Hill

[Enrico_Misso]

Last week he was the only player to get zero contested possessions.
And yes he pulls out of potential high impacts.

But he IS an elite runner and gut runner.
And he IS an elite kick.

So he can run the lines and deliver.
That is priceless and is something we have missed for years.
When our mids are winning Hill rams home the advantage.

Hence more than happy to ignore his soft side as he gives us so much upside.

[SaintPav]

That’s why I used to love Dal.

He could play as both an outside and inside mid he was that good.

He was elite.

ELITE.

[samuraisaint]

That’s why I used to love Dal.

He could play as both an outside and inside mid he was that good.

He was elite.

ELITE.

Agree - two of Dal's best games from 2008:

[Sobraz]

Thought it was Hills best game for the club. He’ll only get better.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[sunsaint]

and someone clearly isnt
you are not allowed to lift the ball with an open hand - which is why it drew query

Open hand is fine the ball can't rest on your hand.

wrong again - sort of
you can lift the ball with the clenched fist
you cant lift the ball with open hand
what you described is a throw every time regardless if the ball is lifted or forced down

refuse to respond to the other refute because the umpire clearly missed it but commentators and fair minded people watching it definitely queried it

[Ghost Like]

I find it quite amusing that Hill is being described as soft. It irks me nearly as much as when people tried to claim the great RH was soft. Ironically that was by Collingwood supporters, at least I could point out he was infinitely harder than Buckley. Buckley was only ever a better kick. I digress though.

Whilst all us arm chair experts like to call this player & that player "soft", the fact is, no one who plays AFL is soft.

If we had Hill in 09, 10, 11 or his ilk, we ThreePeat. He's quality, he's what every Premiership side needs. We have and have had hard players but we craved silk. It is easier to find Dunstans than it is Hills.

[Yorkeys]

His sin may be that he is too humble: for years we have had neither the players nor coaches with the wit to use nuance or lateral thinking in their approach. To have someone with sublime disposal and judgement skills in the clear calling for the ball does not seem to quickly register with the players that this might be a better way to advance the ball to a scoring opportunity. We, unfortunately, often take the charge the gate and hope attrition causes goals approach or have primarily for a number of years. No defence can set up for a speedy pin point pass to a leading forward. I doubt Bradley would stand up in a meeting an demand to be passed the ball because he is a better field kick than anyone else. Ratts might start pointing it out. Of course there needs to be a diagram also showing don't give it to him if a 100kg gorilla is at his elbow, pick your time.

[SaintPav]

That’s why I used to love Dal.

He could play as both an outside and inside mid he was that good.

He was elite.

ELITE.

Agree - two of Dal's best games from 2008:

I've watched both.

That 2008 Hawks game was sublime, particularly in the third quarter where Dal had 10 possessions in the first 5 minutes of play.

It was a fascinating game and highly recommend watching it from start to finish.

[bigred]

Hill does not take his turn in a contested sense.

At all. Undeniable.

But thats not why we got him.

The coach is right. We are not using him at appropriate times, and not nearly enough.

[freely]

The good news is, using Hill better is on the coaching agenda.

[kalsaint]

Can’t believe I’m the one saying this but geeeez some of you guys are tough critics.

I thought he was alright. Got a lot of ball and for the most part used it well and we looked a hell of a lot more dangerous when he was the one kicking it forward.

He was ever present...
Ran all day and was around a heap of contests. Note that he features quite a bit on the highlights reel but not as the guy that finishes the play. Also note that he’s wearing a tough tag, and that conditions were both slippery and the opponents fierce.
Further to that, both Gresh and Jones we’re down on output compared to usual.

Reckon the coaches will be rapt with what he’s bringing to the table... and his work rate in particular.

Absolutely not soft IMO... I think that’s armchair quarterbacking at its finest.

Only real suggestion I have for him was that he had a tendency especially in the first half to handball quite a bit instead of kick.
Pbly suggests that we were stagnant in our movement up the ground at times but we looked a lot better once he started kicking more

Agree Hill is not designed to be a marine guarding that wall. Hes the one to provide options.
Port tonight has shown how good Geelongs defence and midfield can be. We have made a bad choice not playing 2 rucks last week. Our clearances weren't effective and Geelong were able to close up the gap to receivers well because of this. This impacts the value of Hill. As mentioned quarterbacks needed protection. Geelong have been great at player protection for many years now. I've been crapping on about player protection ever since Ross left the club. Our speed was limiting under Ross so player protection was premium we required to ensure our poor kicking skills weren't a handicap. With Watters and Richo ball carriers and receivers protection seemed to go missing. The new plan opened this up but quality control over the midfield now needs work to stabilise the effort so far this year.

[samuraisaint]

According to rumour he was ill on Monday and so was Jake.

6 day break should give them time to turn it around.

Essendon a very different animal to Geelong. Essendon play more like the Suns compared to the physical contest beast that is the Cats.

I will wait and see how we respond before making judgement.

[goods]

Hez an outside player with elite endurance, these revised game times don't do him favour. He will flourish in a full 4 quarters

[The_Dud]

Watching Freo tonight, his brother certainly goes in a bit harder than he does!

[bigcarl]

I thought he was good today. He’s never going to be a contested possession beast, but he got a heap of the ball and used it well

[bergsone]

Happy with his game today.Reckon a BOG is coming,its not just there yet

[The_Dud]

I thought he was good today. He’s never going to be a contested possession beast, but he got a heap of the ball and used it well

Loved the kicks inside 50 in the first half.

Would also like to see him be a bit more selfish when he’s in range.

[Secret Kiel]

The posters who keep banging on about Hill's inside credentials have clearly never played the game. Next we'll be complaining our Full back doesn't know how to kick a bag of goals.

[SaintPav]

The posters who keep banging on about Hill's inside credentials have clearly never played the game. Next we'll be complaining our Full back doesn't know how to kick a bag of goals.

Not sure I agree with this analogy but it made me laugh.

[whiskers3614]

Was certainly better today but coming from a pretty low base,
Would love to see how many of his disposals actually hit a teammate given that this is supposed to be his forte!

[The_Dud]

The posters who keep banging on about Hill's inside credentials have clearly never played the game. Next we'll be complaining our Full back doesn't know how to kick a bag of goals.

Pretty sure Carlisle has kicked a bag of 8 before...

Every AFL footballer should be able to put their head over the ball when required, whether It’s their 1st or 300th game.

[roskilde]

Thought he was much better today and hopefully he can improve even more.

I think with Hill the bottom line is when we're very good he can be a player that excels and brings us an extra dimension but if we're scrapping out victories and unable to play skillful and flowing football then he's not going to be at his best just because of the way he plays the game.

Isn't it always the case with wingers? I mean they're not supposed to be players who can turn a game on their own skill alone.

[johnearljames]

Good game today. In best players.

[saynta]

Thought he was much better today and hopefully he can improve even more.

I think with Hill the bottom line is when we're very good he can be a player that excels and brings us an extra dimension but if we're scrapping out victories and unable to play skillful and flowing football then he's not going to be at his best just because of the way he plays the game.

Isn't it always the case with wingers? I mean they're not supposed to be players who can turn a game on their own skill alone.

W9ell, I never did.

[Peanut Farm]

I find it quite amusing that Hill is being described as soft. It irks me nearly as much as when people tried to claim the great RH was soft. Ironically that was by Collingwood supporters, at least I could point out he was infinitely harder than Buckley. Buckley was only ever a better kick. I digress though.

Whilst all us arm chair experts like to call this player & that player "soft", the fact is, no one who plays AFL is soft.

If we had Hill in 09, 10, 11 or his ilk, we ThreePeat. He's quality, he's what every Premiership side needs. We have and have had hard players but we craved silk. It is easier to find Dunstans than it is Hills.

Hill is soft and yet again today against Essendon he didnt put his body on the line on a few occasions and lifted his head a couple of times when he heard footsteps. That said, it was his best game with us so far but still average. His disposal by foot is a pleasure to watch.