A.F.L Thread

[benchmark00]

Heard you want Waverley training facility thrown in too.

And Michael Tuck's long sleeves.

 

[wfdu_ben91]

Will refuse to trade Hale to Hawthorn unless they offer Franklin, Mitchell and/or Roughead.

Are you kidding? That's worth more then North Melbourne's trophy cabinet. No deal.

 

[vic_orthdox]

*sigh*

Willing to trade David Hale for a ham sandwich ONO.

EDIT: Enough of the bickering. Any further posts with the "tit for tat" stuff will be deleted.

 

[howardj]

You Jet

 

[Mr Casson]

I understand the sentiment, but Hale isn't the player that you should be targetting. He hasn't been a full time ruckman for quite a while, and has never been one. Also, he'll have an inflated price on his head, because he's originally from the Gold Coast, so to get him you'd have to pay over the odds.

You don't look to get quality ruckmen through the draft to play right now; only way that happens is if you have a top 5 draft pick (Nic Nat, Kreuzer). You guys will look at the pre-season and rookie drafts, for either delisted players or those from the feeder leagues (VFL, SANFL, WAFL) if you require one that you wish to have an immediate impact. You effectively did it this year with Skipper, but he's done a bad hamstring before Round 1, which was horrible luck.

Is Bailey a chance of making it back this year? Really hope it goes well for the poor fella.

No, but you can trade for a ready-made one. Seaby and Mumford seem to be going OK and Sydney didn't have to give up the Earth to get either. Hell, even just a first-rounder got Jolly going the other way. If you take a bloke wanting a fresh start you can do pretty well.

To be frank, and this is probably a controversial opinion these days, but I think rucking is pretty over-rated in this day and age. At any rate it's certainly less important than it used to be; teams can concede that they can't beat a certain bloke and if their midfield is good enough, commit to sharking the taps instead. Many teams do this against Sandilands and Cox/Naitanui, and when they're good enough the rucks may as well not be there.

 

[vic_orthdox]

No, but you can trade for a ready-made one. Seaby and Mumford seem to be going OK and Sydney didn't have to give up the Earth to get either. Hell, even just a first-rounder got Jolly going the other way. If you take a bloke wanting a fresh start you can do pretty well.

To be frank, and this is probably a controversial opinion these days, but I think rucking is pretty over-rated in this day and age. At any rate it's certainly less important than it used to be; teams can concede that they can't beat a certain bloke and if their midfield is good enough, commit to sharking the taps instead. Many teams do this against Sandilands and Cox/Naitanui, and when they're good enough the rucks may as well not be there.

Did you watch Hawthorn vs Geelong this year at the 'G?

You need someone who can at least compete, and stop the opposition from getting easy hitouts to advantage. But you can't rely on sharking off opposition ruckmen - look at the difference between the Dockers and Sandilands this year, compared to previous years. And Natanui is providing his players with silver service through managing to take the ball out of the air and handpassing off.

 

[Mr Casson]

Did you watch Hawthorn vs Geelong this year at the 'G?

You need someone who can at least compete, and stop the opposition from getting easy hitouts to advantage. But you can't rely on sharking off opposition ruckmen - look at the difference between the Dockers and Sandilands this year, compared to previous years. And Natanui is providing his players with silver service through managing to take the ball out of the air and handpassing off.

As I said, I didn't expect many to agree with me. I don't think it's that hard to find a bloke who can at least compete in the ruck, but when that's what it comes down to the only criteria is that they're big enough to jump into another bloke.

The reality is that even if you can get first hands on the ball, getting it to a teammate is another thing entirely, and even many of the blokes who can get first hands struggle with that aspect.

You say look at Freo before and now, well what's changed? Their midfield has got better, but does that doesn't say anything about Sandilands. On a personal level sure, he's becoming a better contested mark, and blokes are afraid to jump into him, but I wouldn't say his tap-work is that important.

On Naitanui, he's not your typical ruckman anyway. There's just no one that can do what he does, and certainly not any of the other ruckmen in the comp - he's almost like a ground-level midfielder who happens to be tall and athletic enough to do ruckwork as well.

 

[howardj]

Loving Brisbane's chances this year.

Voss opened the premiership window during the trade period.

And I reckon we've got a few toes through it already.

 

[vic_orthdox]

As I said, I didn't expect many to agree with me. I don't think it's that hard to find a bloke who can at least compete in the ruck, but when that's what it comes down to the only criteria is that they're big enough to jump into another bloke.

Hmm, you watch how many times people try and just jump into another bloke, and the experienced ruckman gets his hands on the ball with his feet on the ground afterwards. It makes a big difference if you can determine to what area the ball goes to.

There was a time when having a smaller ruckman who offered something around the ground was in vogue, in the early 2000s. We used Cam Mooney for a time as back-up, and he'd rarely win a tap when he was in the ruck. Other teams only went in with one ruckman. But the good teams of the time (Brisbane, Port) would ensure that they continued to get dominance of the clearances and dictate stoppages against them, so that they were battling against the tide.

Again, the perfect example of this was the second half of the Hawks vs Geelong game. Against a combination of a tired Renouf and Roughead/Hodge/third man up, we dominated the clearances on the back of Ottens and it pretty much won us the game.

The reality is that even if you can get first hands on the ball, getting it to a teammate is another thing entirely, and even many of the blokes who can get first hands struggle with that aspect.

Nullifying the opportunity for the opposition to get clean breaks off you is just as important. Think about when Cox is in the ruck for you blokes; you rarely have the opposition get a streaming clearance against you because at worst he ensures that the ball rarely goes into the opposition's desired drop zone.

You say look at Freo before and now, well what's changed? Their midfield has got better, but does that doesn't say anything about Sandilands.

Simply, he's now playing amongst a midfield that is good enough to exploit his dominance. And agree with what you say about Natinui.

 

[Burpey]

I watched Saints v Freo yesterday, and I reckon Sandilands was dominating the hitouts but it didn't really tranlsate into a dominance of clearances from what I could see (haven't looked at the stats). However, that may not happen against weaker teams than St Kilda.

 

[vic_orthdox]

I watched Saints v Freo yesterday, and I reckon Sandilands was dominating the hitouts but it didn't really tranlsate into a dominance of clearances from what I could see (haven't looked at the stats). However, that may not happen against weaker teams than St Kilda.

I guess that my point is that there are clearances, and then there are clearances. The second being where you get a clean ball out and get to hit a target without pressure, whereas the first is where someone chucks the ball quickly on their boot and it tumbles into the forward line, where these days it's probably a bit more than a 50% chance that the defence will be able to get that ball, with the extra numbers that push back, and ability of defenders to block for others.

A dominant ruckmen ensures that you are more likely to get a few more of the second, and ensure that the opposition ends up with more of the first type amongst their clearances.

 

[Mr Casson]

Hmm, you watch how many times people try and just jump into another bloke, and the experienced ruckman gets his hands on the ball with his feet on the ground afterwards. It makes a big difference if you can determine to what area the ball goes to.

There was a time when having a smaller ruckman who offered something around the ground was in vogue, in the early 2000s. We used Cam Mooney for a time as back-up, and he'd rarely win a tap when he was in the ruck. Other teams only went in with one ruckman. But the good teams of the time (Brisbane, Port) would ensure that they continued to get dominance of the clearances and dictate stoppages against them, so that they were battling against the tide.

Again, the perfect example of this was the second half of the Hawks vs Geelong game. Against a combination of a tired Renouf and Roughead/Hodge/third man up, we dominated the clearances on the back of Ottens and it pretty much won us the game.

Nullifying the opportunity for the opposition to get clean breaks off you is just as important. Think about when Cox is in the ruck for you blokes; you rarely have the opposition get a streaming clearance against you because at worst he ensures that the ball rarely goes into the opposition's desired drop zone.
Simply, he's now playing amongst a midfield that is good enough to exploit his dominance. And agree with what you say about Natinui.

On the whole I agree with all of that - it's just that I don't think having less glamorous ruckmen is an excuse for teams with good midfields (such as the Hawks or Doggies).

I was at the Saints game yesterday and I agree that on more than one occasion, King didn't even want to jump into Sandilands, such is his figure. But, and I think the proof is in the pudding, you don't really need any more than a big bloke who can keep jumping into another big bloke all day and making a contest to do all you need in the ruck - in this modern version of the game anyway. As for the tapouts, well, good when you get a clean one, but I think many people would be surprised how rarely that happens.

 

[SirBloody Idiot]

I don't know if that was suggesting the Dogs don't have a good ruckman, but Hudson is fine. Minson, though...

Oh, and Wade Skipper isn't really a ruckman. He's too small for mine, and only started playing there because he's failed everywhere else except one game against Geelong.

 

[Burpey]

I was at the Saints game yesterday and I agree that on more than one occasion, King didn't even want to jump into Sandilands, such is his figure. But, and I think the proof is in the pudding, you don't really need any more than a big bloke who can keep jumping into another big bloke all day and making a contest to do all you need in the ruck - in this modern version of the game anyway. As for the tapouts, well, good when you get a clean one, but I think many people would be surprised how rarely that happens.

Yeah this is what I thought. A ruckman like Natanui who can break clear of the ruck himself or one who can push forward as a valid goal-kicking option is much more valuable.

 

[vic_orthdox]

I don't know if that was suggesting the Dogs don't have a good ruckman, but Hudson is fine. Minson, though...

Oh, and Wade Skipper isn't really a ruckman. He's too small for mine, and only started playing there because he's failed everywhere else except one game against Geelong.

Pretty sure he kicked four against Geelong playing up forward. Was there that day.

Anyways, he's not a pure ruckman, but pretty sure that he was selected as back-up for the Hawks in case of injury, and with concerns over Bailey and Campbell at the start of the year.

 

[Mr Casson]

I don't know if that was suggesting the Dogs don't have a good ruckman, but Hudson is fine. Minson, though...

Oh, and Wade Skipper isn't really a ruckman. He's too small for mine, and only started playing there because he's failed everywhere else except one game against Geelong.

Well obviously I can't have been saying they're useless or else all the other stuff I'd said would be a huge contradiction. On the contrary, they're one of the least heralded ruck combos in the competition and yet they do enough for their blokes to be one of the best teams in the league. Obviously the Dogs wouldn't say no to a Naitanui or a Sandilands, but maybe all that means is that the difference between qualities of ruckman isn't that much at all.

Yeah this is what I thought. A ruckman like Natanui who can break clear of the ruck himself or one who can push forward as a valid goal-kicking option is much more valuable.

I think so. A clean tap out is all well and good, but honestly, if people think Sandilands gets it to advantage all that much, I reckon they're kidding. When he does, it's usually just because the other bloke was too scared to run into him, and that goes back to what I was saying before as well - all you need is a bloke who will compete.

 

[Jono]

No, but you can trade for a ready-made one. Seaby and Mumford seem to be going OK and Sydney didn't have to give up the Earth to get either. Hell, even just a first-rounder got Jolly going the other way. If you take a bloke wanting a fresh start you can do pretty well.

To be frank, and this is probably a controversial opinion these days, but I think rucking is pretty over-rated in this day and age. At any rate it's certainly less important than it used to be; teams can concede that they can't beat a certain bloke and if their midfield is good enough, commit to sharking the taps instead. Many teams do this against Sandilands and Cox/Naitanui, and when they're good enough the rucks may as well not be there.

Sup Grant Thomas?

 

[benchmark00]

Sup Grant Thomas?

Haha, yes.

 

[Mr Casson]

Sup Grant Thomas?

Not been in Melbourne long enough to have been influenced by him, thankfully.

 

[Jono]

Haha not saying you're right or wrong, or he was right or wrong, but he basically had the exact same view as you.

To the disappointment of many Saints fans.

Come September there are certain players who become extra-important. Key position forwards and ruckman. Saints flel over there many-a-time.

Love how Ross Lyon walked in and brought in King and Gardiner immediately.