Should Murphy have shirked the contest?

[Plugger35]

For the sake of my dream team he should have shirked it but I don't think a player can afford to shirk a contest these days or they will get labelled soft.

I respected Murphy as a player before that incident anyway but respect him even more now. Probably not much consolation if he will be missing weeks on the sidelines injured but hopefully it's not too serious and he gets back ASAP.

 

[Simon_Nesbit]

If he shirks that contest, then the next contest, the opponent who's 0.0001 seconds behind starts to think "if I go hard enough, he'll pull out"....

soon enough the "safe" option is to just not go near the ball at all.

 

[HolyRioli]

Nope, him getting injured made my DT decision easier

 

[Jobe Watson]

Matty Lloyd said it best on the Sunday Footy Show. Along the lines of "I'd rather be laying in an Epworth Hospital bed than ever being known as someone who pulled out of a contest."

Murphy did the right thing. It was a brave contest from both players. It's just unfortunate, for him and my SuperCoach, that he got injured in the process.

 

[WeetBixKid]

Have you played? It doesn't work like that, there's no time to consider it, you just see the ball & go for it.

 

[PAUR]

He would've been slammed in the media for a few days if he did, but, logically, should Murphy have taken a half step and let Dangerfield have that footy?

I loved the contest, and it raised my respect for Murphy a hell of a lot - I didn't know he was willing to hit a contest that tough, as hard as he did - but for the sake of one contest, he could potentially miss a month of football.

Interested to hear what people, especially Carlton supporters, think; would you have preferred he back off a little?

Heart says no way, you want your players smashing in as hard as they can, at every opportunity.

Head says they've lost their best player for possibly a month of football, due to one contest.

You shouldn't evaluate decisions in hindsight so your "head says" comment is the wrong way to think.

Murphy and Dangerfield made the same decision.

 

[ok.crows]

if he lead with his head how many weeks for Dangerfield?

If Dangerfield lead with his head how many weeks for Murphy?

 

[David the Cat]

And if they both lead with their head.....urghhhhh.....ugly.

Not what we want to see in our game.

 

[BluesMan]

Stupid question really. You can get injured at any contest. Why play contact sport if you think you could get hurt?

 

[Looney]

What Lloyd said on the footy show is just old school heroic nonsense. In the modern game, it's more important to keep your numbers than being a hero and getting injured out of the game where it usually means your team will lose.

 

[Silvagnis]

Injury-prone Murphy must change tack: Alves

"I would suggest that Marc Murphy, on the other hand, has cost himself a couple of years of serious injuries because he doesn't.

"He goes in a bit loose. If you watch how it is, he (Murphy) doesn't play as if there's going to be an impact.

Injury-prone Murphy must change tack: Alves

Should a player be smarter about going in hard if the result is they will miss weeks?

You've got to go in that situation. I wouldn't want to tell Kreuzer, Robinson or whoever that they should stop attacking the ball and playing with intensity.

Don't understand Alves's argument that Murphy is to blame because he doesn't brace for contact. Looks like a normal approach to a contest. He's always going to come off second best against bigger players. Practically calling Murphy soft because he keeps his eyes on the ball. Alves is just another former player like Matthews who played when you could run past the ball and clean players up.

 

[Bazzar]

Murph appears to be a fragile player. Maybe needs to adjust the way he plays before he gets really hurt.

 

[Ollie 22]

Unfortunate he got injured but fantastic he went hard what you would want to see as a blues fan, used to love how Max Rooke went in hard, one of the best parts of the game.

 

[RedLegs#5]

"I would suggest that one person (Hodge) goes to the football and he goes aggressively, crunch, and (is) ready for impact.

"I would suggest that Marc Murphy, on the other hand, has cost himself a couple of years of serious injuries because he doesn't.

I believe the problem (as Alves suggests) is that Murphy does indeed, and quite often, go into contested situations, but doesn't commit to them with the same intensity and aggression as others. Sometimes, unfortunately, you can't teach a player how to do this. One's level of instinctual aggressiveness/anger/intensity can be argued to be apart of their DNA.

So, in my opinion, I don't think he'll ever attack the ball with the same intensity as a Hodge (in fairness, he's one of the best), but I do believe he can definitely improve his attack. Luckily for him, Malthouse has traditionally been quite good for that.

I like Murphy. I think he's a hard working, fair, and very talented footy player. I hope he proves me wrong in regards to his attack. Maybe he can practice improving it at training on Brock McLean.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

Could be the thing that galvanises your playing group, if that was the case, it'd be a positive.

If I was Ratten, I'd put the blowtorch on Gibbs this week - tell him he's taking Murphy's spot, and demand he show the same level of desperation and intensity.

Ratten's at Hawthorn now. As for Murphy shirking the contest, no way. However, the contemporary footballers are not beng taught the basics of the game any more, and knowing how to protect yourself when in a hardball get situation is one of them.

 

[bourbons]

"I would suggest that one person (Hodge) goes to the football and he goes aggressively, crunch, and (is) ready for impact.

"I would suggest that Marc Murphy, on the other hand, has cost himself a couple of years of serious injuries because he doesn't.

I believe the problem (as Alves suggests) is that Murphy does indeed, and quite often, go into contested situations, but doesn't commit to them with the same intensity and aggression as others. Sometimes, unfortunately, you can't teach a player how to do this. One's level of instinctual aggressiveness/anger/intensity can be argued to be apart of their DNA.

So, in my opinion, I don't think he'll ever attack the ball with the same intensity as a Hodge (in fairness, he's one of the best), but I do believe he can definitely improve his attack. Luckily for him, Malthouse has traditionally been quite good for that.

I like Murphy. I think he's a hard working, fair, and very talented footy player. I hope he proves me wrong in regards to his attack. Maybe he can practice improving it at training on Brock McLean.

Disagree - a player with Murphy's physique is always going to come off 2nd best in the odd contest against players with frames like Hodge and Dangerfield, its as simple as that.

It's not like everytime he goes in hard and low against another player this kind of thing happens - he's gone in for a heap of contests similar to Hodge and Dangerfield ones with no problems. Massive (and fairly stupid) overreaction by Alves.

 

[Collingwoodity]

No, Carlton's only gun player. Gibbs has all the talent but is pathetic. Amazing that 2 number 1 draft picks at the same club with same development opportunities and coaches can be polar opposites.

Murphy

 

[autocol]

Ratten's at Hawthorn now.

You quoted a post from last year. Ratts was very much the Carlton coach at the time of the post.

 

[Syd]

He would've been slammed in the media for a few days if he did, but, logically, should Murphy have taken a half step and let Dangerfield have that footy?

Bryce Gibbs likes this

 

[RedLegs#5]

Disagree - a player with Murphy's physique is always going to come off 2nd best in the odd contest against players with frames like Hodge and Dangerfield, its as simple as that.

It's not like everytime he goes ibn hard and low against another player this kind of thing happens - he's gone in for a heap of contests similar to Hodge and Dangerfield ones with no problems. Massive (and fairly stupid) overreaction by Alves.

Murphy's physique? Are you referring to his size? If so, a few years ago I would have agreed. Murphy is big and strong enough now.

Murphy:
Height
180 cm
Weight
82 kg

Hodge:
Height
185 cm
Weight
90 kg

The discrepancy isn't enough to suggest their size mattered in this contest.

 

[Plugger35]

Injury-prone Murphy must change tack: Alves

Injury-prone Murphy must change tack: Alves

Should a player be smarter about going in hard if the result is they will miss weeks?

You've got to go in that situation. I wouldn't want to tell Kreuzer, Robinson or whoever that they should stop attacking the ball and playing with intensity.

Don't understand Alves's argument that Murphy is to blame because he doesn't brace for contact. Looks like a normal approach to a contest. He's always going to come off second best against bigger players. Practically calling Murphy soft because he keeps his eyes on the ball. Alves is just another former player like Matthews who played when you could run past the ball and clean players up.

Yeah it's simply a case of Murphy being outmuscled by bigger, stronger opponents rather than technique. Midfielders are getting bigger and stronger and Murphy is pretty small by today's standards. No doubt there is a tactic to physically target him to put him off his game or put him out of the game, bigger teammates need to get better at protecting him.

He's still in my dream team btw.

 

[Leather Poisoning]

This isn't an example of Murphy being fragile or soft! It's an example of him not protecting himself properly.

Hodge and Murphy both going full tilt at the ball has three possible outcomes:
1. They both go in like murphy did, have a huge clash of heads, possibly both sustaining match-ending injuries.
2. One player goes in head first and one protects - the head first guy gets cleaned up.
3. They both go in protecting themselves like Hodge did and there's a huge bump of upper bodies with the faster one getting the ball.

Unfortunately protecting oneself is a dying art and players are getting injured as a result. I see this more in marking contests.

 

[Collingwoodity]

This isn't an example of Murphy being fragile or soft! It's an example of him not protecting himself properly.

Hodge and Murphy both going full tilt at the ball has three possible outcomes:
1. They both go in like murphy did, have a huge clash of heads, possibly both sustaining match-ending injuries.
2. One player goes in head first and one protects - the head first guy gets cleaned up.
3. They both go in protecting themselves like Hodge did and there's a huge bump of upper bodies with the faster one getting the ball.

Unfortunately protecting oneself is a dying art and players are getting injured as a result. I see this more in marking contests.

I agree with this.

 

[KnaveyBlue]

I often wish he'd stop putting himself in big collisions. We have Robinson, McLean, Bell etc for that sort of thing.

I've never been a big believer in the "when it's your turn to go" mentality. Knowing when you're outmatched in a contest is good football.

Had Murphy shirked it and sidestepped, Hodge would have went to ground and probably rolled 10m, god knows where the ball would have ended up.

 

[bourbons]

Murphy's physique? Are you referring to his size? If so, a few years ago I would have agreed. Murphy is big and strong enough now.

Murphy:
Height
180 cm
Weight
82 kg

Hodge:
Height
185 cm
Weight
90 kg

The discrepancy isn't enough to suggest their size mattered in this contest.

Really? (Assuming those numbers are accurate,) you don't think being taller and 8 kilos heavier mattered in this contest? Welcome to your opinion but I definately think this discrepancy is a factor.

Anyway, fogret the numbers - you can't tell just by looking at Hodge and Murphy who is likely to come off second best in hard hit?