Goodes' ruckman days 'over'

[Go Swannies]

In at least half a dozen newspaper articles I've seen as accepted wisdom that Goodes needs to develop as a forward for the long term development of the team. Roos has certainly said that - and that's why he's played him there. I'm at a loss to understand why.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by Go Swannies
In at least half a dozen newspaper articles I've seen as accepted wisdom that Goodes needs to develop as a forward for the long term development of the team. Roos has certainly said that - and that's why he's played him there. I'm at a loss to understand why.

So am I. Our forward line is potentially one of the best in the competition - Hall, O'Loughlin, Davis, O'Keefe, Schneider. I don't see why we desperately need Goodes there when it is the best part of our team.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
So am I. Our forward line is potentially one of the best in the competition - Hall, O'Loughlin, Davis, O'Keefe, Schneider. I don't see why we desperately need Goodes there when it is the best part of our team.

I think he probably feels it may be a little too short.
Although it doesn't explain why he didn't start Ball in the square for the bounce and then have him move forward leaving Goodes to do the around the ground ruckwork.

One upside to the Gooded injury is that we will definitely find out whether Doyle will make it or not as an AFL ruckman during the course of the remainder of the season.

[dread and might]

can't goodes line up in the square but not contesting the ruck as many others have suggested, and then drop back to a kick behind the play, roaming around waiting for a sloppy disposal from the opposition, or at least able to create a contest? he has the pace to then run forward when we get the ball at half back or to help cut down opposition posessions on the wing.

if we wind up with the ball from the centre, then he can go forward with the rest of the midfield, but could also be useful cutting down opposition rebound from halfback.

i am nowhere near the "on paper technician" that many on the forum obviously are, but i seem to recall that last year when he had tear 'em up games this seemed to be the sort of role he occupied.

thoughts welcome, i am ready to be tactically educated.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by Ruckman
I think he probably feels it may be a little too short.

Doyle/Ball!?!

[liz]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
So am I. Our forward line is potentially one of the best in the competition - Hall, O'Loughlin, Davis, O'Keefe, Schneider. I don't see why we desperately need Goodes there when it is the best part of our team.

More to the point (or as much as to the point), playing Goodes in the forward line doesn't play to his strengths. He takes the odd spectacular mark but normally when he has room to run to the contest. In more static one-on-one situations he is not a great mark. Nor has he shown any great propensity for leading.

Rather, his strength is his ability to find space around the ground and his athletic ability to keep on doing it for most of the game. What makes him so potent, therefore, is the difficulty for the opposition in finding a player who has the athletic ability AND the physique AND the skills to force him into a serious contest for the ball.

[NMWBloods]

That's exactly right. He was a nightmare for opposition coaches to match up on last year, yet this year they simply stick a decent sized defender on him and he's out of the game for large portions of it.