Centre clearances - WTF?

[Melbournehammer]

Thats all very well but against north they werent ineffective kicks.

conceding first possession against the sides with strong forward lines or better forward presses (freo is the most obvious example of this, but hawthorns small forwards also tear us apart) mean that you have to bring the ball out precisely or try to create another stoppage somewhere else where we lose that as well.

listening to jimmy bartel on the weekend was an insight into a different teams approach to stoppages - he said they frequently have amongst the smallest number of clearances - but thats because they have a small number of stoppages - he said 33 from 50 is pretty good going. We are the opposite - we might have 40 wins but its from 85 a game. If you are always going backwards the dam wall breaks eventually.

[Puppy Eyes]

Thats all very well but against north they werent ineffective kicks.

conceding first possession against the sides with strong forward lines or better forward presses (freo is the most obvious example of this, but hawthorns small forwards also tear us apart) mean that you have to bring the ball out precisely or try to create another stoppage somewhere else where we lose that as well.

listening to jimmy bartel on the weekend was an insight into a different teams approach to stoppages - he said they frequently have amongst the smallest number of clearances - but thats because they have a small number of stoppages - he said 33 from 50 is pretty good going. We are the opposite - we might have 40 wins but its from 85 a game. If you are always going backwards the dam wall breaks eventually.

That's actually not correct. We sit 4th in overall clearances (although we are also very high in stoppages so the % would probably be middle of the road).

I just think Horse considers other indicators to be more important than centre clearances, and the results would suggest that he's right.

[tasmania60]

Problems the ruck ,wheres our Ruckmen ,watched them all and its only one that looks any good Tom Derikx ! Dont know why hes going backwards but Pyke experiment gotta be in the death throes . Watched Nankervis and Naismith don't think there going to make it ! Why, why did we get ride of MUMMY .

[mcs]

Problems the ruck ,wheres our Ruckmen ,watched them all and its only one that looks any good Tom Derikx ! Dont know why hes going backwards but Pyke experiment gotta be in the death throes . Watched Nankervis and Naismith don't think there going to make it ! Why, why did we get ride of MUMMY .

You need to watch a lot more closely if you think Derricx is our best ruckman on the list.....

[Ludwig]

A tap to a midfielder on the burst, then a quick kick to a leading forward who kicks a goal in a few seconds always makes a big impression and would suggest that winning the centre clearances is an important matter. There are many other scenarios which stem from centre bounces that are never analysed, at least not in a public forum, such as rebound scores from turnovers after a centre clearance. So it's really hard to say how important the clearance is or what the best strategies are to win them. There are often big differences between hit outs and clearances. Sandilands can totally dominate the hitouts yet Freo may not have such a significant differential in the clearances, although it does seem that they have a fair number of scores from centre breaks every game, but I don't actually know the number.

Geelong have been playing without a legit ruckman for several weeks, using mostly Stanley and Blicavs, and it seems to be working well. I think the 'no ruckman' strategy can be very effective and a point of difference that opponents would have problems adjusting to. Perhaps we would be a more effective side with an extra midfielder or outside runner on the field than a lumbering ruckman, especially someone like Pyke who has a negative impact on the game once the ruck contest ends.

I would use a mixture of Tippett, Reid and few midfielders from time to time, like Kennedy and Parker, at the ruck contests. I think Laidler can be trained up to take his turn as well (tough and has quick hands). I would concede many without a contest and have have the opposition on ballers manned up at the contest and a loose midfielder vs their ruckman around the ball. Mix it up and keep the opposition confused. We would probably win a few free kicks created by the confusion of who was our designated ruckman and at the very least throw the opposing team off their game.


We now have an inside midfield dominated by 2 strong contested ball winners in JPK and Mitchell (I think Parker is a bit more versatile). I can see us evolving into a more dynamic midfield over the next few years with the additions of Heeney, Hewett, Jones and Mills who have good outside games in addition to contested ball winning ability. Hanners is also of this ilk. Repeat stoppages may not play to the advantage of this group. Perhaps we don't play well in the wet because that sort of high stoppage footy doesn't suit our present game. We are not the same side that Kirk and Jude on ball.

[dimelb]

We might think about Geelong's approach if we had non-ruckmen as tall as Blicavs (1.98m) and Stanley (2.0m).

I don't know why Pyke isn't as involved as he used to be, and I wonder what instructions he's getting from the coaches. If they're happy, he's "playing his role"; if he's not, why is he still out there? And I have no idea why he's not marking as often as he used to - are the coaches trying to lull the opponents? There's something unexplained about the whole picture.

[Markus26]

A tap to a midfielder on the burst, then a quick kick to a leading forward who kicks a goal in a few seconds always makes a big impression and would suggest that winning the centre clearances is an important matter. There are many other scenarios which stem from centre bounces that are never analysed, at least not in a public forum, such as rebound scores from turnovers after a centre clearance. So it's really hard to say how important the clearance is or what the best strategies are to win them. There are often big differences between hit outs and clearances. Sandilands can totally dominate the hitouts yet Freo may not have such a significant differential in the clearances, although it does seem that they have a fair number of scores from centre breaks every game, but I don't actually know the number.

Geelong have been playing without a legit ruckman for several weeks, using mostly Stanley and Blicavs, and it seems to be working well. I think the 'no ruckman' strategy can be very effective and a point of difference that opponents would have problems adjusting to. Perhaps we would be a more effective side with an extra midfielder or outside runner on the field than a lumbering ruckman, especially someone like Pyke who has a negative impact on the game once the ruck contest ends.

I would use a mixture of Tippett, Reid and few midfielders from time to time, like Kennedy and Parker, at the ruck contests. I think Laidler can be trained up to take his turn as well (tough and has quick hands). I would concede many without a contest and have have the opposition on ballers manned up at the contest and a loose midfielder vs their ruckman around the ball. Mix it up and keep the opposition confused. We would probably win a few free kicks created by the confusion of who was our designated ruckman and at the very least throw the opposing team off their game.


We now have an inside midfield dominated by 2 strong contested ball winners in JPK and Mitchell (I think Parker is a bit more versatile). I can see us evolving into a more dynamic midfield over the next few years with the additions of Heeney, Hewett, Jones and Mills who have good outside games in addition to contested ball winning ability. Hanners is also of this ilk. Repeat stoppages may not play to the advantage of this group. Perhaps we don't play well in the wet because that sort of high stoppage footy doesn't suit our present game. We are not the same side that Kirk and Jude on ball.

I really like this idea and would love to see it being executed. An extra midfielder who actually has an impact on the ground would be fantastic as opposed to Mike (who at present doesn't seem to be offering much). Even when MP gets ball in hand, his first instinct is to try and offload it to a midfielder who knows they need to hover around him. Any footballer who cannot dispose the footy shouldn't have a spot. We have far too many players in the wings who need to be given game time and I bet they would notch up more effective disposals than Mike. Sorry to say, but I think he's on borrowed time.

[tasmania60]

Who is then cobber , Pykes got someone in his ear doesn't jump either a injury or hes conserving himself ,hes a bad tap ruck men has no confident s with anything he does . Really watched the others to and ones a foward the other hasn't got the tank to play AFL. Looks lazy , Derriccx has no great leap but his ruckwork is solid ,hard ,bullocking .All ways liked playing with a big ruckmen who took the game on buddy, i played footy and was the idiot trying get the ball . You dont think i really would make a statement like that without watching them all play a least 1/2 a dozen games each ! We havent got a good ruckman the idiots sold the last one ,

[Conor_Dillon]

We can't not play a ruckman...our whole game plan is based around the ball staying in close and tight at stoppages, hence Pyke always tapping it down at his feet or attempting to body up whoever his opponent may be to stop them from being able to hit-to advantage.

If Goldstein was playing against a Reid or (especially) a Kennedy/Laidler etc he would have been able to clear the congestion and hit it into space which is much harder to defend than conceding a contested tap in close.

I'm all for abstract thinking but I'm not sure this is the right way to go. At an absolute stretch I wouldn't mind Towers being given a crack against teams with more athletic ruckman (Geelong, Melb, Gold-Coast, Brisbane etc). He played reasonably well there last season when given the chance (albeit an extremely limited chance) and would add some serious X-factor to our midfield.

[mcs]

Who is then cobber , Pykes got someone in his ear doesn't jump either a injury or hes conserving himself ,hes a bad tap ruck men has no confident s with anything he does . Really watched the others to and ones a foward the other hasn't got the tank to play AFL. Looks lazy , Derriccx has no great leap but his ruckwork is solid ,hard ,bullocking .All ways liked playing with a big ruckmen who took the game on buddy, i played footy and was the idiot trying get the ball . You dont think i really would make a statement like that without watching them all play a least 1/2 a dozen games each ! We havent got a good ruckman the idiots sold the last one ,

Derricx's ruckwork is dreadful - the only thing it has going for it is that he seemed quite effective, in his run in the firsts last year, at using his body to block the opposing ruckmen. Being a ruckman is about a lot more than that. I saw Derricx ruck on Saturday at the ressies game and nothing suggested to me he has improved at all from last year.

I'm not saying Pyke is a world beater - I've been critical of him this year on a number of occasions. But to me, any suggestion Derricx is a better ruck is just a wee bit crazy.

It certainly is an area where we are weak, but the modern game is a lot different to what it once was, and having a highly dominant ruckman is no longer a critical part of winning footy games - helpful of course, but not a necessity.

[Jeynez]

Gary Lyon and Barrett briefly talked about this at the end of their Access All Areas segment. Highlighting the Blicavs/Stanley combination, how ruckwork has evolved - hit outs aren't the be all and end all anymore; and even mentioned that Pyke needs to lift his output. I think Pyke should still be our number one ruckmen but I think having Reid or Towers (if he comes back) as third man up against dominant rucks should be considered more.

[Nico]

The centre clearance stats for Saturday were 16 to 3. One of our clearances was clean, one was scrappy and produced nothing and the third was when Tippett got the tap and almost gathered at half forward in the last quarter. North got moving at the start of the third quarter with 2 quick clearances for goals. I have heard coaches say that centre clearances are vital. The 2nd quarter in the GF Sam Mitchell killed us with his centre clearances that resulted in quick goals.

St Kilda win the game 41 seconds on the clock with a clean and quick centre clearance. Maverick Weller on SEN this morning said they rehearse that scenario.

Too right centre clearances are pivotal to fast movement forward. We need to get this right. We had 53 inside 50 to 45, so 16 0f Norths could be attributable to centre clearances. We take 50% of those off them means 61 to 35 inside 50, and we win by miles. Pretty basic to me where we can improve.

[RogueSwan]

... We havent got a good ruckman the idiots sold the last one ,

.. and yet we still made a Grand Final.

[Conor_Dillon]

The centre clearance stats for Saturday were 16 to 3. One of our clearances was clean, one was scrappy and produced nothing and the third was when Tippett got the tap and almost gathered at half forward in the last quarter. North got moving at the start of the third quarter with 2 quick clearances for goals. I have heard coaches say that centre clearances are vital. The 2nd quarter in the GF Sam Mitchell killed us with his centre clearances that resulted in quick goals.

St Kilda win the game 41 seconds on the clock with a clean and quick centre clearance. Maverick Weller on SEN this morning said they rehearse that scenario.

Too right centre clearances are pivotal to fast movement forward. We need to get this right. We had 53 inside 50 to 45, so 16 0f Norths could be attributable to centre clearances. We take 50% of those off them means 61 to 35 inside 50, and we win by miles. Pretty basic to me where we can improve.

I'm happy to concede that clearances around the ground aren't as important as they once were because given the amount of numbers we have around the ball, the opposition clearances are normally rushed and not clean. But you are spot on about centre clearances...it's 4 on 4 which makes clean clearances much easier than in general play. And these days field position is paramount with teams applying forward presses and frontal pressure to cause turnovers etc. We need to be breaking even at a bare minimum.

[Ludwig]

A team has to play to its strengths and stoppages are not a strong point of the current Swans, as opposed to the time when we had Ball, Jolly and Mummy. At present, a stoppage focused game forces us to carry one useless player on the ground if we have either Pyke or Derickx ruck, so we are effectively playing 17 v 18, which I would say is a distinct disadvantage. It may well turn out, despite the opinion of Tasmania60, that Nankervis and Naismith develop into very good ruckmen. I like what I see so far. If that's the case, then we can adjust our game to suit.

But right now we look a much better side when we move the ball quickly and use our speed. We have some very quick runners in Jetts, Rohan and Harry C, the most athletic key forward ever, and a few quick moving mids in KJ, Benny and Hanners, and Heeney is no slouch either. We also have some genuine pace in the reserves, especially with BJ, Towers and Hiscox.

What I am suggesting here is that we do something along the lines of Geelong with a multiple look centre bounce setup. Sometimes we will have Tippett, sometimes Reid, perhaps have Buddy at the centre bounce on occasion, and fake contesting the ball up at other times, stay down and play off the tap of the opposing ruckman. Play different setups around the centre square at the centre bounce and keep the opposition guessing.

The main point is not to play Pyke or Derickx (who can't be spared anyway due to media commitments). But I am also more than happy to give Nanka and Naismith a run and see how they go. We just need a ruckman who can do something around the ground.