Farewell Oscar McDonald

[old55 23,687]

Oscar has had good games and some poor games for MFC.  The problem is that in the role he plays his good games are often invisible - spoils, blocks, postioning and things he prevents his opponents from achieving, whereas when it goes wrong it results in maximum exposure - goals deep in the forward line.

He doesn't deserve the vitriol he receives.  Other players in other roles are far less exposed when they make errors.

Think Zac Dawson - much maligned but Ross Lyon loved him.

Edited October 4, 2020 by Pollyanna

[Wiseblood 24,637]

3 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

I reckon Oscar would do really well at a club like the Swans where there is a strong system, belief in the game plan and belief in the team.  Give him a clear role and he will do it very well; no star but can be an excellent soldier.

So his role of stopping an opposition key forward wasn't clear enough for him?

I agree that he is no star, and that moving to a second club may give him more opportunities and he may become an excellent soldier there, but I hardly think that his role hasn't been clear enough.  He's in the side to stop an opposition key forward.  Even if there are other aspects thrown in, I hardly think it's a tough role to understand.

[binman 43,757]

12 hours ago, Dr.D said:

I cant even be bothered to list the plethora of duds given nominations each year.

A truly trumpian level of debating skills. 

[Kent 2,914]

3 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

I reckon Oscar would do really well at a club like the Swans where there is a strong system, belief in the game plan and belief in the team.  Give him a clear role and he will do it very well; no star but can be an excellent soldier.

so all the features that the Dees dont have right?

[Lucifers Hero 40,359]

17 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

So his role of stopping an opposition key forward wasn't clear enough for him?

I agree that he is no star, and that moving to a second club may give him more opportunities and he may become an excellent soldier there, but I hardly think that his role hasn't been clear enough.  He's in the side to stop an opposition key forward.  Even if there are other aspects thrown in, I hardly think it's a tough role to understand.

That is an outcome.

The role is the part in the team process to achieve that outcome.  There are many such processes varying with game plan, structures, set-ups, ball movement etc.

Since 2018 the defensive players have changed, the zone has changed, our defence structures and processes have changed, ball movement has changed and he has been in and out of the team.  I don't describe those as circumstances which foster 'a strong system, belief in the game plan and belief in the team' to enable a player to be the best he can be in his role..

He is known to read the play well and that is a real asset in defence.  I would like to see him go to a club that can better use his skills.

Edited October 4, 2020 by Lucifer's Hero

[Wiseblood 24,637]

Just now, Lucifer's Hero said:

That is an outcome.

The role is his part in the team process to achieve that outcome.  There are many such processes varying with game plan, structures, set-ups, ball movement etc.

Since 2018 the defensive players have changed, the zone has changed, our defence structures and processes have changed, ball movement has changed and he has been in and out of the team.  I don't describe those as circumstances which foster 'a strong system, belief in the game plan and belief in the team' to enable a player to be the best he can be in his role..

He is known to read the play well and that is a real asset in defence.  I would like to see him go to a club that can better use his skills.

And I would think that, going by the 'outcomes' this year, that the way we set up defensively was excellent.  Steven May didn't have a problem playing his role.  Neither did Lever, Tomlinson, Salem, Hibberd etc.

So what's the problem with Oscar here?  If our defence was a shambles then I'd agree with you that they don't understand the system we have in place.  This clearly isn't the case.  If the others can follow it, why can't he?  

I agree with everything else you're saying, but I think you're making excuses for Oscar here.  Our back line was a strength this year, and if he can't follow the system like the others can, then I think moving him on works for both parties.

[whatwhat say what 22,938]

strengths:

• reading the play
• kicking
• fitness

weaknesses:

• strength in the contest
• ground level game

he's a classic 'good ordinary' player and i could definitely see him going somewhere else, playing for a further seven or so seasons and 120 games, getting up to that 200 mark

he's not a gamebreaker but he's an honest battler

[ChaserJ 5,157]

I look at what Richmond have done with Astbury, who at the same age as Oscar had played less than 50 games and was a whipping boy, and wonder how how he would go there.

In the right setup, he could become a pretty good role player.

[Lucifers Hero 40,359]

2 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

And I would think that, going by the 'outcomes' this year, that the way we set up defensively was excellent.  Steven May didn't have a problem playing his role.  Neither did Lever, Tomlinson, Salem, Hibberd etc.

So what's the problem with Oscar here?  If our defence was a shambles then I'd agree with you that they don't understand the system we have in place.  This clearly isn't the case.  If the others can follow it, why can't he?  

I agree with everything else you're saying, but I think you're making excuses for Oscar here.  Our back line was a strength this year, and if he can't follow the system like the others can, then I think moving him on works for both parties.

I didn't say our defence was a shambles! 

Doubt your claim that our defence set up this year was excellent.  Really?  And even if it was, Oscar wasn't given many chances this year.  Can't see how that is making excuses for Oscar.  

[Deemania since 56 6,716]

3 hours ago, Rab D Nesbitt said:

Hi '56. If Oscar is to leave I can see the Hawks being one of the clubs interested considering their overall success in bringing in players to play very specific roles down back. Particularly as he's still only 24 years old. As he's big on his golf it'll just be a short drive from training to Riversdale where I think he's a member. 

Riverside, nice course. Haven't played there for 30 years, at least. Thanks for the memories. The Yarra owes me about 20 balls when I changed my clubs. Maybe OMac might take that advice after training. Myself, I like to hit off when the sun is rising,  6 days per week. Willunga is my course, here in SA - down south of Adelaide city. Carna Dees.

[Lucifers Hero 40,359]

2 minutes ago, ChaserJ said:

I look at what Richmond have done with Astbury, who at the same age as Oscar had played less than 50 games and was a whipping boy, and wonder how how he would go there.

In the right setup, he could become a pretty good role player.

Yep, Astbury was given a clear role in a strong system and is an asset.  Oscar could well be the same.  Deserves another go, elsewhere.

[Wiseblood 24,637]

3 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

I didn't say our defence was a shambles! 

Doubt your claim that our defence set up this year was excellent.  Really?  And even if it was, Oscar wasn't given many chances this year.  Can't see how that is making excuses for Oscar.  

I know you didn't, but you said he didn't have a clear role.  Our defence worked very well this year and was probably the area of the ground where we functioned best.  Clearly, the roles set out to the players were easy to follow.  Oscar had 7 games and, clearly, couldn't either play in the role that he was given, or couldn't follow the instructions given.  Considering that the other defenders understood their role and executed it well as a unit, I think it's on Oscar that he couldn't do the same.

Either way, it looks as though he may well be headed to another club, and I think that's a positive outcome for all involved.

[Cheesy D. Pun 1,765]

TMac is absolutely right - Oscar's treatment by supporters is bloody horrible.

You can challenge a player's position in the team without reverting to personal vitriol.

Even on this site, which is mostly pretty respectful, I've gotten to the point where I look for keywords.

If I see words like 'spud' or 'useless', I'll scroll past because it's immediately clear the person hasn't put much thought into their post.

I'd imagine it'd be very difficult to simply scroll past that if it's about you.

[Mach5 4,768]

I don’t dislike Oscar on the list, but he has had issues with injuries robbing him of some power & stability.

Depends on what we could get, but wouldn’t mind too much either way if we keep him or move him on for something else more suited to our needs.

[Moonshadow 17,677]

4 hours ago, Deemania since 56 said:

OMac will not get any better as a footballer. He peaked in his second year for two games, and has achieved very little since. 

Confirmation bias. He played a couple of good games this year too, from limited opportunities.

I won't stress if he is traded, but I believe at the right club he will develop into a handy backman. A change for Oscar will be as good as a holiday. Good luck to him.

[old55 23,687]

On 10/2/2020 at 9:12 PM, Dr.D said:

Trading or delisting Oscar McDonald would be an early Xmas present. No idea what the club saw in him. 

What's your full FD and list management plan this year?

[buck_nekkid 6,046]

The guy was taken pick 50 ish.  Complete punt this deep.  Has probably outperformed.  The big question really is ‘does his skill set improve our system, or work against it’?  He gets absolutely derided here and elsewhere (often even called a spud) when he gets caught manning grass, getting worked out of a contest, or turned inside out at ground level.  I think he has good disposal by foot.  Probably good at taking the resting ruckman when forward, or acting as an outlet passer.  May suit other systems better than ours, where we probably need another good intercept defender and someone that can play tall/small (perhaps why the club persist with Smith) to reinforce May and Lever.

If we get a decent pick, then may be better for all if he plays elsewhere 

[picket fence 17,498]

21 hours ago, spirit of norm smith said:

Pick 62 and Omcd and Tmcd to Kangas ??for Brown ??

Thats overs!! just leave out pick 62 and would do this in a heartbeat!

[Farmer 887]

11 minutes ago, picket fence said:

Thats overs!! just leave out pick 62 and would do this in a heartbeat!

Really. In these boring times do yourself a favour and watch our two winning finals from 2018 and then tell us if Oscar, let alone Tom, should be traded .

oscar does not LOOK the part. When he first started playing I had friends who jeered him unmercifully  and often unfairly . In fact he’s a more than useful player . Good height against tall key forwards . Lovely kick. Only 24. Are you certain we will get someone more useful ? I find it interesting comparing him with Lever  who DOES look the part  but who makes howlers every game, three in a row costing immediate goals  against, from memory, Gold Coast. Who often panics and handballs to nobody. Yet because he looks ok and, let it be said, defends pretty well when he has no opponent,  no-one calls for his sacking like they do for Oscar . He’s been most unfairly treated on this site and elsewhere 

[Farmer 887]

On 10/2/2020 at 9:12 PM, Dr.D said:

Trading or delisting Oscar McDonald would be an early Xmas present. No idea what the club saw in him. 

Just watch the first two finals of 2018, then you would know a lot more 

[Farmer 887]

On 10/2/2020 at 1:20 PM, spirit of norm smith said:

Omc is a spud.  He didn’t develop and unfortunately should be delisted.  

If it’s a trade , Pick 88 or similar gets it done.  
Or maybe trade to Swans in pick exchange (Dees trade OMc and pick 62 for Swans pick 56). 

Same trade value as Cale Morton.  

Are u serious. Trade OMac for pick 88? Hardly anyone rated 70 or above gets to play a single game 

[Wiseblood 24,637]

1 hour ago, buck_nekkid said:

The guy was taken pick 50 ish.  Complete punt this deep.  Has probably outperformed.  The big question really is ‘does his skill set improve our system, or work against it’?  He gets absolutely derided here and elsewhere (often even called a spud) when he gets caught manning grass, getting worked out of a contest, or turned inside out at ground level.  I think he has good disposal by foot.  Probably good at taking the resting ruckman when forward, or acting as an outlet passer.  May suit other systems better than ours, where we probably need another good intercept defender and someone that can play tall/small (perhaps why the club persist with Smith) to reinforce May and Lever.

If we get a decent pick, then may be better for all if he plays elsewhere 

I hate that word, especially when describing a player.

As fans we can be critical of players in the right manner, and critical of how games turn out, but resorting to calling a player a 'spud' is pretty low to be honest.

In the end, Oscar McDonald has played 81 more AFL games than me, so if that still makes him a spud, then the rest of us must be absolute dog [censored] in comparison.

[DeeSpencer 26,080]

23 minutes ago, Farmer said:

Really. In these boring times do yourself a favour and watch our two winning finals from 2018 and then tell us if Oscar, let alone Tom, should be traded .

oscar does not LOOK the part. When he first started playing I had friends who jeered him unmercifully  and often unfairly . In fact he’s a more than useful player . Good height against tall key forwards . Lovely kick. Only 24. Are you certain we will get someone more useful ? I find it interesting comparing him with Lever  who DOES look the part  but who makes howlers every game, three in a row costing immediate goals  against, from memory, Gold Coast. Who often panics and handballs to nobody. Yet because he looks ok and, let it be said, defends pretty well when he has no opponent,  no-one calls for his sacking like they do for Oscar . He’s been most unfairly treated on this site and elsewhere 

You don't think people call for Lever to be dropped or traded?  You've missed a lot of posts around here. 

The main difference between Lever and Oscar is Lever can do things while apart from the occasional game here or there - including those first 2 finals - Oscar hasn't shown the ability to take intercept marks, to track an opponent on a lead and make a closing spoil, to follow up at ground level and so on.

Oscar's a nice kick in uncontested situations but he doesn't get used like May does. He rarely if ever runs the ball out of the backline. He seems to trip over his feet when asked to run and kick at pace and will often stuff up those kicks which are the most risk/reward. Any time he gets the ball in traffic it's a backwards handball or a panicked kick because he can't beat pressure.

The reality is he can't play on smaller or faster opponents and doesn't even get trusted to play on the best forwards, he doesn't provide any defensive drive and he doesn't take enough intercept marks to cover for his lack of mobility. 

[titan_uranus 25,043]

I'm not a fan of Oscar. If he stays to give us a depth option to plug a hole if May or Lever get injured, so be it, but IMO we can do better.

On 10/2/2020 at 4:19 PM, Go the Biff said:

Oscar is neither as good as a few make out nor as bad as many make out. He has deficiencies but can come in and do a defensive job and if selected ahead of Tomlinson, can run a zone, allowing May & Lever to do their thing. His bad games have usually come when the team defence as a whole collapses and he becomes a convenient scapegoat.

If he stays he's good injury coverage. If he leaves I won't be overly fussed.

The thought of reading a Hawthorn backline of Frost, Frawley & Omac does provide some amusement though.

I strongly disagree, other than with the scapegoat bit which is fair and true.

Oscar's bad games are usually a result of his own weaknesses as a player. As @DeeSpencerhas pointed out above, he's weak in one-on-one contests, he's really poor when transitioning into offence, he regularly looks lost when the ball is moving fast, and he therefore adds nothing positive to our offensive game.

These are weaknesses he's had in his game his entire career. There was a brief window early this year where I thought he might have improved. That didn't appear to eventuate though and the rest of 2020 turned out much like previous years.

On 10/3/2020 at 10:32 AM, Moonshadow said:

How many do Port, WCE or St K have?

You're seriously arguing West Coast doesn't have elite superstars?

Kelly, Kennedy, McGovern, Ryan, Shuey, Yeo, Gaff, Naitanui, Hurn and Darling isn't enough for you? (And that's without adding players like Redden, Cripps, Sheppard and Sheed).

Port Adelaide have Boak, Gray, Wines, Dixon, Ebert and Byrne-Jones with support from Lycett, Powell-Pepper, Butters, Duursma, Rozee, Jonas and McKenzie. 

Those two clubs have far superior top end talent to us.

St Kilda does not, but then watch their final compared to Port's or West Coast's and you'll see the difference.

[old55 23,687]

38 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

I hate that word, especially when describing a player.

As fans we can be critical of players in the right manner, and critical of how games turn out, but resorting to calling a player a 'spud' is pretty low to be honest.

In the end, Oscar McDonald has played 81 more AFL games than me, so if that still makes him a spud, then the rest of us must be absolute dog [censored] in comparison.

I went to school and played under age football with a guy who was at least 1 or 2 levels better than anyone else in the team. He was about 10x better than me.

He went to a successful VFL club and played 2 or 3 seasons in the U19s and Reserves before moving to a successful football career at a strong club in a rated regional league.

I know how good he was and he couldn't make it at the top level.  I never call AFL players spuds for that reason.  

Edited October 4, 2020 by Pollyanna