Roast Stephen Hill

Remove this Banner Ad

Moo said:
Rather simplistic view.

Hill is not without courage, he just has to learn how to contribute when he is off the pace.

I still wish they would give him a more specific role when he cops the tag - push back or even forward.
Click to expand...

That's the issue and unfortunately it is very, very hard to teach. He looked good in the backline last year and it puts the tagger into unfamiliar territory so they should give that a go. The worrying sign is that the players that tag him out of the game are not superstar players by any stretch of the imagination and he has all the tools to beat the tag this year. Hopefully he rips it up this week, he often seems to play well against the Lions.
 
Moo said:
Rather simplistic view.

Hill is not without courage, he just has to learn how to contribute when he is off the pace.

I still wish they would give him a more specific role when he cops the tag - push back or even forward.
Click to expand...

I still scratch my head as to why this doesn't happen too.
Someone from our club needs to make a stand ,if you're going to put a hard tag on hilly be prepared to get flattened.Not once has this ever happened.
I know I would be on high alert if a few taggers had been stretchered off the ground.
 
I seem to recall see a passage in the second half where whoever was standing next to Hill was pushed by him, and then got whacked by two other Dockers for good measure during a stoppage. I think it was Shaw but will need to rewatch the game to look for it - mind you 30 seconds later Shaw was pivotal in getting the ball out of our forward 50 :p

Certainly doesn't happen enough though - the boys are getting better at protecting each other - but lots more to be done, and once they are blocking for each other Hill should have more impact.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Arcassius said:
I seem to recall see a passage in the second half where whoever was standing next to Hill was pushed by him, and then got whacked by two other Dockers for good measure during a stoppage. I think it was Shaw but will need to rewatch the game to look for it - mind you 30 seconds later Shaw was pivotal in getting the ball out of our forward 50 :p

Certainly doesn't happen enough though - the boys are getting better at protecting each other - but lots more to be done, and once they are blocking for each other Hill should have more impact.
Click to expand...

Was McGlynn, Pav and someone else came in a gave him a couple for good measure. I was glad when I saw it because it doesn't happen enough.
 
He doesn't lack desperation or work rate - he threw himself whole-heartedly into the contest against the Cats to help win the game.

Also, of his 18 possessions today, 12 were contested.
 
Certainly Hill´s slow starts are a big concern. It really costs us one midfielder when he is tagged completely out of the game.

There are some encouraging signs though, which could be due to Ross´s influence.

In the second half today, rather than getting more possies as the game opened up, he got most of his possies in the contest. As pointed out above, 12 of his 19 possies were contested. Of those, he led the team with 9 clearances.

Thats right - 9 clearances.

What´s all this about Hill being a sweeper/outside player? Looks like all the work to toughen up his inside game is starting to pay some dividends. Once he can build his game around getting the hard balls, the outside game will also flourish.

Disposal efficiency of 83%, much better than all our other mids.
 
I think Hill has to play as an inside player rather than waiting for someone to give him a cheapie on the outside. When he started playing well yesterday was when he was getting it on the inside and then bursting into space.
 
You'd all be singing a different tune if Hill had nailed one of those 2 goal chances he had late in the game.

Hill works his butt off, anyone who doesn't see that is blind. He gets scragged as much as Sandi likewise with no calls. If that was Judd, he'd have 10 frees.

Lyon is quickly hardening this team up, we are only 2 games in. By mid-year, we'll be blocks of granite and our gameplan etched on their foreheads. By finals (barring injuries) I daresay no one will want to face us.
 
Agree with the sum of parts thing, instantly looked better with Barlow on the field, Mundy, Ballantyne and Morabito will be nice additions.

Hill is an instinct player, plays better when the ball is in vicinity. I'm not sure he's a great reader of the play as he rarely finds the ball on the outside unless its hand delivered. He doesn't have the Haselby or Barlow brain to predict where the ball will be in 5-10 seconds. He does seem to be able to run away from a clearance with purpose and is awesome in that aspect.

Personally i think Lyon knows he plays his best footy on ball. He doesn't have the body to play a full season as an inside mid. 3/4 at HBF, wing, HFF then last 1/4 on ball as our impact player. Finals series starts onball from the get go.
 
I don't understand why people want to bag one of our best players. I guess because Michael Johnson is performing well now people have to move on to their new target. 22 players played yesterday, quite a few under par, yet apparently it's all got to do with stephen hills perfomance. He has already improved this preseason and was good in the geelong game. For christ sakes people, every player on our team has to improve facets of their game, Why the hate for Stephen Hill?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Hilly will work his way through this. I think people are going too hard too early (and maybe not giving Sydney enough credit - there are a lot of crap teams in the league this year, neither Geelong nor Sydney are among them).

I reckon we are already seeing the benefits of Lyon's game day coaching but implementing his overall game plan will take time. I reckon we win that sort of game later in the year. Keep the faith.
 
Chops_a_must said:
Pav had an opportunity to lay out Shaw with a fair shepherd on Shaw and pulled the handbrake.

It's the sort of thing that is staining Pav's reputation.

He needs to do it. And so do every one of the senior players. If they don't start getting stuck into Hill's taggers, I will spew.

Having said that, too many times in the first half he was caught ball watching and did not commit to the contest - instead seemed concerned about his man getting the ball. No-one is going to hold his hand. He needs to get involved from the first bounce.
Click to expand...

Absolutely ironed out malceski in the last quarter though
 
we had plenty of players off their game for a half yesterday. and hill was by no means anywhere near our worst. I think fyfe gets overrated... if you get the ball a heap but turn it over consistently, then what good are you?

having said all that, fyfe is a gun and hill needs to find a way to be more effective under a tag. once we have barlow and mundy up and running there is no doubt in my mind that hill wil begin to dominate games.

i think hill will eventually be the best player in our team, he has the talent for that, and when you are at the game you can see he has the work rate.


on a positive note, would we have ever seen a mark harvey led side get 40 points down and then almost pinch the game? i think not
 
Sadly, Hill maybe one of those players that needs other better players around him in the midfield in order for him to look good. Many of us have high hopes because he was drafted highly but thats not really his fault. The way he handles tags suggests to me that he will need more time before he can hold a regular spot in the midfield.
 
Hill is shorter and smaller than you think. He's still a boy. But in saying that, his mindset needs to be molded to attacking aggressive playmaking football.. like Ballas..

I personally don't want him to go in hard against bigger opponents ..I would rather him hang off it waiting.. otherwise he WILL get injured...

He needs to get educated in attitude and confidience and a bit of competitive-ness to win...ARRRhhhh..you know...

.. If the coaches just leave it as is, he will never get there or be the best he can be. The attitude is the hardest to learn....
 
For all the talk on here about Hill not being competitive... 9 clearances to lead the team in that stat yesterday. Must have made some contests then?
 
He's also currently fourth in the club for contested possessions this season. People are too worried about disposal efficiency. For example Zac Dawson has the second highest disposal efficiency at the club so far this season, higher then Hill's. Yet he is probably the worst kick in the team.
 
Tayl0r said:
He gets tagged so heavily, not because it is effective or else they would tag Duffield, but because if he runs free he is worth almost a team goal per kick.

Yes, Stephen Hill is a rubbish player, that's why the opposition put so much effort into stopping him. They tag team him, they work against him as a unit. We still don't protect him as a team and that's the real problem.

Our club hasn't ever had a player capable of being as damaging as Hill. We got Fyfe later but if not for Stephen Hill I think you would be landing these threads on Nathan Fyfe's head, because if the opposition put as much effort into him as they do with Hill and Fremantle puts as little effort in to free him up as they do with Hill, we'd get the same result.

Hill isn't as good overhead as Fyfe, but that is the only area of his game he is superior in. Hill has as good a touch with the loose ball, Hill is faster on the burst and Hill is a much, MUCH better kick of the ball.

Stephen Hill in Geelong's midfield would already be a star, it will be a barometre of where our team is at when Hill gets as much team support as he needs to tear a game apart.

That's just my opinion anyway.

The Dawsons and McPhees of our team need to be putting big, BIG bumps on Hill's tagger. They need to suffer.
Click to expand...

Rubbish, Fyfe is better with the loose ball because he doesn't panic. Fyfe is better in congestion and most of all, he is consistent. He doesn't go mia for an hour.

Hill might be better finding his feet at WAFL level maybe. Not a slight on him. Just might be a very slow maturer.
 
I'm putting it out there: Stephen Hill is overrated. He's also not my kind of footballer.

I don't mean to be negative. I'm a deluded hopeful like everyone else on this board. But in my opinion, realistically, Hilly just isn't that good.

Why? I believe he's too soft for the elite level that is the AFL. At the start of his career, he was a relative unknown. Despite being a high draft pick, his attributes weren't known throughout the league. His tags were easy to break, his competition minimal, and the results exciting: Bounding runs along the wing with three bounces and a goal from 55 out. He was a real star. And he'll always have those appealling skills.

However, even during this time, he was slow at the contests. He'd duck, weave away, or simply not get into a contest. He'd put his hands into the pack, but nothing else.

Fast forward. Coaches, commentators, fans, and fellow footballers acknowledge his ability to break open a passage of play. Inevitably, Hill gets tagged. Hill's inability to get stuck into a tackle is severely highlighted. He can't get the easy ball outside a pack, because he's always got an opposition player up against him. If he can't fight hard enough, he doesn't get a possession. This dents his confidence. Confidence was a very big part of his game: A few bounces will always be born out of self-belief. If he can't do that, what's he got?

From here, his mental strength was showcased.

Or, his lack thereof.

He didn't have the ability to think "I can beat this tag, I'm fast enough". And he didn't have the ability to back himself (whether that be with a run, or a contested possession). On top of that, his inability to grab the tough ball has resulted in a pretty poor game from Hill.

He's a confidence player. So this is a real chicken and egg situation. He's not the kind of player to get in and under. But you need to have a little bit of mongrel (I'm not condoning foul play, more so toughness) in you to succeed at AFL level. He can't get the hard ball, and so he's unable to get many possessions. Any person in any sport will have their confidence dented if they're not getting a touch. It's inevitable that his kicks will go astray, that he won't take that extra bounce, that he won't enhance his footballing ability.

You know how AFL clubs picked athletes in the 2000s? And athletes were primed to be turned into footballers? It's harder to instill that game-reading ability into a natural athlete (Clive?!), than it is to make Michael Barlow a fitness machine. Well it's a little like that. You can't teach a bloke to be hard. You can't make him a tough competitor. And it's pretty difficult to embed mental strength into someone who doesn't really have it in them.

Hill is a great player. His skills are enviable. If utilised well, or at all, he's one of the better wingmen in the competition. But alas, we have a dilemma...
 
Silent Alarm said:
I'm putting it out there: Stephen Hill is overrated. He's also not my kind of footballer.

I don't mean to be negative. I'm a deluded hopeful like everyone else on this board. But in my opinion, realistically, Hilly just isn't that good.

Why? I believe he's too soft for the elite level that is the AFL. At the start of his career, he was a relative unknown. Despite being a high draft pick, his attributes weren't known throughout the league. His tags were easy to break, his competition minimal, and the results exciting: Bounding runs along the wing with three bounces and a goal from 55 out. He was a real star. And he'll always have those appealling skills.

However, even during this time, he was slow at the contests. He'd duck, weave away, or simply not get into a contest. He'd put his hands into the pack, but nothing else.

Fast forward. Coaches, commentators, fans, and fellow footballers acknowledge his ability to break open a passage of play. Inevitably, Hill gets tagged. Hill's inability to get stuck into a tackle is severely highlighted. He can't get the easy ball outside a pack, because he's always got an opposition player up against him. If he can't fight hard enough, he doesn't get a possession. This dents his confidence. Confidence was a very big part of his game: A few bounces will always be born out of self-belief. If he can't do that, what's he got?

From here, his mental strength was showcased.

Or, his lack thereof.

He didn't have the ability to think "I can beat this tag, I'm fast enough". And he didn't have the ability to back himself (whether that be with a run, or a contested possession). On top of that, his inability to grab the tough ball has resulted in a pretty poor game from Hill.

He's a confidence player. So this is a real chicken and egg situation. He's not the kind of player to get in and under. But you need to have a little bit of mongrel (I'm not condoning foul play, more so toughness) in you to succeed at AFL level. He can't get the hard ball, and so he's unable to get many possessions. Any person in any sport will have their confidence dented if they're not getting a touch. It's inevitable that his kicks will go astray, that he won't take that extra bounce, that he won't enhance his footballing ability.

You know how AFL clubs picked athletes in the 2000s? And athletes were primed to be turned into footballers? It's harder to instill that game-reading ability into a natural athlete (Clive?!), than it is to make Michael Barlow a fitness machine. Well it's a little like that. You can't teach a bloke to be hard. You can't make him a tough competitor. And it's pretty difficult to embed mental strength into someone who doesn't really have it in them.

Hill is a great player. His skills are enviable. If utilised well, or at all, he's one of the better wingmen in the competition. But alas, we have a dilemma...
Click to expand...
Yeah nah.

Hill has flaws. They can be overcome. In terms of overrated Freo players he's way less overrated than some, cf. eternal hack, Suban.
 
Silent Alarm said:
I don't mean to be negative. I'm a deluded hopeful like everyone else on this board. But in my opinion, realistically, Hilly just isn't that good.


Hill is a great player. His skills are enviable. If utilised well, or at all, he's one of the better wingmen in the competition. But alas, we have a dilemma...
Click to expand...

just lol.
 
I think as has been mentioned he's very reliant upon other players in the team. But I think that was the understanding when we recruited him and most supporters expectations. He is never going to be a Barlow type who can be at their best regardless of whether we are winning or not.

Like headland he's the type of player that can/will be the difference between a top 4 side and a top 2 side. But will have little impact when the side is struggling.

He also suffers from having such a big gap between his best and worst, its very obvious when he is performing well or battling. Someone like Barlow can have a poor game and still accumulate 20 possessions.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Roast Stephen Hill

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top