running ability, tackling and general pressure. Unsurprisingly he is unable to amass possessions in that role, unlike last week in the middle, and perhaps adds less than others when in that position.
Unfortunately for Nick, Ed is back this week and joined by Cuningham who will hopefully get some time in the guts too.
Given our inability to spread from the stoppage has been a major detriment to our on field performances, perhaps the club would prefer the like of Kerridge and his running ability on the outside and fringes of the contest.
Perhaps his disposal was deemed to be the culprit: he ran at 57% which isn't amazing for someone who still had 13 on the outside, considering that CD call a kick over 40m to any kind of contest to be effective (and he had an impressive 436m gained) that 57% could actually be misleading (although the same could be said for Kerridge, Thomas, etc).
Maybe he was electing to move the ball in a way that went against the coaches instructions? Maybe his off the ball work wasn't up to scratch: running patterns, defensive work, etc.
Maybe he just had a really, really **** week on the track and that was enough?
There are so many possibilities why he could have been dropped and I'd argue we won't be able to know for sure just by speaking on gut feel from watching the game and having a look at the dozen or so stats available on the afl app.
It's tough for Nick but at the end of the day I'm still pretty happy with the ins.
