West Coast had made another break. Richmond trailed by 22-points midway through the final term when Ty Vickery accepted a handpass in the pocket about 30-metres out.
Vickery had time and space. He was under scoreboard pressure and pressure to kick the goal. In a split second, he had to evaluate the distance and decide non-preferred left or right-foot banana.
He fired off a right-foot banana. The kick lacked penetration, hooked to the right and didn’t make the distance. Shannon Hurn took a simple defensive mark.
Vickery could’ve kept Richmond in touch with a goal. He could’ve used his left foot but went with his preferred foot and blew it.
That he missed puts him in a no win situation. The question has been asked, why no left foot. But that overlooks the obvious. He might’ve blown it with his left.
At training, Vickery would’ve had dozens of kicks at goal on his left foot and with a banana. Maybe he hits those shots eight out of ten at training and just three out of ten on the left.
He knows his strengths and weaknesses. If he wasn’t confident on his left, the banana was the best option.
But missing a goal from thirty out at a crucial time of the game showed an apparent weakness. He ignored his balance and positioning and seemed to take the harder option.
It’s an option many players take, the banana instead of a non-preferred kick. It seems proficiency on the non-preferred side is becoming irrelevant.
Today’s game is helping that irrelevance. It is dominated by uncontested possession. Given all that time and space, players don’t often need to use their non-preferred foot.
Most players have some ability on their opposite side. But risk-free footy doesn’t involve players going forward with a wonky, lofted floater that misses the target when they can kick backwards or sideways with their preferred foot and find a teammate.
Few players are willing to gamble with their non-preferred side in defence or the midfield. Turnovers lead to goals. Turnovers get players subbed or dropped.
Footy is all about percentages. Most players try and get on their preferred side. Vickery did what he thought was best. Should we be critical if a player choses his best option and misses? He didn’t cost Richmond the game, but his miss didn’t help.
Players like Sam Mitchell, Steve Johnson, Jason Akermanis, Greg Williams, Wayne Carey, the Jarman brothers and Gary Ablett (both of them) would’ve kicked the goal on their left foot.
Those players are a class above their teammates and opponents. They attained a skill level few footballers possess. The ambidexterity is great to watch, because when a footballer kicks a goal or hits a target with the non-preferred side it is beautiful to watch.
Unfortunately, the level of precision and skill required to be equally proficient on both sides of the body is immense. Most footballers use their opposite foot in emergencies.
Today’s players are better skilled and fitter, but many still don’t trust their non-preferred foot.
No one should be surprised. It has been an issue throughout the history of the game. Poor proficiency on the non-preferred side has been a weakness for many footballers, including champions.
For more than a hundred years, whenever a player is trapped on his preferred side and mucked up a pass or missed a shot at goal, people have screamed no left foot or no right foot.
This weakness doesn’t make sense, because by the time the average player reaches the AFL, he has played football for about fifteen years, since he was five or six. Yet few can use both feet with similar perfection.
As a junior we are taught to develop both sides of the body, foot and hand. Training is tailored to improvement. This demand extends to senior footy. Every club does drills where players must kick and handpass on the opposite side.
You’re never too good to improve, and still the majority don’t.
Some footballers get through their entire careers without using their opposite side too much. The knowledge, I’m not as good on my non-preferred, is the reason men like Vickery attempt an improbable banana without the skill to execute it.
No one wants to kick on their non-preferred side. But at AFL level, it should be more than an emergency option. It should be ingrained. And football’s best players have shown how important skills on the non-preferred side are.
Versatility in football is vital. It extends to the opposite side.
There is no statistical evidence to show whether or not a banana or non-preferred kick produces more goals. Someone should do a study.
In today’s game, the banana would probably come out on top because few players fire at the goals with their non-preferred side.
But it’s all about the miss. If Vickery kicked the goal, his choice wouldn’t be an issue. He’d be hailed for his kick.
But he missed.
So the question needs to be asked again, if Vickery’s balance and positioning meant a left-foot shot seemed the best option, why no left foot.
Vickery isn’t the only footballer who can provide an answer…
