Jewell said:
If Ray Hall was able to take a grab then he'd be a headache for mostteams and would suit many of the roles that have been suggested here.....but....as he is as weak as water above his head he doesnt really suit any of them. Backup at best. Burgers next year
Hall averages the same amount of marks per game as Polak and despite injury and their differing positions/opportunities, averaged 0.9 less marks a game than Simmonds in 2006.
But don't let facts stand in the way of myth creation.
Is Simmonds 0.9 marks a match away from being 'weak as water' overhead? Is Polak already there despite this being his prime attribute?
Or are you talking crap?
Tigers of Old said:
DirtyDogTiger said:
ray hall can mark overhead
Are you sure?
I'm still having nightmares about that game in Tasmania this year.
Do these nightmares include Kane Johnson dropping an easier mark (nobody within 10m of him) in the exact same position for the exact same reason?
For some reason they sited York Park/Aurora Stadium so that in mid-winter the northern end is facing directly into the low afternoon sun.
A long term knowledge of the ground would tell you Dunkley (and many other very good grabs) had the same problem there when playing up forward for Nth Launceston.
The sun is directly in your eyes. It rarely comes out, but when it does it's deadly.
Hall took seven marks for the match, Franklin took two. They each had 16 possessions.
Was he beaten in the air? Or is he among the 99% of AFL DKP's who can't keep pace with Franklin and could end up punished for it in a match where Hawthorn totally dominate the centre all day long?
Rather than lament the fact we don't have a mid-size, fast defender to play on Franklin, or the fact our midfield was appalling, we should crucify the DKP who got the job.
Rather than remember Deledio handballing backwards (after Hall won us the ball) straight into Franklin's arms for a goal, let's remember Hall dropping the only mark he missed for the day and forget the other seven. After all, Deledio is faultless...it was Hall's fault for being on his knees winning the ball and not lurking at the back of the pack with Franklin.
GoodOne said:
If he could do all that we would have had him doing so since he started at the Tigers instead of fumbling his way around the backline. I'd love to see him do that but do we seriously think he can?
Gaspar had a reco to recover from in 2004 and we traded Holland - until then Hall hadn't been near the backline. Lacking anyone else that could do the job as well (Kellaway included) he was forced to play at full back. He went from being a ruckman to having the no.1 defensive task with no apprenticeship whatsoever, in a side destined to win the spoon who got flogged week in week out.
Rather than viewing this as a bloke who drew the short straw and made a very solid effort to live up to an unenviable task other more established defenders failed miserably at, many drew conclusions about Hall's worth from the season (including Frawley who proclaimed Hall a '10yr defender' after he held Barry Hall at the SCG).
In 2005 with Graham recruited and Gaspar back to some sort of form, he played largely at CHB, was seldom beaten and claimed a few big scalps along the way.
In 2006 he was out with a back injury for six weeks at the business end of the pre-season, then thrust straight back into the team underdone after Schulz and Thursfield were seriously injured in the first few rounds. Twice more through the season he was brought back underdone due to the injuries of others.
Rather than judge him as a defender on his 2005 form, where he was mostly fit, played in the defensive role that suits him best (CHB rather than FB) and had something resembling support, people judge him on his first season as a defender, and on his 2006 season where the injuries of others meant he played only a handfull of games anywhere near full fitness.
We can turn the clock back years for Polak's last half decent football, but in Hall's case we can't remember 2005, or the good games he played when somewhere near fit and given half a break in 2004 and 2006?
As for his ability to influence the game away from defense, I don't know where you were GO, but does 16 possessions off the bench, a goal, beating his opponent hands up and smashing Carlton's most influential midfielder (Camporeale) out of the game in the cut-throat 2001 semi-final count for you?
Nah, you'd be the bloke counting the free kick he gave away to clobber Camporeale among his 'disposal errors'...right?
Where were you when Hall has been forced to replace an injured Richo in combination with Ottens and came out averaging 3 goals a game as a makeshift forward? While Ottens the 'super forward' managed an average of one?
Hall's had one chance up forward since for half a game (rd.21 2005), again kicked 3 goals while picking up 20 possessions, a brownlow vote and set up the match winning play.
Hall has kicked 28.17 in the 99 games of his career from very limited opportunites, Polak has had many more opportunities and has kicked 9:15.
I'm still yet to have anyone give me a single example of which good forwards and when Polak has beaten them.
Yet many of the same people who constantly deride Hall are now lauding Polak as a far better option either up forward or at CHB.
Neither statistics or realistic analysis bear out this fact.
Greener pasture syndrome and an abject failure to rate Hall's contributions to the club fairly is driving a fair portion of the commentary which has been around lately regarding Hall.
