North Melbourne’s Harry Sheezel, one of the competition’s biggest rising stars, finds himself at the eye of a media frenzy. This drama all started after AFL commentator Kane Cornes ran his mouth. Cornes, who has been vocal about Sheezel’s performance this season, stated that the club needs to challenge the young player to utilize his skills in more impactful ways. The public conversation escalated when Sheezel was allegedly prohibited from entering the North Melbourne rooms. This controversial decision has received a flurry of criticism and reaction from the top faces in the AFL world.
As for Brown’s draftee teammate, Sheezel has been averaging a mammoth 30 disposals per game this season, a stat line that has made him famous. Cornes agrees and admits that Sheezel’s early numbers are remarkable. He argues they fail to pack the destructive punch required to hype up the squad and turn things around. He stated, “I don’t want to retract anything other than to confirm that he has got huge potential in the game,” while emphasizing that the club should focus on where Sheezel is winning his possessions rather than just the total number of disposals.
Dale Thomas, another prominent figure in the analysis of Sheezel’s play, defended the young player, noting that his numbers are “serviceable and outstanding considering the flexibility” he has shown on the field. Thomas was particularly upset with Cornes’ fierce criticism, calling it “absolutely ridiculous” and “over-the-top.”
Nick Riewoldt joined the conversation, stating that while Sheezel would undoubtedly “love” to improve his stats, Cornes had been excessively critical. Riewoldt claimed that had Sheezel played for Port Adelaide, his professionalism and approach would be interpreted in a different light.
Todd Viney, North Melbourne’s football boss, expressed his frustration with Cornes’ comments, accusing him of engaging in “inappropriate, targeted, vindictive, bullying behaviour.” Viney stressed that the club had a duty to protect its players from what he labelled as character assassinations. He said they are open to fair, fact-based criticisms of their performance. He noted that once that criticism becomes personal, it’s up to him to defend his team.
Sheezel responded to the controversy, in a wide ranging interview on SEN radio, conceding how high what he described as media pressure can be. All of it, he said, came from having a “huge couple of days” off the field. Like many other finance committee members, he returned to an agreement with Cornes’ big-picture premise. “I’ve got no ill will towards Kane; everyone’s allowed to have their opinion,” Sheezel said. At the end of the day, he is all for constructive criticism, but why focus on things that he can’t control. He’s eager to put the media circus behind him.
Luke Hodge, present during discussions about this situation, pointed out that Sheezel’s struggles could stem from a lack of effective support from the team’s forward line. Hodge proposed that this lack of deficiency hampers Sheezel’s ability to turn his chances into game-changing plays.
Though the debate over Sheezel’s performance may rage on, he has shown himself to be a resilient performer. He said that kind of media attention “does hit you. But he knows damn well that when the dust clears from this week’s criticism, he’s going to be just fine.
Cornes remains steadfast in his critique of Sheezel’s gameplay, reiterating his belief that the young player is “stat-padding and getting his possessions in non-damaging areas.” Most importantly, he argues that pushing Sheezel to improve is important for his growth and North Melbourne’s long-term success.
Tensions are certainly high right now between North Melbourne and opinion shapers/ commentators such as Cornes. Imaginary Future of Sheezel retains a lot of hype. The young player’s odyssey goes on as he balances media pressure with a growing professional demand.
