The Ruck

[midaro]

So we have 4 ruckmen who have a legitimate claim to being in our best 22.

Even assuming Goodes does not play ruck at all - which would be a shame - I can't think of any precedent for a team fielding three 200cm, 100kg dedicated ruckman, in their 22.

IMO the ruckmen's abilities are about so (opinions will differ ):

At the Tap:
Jolly > Doyle > Ball > Goodes

Around the Ground:
Goodes > Ball > Doyle/Jolly

Resting in the Forward Line:
Goodes > Doyle > Ball/Jolly

So, in your opinion, how will this all work out?

[swansrule100]

i think 2006 and beyond will see jolly and doyle play together as a combo and it would be a shame if they didnt play together this year. But with Ball there and the number one ruckman, i think we can only play doyle or jolly for now. Unless doyle can really shine up forward.


Right now id play ball and doyle ahead of jolly

'I hope goodes can ruck again

[midaro]

Originally posted by swansrule100
I hope goodes can ruck again

Me too, even if its just around the ground (or even just in the defensive 50).

However, I think Jolly is (or will be) a good tap ruckman - better than we've had in many years - so I'd pick him over Doyle ATM.

I wonder if Ball is a certainty for Round 1? I haven't heard much of him in the practice matches.

[Charlie]

Forget Goodes as a specialist ruckman. He'll take some ball-ups around the ground, but I don't think we'll ever see him rucking in the centre again.

At the moment, Ball is a certain starter, and Jolly and Doyle are not. Only one will play most weeks - if they can both show that they have what it takes in the centre then Ball will have a graceful retirement in the goal square, and the others will rotate off the bench. Until then, Jolly will probably have to wait for Doyle to struggle.

A wonderful problem to have.

[swansrule100]

yes a great problem


id hate a repeat of last year v port. Thought we would be doorknocking around sydney for a ruckman

[liz]

Originally posted by midaro


I wonder if Ball is a certainty for Round 1? I haven't heard much of him in the practice matches.

I would say yes.

Ball is only a mediocre ruckman at stop plays but he provides tremendous value around the ground. He knows where to run and is probably the best contested mark in the team other than Hall. Neither Jolly nor Doyle yet promises to provide this 'around the ground' value.

Doyle as a close to permanent FF would be interesting to see, with just short bursts on the ball. He could pretty much just station himself in the goal square and not have to lead much. His contested marking is already pretty good and the new rule that defenders cannot chop the arms of a marking player will help all beanpole forwards this year. Add to that the fact that Davis, Buchanan, O'Loughlin and Schneider (and arguably even Hall) are pretty good once the ball hits the ground and it could be an interesting forward set-up.

The most encouraging thing about yesterday is that it sounds like the forward line was provided with pretty good supply but that they failed to capitalise. It is not unreasonable to expect the efficiency of the forward line to improve given that they've been efficient for two years in a row. They just need to get the supply to enable them to regularly kick 16,17,18 goals a game.

[midaro]

Was yesterday Ball's first game of the preseason?

[liz]

Originally posted by midaro
Was yesterday Ball's first game of the preseason?

No, he played against the Lions. Can't recall if he played last week - may have been a late withdrawal.

[penga]

IMO, there is a chance for all three to play round one. That is, ball do a hard tag on spider, wherever he may roam. then the other two, rotating from bench to forward line to the centre. IIRC, we essentially played 3 ruckmen against them early on last season, ie saddington was the makeshift third ruckman mind you.

[midaro]

Originally posted by penga
IMO, there is a chance for all three to play round one. That is, ball do a hard tag on spider, wherever he may roam. then the other two, rotating from bench to forward line to the centre. IIRC, we essentially played 3 ruckmen against them early on last season, ie saddington was the makeshift third ruckman mind you.

I think we're unlikely to play all three, unless O'Loughlin doesn't play - which is quite possible .

In that scenario, a second big body in the forward line (after Hall) would become much more important, and a FF/Ruck/Interchange rotation with the three ruckman may the best we could do.

We really don't have an obvious backup big forward, do we?

[dendol]

Re: The Ruck

I remember seeing Port play Primus, Brogan and Lade recently. Im not sure what came out of it, but Im assuming they had had the three alternating between FF, ruck and the bench.

As for our team, we might as well forget about Goodes as a ruckman because he will be named and playing CHB.

The only issue with playing Ball, Doyle and Jolly in round 1 would be that we might not have enough match-fit runners in the game. That is, I'd expect one of the three to be on the bench at any given time, and where this is combined with MOL, Davis and Goodes being underdone, we might not run the game out.

[stellation]

I wouldn't mind playing Ball/Doyle/Jolly (BDJ, or if you are Mr P. Roos BDJy) against the Hawks. Everitt is bound to go forward at some point, Ball doesn't seem too bad playing as a (very) tall defender on a resting ruckman- and Jolly certainly seems mobile enough to be able to give it a crack also. We could theoretically have them all on the park at once with 1 in defence, 1 in the ruck and 1 in the forward line.

Of course that may just give us an advantage for all of 5 minutes out of 120. And of course might not work

[NMWBloods]

Re: The Ruck

Originally posted by midaro
Resting in the Forward Line:
Goodes > Doyle > Ball/Jolly

I'd say this would be more like:

Doyle > Jolly > Ball > Goodes

I think there is a reasonable chance that, if fit, all four of these guys will play most games. I'm sure we didn't trade for Jolly just to make him our third ruckman.

[Bleed Red Blood]

Originally posted by midaro
We really don't have an obvious backup big forward, do we?

Saddington.

[midaro]

Originally posted by Bleed Red Blood
Saddington.

...almost, just barely, pay that