First huge test for new coach! 2nd ruckman or no?

[staple]

The new interchange rules Sub rule 'won't go the distance': Rodney Eade | Adelaide Now could mean a second ruckman isnt picked. could this make jesse white the perfect solution by acting as a mobile forward and second ruck? is seabys career at the swans over before it started?

[Nico]

Why not rest the ruckman in the forward pocket for a good part of the game rather than off the bench, like had been done before the interchange was invented.

[staple]

Why not rest the ruckman in the forward pocket for a good part of the game rather than off the bench, like had been done before the interchange was invented.

good idea. but then you have one less player to rotate through the midfield. also the forward pocket is also a great place to rest your jude boltons, jarred mcveighs and other mids.

[ShockOfHair]

We'll definitely play both Seaby and Mumford if fit. Seaby's an essential part of our forward setup and Mumford is a midfielder anyway.

[goswannies]

We'll definitely play both Seaby and Mumford if fit. Seaby's an essential part of our forward setup and Mumford is a midfielder anyway.

What will that mean for Pyke? Fully functioning twin towers in the forward line has it's appeal tho

[Owen87]

What will that mean for Pyke? Fully functioning twin towers in the forward line has it's appeal tho

I remember in the game against Port Adelaide this year he took a few good contested marks when he pushed back in defence, perhaps he could develop into a tall defender

[Jesse Richards]

Just when we have the best ruck duo/trio in the comp there is a rule change to take away that advantage. Damn.

So let's play all three and blast the rule back where it belongs. One ruckman in the centre (Mummy), one up forward (Seaby) and one down back (Pyke)

Spreading the ruck work would have at least these advantages
1) no other team will be able to do this to our standard in 2011
2) not so strenuous for any one ruckman therefore fewer ruck injuries
3) time on ground for each increased
4) hard to defend against

Yes, but... I hear the shouts, including who would make way? Jesse White doesn't seem to have developed as well as expected. Kennelly has games with few or no contested possessions. Shaw is erratic. Mattner doesn't seem to be as good as when we first got him (but that could be more game plan than his ability) The run from the back will need to be replaced with long kicks to contests for marking, fast to the ball or crumbing forwards (how many times last year did we see scintillating run from the backlines, bounces and multiple handballs only to turn it over up front from pathetic disposals -if we're going to do that we may as well save the players and time and kick the ball long) Pyke, Mumford and Seaby would all suit this style of play. And if Jesse comes good, he would too.

Some pundits are saying that Ted is reinventing himself and playing the best he's ever played. Grundy had a solid season, as did Smith. Would leave these three in defence.

I prefer solid, reliable team performers with flashes of brilliance in preference to flashes of brilliance amongst dross, particularly ineffective disposals. My other pet hate is playing injured players.

[staple]

We'll definitely play both Seaby and Mumford if fit. Seaby's an essential part of our forward setup and Mumford is a midfielder anyway.

im not sure if seaby qualifies as an essential part of our forward set up. doesnt white offer more in that role?

[hammo]

So let's play all three and blast the rule back where it belongs. One ruckman in the centre (Mummy), one up forward (Seaby) and one down back (Pyke)

I don't think any team can afford to have three ruckmen on the ground at any one time because opposition teams will exploit the lack of moibility.

[Bas]

I don't think any team can afford to have three ruckmen on the ground at any one time because opposition teams will exploit the lack of moibility.

Pyke and Mummy are very mobile.

[Hartijon]

If it rained we might be in trouble with triple towers,they may prove Faulty or Fawlty Towers instead!

[Trickster]

Just when we have the best ruck duo/trio in the comp there is a rule change to take away that advantage. Damn.

So let's play all three and blast the rule back where it belongs. One ruckman in the centre (Mummy), one up forward (Seaby) and one down back (Pyke)

Spreading the ruck work would have at least these advantages
1) no other team will be able to do this to our standard in 2011
2) not so strenuous for any one ruckman therefore fewer ruck injuries
3) time on ground for each increased
4) hard to defend against

Yes, but... I hear the shouts, including who would make way? Jesse White doesn't seem to have developed as well as expected. Kennelly has games with few or no contested possessions. Shaw is erratic. Mattner doesn't seem to be as good as when we first got him (but that could be more game plan than his ability) The run from the back will need to be replaced with long kicks to contests for marking, fast to the ball or crumbing forwards (how many times last year did we see scintillating run from the backlines, bounces and multiple handballs only to turn it over up front from pathetic disposals -if we're going to do that we may as well save the players and time and kick the ball long) Pyke, Mumford and Seaby would all suit this style of play. And if Jesse comes good, he would too.

Some pundits are saying that Ted is reinventing himself and playing the best he's ever played. Grundy had a solid season, as did Smith. Would leave these three in defence.

I prefer solid, reliable team performers with flashes of brilliance in preference to flashes of brilliance amongst dross, particularly ineffective disposals. My other pet hate is playing injured players.

What do you do with C.Bolton and LRT?
Are you moving Kennelly, Shaw & Mattner into the ressies? I'm can see where you are coming from but wonder who you would play and where

[Jesse Richards]

What do you do with C.Bolton and LRT?
Are you moving Kennelly, Shaw & Mattner into the ressies? I'm can see where you are coming from but wonder who you would play and where

Thanks for your response, Trickster. My strength lies in coming up with odd, new or different suggestions, rather than in the practicalities, realities and depth of knowledge that so many people on RWO are so good at. They would be better at answering the question of 'how could we make it work?'

Having said that... here's some more innovation. I'm not averse to the concept of rotating players in and out of Reserves on a more regular basis - eg forming twosomes or threesomes, each of which play in the Reserves every second week, or every third week. Two or three players roughly equal in skill and fitness and role - like job sharing, buddy systems, training partners and co-teaching... This alternative could have several advantages, but would require the players involved to let go of the Firsts versus Reserves split. It would be more like Firsts and Reserves, we're all in this together, for each other etc. for the good of the whole team. It's about keeping the team fresher, skills current and ensuring that non-playing travelling emergencies are a part of the rotations, not as a back handed reward, but as part of the job. With the Blood's culture already entrenched we'd have more chance at making this work than any other team at present. It's about shifting from the priority of the best on the field each week to a more all encompassing longer range strategy to maximise the contribution of each member of the team over the whole season and ultimately to win more games, especially the big one at the end.

[Nico]

good idea. but then you have one less player to rotate through the midfield. also the forward pocket is also a great place to rest your jude boltons, jarred mcveighs and other mids.

By having a tall up forward or back means we only rotate largely the mids off the bench so it doesn't restrict your rotations. The old method was a ruckman resting in one pocket and a rover in the other. I would suspect the coaches will be far innovative than we can ever be, but one thing for sure is that players of the future will need to be versatile and able to run all day. Once again the quick centre clearance will be ever important and the longer you keep the ball up forward, the more rest your backs get. Collingwood does that very well and theories will abound.

[Auntie.Gerald]

Why not rest the ruckman in the forward pocket for a good part of the game rather than off the bench, like had been done before the interchange was invented.

Nico i reckon we have moved beyond the second ruckman resting in the F line.........they spend only a few mins a qtr if you are lucky up front if at all.......

first line of defence is the forward line..............hence our forward line full of midfielders..........