Luck

[JP_ 60]

I know it's difficult to accept where this club is at the moment, and I know it's tempting to turn our malaise into a kind of moral issue and to blame factors like laziness, ineptitude, "culture" and so on for where we are. However, while the presence of all these factors amongst the staff and playing members might have played a part, I think it's important to look at just how unlucky we've been over the past 7-8 years. I know we haven't helped ourselves along the way, and have frequently made the wrong decisions at important times, but I don't think there are many teams who could have been competitive with the kind of luck we've had during this time.

So what do I mean by luck? Well, I mean specifically our luck with regards to drafting and injuries.

With drafting, I know there is a certain "science" to it and that we may have selected the wrong players at times, but - for the most part - we have selected players (in the first rounds at least) who had been universally regarded by the entire scouting community as being worthy of the position in which they were selected. If we hadn't been unlucky enough to select these players, then they probably would have been taken in the next few spots by a team that - as it happens - must have had a lot more drafting luck than we did. Here are the top 20 picks we had from 2007-2012:

- Pick 1: Jack Watts

- Pick 1: Tom Scully

- Pick 2: Jack Trengrove

- Pick 4: Cale Morton

- Pick 4: Jimmy Toumpas

- Pick 11: Jordan Gysberts

- Pick 12: Lucas Cook

- Pick 14: Jack Grimes

- Pick 17: Sam Blease

- Pick 18: Luke Tapscott

- Pick 19: James Strauss

Literally not one of those players has come on in the way we expected. Only Gysberts and Cook could really be classified as "surprise" picks (where the recruiters selected players much higher than they were anticipated to go), but the rest were all universally considered to be justified picks at the time. Partly we can blame player development, of course, but that only gets us so far. For example, Scully, Morton and Gysberts have gone on to play with other clubs, and none of them showed any more than they did at Melbourne, so it can't merely be a matter of "culture". Furthermore, player development requires some luck - so that new players are able to come in with experienced players bearing the brunt of the load for their first few years, so they have time and space to learn - and we never had that. While we shot ourselves in the foot by offloading players like MacDonald, Yze, White, Moloney and Bruce a little prematurely (with the universal consent of this forum, I seem to remember!) the fact is we just never had the cattle to help the younger players along. Partly this was down to having a bad list to start with, but even then the best and most experienced players we've had have spent more time injured than they have on the park. These endless injuries over the past few years are the second heap of bad luck we've had to endure.

Let's take the players we've drafted there: Scully missed half his second season with a knee injury. Trengrove and Grimes have been hobbled with serious foot injuries. Blease and Strauss have both suffered broken legs. Toumpas and Tapscott have continually missed pre-seasons with hip injuries. It's difficult to develop these players when they can't get on the pitch, or - at best - are forced to get on the pitch playing with the equivalent of one leg! Watts is the only one of those 11 top 20 picks who is both not an abject spud and who has had no serious injuries during his time at the club.

And for the rest of the team? In the last four years Dawes has missed 14 of 40 games. Clark has missed 47 of 62 games. Grimes has missed 25 of 84 games. Hogan has missed 18 of 18 games. Jamar has missed 33 of 84 games. Viney has missed 11 of 40 games. They aren't walk-up starters, but Gawn and Spencer have had knee reconstructions. Cross has broken his leg. Trengove has missed 16 of 18 this season (and I'm sure he was injured before that), Garland 7 of 18 (and I'm sure he isn't 100% now). When you're already struggling, you can't afford to have these players on the sidelines so often - particularly when you combine it with the poor drafting. Then, just to top it off, we can think about Jurrah, Clark and Wonaeamirri leaving the club for personal reasons at the height of their powers; Rivers, Sylvia, Moloney and Scully leaving via free agency (not the best players in the world, but I suspect they'd be best 22 atm); and so on.

In short, we just haven't had any luck lately and I doubt that any teams would be particularly competitive if they had endured what we have endured. I don't wish to make excuses, nor to suggest that the club isn't ultimately responsible for where it is today: quite clearly it is. What I want to stress, though, is that a lot of the misery we've suffered over the past few years most certainly has been outside of our control, and it may represent the difference between us being a competitive side and the pitiful mess we see before us at the moment. These kind of miseries tend to be self-compounding: a team going well can afford to absorb a few injuries, or bad drafting choices, or players leaving the club: a bad one can't. Injuries have stifled player development, which has stifled onfield performance, which has stifled players development further. Small discrepancies in luck at the beginning can snowball into massive problems further on, through a kind of positive feedback loop: that's the essence of chaos theory, and if there's one entity in the world that currently embodied the ethos of chaos, it's surely the Melbourne Football Club.

The only bright spot to come from all this is that - at some point - the luck has to start turning. We will eventually begin to draft players who know how to play and who spend more time on the field than in the medical rooms (Salem and Tyson are a good start). Until then, perhaps the best thing for it is to recede from it all with a kind of ironic detachment, to trust in Roos and to shake your fist impotently at the sky. I'm not sure there's much else for it.

[binman 42,556]

I know it's difficult to accept where this club is at the moment, and I know it's tempting to turn our malaise into a kind of moral issue and to blame factors like laziness, ineptitude, "culture" and so on for where we are. However, while the presence of all these factors amongst the staff and playing members might have played a part, I think it's important to look at just how unlucky we've been over the past 7-8 years. I know we haven't helped ourselves along the way, and have frequently made the wrong decisions at important times, but I don't think there are many teams who could have been competitive with the kind of luck we've had during this time.

So what do I mean by luck? Well, I mean specifically our luck with regards to drafting and injuries.

With drafting, I know there is a certain "science" to it and that we may have selected the wrong players at times, but - for the most part - we have selected players (in the first rounds at least) who had been universally regarded by the entire scouting community as being worthy of the position in which they were selected. If we hadn't been unlucky enough to select these players, then they probably would have been taken in the next few spots by a team that - as it happens - must have had a lot more drafting luck than we did. Here are the top 20 picks we had from 2007-2012:

- Pick 1: Jack Watts

- Pick 1: Tom Scully

- Pick 2: Jack Trengrove

- Pick 4: Cale Morton

- Pick 4: Jimmy Toumpas

- Pick 11: Jordan Gysberts

- Pick 12: Lucas Cook

- Pick 14: Jack Grimes

- Pick 17: Sam Blease

- Pick 18: Luke Tapscott

- Pick 19: James Strauss

Literally not one of those players has come on in the way we expected. Only Gysberts and Cook could really be classified as "surprise" picks (where the recruiters selected players much higher than they were anticipated to go), but the rest were all universally considered to be justified picks at the time. Partly we can blame player development, of course, but that only gets us so far. For example, Scully, Morton and Gysberts have gone on to play with other clubs, and none of them showed any more than they did at Melbourne, so it can't merely be a matter of "culture". Furthermore, player development requires some luck - so that new players are able to come in with experienced players bearing the brunt of the load for their first few years, so they have time and space to learn - and we never had that. While we shot ourselves in the foot by offloading players like MacDonald, Yze, White, Moloney and Bruce a little prematurely (with the universal consent of this forum, I seem to remember!) the fact is we just never had the cattle to help the younger players along. Partly this was down to having a bad list to start with, but even then the best and most experienced players we've had have spent more time injured than they have on the park. These endless injuries over the past few years are the second heap of bad luck we've had to endure.

Let's take the players we've drafted there: Scully missed half his second season with a knee injury. Trengrove and Grimes have been hobbled with serious foot injuries. Blease and Strauss have both suffered broken legs. Toumpas and Tapscott have continually missed pre-seasons with hip injuries. It's difficult to develop these players when they can't get on the pitch, or - at best - are forced to get on the pitch playing with the equivalent of one leg! Watts is the only one of those 11 top 20 picks who is both not an abject spud and who has had no serious injuries during his time at the club.

And for the rest of the team? In the last four years Dawes has missed 14 of 40 games. Clark has missed 47 of 62 games. Grimes has missed 25 of 84 games. Hogan has missed 18 of 18 games. Jamar has missed 33 of 84 games. Viney has missed 11 of 40 games. They aren't walk-up starters, but Gawn and Spencer have had knee reconstructions. Cross has broken his leg. Trengove has missed 16 of 18 this season (and I'm sure he was injured before that), Garland 7 of 18 (and I'm sure he isn't 100% now). When you're already struggling, you can't afford to have these players on the sidelines so often - particularly when you combine it with the poor drafting. Then, just to top it off, we can think about Jurrah, Clark and Wonaeamirri leaving the club for personal reasons at the height of their powers; Rivers, Sylvia, Moloney and Scully leaving via free agency (not the best players in the world, but I suspect they'd be best 22 atm); and so on.

In short, we just haven't had any luck lately and I doubt that any teams would be particularly competitive if they had endured what we have endured. I don't wish to make excuses, nor to suggest that the club isn't ultimately responsible for where it is today: quite clearly it is. What I want to stress, though, is that a lot of the misery we've suffered over the past few years most certainly has been outside of our control, and it may represent the difference between us being a competitive side and the pitiful mess we see before us at the moment. These kind of miseries tend to be self-compounding: a team going well can afford to absorb a few injuries, or bad drafting choices, or players leaving the club: a bad one can't. Injuries have stifled player development, which has stifled onfield performance, which has stifled players development further. Small discrepancies in luck at the beginning can snowball into massive problems further on, through a kind of positive feedback loop: that's the essence of chaos theory, and if there's one entity in the world that currently embodied the ethos of chaos, it's surely the Melbourne Football Club.

The only bright spot to come from all this is that - at some point - the luck has to start turning. We will eventually begin to draft players who know how to play and who spend more time on the field than in the medical rooms (Salem and Tyson are a good start). Until then, perhaps the best thing for it is to recede from it all with a kind of ironic detachment, to trust in Roos and to shake your fist impotently at the sky. I'm not sure there's much else for it.

great post. Two things though. Its not true we have had no luck. We've had heaps of bad luck. To add to your list there was the death of our talisman, Brendan Schwab, getting pinged for tanking where several other clubs didn't and neeld (self inflicted but still). Oh and Salem apparently has done his quad.

[daisycutter 29,600]

great post. Two things though. Its not true we have had no luck. We've had heaps of bad luck. To add to your list there was the death of our talisman, Brendan Schwab, getting pinged for tanking where several other clubs didn't and neeld (self inflicted but still). Oh and Salem apparently has done his quad.

Brendan? you mean Cameron

[Jara 1,153]

Thoughtful post. I've wondered that sometimes, too. I suppose every melbourne supporter has. (Mind you, there are many areas in life in which we make out own luck)

[monoccular 17,411]

great post. Two things though. Its not true we have had no luck. We've had heaps of bad luck. To add to your list there was the death of our talisman, Brendan Schwab, getting pinged for tanking where several other clubs didn't and neeld (self inflicted but still). Oh and Salem apparently has done his quad.

Salem- OMG. Whenever we do make a good recruiting call, something seems to happen to them. Goes back decades. Tingay, Glenn Lovett, Prympke, Ox, Jakovich, Lyon, (?Matthew) Newton (no, not juice), Clark, Hogan and now Salem. [censored]. Merde.

The curse of Norm Smith. Thanks Dr Duffy and friends.

[Ted Lasso 19,260]

Finally gain a player who looks like been a star for us, next minute career ending injury

we are cursed

[Ron Burgundy 8,584]

Our club has been poorly run.

Over the period of time we're talking, it's not just bad luck.

I'm hopeful that Roos, PJ et ors will now demonstrate that.

[old dee 23,744]

Our club has been poorly run.

Over the period of time we're talking, it's not just bad luck.

I'm hopeful that Roos, PJ et ors will now demonstrate that.

Agree RB

You make your own luck.

The teams at the top don't rely on luck they make their own

[jnrmac 20,053]

Agree RB

You make your own luck.

The teams at the top don't rely on luck they make their own

This

[drdrake 3,157]

Just imagine a forward line

Jurrah Clark Hogan

Aussie Dawes Howe

The three gone the club couldn't do much about, all would be in there prime now with 5 years to go.

[Dr John Dee 1,057]

Agree RB

You make your own luck.

The teams at the top don't rely on luck they make their own

Sounds good, but it's also probably wrong.

Ron's point (which I also agree with) was about the contribution of the way the club's been run. I'm not sure there's a corollary that says a properly run club confers on the team any particular relationship to "luck" or how it might be made.

But you might also like to Google "The Numbers Game: Why Everything You Know About Football Is Wrong." It's about "football" rather than football, but if luck is statistically as important as skill in the round-ball game how much more important is it with a football that bounces every which way (leaving aside other sources of misfortune like umpires)?

[old dee 23,744]

Sounds good, but it's also probably wrong.

Ron's point (which I also agree with) was about the contribution of the way the club's been run. I'm not sure there's a corollary that says a properly run club confers on the team any particular relationship to "luck" or how it might be made.

But you might also like to Google "The Numbers Game: Why Everything You Know About Football Is Wrong." It's about "football" rather than football, but if luck is statistically as important as skill in the round-ball game how much more important is it with a football that bounces every which way (leaving aside other sources of misfortune like umpires)?

My problem Dr is that i see lots of MFC supporters who want to blame bad luck for our misfortunes when the majority have been self imposed .

Over the last decade we have had a series of poor administrations, poor Coaching, Poor player selection, poor development and looking to take the easy option by tanking.

We may have had a few unexpected player failures but to lay our problems at the feet of "bad Luck" is IMO just looking for a handy excuse.

[Dr John Dee 1,057]

My problem Dr is that i see lots of MFC supporters who want to blame bad luck for our misfortunes when the majority have been self imposed .

Over the last decade we have had a series of poor administrations, poor Coaching, Poor player selection, poor development and looking to take the easy option by tanking.

We may have had a few unexpected player failures but to lay our problems at the feet of "bad Luck" is IMO just looking for a handy excuse.

I don't disagree too much, Old Dee, there's too many self-inflicted wounds to argue otherwise. But I think there's more factors than just administrative/management ones. Luck on the paddock and luck off it might just be worth thinking about. And when all the problems are added together like they are in the OP, they tell a sorry tale that also suggests that maybe, just maybe, administration hasn't been the only author of our misfortunes.

[Waltham33 475]

My problem Dr is that i see lots of MFC supporters who want to blame bad luck for our misfortunes when the majority have been self imposed .

Over the last decade we have had a series of poor administrations, poor Coaching, Poor player selection, poor development and looking to take the easy option by tanking.

We may have had a few unexpected player failures but to lay our problems at the feet of "bad Luck" is IMO just looking for a handy excuse.

MFC missed the boat. 15 years ago player development went to the next level and clubs like Sydney, WCE, Colingwood, Hawthorn invested heavily in it and have benefited. Ordinary players at 18 became stars at 22. The MFC went down the road of drafting players and not investing enough in development. For mine player developed between 18-21 is as important as 15-18. I think this is beig rectified now

Edited August 5, 2014 by Waltham33

[Tony Tea 2,806]

Most players who come into the AFL can run, kick, hand pass and generally play. The key is to turn those draftees into AFL standard adult footballers, which requires more than just talent and coordination, it requires aggression and strength. What that list lacks are players who can play footy AND compete with adult footballers. Tapscott & Grimes try hard, but have their limitations. Trengove has good skills and it looks like he can be turned into a league footballer if he gets his body right. The rest are yet to understand - or never did understand - that footy is all about big blokes knocking over other big blokes.

What we need are competitive animals, not nice looking footballers.

[jnrmac 20,053]

Most players who come into the AFL can run, kick, hand pass and generally play. The key is to turn those draftees into AFL standard adult footballers, which requires more than just talent and coordination, it requires aggression and strength. What that list lacks are players who can play footy AND compete with adult footballers. Tapscott & Grimes try hard, but have their limitations. Trengove has good skills and it looks like he can be turned into a league footballer if he gets his body right. The rest are yet to understand - or never did understand - that footy is all about big blokes knocking over other big blokes.

What we need are competitive animals, not nice looking footballers.

Mostly the junior stars can play reasonably offensive football. They are usually hopeless and two way running and defensive football. And handling a tag.

[ThreeOneSix 954]

Watts, Scully, Cook, Morton, Toumpas, Blease, Strauss.

A lot of outside/athletic types at a time when MFC needed to get the football.

When the club needed to make a stand it drafted kids who were never going to get the football.

We taken risky players when we had safe choices to make - and choices that filled our needs.

I'd of taken Daniel Rich ahead of Watts, Martin ahead of Scully and Wines ahead of Toumpas.

Morton was a laughable pick, he had a booming kick in under 18's, but MFC must've anticipated him kicking them from the centre square.

Strauss was a one paced outside type who hadn't shown much. Cook surprised making the AA squad and was just ridiculous to select where he was.

There was nothing wrong with Jack Darling... Also in their draft years, there was nothing wrong with Vic Metro captain Parker - or Shuey.
There was nothing wrong with Rory Sloane, these guys give their heart and soul in juniors and represented something even back then.

MFC instead drafted stick figures and project picks.

Luck has played no part. Athletic stick figures and outside skirt riders aren't going to get you wins - hence why we are still tailing out every year.

[AzzKikA 2,371]

Do you really believe that Jack Watts would be the same player if he was at Hawthorn? OR Geelong?

Jack's problem is he thinks he is too important to get hurt so he doesn't go hard at it.

Nothing to do with luck.

I agree that Morton was/is a dud, i guess they were hoping they could put bulk on him and he would still be good. Complete failure, nothing to do with luck.

Do not dribble [censored] about Scully, we all wanted him at the time, it's just the fact he left us that pisses you off. Nothing to do with luck.

Luck is complete tripe and any who believe it's partly lucks fault for our dismal years is a fool.

[old dee 23,744]

Do you really believe that Jack Watts would be the same player if he was at Hawthorn? OR Geelong?

Jack's problem is he thinks he is too important to get hurt so he doesn't go hard at it.

Nothing to do with luck.

I agree that Morton was/is a dud, i guess they were hoping they could put bulk on him and he would still be good. Complete failure, nothing to do with luck.

Do not dribble [censored] about Scully, we all wanted him at the time, it's just the fact he left us that pisses you off. Nothing to do with luck.

Luck is complete tripe and any who believe it's partly lucks fault for our dismal years is a fool.

I wish you would strengthen up your opinions a bit

A little on the timid side.

[dimmy 1,307]

What does it say about pur successes :

Mc Donald , Jetta (this year), Howe, Viney ( WIP), Dunn .

Toumpas had hip problems and is about to start his second pre season

Do not think we have seen the best of RIley Yet ( Injury)

[Demon trucker 1,800]

Its stupid to put a line through jimmy last year he had a good year, everyone should chilax on him.

[The Song Formerly Known As 6,479]

You create your own luck

[Beats 190]

Watts, Scully, Cook, Morton, Toumpas, Blease, Strauss.

A lot of outside/athletic types at a time when MFC needed to get the football.

When the club needed to make a stand it drafted kids who were never going to get the football.

We taken risky players when we had safe choices to make - and choices that filled our needs.

I'd of taken Daniel Rich ahead of Watts, Martin ahead of Scully and Wines ahead of Toumpas.

Morton was a laughable pick, he had a booming kick in under 18's, but MFC must've anticipated him kicking them from the centre square.

Strauss was a one paced outside type who hadn't shown much. Cook surprised making the AA squad and was just ridiculous to select where he was.

There was nothing wrong with Jack Darling... Also in their draft years, there was nothing wrong with Vic Metro captain Parker - or Shuey.

There was nothing wrong with Rory Sloane, these guys give their heart and soul in juniors and represented something even back then.

MFC instead drafted stick figures and project picks.

Luck has played no part. Athletic stick figures and outside skirt riders aren't going to get you wins - hence why we are still tailing out every year.

Watts for Rich, Martin for Scully and Wines for Toumpas. All were possible, but the players the MFC picked were all regarded as the 'better' players at that time.

Morton was the right pick, he was tipped to go at 3, but WCE surprised and took Masten instead. Remember his first year at the club? Had superstar written all over him, then he got Melbourned. Same thing has happened to a number of high picks in recent years, showed something in their first year then went backwards steadily (Morton, Trengove, Gysberts, Tapscott and even Grimes to an extent).

Strauss was a quick rebounding defender who was rated as the best kick in juniors, did enough to justify being picked where he was.

Cook and Gysberts were picked high for where they were rated.

Jack Darling had a questionable off-field character and had a few incidents leading up to the draft. Ability wise he was a top 10 pick, but clubs had question marks on him - same as Dayle Garlett.

There were questions on Parkers athleticism - that's why he was looked over by every team at least once. Shuey was picked around where he should have been. Rory Sloane had the same issue as Parker - questions over his athleticism.

Luck plays a part in everything - If Blease and Strauss didn't break their legs who knows how they'd be going.

Part of what you touched on is the trend within the AFL of picking athletes and trying to turn them in to footballers, rather than footballers becoming athletes (Parker, Sloane, Rockliff etc.)

Edited August 6, 2014 by Beats

[Chook 15,012]

[KingDingAling 3,752]

Treloar, Shiel, Cameron, Mitchell.. Be good to land a couple of those names.

All have a hard edge and can seriously play.

Bring a couple of those players in, and with the inclusion of Hogan and hopeful improvement from Salem, Toumpas and co - we'll improve next year.

Good drafting goes a long way, it can rapidly improve a list.