By Ben Somerford
July 10th 2009 @ 12:47am
Loading ...AFL rookies: blind faith or good coaching?
This weekend Fremantle will become the first club since 2006 to hand AFL debuts to ten players or more in the one season, representing their concerted youth policy.
Incredibly, nine of those ten Fremantle debutants have been in their first year of AFL footy, with youngster Tim Ruffles the latest addition.
In comparison, Richmond and North Melbourne are the nearest clubs to this title this season offering debuts to 7 youngsters, whilst Melbourne has blooded 6 new players.
Fremantle coach Mark Harvey professed this week, “It’s only a matter of time before the whole list grows, gets more mature, gets more experience and then things will start to turn.”
Indeed, it seems this policy of youth first has been encouraged and is becoming widely accepted in the AFL on the back of Hawthorn’s 2008 premiership success after adopting such an approach during their years wallowing down towards the bottom of the ladder.
But is such a policy of blooding youth simply blind faith or is there a science to it?
Fremantle’s newest debutant-to-be, Tim Ruffles, admitted he wasn’t expecting his AFL call-up, saying this week, “He (Harvey) just announced it…I had no idea it was coming.
“I think I’ve been playing consistent footy in the WAFL and the coaches have been pretty happy with that.”
Indeed in some ways, Ruffles’ reaction makes you question the wisdom of handing a debut to a first-year player without really testing their desire to push hard and earn a place in the team.
On the other hand, you could argue the experience he’ll get from playing at AFL level will challenge him to improve himself, so why not throw him in at the deep end.
In saying all that, it is worth examining the example of the Brisbane Lions, the last club to blood 10 debutants in one season.
Before introducing the ten youngsters in 2006, the Lions actually gave debuts to 11 players in 2005, on the back of their successful period from 2001 to 2004 when they played in four consecutive Grand Finals and won three premierships.
Right now the Lions are certainly in the mix for the finals and perhaps the top four, but they are not realistically a premiership contender.
But more importantly, it’s interesting to note that of those 21 debutants the Lions had in 2005 and 2006, only 11 remain currently on the club’s list.
Indeed, Brisbane’s ratio of just over 50% suggests the youth policy route is a hit-and-miss game and is a lot harder than just recklessly blooding rookies into the big-time and hoping they’ll make it.
But with the imminent introduction of a team on the Gold Coast, perhaps the youth direction is the right way to go. I guess only time will tell.
Get Australia's best AFL opinion emailed daily.
Like this content? Buzz it up!
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(10)
to be honest i didn’t notice much perhaps I wasn’t paying close enough attention.
Kurt said | July 10th 2009 @ 6:25am | Report comment
You raise some interesting points Ben. My personal opinion is that whether or not playing rookies is the right thing to do, coaches under the pump will increasingly adopt this approach as it is paradoxically seen as a low-risk strategy. Not low risk as in the best way to win games, but low risk as in the best way of avoiding the media blow torch and an early severance package. Play experienced players and lose you’re just asking for trouble. Play rookies and lose? ‘We’re building for the future, things will start to turn, the last bloke didn’t develop the list etc. etc”. It’s an effective way of putting off the pressure for a season or so as the coach desperately works out how to turn a bunch of hacks into a half-decent team capable of sneaking into 7th or 8th spot.
Ben Somerford said | July 10th 2009 @ 6:37am | Report comment
Yep spot on Kurt. In some ways that was Terry Wallace’s downfall, maybe even Dean Laidley in some respect. And then you look at Bailey & Harvey, who are two prime examples of what you speak about and they seem to getting away with it. Clarkson got it right and now it seems clubs are willing to have faith in untried coaches like this adopting this youth policy. It’s an interesting little evolution in the game.
Michael C said | July 10th 2009 @ 7:03am | Report comment
Outside of the top 10 draft picks – the stats show that the rest is pretty much a lottery.
Simply because, pure talent only gets you so far. It then comes to burning desire, luck, unforeseen development or lack of development (both physical, skill based, fitness etc).
The reality is that the rookies lists have been a very good pathway, and perhaps especially because these are generally the kids that got missed in the draft, and may get one or two years rookie listed, and if they get a chance for a game – it’s a narrow window of opportunity (whilst someone else is on the long term injury list).
There is currently a major focus on given the kids a go, having a look in the company of adults.
This is the key here. With too great a focus on talent via the TAC and under 18 pathways – especially in Victoria. The limitation is that it’s quite one thing to play against age group peers – it’s entirely another to play against adults. Some of the walk up start young draftees out of Adelaide and Perth who have played in the SANFL and WAFL have stepped straight into the AFL. Daniel Rich is an obvious example.
North Melbournes rookies include 21 yr old Liam Anthony from WA, so considered a ‘mature age’. Nathan Grima came from SA, and along with a knee reco, debuted this year age 23 and has stepped straight into footy and down a great job down back.
Ben Warren, aged 20 and a tad, debuted this year after being around the club for several years after coming from QLD.
These guys have all debuted and been very good players right from the start. And certainly are not 17-18 yr olds being thrown to the wolves just to see who survives.
Pippinu said | July 10th 2009 @ 2:44pm | Report comment
Ben
good article – I agree with MC that it’s a bit of a lottery – but it has always been thus.
Prior to the introduction of the U18s, each VFL club had U19s and reserves teams, and only a handful of U19s ever graduated all the way to the senior team (to become permanent fixtures).
The fact is that once you move beyond the very best of the best young players, it’s almost impossible to know how they will respond to being immersed in a professional senior team until it actually happens.
For some, it clicks only 2nd or 3rd time around – many just drop off the face of the Earth.
I suspect that’s the same for every football code.
I read a story about a wonderful West Ham Youth team that won their FA cup 6-0. The team included Joe Cole, and as it happens, two Australians, Ferrante and Garcia. Joe Cole went on to be a star (and it was obvious that he was destined for stardom), the bulk of players ended up a bit like Ferrante, some even worse, some just dropped out of the game completely.
That’s the football game.
Kazama said | July 10th 2009 @ 4:49pm | Report comment
Considering that Fremantle lost a host of experienced players at the end of last season – Jeff Farmer, Josh Carr, Matt Carr, Heath Black, Mark Johnson, Robert Warnock, Peter Bell, Shaun McManus – it isn’t surprising that they’ve blooded so many youngsters. The injuries they’ve copped this season have contributed to the need to bring in some new faces as well.
Rookies are hit-and-miss, but the best way to find out whether they’re any good or not is to expose them to AFL footy and see how they perform.
Ben Somerford said | July 10th 2009 @ 7:32pm | Report comment
But is it Kazama. It’s like throwing them in at the deep end and seeing if they can swim. Isn’t there some nurturing to be done by AFL clubs and coaches? That’s the question, is it blind faith by just chucking them in, or isn’t there more to getting a young fella ready for AFL footy, that’s the premise of the article.
Kazama said | July 10th 2009 @ 10:16pm | Report comment
Ben, Fremantle cut nearly 1/4 of its list at the end of the season. With all of the injuries they’ve had this year, I feel that they’ve had no choice but to bring in the kids. Either that or play short, perhaps.
There are no players over 30 on Freo’s list. 19 players on the senior list had played 27 AFL games or less at the start of the season. Fremantle ranked equal 12th with Essendon, ahead of only Nth Melb, Brisbane and Melbourne, for average games played at the beginning of 09. In 08, they were ranked 2nd for average games played! In a year, Freo’s games per player average went from 84.8 to 58.4! Bit of a drop there!
Another factor may be Fremantle’s woes with their draft picks in previous seasons. e.g. from Freo’s 2006 draft and rookie draft only Brock O’Brien and Andrew Foster remain on the list, combining for just 10 games in 3 seasons. And while they didn’t pick until #31 in the national draft, they passed up on players like Kurt Tippett (taken by the Crows with the following pick!), Alwyn Davey, Nathan Krakouer, Brad Dick, Kyle Reimers, David Mackay, Tyson Goldsack, so it is not as if the talent wasn’t there when their first pick came around.
It seems teams now wish to get their youngsters playing AFL footy as soon as possible (or as soon as their body is vaguely ready) in order to learn the system they want them to play. All of the guys I mentioned above are already regulars for their teams, so I think perhaps there is something to be said for throwing players into the deep end. And it’s not as if Freo’s youngsters aren’t contributing.
Ben Somerford said | July 10th 2009 @ 11:31pm | Report comment
What did you think of Jack Watts getting a run a couple weeks back?
Kazama said | July 11th 2009 @ 9:58am | Report comment
I think it was probably good for him to get a taste of AFL footy. All of the criticism he copped won’t have done his confidence any good, but to get his hands on the footy and kick a goal at the top level hopefully will counter that a bit. Did his debut come too soon? Perhaps, but maybe the Dees felt that this kid is going to be so important to them they want to get him on the field whenever possible, if only for him to get the experience of playing at the highest level. For the rest of the season he should probably just concentrate on finishing Year 12, then once that’s out of the way it’s footy, footy, footy.
I’d be very surprised if he wasn’t a regular next year, assuming he builds his body up during the pre-season. Melbourne has the least experienced list in the competition and they’ll really need Jack Watts to step up if they want to be a even a snowball’s chance in hell of playing finals in the near future. Once the kid is ready physically, it’s simple: he’ll play every week.
For guys like Leigh Matthews, who reckon that Watts has shown nothing to suggest why he was the first name read out at the draft: the guy was the #1 pick for a good reason. Matt Rendell (head of recruitment at the Crows) claimed he was the only player he’d have picked ahead of Phil Davis. Why would he have passed on Rich, Ziebell, Hartlett, Hill etc? Because Rendell knew this year’s draft would be light on KPP – that’s why the Crows took 4 talls with their 5 picks. The gun midfielders will be available again but there isn’t another Jack Watts out there.
Jack is the first Key Forward taken at #1 since Nick Riewoldt in 2000, and his numbers at junior level – graded as elite in a number of categories by Champion Data, including score assists and contested marks – show that he has the potential to be as good as the Voldt. In fact, he is probably more versatile than Nick, as at junior level he was considered an elite ball-winner for his height and he played in the midfield and across half-back for Sandringham in the TAC Cup. (And yes, I did flog all of that from the AFL Prospectus. Never leave home without it.)
The Dees wanted a talented key forward prospect and they’ve got one, it’s just up to them to get him adjusted to life at an AFL club and in my opinion that will come through playing regular footy more than anything else. Riewoldt didn’t set the world on fire in his first year either, playing six games and kicking 2.2 – though in his second year he established himself in the Saints 22 and started to show his brilliance, so let’s reserve judgement on Watts’ worthiness as a #1 pick until next season.
David said | July 14th 2009 @ 8:10pm | Report comment
its prob a good argument. im not sure how beneficial freo getting beaten by 117 pts and kicking one goal agst Adelaide would have been.