AFL Toast RND 4: Win Against the Crows

[Red Black and Blue]

No.
You said he was not hard at it. He has been. Changing the narrative again.

Rubbish. I said poor standards of general competitiveness and lack of body lining the ball. It’s obviously talking about the trend of his career in the context of the competition relative to his role. That doesn’t mean he never entered a contest.

 

[faible]

I said poor standards of general competitiveness

Yeah.

This is what people keep saying you're wrong about.

 

[Red Black and Blue]

Yeah.

This is what people keep saying you're wrong about.

Not relative to position I’m not. The guys nickname around the comp was literally shortstepell

 

[faible]

Not relative to position I’m not.

How is competitiveness relative to position?

Does HBF Heppell work harder than Inside Midfield Heppell?

 

[Red Black and Blue]

How is competitiveness relative to position?

Does HBF Heppell work harder than Inside Midfield Heppell?

It’s nothing to do with working hard. It’s about how hard you enter physical contests. How willing are you to do damage and take damage.

 

[faible]

It’s nothing to do with working hard. It’s about how hard you enter physical contests. How willing are you to do damage and take damage.

Oh so when you change the definition of competitiveness to something else entirely then?

 

[brain taylor]

How willing are you to do damage and take damage.

walking backwards under the ball and getting clobbered over the head is pretty much the guy's signature move lol

 

[Red Black and Blue]

Oh so when you change the definition of competitiveness to something else entirely then?

Definition- “possession of a strong desire to be more successful than others.”
Relative to role. When you’re an inside mid your judged off your ability to attack and win the contest.

 

[Pweter]

I can't believe there's been such a long running argument in a thread and it hasn't involved eth-dog

 

[TheGrizz]

Definition- “possession of a strong desire to be more successful than others.”
Relative to role. When you’re an inside mid your judged off your ability to attack and win the contest.

So because he is not an inside mid, he isnt competitive because putting his body on the line willingly and being generally desperate is an inside mids job and isnt the definition of competitive that you use for a Half back?

Ok

 

[Red Black and Blue]

walking backwards under the ball and getting clobbered over the head is pretty much the guy's signature move lol

He is generally quite good aerially. He’s been a good hbf for the majority of his time there.

 

[brain taylor]

Definition- “possession of a strong desire to be more successful than others.”
Relative to role. When you’re an inside mid your judged off your ability to attack and win the contest.

how is a desire to be better than others relative to a role? it's pretty universal.
also you've defined competitivess then given us a metric for ability, which is not the same thing

 

[faible]

Definition- “possession of a strong desire to be more successful than others.”
Relative to role. When you’re an inside mid your judged off your ability to attack and win the contest.

Nope. Try again.

Desire and outcome aren't the same thing.

 

[Red Black and Blue]

Nope. Try again.

Desire and outcome aren't the same thing.

how is a desire to be better than others relative to a role? it's pretty universal.
also you've defined competitivess then given us a metric for ability, which is not the same thing

It’s about how you demonstrate that desire. Do you lead with your head, do you accelerate or deccelarate into traffic, do you hit tackles with aggression etc...

They aren’t ability relative, they are manifestations of desire.

 

[Lance Uppercut]

Not relative to position I’m not. The guys nickname around the comp was literally shortstepell

Lol! That was 100% a BF Norf nuffy only nickname because they were b-hurt that whispers Sean Atley was never anything more than a mediocre player.

****s sakes, brush up on your Bigfooty lore, turbo

 

[brain taylor]

It’s about how you demonstrate that desire. Do you lead with your head, do you accelerate or deccelarate into traffic, do you hit tackles with aggression etc...

They aren’t ability relative, they are manifestations of desire.

if they aren't ability relative, why are you judging him off his ability to win contests? lol
the guy who routinely stands in front of (and gets cleaned up by) a speeding truck to get a hand on the footy is actually an uncompetitive wimp because he doesn't do bont numbers?
still waiting on an explanation of how competiveness is relative to position btw

 

[faible]

Do you lead with your head

Oh so in order to 'demonstrate competitiveness' you have to actively make bad choices. Got it.

 

[Red Black and Blue]

if they aren't ability relative, why are you judging him off his ability to win contests? lol
the guy who routinely stands in front of (and gets cleaned up by) a speeding truck to get a hand on the footy is actually an uncompetitive wimp because he doesn't do bont numbers?
still waiting on an explanation of how competiveness is relative to position btw

Because temperament is still metric of a success footballer. I don’t blame him for being the player he is. I blame Dodoro for not drafting more appropriate players so Heppell could have had a great long career at half back.

How is competitiveness not relative to the metrics of role? The judging of Tom Hawkins applying pressure is not the same as Brad Close.

 

[Red Black and Blue]

Oh so in order to 'demonstrate competitiveness' you have to actively make bad choices. Got it.

Yes. Part of being a successful inside midfielder is recklessness.

 

[faible]

Yes. Part of being a successful inside midfielder is recklessness.

Here I was thinking successful inside midfielders had skill and the ability to extract the ball without getting knocked out.

Angus Brayshaw was right all along!

 

[Red Black and Blue]

Here I was thinking successful inside midfielders had skill and the ability to extract the ball without getting knocked out.

Angus Brayshaw was right all along!

Or or or maybe he wasn’t suited to the role. Viney and Oliver seem to go alright without getting ko’d though.

 

[brain taylor]

Because temperament is still metric of a success footballer. I don’t blame him for being the player he is. I blame Dodoro for not drafting more appropriate players so Heppell could have had a great long career at half back.

How is competitiveness not relative to the metrics of role? The judging of Tom Hawkins applying pressure is not the same as Brad Close.

temperament is also not the same as ability, so why is 'ability to win contests' a metric by which you measure it?
pressure acts are not something i would expect of tom hawkins, but if he and brad close had the same output pressure-wise, i wouldn't say "brad close is more competitive, because pressure acts are more important to his role".
in fact, it would be an indicator of higher competitiveness in hawkins, as chasing and tackling desperately isn't an important part of his job but he's doing everything he can to affect the game.

 

[faible]

Or or or maybe he wasn’t suited to the role. Viney and Oliver seem to go alright without getting ko’d though.

Perhaps because they don't lead with their head?

I know this is confusing, but being an inside midfielder is a skill in and of itself.

You can be a courageous and competitive player, but not an inside midfielder.

Take Nick Reiwoldt, no one would argue he wasn't competitive or courageous, surely, but he was never an inside midfielder.

Heppell can be competitive and courageous, but not an inside midfielder.

 

[Red Black and Blue]

Perhaps because they don't lead with their head?

I know this is confusing, but being an inside midfielder is a skill in and of itself.

You can be a courageous and competitive player, but not an inside midfielder.

Take Nick Reiwoldt, no one would argue he wasn't competitive or courageous, surely, but he was never an inside midfielder.

Heppell can be competitive and courageous, but not an inside midfielder.

They absolutely lead with their heads often. They also protect themselves when appropriate.

I agree with the rest, It's not a one size fits all for every scenario, but when I say relative to role I mean relative to other inside mids in the competition. Relative to the standard that other high level players in their position do.

I don't expect players to be something they aren't. I expect us to recruit and select players appropriately.

 

[Red Black and Blue]

temperament is also not the same as ability, so why is 'ability to win contests' a metric by which you measure it?
pressure acts are not something i would expect of tom hawkins, but if he and brad close had the same output pressure-wise, i wouldn't say "brad close is more competitive, because pressure acts are more important to his role".
in fact, it would be an indicator of higher competitiveness in hawkins, as chasing and tackling desperately isn't an important part of his job but he's doing everything he can to affect the game.

Temperament is ability in this regard. It'd be something like trait aggression. Whether or not it can be changed is questionable. Occasionally.

Someone performing beyond their role is always a good thing, but if they aren't performing their main function doing the extras isn't enough. So if Hawkins was chasing and tackling but constantly let his man roll off and take intercept marks, I wouldn't consider him being competitive.