Changes for Rnd6 v Crows

[ShockOfHair]

Longmire said in Swans TV interview White was "a bit stiff" to miss out.

[ScottH]

I'm wondering whether Malceski will be Sub, if he's not 100%

[Nico]

Nico I think you might like to move into the 2010's. We are a far different and talented side than that of the naughties and we managed to win a premiership then. But you obviously don't watch the 2's otherwise you wouldn't call TDL soft. He is doing all asked of him, tackling, going in hard etc. Get with the plot Nico this is a new year if you haven't seen him play don't comment. By the way the days of the tough no-talents is gone and we are developing talented footballers to be tough as well.

Sorry Wolfy, I can't afford to fly up every week. If he gets a game we will hopefully see if they have made a silk purse from a sow's ear. Big difference between showing a bit of muscle in 2's as against mixing it with the big boys.

[caj23]

I cannot believe anyone on earth thinks LRT ineffective and I certainly can't believe anyone thinks White a better option.
A passable replacement perhaps, but better option??????

I love the guy but LRT is ineffective as a forward/ruck unless you count someone who doesn't provide any creative scoring options up forward, wins very few hitouts, and doesn't provide much link up play as effective.

By all means play him as a key backman where he belongs, but Jessie is a better ruck/forward than LRT every day of the week.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

I reckon the coaches don't rate the "Second Ruck" job as very important. Its more the other jobs players selected in that position can do that is really important.

As longmile notes LRT certainly hasn't gotten very many taps (although 1 of his 3 games was against Sandilands, which scews the average). But I think you may be right about the coaches thinking aardy.
Does it matter that our second ruckman gets no taps, especially if we win the lions share of clearances throughout the game?
And if it doesn't matter then why not go for a player that you think can perform a specific job around the ground. In this case LRT may become plan B for Tippet.

[Reggi]

Lrt's super coach scores tell the story. Can't really believe anyone would think he is anyway effective. He is our second ruck man against other second ruck man and he is terrible

[aardvark]

Lrt's super coach scores tell the story. Can't really believe anyone would think he is anyway effective. He is our second ruck man against other second ruck man and he is terrible

Jesses ave this year is 69. LRT is 60 having come off injured the last 2 times he played eg half games. Its hardly a massive difference either way. It would make selection easy if the coaches just picked the top 22 each week from the fantasy footy leagues but we probably wouldn't win many games.

[stellation]

I reckon the coaches don't rate the "Second Ruck" job as very important. Its more the other jobs players selected in that position can do that is really important.

Yep I agree, I have no issue with LRT in the side playing whatever role that is required. He's a class player with experience who can play forward or back when needed.

I think it's a bit of a worry if the coaches really think that the backup ruck isn't that important, Seabs averages 80% TOG and Mummy 84%- ignoring some time spent up forward etc., that's still a good 20 minutes or so each game that the number one ruckman isn't on deck.

[jono2707]

Mummy's strength has been that he's started really contributing to the play around the ground - a good ruckman these days is really an extra midfielder. I would rather not play two ruckman where one (or both) does not contribute much around the ground. Hey we are 5-0 at the moment with 1 ruckman and a pinch-hitter so its working so far. As others have said, what's more important is what happens when the ball hits the deck and our midfielders are doing just fine in that regard at the moment.

BTW last time I saw Cliffy he was working on a building site in Macquarie St last year - he was on his durry break at the time, and I reckon there'd be a few of them thru the day....

[caj23]

I think it's a bit of a worry if the coaches really think that the backup ruck isn't that important, Seabs averages 80% TOG and Mummy 84%- ignoring some time spent up forward etc., that's still a good 20 minutes or so each game that the number one ruckman isn't on deck.

I don't have any stats to back it up and i haven't examined it in detail but I've heard a couple of times from commentators during games (I think Hawks and North) that the opposition team came back when our no 1 ruck was on the bench, so there is an impact of sorts.

Having said that it's not black and white as I'm not sure whether our no 2 was up against there 1 or 2at the time.

I do think however that there are 2 long term issues to consider.

1. Seaby is an adequate back up but to be a contender we need Mummy out there and on the ground. Our no 2 needs to be able to provide him with enough of a break so that he isn't burnt out or injured come finals time. I'm not sure that is the case presently (be it with Jessie or LRT as backup).

2. If we were to get to the GF I'm not confident that LRT is good enough* to be selected as a forward or back up ruckman at that level

* I repeat happy for him to play CHB/FB

[wolftone57]

I must of missed something...There's a rule that says "if a player cops a knock they play sub the next week" ???? Don't think so.
More likely...If a player is coming back from 2 or more weeks off, like Smith last week, they may bring them back, as sub, if it suits, to ease them back in.
Otherwise they pick who they think will fill potential holes and have an impact.
IMO, if Mals knee is ok, he'll play a full game. If it's not, he won't play at all....All the signs are he'll play a full game.

It is called a 'rule of law' or 'general rule' Ernie it is a given not a rule as such. Stop being a prig! He shouldn't play at all in my opinion if there is one iota of doubt about his knee. How many recons has he had after all! If he stuffs his knee in the first minutes of next weeks game then we are a man down! Be sensible here I believe the player should be honest but there is no hope of that. I played and did it while injured and lied about the twinges I had, we all did and so do our blokes! Any chance he is going to get a recurrence of his old injuries and I would have him back to the specialist. He felt for his knee against North and we thought he had gone then and last week they took him off.

[Triple B]

Scott Watters said something which caught my interest last night on Marn Grook. When asked if he could strengthen one area, where would it be?, he said in the ruck. He acknowledged that McEvoy was doing a great job as #1, but feels you need 2 good rucks in the squad, not necessarily in the team at the same time, because it is not possible for a lone ruckman to get thru a full season the way the game is played nowadays and they need to be rested occasionally. I read that as saying completely rested for a week, rather than during games.

We were prepared to let Seaby go last year, probably as an act of goodwill to Seaby knowing his chances would be limited in Sydney. I think clubs are starting to realise that maybe the second ruck isn't dead after all. I suspect that if he requests a trade this year (contract status notwithstanding), the club may not be so keen to accommodate him.

Let's face it, without Seaby, we would have been in some deep do-do the past few weeks going into the ruck with a combo of LRT/White and an underdone Pyke. We may well not be 5-0 or anything like it.

A bit unfair on Seaby I guess to languish in the ressies hoping for an opportunity, but if we all agree our 'premiership window' is opening in the next few years, it may well be a necessity for the good of the team.

[wolftone57]

Sorry Wolfy, I can't afford to fly up every week. If he gets a game we will hopefully see if they have made a silk purse from a sow's ear. Big difference between showing a bit of muscle in 2's as against mixing it with the big boys.

Ok point taken but I think there has to be a point where you have to take from us who do see the games that he is performing well. I'd rather have a hundred of him that one Bevo! Bevo was a solid hard player with little skill. He did go in hard but with very little talent his execution was very poor. He was at one stage by far the worst at giving frees away.

At least these new players we drafted all have talent! This is important! In this new footy age it is not enough to have a good solid tough team. They are going to get flogged by really talented tough teams. 2005 was a good year for solid tough teams but that was then! You now need talent otherwise you get flogged, have a look at the Bullies.

[wolftone57]

As longmile notes LRT certainly hasn't gotten very many taps (although 1 of his 3 games was against Sandilands, which scews the average). But I think you may be right about the coaches thinking aardy.
Does it matter that our second ruckman gets no taps, especially if we win the lions share of clearances throughout the game?
And if it doesn't matter then why not go for a player that you think can perform a specific job around the ground. In this case LRT may become plan B for Tippet.

It does matter if we don't get taps because primary first use of the ball is the best way to clear the centre square. There is a stat that is saying our attach and clearance rate falls to almost nothing when the second ruck is in the centre square.

[Triple B]

It is called a 'rule of law' or 'general rule' Ernie it is a given not a rule as such. Stop being a prig! .....

Maybe we call it 'Wolftones Rule' because you've just plucked it out of your backside and ran with it as fact....