View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Dave The Man
Joined: 01 Apr 2005 Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia
|
|
|
|
|
Brown26
Joined: 14 Sep 2001 Location: Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
|
Post subject: | |
|
We have 2 number 1 ruckmen - that means when both Grundy and Witts are in the seniors then the VFL is stuffed...
- Ben |
|
|
|
|
Doc63
Joined: 06 May 2004 Location: Newport
|
Post subject: Re: We have 1 Ruckman - Bucks | |
|
It says, we have 2 number 1 ruckmen. _________________ I hold a cup of wisdom, but there is nothing within. |
|
|
|
|
Clemo
clemo
Joined: 24 Mar 1998 Location: Mentone
|
Post subject: | |
|
2 x #1 Ruckman = Grunduy & Witts (we're blessed)
Frost has a corky in his hammy _________________ Go Pies !!!! |
|
|
|
|
John Wren
"Look after the game. It means so much to so many."
Joined: 15 Jul 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
we have two no.1 ruckmen. kind of makes sense. i interpret as we don't have a back up, both are bona fide rucks in their own right. _________________ Purveyor of sanctimonious twaddle. |
|
|
|
|
Dave The Man
Joined: 01 Apr 2005 Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia
|
Post subject: | |
|
But Playing Both Hurts there Impact on a Game as Either are not up to AFL Standard as Forwards _________________ I am Da Man |
|
|
|
|
John Wren
"Look after the game. It means so much to so many."
Joined: 15 Jul 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
that's less of an issue because having a proper ruckman at the ball ups increases our chances of getting first use of the ball. we tend to struggle when we have a makeshift ruck giving the main ruckman a spell. _________________ Purveyor of sanctimonious twaddle. |
|
|
|
|
Dave The Man
Joined: 01 Apr 2005 Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia
|
Post subject: | |
|
John Wren wrote: | Dave The Man wrote: | John Wren wrote: | we have two no.1 ruckmen. kind of makes sense. i interpret as we don't have a back up, both are bona fide rucks in their own right. |
But Playing Both Hurts there Impact on a Game as Either are not up to AFL Standard as Forwards |
that's less of an issue because having a proper ruckman at the ball ups increases our chances of getting first use of the ball. we tend to struggle when we have a makeshift ruck giving the main ruckman a spell. | \
Felt like Nicholls beat both Witts and Grundy Tonight _________________ I am Da Man |
|
|
|
|
John Wren
"Look after the game. It means so much to so many."
Joined: 15 Jul 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
yeah, i thought nicholls was good too. _________________ Purveyor of sanctimonious twaddle. |
|
|
|
|
Tannin
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006 Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
Post subject: | |
|
The figures say that we won the hitouts. And we certainly won the clearances. Now you might say that winning the clearances just shows that Swanny and Adams and the other mids had a good game, but there is usually more to it than that.
In fact, there are only two circumstances where getting first hand to the ball matters a damn: (a) where our ruckman sticks it down the throat of a rover who is clear; and (b) where the opposition ruckman does that. Hitouts to advantage - genuine advantage, not just hitouts that go to one of our smalls who gets instantly tackled and wind up with another ball up - are very rare. You typically only see three or four per quarter, and that's counting both sides. Nearly all normal ruck contests wind up pretty even, with no great advantage to either side. It's the smalls who decide the clearances nine times out of ten.
BUT when one ruckman is in a different league to the other one - typically where one is a genuine tap ruckman of quality and the other is a tallish forward doing fill-in duty while the #1 ruck rests - hitouts to real advantage are much more common.
Nichols got a lot of taps, yep. On the other hand, most of them went to one of our smalls. Is Nichols no good? Or might it just be the case that he was battling to get first hand to the ball because of strong competition from Witts and Grundy and in consequence had little control over where it went? _________________ �Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
Dave The Man
Joined: 01 Apr 2005 Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia
|
Post subject: | |
|
Grundy had a few really good tapes with Throw-Ins when he put the Ball down Swans Throat.
Witts also had some nice taps in the Middle.
I say that our Mids Dominated there Mids.
So Grundy and Witts putting Pressure on Nicholls mean he did not Direct them as he wanted to _________________ I am Da Man |
|
|
|
|
MagpieBat
Joined: 27 Nov 2010 Location: Brooding in a cave... somewhere... maybe...
|
Post subject: Re: We have 1 Ruckman - Bucks | |
|
The full quote, for the record...
Nathan Buckley wrote: | "Yeah, well, pretty much we've got two #1 ruckmen. It's just a matter of how we manage their time through the centre (square) and forward. But... we don't want to arrive at a set in stone (mix). 50-50 or 70-30, I think that will shift and change and adapt and evolve. And if it's one way for 2 or 3 weeks, I wouldn't be surprised if it could be the other for the next (few weeks). They're both still young, in terms of their development. Brodie's matured physically really quickly. Wittsy's a big boy and still got a lot of physical development in him, and he's come off a couple of shoulders, which is a challenge. But we're bullish about where they can both go. And we'll play them as often as we can, without the detriment of any short-term concerns. And we think that we can make that work." |
_________________ I am vengeance. I am the night. I am MagpieBat. |
|
|
|
|
Dave The Man
Joined: 01 Apr 2005 Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia
|
Post subject: Re: We have 1 Ruckman - Bucks | |
|
Thanks MagpieBat
Well this week was the best they Looked Together and would hope that they both together improve.
That answer the Question. They will both play together for the Foreseeable future
Both Need to work on the Forward Play and hopefully come a Threat Up there on the Forward Line _________________ I am Da Man |
|
|
|
|
AN_Inkling
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
Perfect answer from Bucks. Yes, playing Witts and Grundy may cause us some small pain in the short term but it simply has to happen, the potential payoff is well worth the effort. Taking a short term view at our current stage of development would be a major mistake, especially when the decision is between a Gault or a Witts/Grundy, there's not much to be gained there. _________________ Well done boys! |
|
|
|
|
Tannin
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006 Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
Post subject: | |
|
Something I've been wondering quite a bit lately -
These days, the resting ruckman nearly always plays as a forward. The idea seems to be that he can take a mark and kick the odd goal, or at very least cause some consternation among the defenders as they have to either play a tallish medium (a Goldsack size defender) on a giant, or else swap one of their genuine KPDs over to the resting ruck and cover the specialist tall forward the KPD is now not minding with a medium. (Or, of course, play three talls in defence, which is usually considered a bad idea.)
In the good old days when men were men and footy was played on Saturday afternoons and you had to race home to watch The Winners in black and white, the ruckman would position himself a kick behind the play: pretty much what we now call a floater. I wionder if we might not see a bit of a return to this theory.
(Garry Dempsey, where are you now?) _________________ �Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
|