Seaby Sub

[Young Blood]

problem was not so much seaby as sub as one too many big men in the 22. If seaby was required, he should have been in the 21 with white or reid missing out.

A case of horse wanting to have his cake and eat it too?

[Ruck'n'Roll]

H'm interesting, it's as if Seaby had to be either a replacement or excluded from the team completely.

A good proportion of RWOers have accepted the conventional wisdom of the "experts" and are just as incapable or unwilling to consider using the second true ruckman as an interchange (not a replacement).

I know I'm biased but I do not understand why this needs to be so. Perhaps this is this yet another plot by the short-arses and OHS pansies that infest the game to exclude ruckmen?

Perhaps the best use of a ruckman (especially the Mummy type) is to use their power and agression in bursts, that means giving them a break on the bench, rather than have them running up and down on the spot with exhaustion towards then end of each quarter.

Besides speed decreases with tiredness, height doesn't. So I for one am very attracted of the thought of a relatively fresh Ruck monster gambolling around the field wiping out lots and lots of leg weary grass burners.

They may be dinosaurs, but give the ruckmen a chance to go completely Jurassic!

[Mr Magoo]

H'm interesting, it's as if Seaby had to be either a replacement or excluded from the team completely.

A good proportion of RWOers have accepted the conventional wisdom of the "experts" and are just as incapable or unwilling to consider using the second true ruckman as an interchange (not a replacement).

I know I'm biased but I do not understand why this needs to be so. Perhaps this is this yet another plot by the short-arses and OHS pansies that infest the game to exclude ruckmen?

Perhaps the best use of a ruckman (especially the Mummy type) is to use their power and agression in bursts, that means giving them a break on the bench, rather than have them running up and down on the spot with exhaustion towards then end of each quarter.

Besides speed decreases with tiredness, height doesn't. So I for one am very attracted of the thought of a relatively fresh Ruck monster gambolling around the field wiping out lots and lots of leg weary grass burners.

They may be dinosaurs, but give the ruckmen a chance to go completely Jurassic!

I think we are paying too much attention to this idea of a "super sub". If they are that "super" they should be in the first 21 not the 22nd man.

I think teams will learn as the season goes on that the 22nd man should not be utilised until someone gets injured or to interchange someone coming back from injury that may have limited game time fitness. Horses reason for putting Seaby there was sound and in some respects he should have been used earlier as Mumford was out on his feet at the end of the third quarter.

If Pettard is that good he should have been on for the whole game and just interchanged when he needed a rest. It was just fortuitous that he got involed when he first went on and this was probably more a mistake on the backline coaches choice of matchup then the result of some "super sub" coming into the game.

The subbing or not of seaby had little to do with the result in our game BUT the subbing of other players that were not injured was the reason for some teams downfall. I think coaches will learn that it is dangerous to role the dice early with a sub when you arent sufferring any injuries.

Really the sub should be the 22nd man you would have picked or like horse did , picked to cover a specific role if you have doubts about a person selected filling that role for the game.

[Triple B]

I think we are paying too much attention ........ that role for the game.

Good post

[AnnieH]

A good proportion of RWOers have accepted the conventional wisdom of the "experts" and are just as incapable or unwilling to consider using the second true ruckman as an interchange (not a replacement).

Not I.
I'm all for rotating two rucks (who can also go into a "forward" position to "rest").
Put someone in the green vest who is able to cover more "positions" .... but not Goodesy!!

[RogueSwan]

I think we are paying too much attention... filling that role for the game.

Good post

+2

[Scottee]

It seems pretty clear that despite the reduction in the bench size that it will be necessary to play 2 rucks. Simply having Seaby interchanging with Mumford would have greatly increased the Mummy's impact as well as providing a counter to the Demon's Martin who was quite an important player for the Dees. Seaby has good around the ground ability and his 4 disposals would have been many more if he had been interchanging. Essendon will have 2 recognised ruckmen next week but I note that Patrick Rider is almost the same size as Sam Reid and he could be given a run-with role perhaps, he definitely has the speed and stamina and would learn a lot from the experience.

I don't really subscribe to the view that White should be the one to make way for Seaby either. He was directly responsible for 3 of the Swans goals, despite people's disappointment with him. Sumner or Bevan might have been better out of the side.I also don't think White, despite his size, plays as a real tall. He has excellent ground skills in attack and his bulk assists him in that, very fast for his size as well. It really is probably time to groom him as a FF with Bradshaw looking a bit doubtful.

[Bleed Red Blood]

Reid on Ryder? Size might be similar. But Ryder has been around since 05, and has played in the ruck a lot, I do remember our Reid doing a bit of ruck in the reserves last year when they we're stretched but I think this week he should be out and Bird brought in for extra midfield rotations.

[RogueSwan]

Reid on Ryder? Size might be similar. But Ryder has been around since 05, and has played in the ruck a lot, I do remember our Reid doing a bit of ruck in the reserves last year when they we're stretched but I think this week he should be out and Bird brought in for extra midfield rotations.

A bit harsh on Reid, he (and other youngsters) should be given a couple of weeks at least of seniors footy unless they are obvioulsy completely unready. And on last weeks performance Reid looks ready.

Not I.
I'm all for rotating two rucks (who can also go into a "forward" position to "rest").
Put someone in the green vest who is able to cover more "positions" .... but not Goodesy!!

Barlow??

[ShockOfHair]

Surely the biggest risk of Seaby as sub was that we'd be over-tall if someone had got injured early a la Porplyzia or Selwood. Otherwise it seems to have been a reasonable bet given Mumford's fitness.

For this week I'd revert to the two rucks plus White at FF. For the time being, White is ahead of Sam. I guess Everitt would be our third tall in defence if needed.

[Hartijon]

It seems pretty clear that despite the reduction in the bench size that it will be necessary to play 2 rucks. Simply having Seaby interchanging with Mumford would have greatly increased the Mummy's impact as well as providing a counter to the Demon's Martin who was quite an important player for the Dees. Seaby has good around the ground ability and his 4 disposals would have been many more if he had been interchanging. Essendon will have 2 recognised ruckmen next week but I note that Patrick Rider is almost the same size as Sam Reid and he could be given a run-with role perhaps, he definitely has the speed and stamina and would learn a lot from the experience.

I don't really subscribe to the view that White should be the one to make way for Seaby either. He was directly responsible for 3 of the Swans goals, despite people's disappointment with him. Sumner or Bevan might have been better out of the side.I also don't think White, despite his size, plays as a real tall. He has excellent ground skills in attack and his bulk assists him in that, very fast for his size as well. It really is probably time to groom him as a FF with Bradshaw looking a bit doubtful.

While I totally agree about running two ruckmen and keeping White, I think Ryder would slaughter Reid. Rieds a young kid maybe not suitable for every game . I agree Sumner(promising) and Bevan might have to go although if they decide to play Bevan in the forwards,i change my mind.

[ShockOfHair]

Great piece by Leigh Matthews on this topic. He says clubs have to balance between "an average second ruck versus an average big forward".

Rethink on subs? - AFL.com.au

Last weekend Essendon went with Hille-Ryder and Carlton with Warnock-Hampson, while Geelong went with just one ruckman, Ottens, with Hawkins as backup.
The Swans were in the middle, with one specialist ruckman and the second as a sub.

Looks like this is going to be one of those hot early season topics.

[RogueSwan]

I read that article yesterday - it was good to read something that doesn't just parrot the media's obsession with the "death" of the second ruckman.

[caj23]

Exactly, its only trouble for teams with a 2nd ruckman who offer nothing around the ground (i.e. Blake at Geelong). Teams like us and the Bombers who have ruckmen that are capable around the ground will be advantaged by playing 2 quality ruckman.

Just don't use them as a sub FFS Horse!!!!

[Ruck'n'Roll]

The Swans were in the middle

Yes I think we tried to have a bet each way, but in endevouring to get the best of both solutions we kind of dudded ourself, and got neither. We would have been better going one way or the other, lets see what happens this week.

While the afl seems intent on sticking with the sub (despite the average number of interchanges being up this year) I think we should pick someone who can have an effect/impact for a relatively short period of time rather than looking for someone who can do a mediocre job at either end. Geelong used an older player, Melbourne used someone that was underdone.
Perhaps Bradshaw when/if he recovers could be injected into a game when a bit of the pace has left it?