Ruckmen v Port

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • barry
    Veterans List
    • Jan 2003
    • 8499

    Ruckmen v Port

    With Ball probably unavaliable due to hammy or corky - not sure what....

    Will we take Doyle and MekleJohn in as our ruck combination to Port Adealide. A sneak peak at our future right there IMO.

    BTW, did my eyes decieve me, or did Ablett take a centre bounce during the last quarter?
  • swansrule100
    The quarterback
    • May 2004
    • 4538

    #2
    jeez i hope ball is somehow alright, doyle was good today once ball got injured tho and port are missing primus..but micklejohn was pretty ordinary last year when he played
    Theres not much left to say

    Comment

    • swansrule100
      The quarterback
      • May 2004
      • 4538

      #3
      could roberts thompson be right for next week???
      Theres not much left to say

      Comment

      • ugg
        Can you feel it?
        Site Admin
        • Jan 2003
        • 15970

        #4
        Re: Ruckmen v Port

        Originally posted by barry
        BTW, did my eyes decieve me, or did Ablett take a centre bounce during the last quarter?
        Yes, he did and there was a lot of confusion in the square as to where the ruckman was. McVeigh was pointing to the backline. You could see Maxfield running in before the ball was bounce as we only had 3 in the centre. The Saints actually got a free from it, but I can't figure out why.
        Reserves live updates (Twitter)
        Reserves WIKI -
        Top Goalkickers| Best Votegetters

        Comment

        • hemsleys
          It's Goodes to cheer!!
          • Sep 2003
          • 23665

          #5
          Yes, I noticed that too. Very odd situation. Luckily the game was over so it was not a big concern. If scores had been a lot closer it could've been a major problem.

          Comment

          • Snowy
            On the Rookie List
            • Jun 2003
            • 1244

            #6
            Was mentioned on Fox that the Ball hammy was quite severe but that was just Matthew Campbell.
            LIFE GOES ON

            Comment

            • Ruckman
              Ego alta, ergo ictus
              • Nov 2003
              • 3990

              #7
              Ball's loss is a problem and Port will probably play Brogan and Lade so . . .

              Miekeljohn or Erickson?

              The former has played in both the ruck and down back in the ACTFL without setting the world on fire in the AFL.

              And the latter is far too young to do more than make a guest appearance in the ruck, but perhaps that's all we want.

              Comment

              • barry
                Veterans List
                • Jan 2003
                • 8499

                #8
                Originally posted by Ruckman
                Ball's loss is a problem and Port will probably play Brogan and Lade so . . .

                Miekeljohn or Erickson?

                The former has played in both the ruck and down back in the ACTFL without setting the world on fire in the AFL.

                And the latter is far too young to do more than make a guest appearance in the ruck, but perhaps that's all we want.
                It has to be Miekeljohn. He has AFL experience, and as 2nd stringer to Doyle, all he has to do is make a contest. He's big enough and strong enough for that.
                Bench and last 5-10 minutes of each quarter. Shouldnt be beyond him.

                I sure hope Goodes doesnt get thrown back in there.

                Comment

                • Ruckman
                  Ego alta, ergo ictus
                  • Nov 2003
                  • 3990

                  #9
                  I doubt that he will (without Schauble the defence really needs Goodes) but playing Doyle at the centre bounce then moving forward and leaving the round the ground stuff to Goodes IS an option.

                  Comment

                  • Barry Schneider
                    On the Rookie List
                    • Sep 2003
                    • 530

                    #10
                    If I remember correctly( and that is a big if ) against Port in that final Barry Hall did alot of rucking around the ground..He moved further up the ground in the latter part of the game and really competed.
                    That would give Doyle a rest and let him concentrate on the central bounces and have him in the whole in the backline.

                    Comment

                    • Mike_B
                      Peyow Peyow
                      • Jan 2003
                      • 6267

                      #11
                      Wasn't that because we were shot of options on the bench through injuries sustined during the game? I'd imagine if we have 22 fit players available, Bazza will be spending his time in the forward line for the entire game.

                      I'm on the Chandwagon!!!

                      If you cannot compete for the premiership, it's better to be young and exciting than middle-aged and dowdy.

                      Comment

                      • Barry Schneider
                        On the Rookie List
                        • Sep 2003
                        • 530

                        #12
                        True.Having seen Miecklejohn last year I am displaying a lack of confidence in him and would prefer him not to play.
                        It will be interesting to see who plays as this is a look into the future as Ball is close to the end( unfortunatley).
                        Doyle has to start showing something as Goodes is finished as a ruckman.I can't see us recruiting a top class ruckman in the near future so Doyle really has to to make an impact in the upcoming games.

                        Comment

                        • barry
                          Veterans List
                          • Jan 2003
                          • 8499

                          #13
                          We cant go in with only Doyle. He's injury prone, playing in a high injury position. Who would ruck if he went down ???

                          Comment

                          • Ruckman
                            Ego alta, ergo ictus
                            • Nov 2003
                            • 3990

                            #14
                            Originally posted by barry
                            We cant go in with only Doyle. He's injury prone, playing in a high injury position. Who would ruck if he went down ???
                            I agree

                            Hall can't leap as a ruckman, and he's deperately needed up forward.

                            We must never plan to play Goodes in a centre bounce.

                            LRT would be ok but he's out.

                            So Miekeljohn or Erickson?

                            I may be blowing smoke, because I didn't see the ressies this week, but maybe the latter?

                            Comment

                            • swansrule100
                              The quarterback
                              • May 2004
                              • 4538

                              #15
                              might have to let leo barry have a leap in the ruck for a bit :P pity hes such a good defender and cant afford to move him......

                              i think we will need to be extra good with our midfield to make up for the ruck
                              Theres not much left to say

                              Comment

                              Working...