Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: Docherty standing down (Read 10925 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Docherty standing down

Reply #15 –
When Cripps is on his game, and at his best, it really doesn't matter what his opponents are doing.
He's the problem that the opposition need to deal with.

Where it's become a problem for us is that in recent times Cripps hasn't been that influential...it's then that his opponents become an issue for us.

Re: Docherty standing down

Reply #16 –
I suspect the more pace we place around Cripps the less of a problem Cripps will become.

Diesel spent his career surrounded by the small fast runners that could leave the stoppage after he fed them the pill. If Diesel had to also run and carry all the time he would have been far less effective.

Our problem is that our midfield is over stocked with players who like Cripps have medium to slow acceleration, average agility and average top pace. Get a few rundown types in their around Cripps and it will all change.

Plus, ever since Judd arrived we've had this sacrificial midfielder game plan, where Cripps or whoever is meant to dominate the stoppage and feed the ball out for the players around him. But in my opinion that only worked with Judd for Judd because he had Cripps inside ball winning ability combined with the most powerful acceleration in the league.

Nthmond's hive mind approach works far better, where they swarm in both directions, but you still need some extreme pace.

Voss was a similar type to Judd, swift and immensely powerful, hopefully he recognises the problem.
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: Docherty standing down

Reply #17 –
With all due respect to Diesel, the game he played is far different to the current game. The speed, endurance and shear gut running is at a whole other level.

Back then, Bradley was a freak because of the way he could gut run.
Today, its expected of not only the mids, but wingers, half backs and half forwards too.

The rules are different now meaning you can't sit someone else behind play to cover for 1 way runners.

We need to adapt.

Cripps can dominate the lesser known midfields out there and might be able to dominate his direct opponent against some of the better midfields out there too. Ultimately, as good as a player that he is, his style is simply not sustainable consistently enough to win week in week out.

Sam Walsh is the midfield player you need now. 3 of him vs 3 of Cripps and the Cripps' will start of well, but be overrun by Walsh's each and every time.

Re: Docherty standing down

Reply #18 –
Quote from: kruddler – on
The rules are different now meaning you can't sit someone else behind play to cover for 1 way runners.
Just on this, I know the AFL have said no changes for 2022 but do not be surprised if further COVID interruptions are used by the AFL to justify some late changes to the rules.

I have word that Dad's Army is continually lobbying to get the Stand Rule changed, it's not the best thing for Selwood and some of his compatriots. The Handbaggers have significant influence in the Big House at the moment.

If that happens, then the changes really suit Cripps and doesn't hurt many of our slower more aerobic players.

I suspect Nthmond would be lobbying for this change as well, it would see the Nthmond game plan returned to full strength.

I presume the Dogs and Cheats would be vehemently opposed!
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: Docherty standing down

Reply #19 –
Quote from: LP – on
Just on this, I know the AFL have said no changes for 2022 but do not be surprised if further COVID interruptions are used by the AFL to justify some late changes to the rules.

I have word that Dad's Army is continually lobbying to get the Stand Rule changed, it's not the best thing for Selwood and some of his compatriots. The Handbaggers have significant influence in the Big House at the moment.

If that happens, then the changes really suit Cripps and doesn't hurt many of our slower more aerobic players.

I suspect Nthmond would be lobbying for this change as well, it would see the Nthmond game plan returned to full strength.

I presume the Dogs and Cheats would be vehemently opposed!

They've just introduced the stand rule into the AFLW, no chance they will scrap it a few weeks later for the mens game....not this year at least.

Re: Docherty standing down

Reply #20 –
Quote from: kruddler – on
They've just introduced the stand rule into the AFLW, no chance they will scrap it a few weeks later for the mens game....not this year at least.
Personally, I think if a club builds an A-Grade list with good depth across all positions like the Demons have done, then the rules make no fecking difference!
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: Docherty standing down

Reply #21 –
Quote from: LP – on
Personally, I think if a club builds an A-Grade list with good depth across all positions like the Demons have done, then the rules make no fecking difference!
The dees only have a good list because they had no injuries.
3 years ago they were where we were last year.

Re: Docherty standing down

Reply #22 –
Quote from: Lods – on
When Cripps is on his game, and at his best, it really doesn't matter what his opponents are doing.
He's the problem that the opposition need to deal with.

Where it's become a problem for us is that in recent times Cripps hasn't been that influential...it's then that his opponents become an issue for us.

I think that's a key issue Lods; if Cripps is dominating, or even just winning his share of contests, who gives a fat rat's clacker about what his opponent is doing.  If Cripps is hampered by injury, his opponent's possessions become more important.

To my mind, the real issue is not Cripps's ability to run with his opponent.  It's how the coach organises the team to (a) maximise the benefits of Cripps's ability to win contested possessions and (b) to minimise the influence of Cripps's opponent.  Surely, it's not too difficult to come up with a structure that enables Cripps to focus on winning the pill and defending one of the less demanding opponents.  If Cripps's tagger is tagged by one of our elite runners, say O'Brien, that tagger is going to focus more on  breaking his tag than sticking to the main man.

With Voss, Power, Clarke and O'Keefe on our coaching panel, and Diesel in the wings, coming up with a plan to get the best out of Cripps should be a piece of p1ss.  It should also be within their ability to let Crippa know that he doesn't have win each game off his own boot and 3 or 4 mercurial efforts per game are more than enough.

It's a no brainer that Doc has relinquished the co-captaincy.  He needs to focus on his own wellbeing and, as Voss mentioned, he will still be a leader regardless of his official capacity.

I would leave Cripps as captain with Weitering and Walsh as vice-captains.
It's still the Gulf of Mexico, Don Old!

Re: Docherty standing down

Reply #23 –
@ DJC
Yes, agree with most of that. Just not sure about Cripps remaining as captain, although taking it away from him may create some problems.
Reality always wins in the end.

Re: Docherty standing down

Reply #24 –
I'd like to see the Weitering/Walsh combination.
Not as dual captains, but in the more traditional C/VC role.
I'm thinking  that will probably happen, so the question is one of timing.
In some respects the new President/CEO/Coach changes should make this a good time, but....

We're looking at it from a distance.
That means we're probably not in the best position to understand the team dynamics, who the players see as the driving forces and which players they respect in terms of leadership.
How has the dual captaincy sat with Cripps?
Has he felt like it's a partial role and will he be better suited in the solo role.

Maybe it's best to leave it to the folks at the coalface, with access to a wide variety of player views to thrash this one out.

Re: Docherty standing down

Reply #25 –
Quote from: Lods – on
I'd like to see the Weitering/Walsh combination.
Not as dual captains, but in the more traditional C/VC role.
I'm thinking  that will probably happen, so the question is one of timing.
In some respects the new President/CEO/Coach changes should make this a good time, but....

We're looking at it from a distance.
That means we're probably not in the best position to understand the team dynamics, who the players see as the driving forces and which players they respect in terms of leadership.
How has the dual captaincy sat with Cripps?
Has he felt like it's a partial role and will he be better suited in the solo role.

Maybe it's best to leave it to the folks at the coalface, with access to a wide variety of player views to thrash this one out.


A novel idea Lods  ;)

Surely the club won't make any decision before scrutinising every post here  ::)
It's still the Gulf of Mexico, Don Old!

Re: Docherty standing down

Reply #26 –
re Cripps as captain....it was made quite clear that he was one of the players who did NOT stand with Teague.....meaning he was one who was sought an opinion on should Teague stay. Given Teague is no longer there, we know Cripps' answer.

So, he put himself above that of the team (at least part of the team 10+ names confirmed as pro-teague) which is not unlike how he plays on game day, me me me.

Take the captaincy of him, force him to focus more on team rather than him trying to carry the team (and failing) and choosing our direction without having a map.

The way i look at it, the only 'pro' to keeping Cripps as captain is because he is already captain. Thats not enough of a reason for mine.
 

Re: Docherty standing down

Reply #27 –
Quote from: kruddler – on
re Cripps as captain....it was made quite clear that he was one of the players who did NOT stand with Teague.....meaning he was one who was sought an opinion on should Teague stay. Given Teague is no longer there, we know Cripps' answer.

So, he put himself above that of the team (at least part of the team 10+ names confirmed as pro-teague) which is not unlike how he plays on game day, me me me.

Take the captaincy of him, force him to focus more on team rather than him trying to carry the team (and failing) and choosing our direction without having a map.

The way i look at it, the only 'pro' to keeping Cripps as captain is because he is already captain. Thats not enough of a reason for mine.
Tend to agree, I favor Weitering as Captain and Walsh as VC. I think Cripps has to concentrate on his football more and get some runs on the board this season. He was struggling with fitness, couldnt kick over a jam jar and mentally out of it as well and has been that way for the last couple of seasons. I appreciate his partner has been unwell and that would have taken its toll so I think we need to help him by relieving him of the captains duties and making his role more simple.
With Cerra now in the team and Hewett I think he can back to "see ball get ball" footy and with extra kegs back on the frame he can be the beast he once was. If that doesnt transpire this season then I would give consideration to trading him back to WA while he still has decent market value.
Voss also has to come up with a game plan to help him out and maximize his impact, Voss being a gun mid himself should know exactly what is needed and be able to execute a game plan to suit...no excuses this season and I expect Cripps to be racking up the three votes.

Re: Docherty standing down

Reply #28 –
Quote from: kruddler – on
re Cripps as captain....it was made quite clear that he was one of the players who did NOT stand with Teague.....meaning he was one who was sought an opinion on should Teague stay. Given Teague is no longer there, we know Cripps' answer.

So, he put himself above that of the team (at least part of the team 10+ names confirmed as pro-teague) which is not unlike how he plays on game day, me me me.

Take the captaincy of him, force him to focus more on team rather than him trying to carry the team (and failing) and choosing our direction without having a map.

The way i look at it, the only 'pro' to keeping Cripps as captain is because he is already captain. Thats not enough of a reason for mine.

There's a fair bit of speculation in all that Kruds.
Unless we were in the thick of that we have no idea of the divisions or player dynamics....or in fact Cripps's role.
He may have expressed some elements of concern to Sayers, who with an agenda of his own, has run with it.
Cripps, and perhaps Docherty may have been the trigger to the review but they didn't determine the outcome.

I have a feeling that amongst the players who expressed support for Teague after he was sacked, there may have been some who were critical during the review but didn't think (or want) it to end in his termination.
For some there may have  been a "What have I done moment?" followed by a 'don't sack him sentiment.'

How was the team divided in their opinions?
Many of the younger and newer players would have been of an age that they were heavily influenced by older players?
What was Cripp's role and behaviour during the period of the review in terms of his direction and guidance to his team-mates?
We can't say he put himself 'above the others'...at best we can say he may have had a different view to some.

It's all a guess, but the bottom line is there are people in the club with a much better idea of the behaviour during that review and if someone has acted in a divisive manner, and that hasn't been settled, then a change may be warranted.

Re: Docherty standing down

Reply #29 –
@Lods...
Speculation? Yes and No.

Silence is deafening at times.

We don't know the dynamics between players, nor who Cripps was influencing one way or another.
BUT, as captain, there are certain things you need to do and thats provide unity.
Its a tricky one, i'd much prefer a "The coach has got the full support of the board" type message from Cripps even if it is ultimately hollow. We didn't get that from him....we should've.

The media speculation (yes, speculation) was pretty clear on who was going into bat for the coach, and his name was nowhere to be found. Even once the names are posted, and you're not on it, you should make an effort to stick up for your coach and/or say something positive about him. Barely a peep.

All that being said, it goes back to what i said before. As far as i can tell, the only 'pro' to Cripps being captain is because he is already captain. Not good enough.