How good was Mike Pyke today?

[ScottH]

3 goals, 4 contested Marks, and good ones at that.
6 contested possessions out of 9.

hope is ankle isn't too bad.
They iced it straight away, and he was walking OK after the game.
Well as good as you can with an ice bag taped to your ankle.

[31 hard at it]

He took it to another level today.
A lot of run around the ground as well.
We like Mike

[Dirtyburt]

3 goals, 4 contested Marks, and good ones at that.
6 contested possessions out of 9.

hope is ankle isn't too bad.
They iced it straight away, and he was walking OK after the game.
Well as good as you can with an ice bag taped to your ankle.

Especially when you tread On the ice bag walking off the ground and burst it. Lucky he didn't do a knee as well!!

Best game in r&w took some cracking contested marks.

[TPR4]

Very very good, more so because it was his forward work and around the ground that was the difference. The tapwork is the easiest to teach. That his other stuff is that good now is credit to the man, he must be an amazing student. He's above your average AFL ruckman for groundlevel work. Love the Moose!

[Primmy]

It was really pleasing to see that unit out there; it stuffs up so many other combinations from other clubs, and he can hold his head high. He is an AFL player. Who can kick goals and take marks above his head. Yum.

[ugg]

Here's an interesting question, would Mike Pyke have made it if he came into the league today as opposed to 3 years ago?

I came up with this question whilst reading through the article on afl.com.au about whether Folau is going to make it in our game, and how Sheedy used Pyke as the example to follow and how it took Pykey four years to succeed. We also had Pyke featured during the half time (pre-recorded) interview where he told Tom Harley that in his first year the coaches told him to concentrate solely on the hitouts. When he was first selected in 2009, the interchange was in the old 4 on the bench sytem and hence we could afford the luxury of having a 2nd ruckman who spent most of his time resting on the bench rather than in the forward line. It's hard to imagine that any team could afford such a luxury now with the 3+1 system and hence it would have been extremely unlikely that we could carry a "1st year Pyke" whose job was solely to win his hitouts.

Also in the post match presso, Longmire was asked about Pykey's form and he said that if someone had asked him at the beginning of the year whether the Swans could play 2 ruckmen he would have said no. So it's a testament to Pykey's improvement and consistency that he's been able to change Horse's view on the structure of the team.

Izzy article - http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsartic...6/default.aspx

Oh and to answer ScottH's orignal question, pretty darn good. I love the way he charges into the packs and takes the contested mark.

[TPR4]

It's a valid point, with the sub rule there's less opportunity to carry any passengers - whether that be someone learning the game, a kid or an underdone player. Just hammers home how far the Moose has come.

[Swansinger]

He was too much for the Dogs to handle in the forward line and was a catalyst after our early slumber.
He could have had more goals , but he is clearly team-oriented and unselfish.

Anyone know if BT got another ribbing for calling him "the worst player ever?"
He could at least say he is the best Canadian player ever !

Well done Mike - very good game indeed .

[dimelb]

Here's an interesting question, would Mike Pyke have made it if he came into the league today as opposed to 3 years ago?

I came up with this question whilst reading through the article on afl.com.au about whether Folau is going to make it in our game, and how Sheedy used Pyke as the example to follow and how it took Pykey four years to succeed. We also had Pyke featured during the half time (pre-recorded) interview where he told Tom Harley that in his first year the coaches told him to concentrate solely on the hitouts. When he was first selected in 2009, the interchange was in the old 4 on the bench sytem and hence we could afford the luxury of having a 2nd ruckman who spent most of his time resting on the bench rather than in the forward line. It's hard to imagine that any team could afford such a luxury now with the 3+1 system and hence it would have been extremely unlikely that we could carry a "1st year Pyke" whose job was solely to win his hitouts.

Also in the post match presso, Longmire was asked about Pykey's form and he said that if someone had asked him at the beginning of the year whether the Swans could play 2 ruckmen he would have said no. So it's a testament to Pykey's improvement and consistency that he's been able to change Horse's view on the structure of the team.

Izzy article - http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsartic...6/default.aspx

Oh and to answer ScottH's orignal question, pretty darn good. I love the way he charges into the packs and takes the contested mark.

The question is well posed.
I think the only way it could be done would be by leaving him in the seconds longer. As it is, I think the main bias to overcome was that you can't use two ruckmen under the present 3+1 policy. I have long thought that two ruckmen (who can do other stuff as well) is an enormous advantage over sides that only have one and rely on a tall forward or defender to carry part of the load, which is the way Collingwood does it. I think we are better off.
I have carried my present sig for a long time; the longer I leave it, the better it looks. I'm sure most teams regard Pykey down the front as a bloody menace, and long may it continue.

[liz]

I am actually getting a little sick of the commentators going on about how great he is every time he takes a mark or kicks a goal, as if it is still a surprise. And while I don't dispute he has improved this year, I don't think it is by as much as some suggest. He was showing excellent signs at the end of 2010 - remember his performance in the Carlton final? - and looked good early last year before injury ruined his year. He has been a bona-fide footballer for a couple of years and deserves to be recognised as such.

[johnno]

His best game for us thus far.

Hopefully he believes that he's more than good enough to play this game and match it with the leagues best and just gets even better. That would be an awesome luxury.

[SimonH]

I guess the fact that he's been in & out of the side (due to a combination of injury, the new one-ruckman bias caused by the sub rule, and Sydney having 3 league-quality rucks plus two tweeners in LRT and White) has unfairly made the 'Canadian boy learns how to play Aussie game!' dilettante cliche, stick longer than it should have.

His kick is impressively accurate and reliable, but he still kicks a drop punt like someone who's learnt to do it from a book, rather than having any sort of instinctive feel for the skill. That probably contributes to the vibe.

[ShockOfHair]

Here's an interesting question, would Mike Pyke have made it if he came into the league today as opposed to 3 years ago?

I came up with this question whilst reading through the article on afl.com.au about whether Folau is going to make it in our game, and how Sheedy used Pyke as the example to follow and how it took Pykey four years to succeed. We also had Pyke featured during the half time (pre-recorded) interview where he told Tom Harley that in his first year the coaches told him to concentrate solely on the hitouts. When he was first selected in 2009, the interchange was in the old 4 on the bench sytem and hence we could afford the luxury of having a 2nd ruckman who spent most of his time resting on the bench rather than in the forward line. It's hard to imagine that any team could afford such a luxury now with the 3+1 system and hence it would have been extremely unlikely that we could carry a "1st year Pyke" whose job was solely to win his hitouts.

Also in the post match presso, Longmire was asked about Pykey's form and he said that if someone had asked him at the beginning of the year whether the Swans could play 2 ruckmen he would have said no. So it's a testament to Pykey's improvement and consistency that he's been able to change Horse's view on the structure of the team.

Good question but rucks are evolving fast. The game went from two rucks to one last year. This year the league has gone tall crazy: we've got three talls plus a ruckman in our forward line. So I think he'd get a go now, just like Alex Starling is going to get a go.

[GongSwan]

I am actually getting a little sick of the commentators going on about how great he is every time he takes a mark or kicks a goal, as if it is still a surprise. And while I don't dispute he has improved this year, I don't think it is by as much as some suggest. He was showing excellent signs at the end of 2010 - remember his performance in the Carlton final? - and looked good early last year before injury ruined his year. He has been a bona-fide footballer for a couple of years and deserves to be recognised as such.

All true and would have played more games last year but for injury. I think he has the added bonus of pace for a big man and must have done considerable work to build his tank from the early days of tap work. More credit to him

[Rob-bloods]

His work in the forward line today, marking of course but his contesting and keeping the ball in was excellent, not a great defence against him of course, but as stated by everyone else here, he really looks like a footballer.