Changes for Round 6 - CARLTON

[Mug Punter]

Happy enough with those three changes.

BJ will at least have a crack and make a contest, Laidler is solid and much better than Marsh who is squad filler at best and Newman was very very unlucky to be dropped in the first place.

[Flying South]

I hope they give Brandon Jack at least 2 games. He has been very good in the NEAFL - I know the standard is low but if you keep performing you have to get a chance if you are on the list. I would imagine this is his last chance so he deserves at least 2-3 games to prove himself.

Newman is an excellent kick and finds the ball easily - I can't understand why he was dropped in the first place. I'm sorry for the fans, but I don't think Foote will make it. He tries hard for sure but seems a bit below this level.

Laidler is handy as he is pretty tall and relatively experienced. Pretty good balance to this side but I hope Aliir has a good game as we need his height, pace and skill back soon.

BJ has certainly been given a number of chances. In 2013 he was in and out of the team 3 times. In 2014, 4 times and 2015, 2 times. Maybe injuries played a part in that, but on face value he has now been given 10 opportunities to show he has what it takes. Kudos for working hard and not giving up. He is still only 22 and i sincerely hope he makes a success of it. Unless he has a shocker I would expect him to hold his brothers spot until he returns from injury. As his contract expires this year I imagine this could be his last chance to save his AFL career.

I'm hoping with Newman coming in for Foote that will free up Jones and Mills to play predominantly through the midfield. Though the way the lineups have been annouced it appears not. I hope they are just playing mind games with Carlton.

[The Big Cat]

We could certainly do with his pace, the MCG might suit him.

Didn't he kick a bag against Melbourne at the G one day?

[Meg]

Didn't he kick a bag against Melbourne at the G one day?

Yes four goals in 2013 in his 3rd senior game. I think he came off the sub bench after an injury to Reid. I was there that day and thought I was seeing the beginning of a stellar career. So let's hope he can do it again.

[bloodspirit]

When I said I was pleased for all the ins I meant I am happy for them, rather than I am delighted with their selection. I am not wildly excited about what BJ offers but would love to see him do well. I doubt he will get 30+ possessions even if he is given that type of role, which I am not assuming he will be. Subject to his performance I reckon he is closest to the exit and most vulnerable to being dropped whether it's his brother or Macca or Robbo returning. Although, by now, I would hope that any of those players will return via the twos. So hopefully he will will get 2 games minimum to show his wares. Not sure he'll be first dropped if it's Rampe returning though.

Incidentally I reckon the player Melican was kicking to may have been Ronke, on the comeback trail from injury.

[bloodspirit]

Another that could threaten BJ's spot when he's next available is Fox.

Incidentally, we haven't yet seen much of him, but Ronke may be another player who can get his hands on the ball. Potentially he could one day be one of our inside mids.

[bloodspirit]

Ludwig has been leading the charge for us to play no ruck or a makeshift ruck like Aliir or Towers (although not this week). Flying South and others have been receptive and taken up this suggestion too. I don't understand why.

No team voluntarily played last year without a ruck. And the role of ruck is even more important this year since the rule changes. Melbourne's current lack of a ruck is described as a crisis. Essendon resumed playing a ruck as soon as they could.

Even last year, when Campbell was injured at the Dogs and Beveridge ignored Minson, he still used Roughead and Tom Boyd both of whom are 200+ cm and both of whom have rucking experience. It wasn't that Bevo chose to play without rucks rather that he thought they were his best rucking options.

So, I'd like to hear Ludwig et al explain more properly the virtues of this "no real ruck" system and why it will work when no other coach in the league appears to agree.

[Flying South]

Ludwig has been leading the charge for us to play no ruck or a makeshift ruck like Aliir or Towers (although not this week). Flying South and others have been receptive and taken up this suggestion too. I don't understand why.

No team voluntarily played last year without a ruck. And the role of ruck is even more important this year since the rule changes. Melbourne's current lack of a ruck is described as a crisis. Essendon resumed playing a ruck as soon as they could.

Even last year, when Campbell was injured at the Dogs and Beveridge ignored Minson, he still used Roughead and Tom Boyd both of whom are 200+ cm and both of whom have rucking experience. It wasn't that Bevo chose to play without rucks rather that he thought they were his best rucking options.

So, I'd like to hear Ludwig et al explain more properly the virtues of this "no real ruck" system and why it will work when no other coach in the league appears to agree.

I certainly don't think we should play without a ruck. Ludwig put forward three suggestions play existing out of form ruckmen, play an alternative ruck or no real ruck. Based on the fact that Naismith is injured, Tippett was poor last week and was labouring at times, Sinclair offers nothing and Cameron isn't fit enough yet for senior football. I simply chose the alternative ruck solution. Apparently Aliir has rucked a lot in junior footy, has a great leap so i thought why not see what he's got against a weaker team. I also thought he would be up against Phillips not Kreuzer.

[rb4x]

Might have to take back what I said about getting away with two tall defenders against Carlton. On checking Casboult 201cm, Weitering 195cm and Charlie Curnow 194cm might have our defenders a little stretched. Did not realise that Charlie Curnow was that tall. As they are named Zak is on Weitering which would be another mismatch. Probably now a job for Laidler.

[Cosmic Wizard]

Might have to take back what I said about getting away with two tall defenders against Carlton. On checking Casboult 201cm, Weitering 195cm and Charlie Curnow 194cm might have our defenders a little stretched. Did not realise that Charlie Curnow was that tall. As they are named Zak is on Weitering which would be another mismatch. Probably now a job for Laidler.

Charlie Curnow is a star in the making; saw him against Port, lots of overhead marks and a big body making things happen.

We should recruit him or someone like him ASAP, Reid just does not compare to him.

[ScottH]

Is it too late to get Ted back in the team?

[Hotpotato]

So we won't be capable of beating Carlton ?

[Meg]

Is it too late to get Ted back in the team?

Aren't the Swans having a farewell lunch for Ted and Benny in Melbourne to coincide with this match? So Ted must be going to be in Melbourne on Saturday ............

[ugg]

Aren't the Swans having a farewell lunch for Ted and Benny in Melbourne to coincide with this match? So Ted must be going to be in Melbourne on Saturday ............

It's not this match, it's the Friday before the NM match in May.

[Ludwig]

Ludwig has been leading the charge for us to play no ruck or a makeshift ruck like Aliir or Towers (although not this week). Flying South and others have been receptive and taken up this suggestion too. I don't understand why.

No team voluntarily played last year without a ruck. And the role of ruck is even more important this year since the rule changes. Melbourne's current lack of a ruck is described as a crisis. Essendon resumed playing a ruck as soon as they could.

Even last year, when Campbell was injured at the Dogs and Beveridge ignored Minson, he still used Roughead and Tom Boyd both of whom are 200+ cm and both of whom have rucking experience. It wasn't that Bevo chose to play without rucks rather that he thought they were his best rucking options.

So, I'd like to hear Ludwig et al explain more properly the virtues of this "no real ruck" system and why it will work when no other coach in the league appears to agree.

I started thinking about how best to utilise the ruck position when Jason Blake at 189cm had to come in for STK and play in the ruck against us a few years back. I can't remember who we had as ruckmen that day, but we were soundly beaten. There are 3 ruckmen that have influenced my thinking in this area, Adam Goodes, Patrick Ryder and Stefan Martin. All 3 would be considered undersized for a ruckman, but are able to do things around the ground which make them so valuable compared to your average ruckman.

On the other hand, suppose you have a dominant ruckman, like Sandilands. You can plan on winning nearly all of the hitouts and Sandi often gets 20+ hitouts to advantage. So you would think Freo would be unbeatable under these circumstances, but it's surprising how often Freo lose the clearances even with this advantage. Obviously, opposition sides go into the game planning to lose the hitouts and have setups of counteract this. There is another disadvantage to having such a dominant ruckman: What to do when that ruckman is injured, since your whole game plan has been based on winning the hitouts. A good example of this is how bad the GWS falloff was when Mummy got injured. A dominant ruckman becomes nearly irreplaceable, since the team has to change its game plan to adjust to the loss. So there is little flexibility when having a ruckman-centric game plan.

I thought we played well last year when Naismith was a 1st ruck and our powerful contested ball winning midfielders could take advantage of his strong tap work. It sounds perfect, but your stoppage game plan becomes fixed on Naismith being fit and in form and the not having the opposition come up with good countermeasures.

Adam Goodes was the perfect ruckman. It's a shame he had that PCL injury. He wasn't the best ruckman, but once the ball was in play we had such an advantage in what we could get from our ruckman compared to the opposition.

Our problem at present is that we are playing an out of form Tippett plus Callum Sinclair who are taking up 2 of our 22 spots in our side. They are not offering much at stoppages nor around the ground, so we are effectively playing 2 men short. Longmire doesn't know what to do because he loves playing his 2 ruckmen, and that's just the way it's going to be.

My idea is to have several players in the side who play a regular (non rucking) role who take turns as the ruckman at stoppages. The team has a game plan not dependent on winning the hitouts, but rather countering the other sides' hitout dominance. Our ruckman shouldn't engage in the physical part of the ruck contest (wrestling and such), avoiding injury. It shouldn't make much difference to how we play, regardless of who is playing in the ruck.

Of our current playing list, Aliir is probably the best ruckman, because he would be a lot like a Patrick Ryder in the ruck with his athleticism, and would be extremely difficult to counter around the ground. It would be good if Toby Pink can make it, because he can play in the ruck as well as offer a mobile player around the ground. From what I've seen of Darcy Cameron so far, he could be our best choice going forward, because he could genuinely earn a spot in the side as a true forward and makes a good contest in the ruck.

The Bulldogs have a game plan which doesn't depend on winning ruck contests, but nonetheless fight for every contested ball around the ground. Tom Boyd is tall, but not a good ruckman, and was very poor when playing 1st ruck. Beveridge has already said that he might not play a ruckman at times. It turns out to be a difficult strategy to counter and is one that more easily facilitates player substitutions when injuries occur. It would have been interesting to see what Leigh Mathews would do if still coaching, as he's another one who doesn't think teams should focus on having a ruckman as a central part of the team's strategy.

In retrospect, I would have loved for the Swans to have a ruckman like Sam Jacobs. He's and excellent ruckman, a handy player around the ground and is rarely injured. I say 'in retrospect' because you really don't know this is going to be the case until you look back and review how things have transpired. It's not something easily planned for. The other side of the coin is someone like Matthew Kreuzer, a #1 draft pick who is good as both a forward and a ruckman, but has had an injury plagued career and has never reached his potential. I'm sure Carlton thought they would build a team around Kreuzer, but injury ruined their plans. There is simply too much luck involved on building a game plan around a ruckman, so why not eliminate this from consideration by having a game plan without a ruckman.

Darren Jolly was reliable ruckman who hardly missed a game, but since then, it's been like a merry-go-round. It must be hard on the midfielders working practicing stoppage work only to find the key player is out and someone with a different technique and ability has taken his place.