View Full Version : Are we burning out Josh Fraser?
Cassius_Clay
14 Aug 2006, 23:10
Every week he looks absolutely stuffed. Vomiting every 2nd game. We desperately need a 2nd ruckman to help him out.
Is he at risk of retiring at 28-30?
94_Eagles
14 Aug 2006, 23:15
Why don't you have a back-up ruckman in the team?
Cassius_Clay
14 Aug 2006, 23:18
Because we dont have any decent ruckmen in our list of 40.
Fanning is pure ****.
Cam Cloke is a hack and isnt a ruckman anyway
Richards is ok but is always ****ing injured.
94_Eagles
14 Aug 2006, 23:29
Well that's gotta hurt.
The answer to your question is easily yes. It is getting rediculous that this year josh has been fit for every game, yet has had no back up whatsoever because on injuries and just pure scheisehauseness of our ruckman. Id love to see Josh get a decent backup, as it allows him to put some energy in some of the other aspects of his game, such as kicking goals. 2ndly it would lower the risk of him injuring himself and 3rdly the most obvious reason, he would be fresher for nexts week game only spent a certain amount of time on the field or running around. However knowing our luck, when we finally get a decent option josh will get injured.
Timmy from Thomastown
15 Aug 2006, 00:02
Fanning needs to come back in as a backup. Malthouse is killing Fraser.
Crosby87
15 Aug 2006, 04:04
All our backup ruckman are terrible, that's the problem.
Coin_Toss
15 Aug 2006, 08:50
Because we dont have any decent ruckmen in our list of 40.
Fanning is pure ****.
Cam Cloke is a hack and isnt a ruckman anyway
Richards is ok but is always ****ing injured.
Cam Cloke > Guy Richards.
I'm sick of waiting for Richards, the guy has played 20 games in 6 years and struggles to continually play at the highest level.
If Cameron can recover from his latest set back he will be our second stringer.
King Woodie
15 Aug 2006, 09:42
I don't disagree with that Coin Toss...
Richards has shown some good spurts in the ruck, but can't get on the park. C cloke is good because he is quite a good ruckman, and he has the flexibility of being able to be a semi-dangerous marking forward.
The Fanning experiment didn't work.
PieLebo87
15 Aug 2006, 11:46
I don't disagree with that Coin Toss...
Richards has shown some good spurts in the ruck, but can't get on the park. C cloke is good because he is quite a good ruckman, and he has the flexibility of being able to be a semi-dangerous marking forward.
The Fanning experiment didn't work.
& Coin Toss are right on the money...
If it wasnt for the latest shoulder, C2 would've been back in the team, he wasnt doing to badly coming back from previous shoulder. I always knew C2 wouldnt be a star, but he can dependently be a good bit player/back-up ruckman-cum-forward for Fraser. I hope he can make a full recovery because he might get used in the finals if he gets himself some form too.
Because we dont have any decent ruckmen in our list of 40.
Fanning is pure ****.
Cam Cloke is a hack and isnt a ruckman anyway
Richards is ok but is always ****ing injured.
Rocca?
PieLebo87
15 Aug 2006, 13:20
Rocca?
Cant even ruck for more then 5 minutes without collapsing from exhaustion. Ankle just cant handle all that weight anymore.
Jeff White has rucked alone pretty much his whole career and has had a few injuries but is still pretty good.
Fraser can do it but Fraser would be so much more effective if he can have a rest for a few minutes or move forward as a key forward and force a mismatch. He may even be able to play the Adam Goodes role with enough rest.
bradrowe#32
15 Aug 2006, 14:33
Fanning needs to come back in as a backup. Malthouse is killing Fraser.
Agreed. Give Fanning the last 7-10 mins of every quarter and give Josh a break.
magpie_militia
15 Aug 2006, 14:39
Anyone but Fanning!! What about T Cloke to play that role for the last 10 mins of each quarter, that way Josh could have a rest up forward and hopefully kick a few.
Cassius_Clay
15 Aug 2006, 15:34
Rocca?
Yeh but I feel we need a proper tap ruckman. Like McKee was in 2002/2003. All he was good at was tapping and I feel thats all we need.
Bentleigh
15 Aug 2006, 16:12
Yes.
Remember he started very young also.
Played almost the entire season in his 1st/2nd year.
Can't be good for him come 28/29 years of age.
Bentleigh
15 Aug 2006, 16:13
Yeh but I feel we need a proper tap ruckman. Like McKee was in 2002/2003. All he was good at was tapping and I feel thats all we need.
Trent Knobel?
Can't get a game as Pattison has gone past him. Although we need him for deapth/cover.
The simple fact is we have failed to address an obvious issue for a long time. We over did it with Fraser in 2000, attempted to ease the load with a dud and relied on an injury prone similarly skinny option of unproven ability and a rookie that was never going to be a short term solution if any solution at all. As it is Fraser is a very good follower but an average ruckman anyway. He should be the mobile, versatile backup that can be an option when Rocca and Tarrant are not firing or fit. I wonder if another year will pass without this being addressed. As it stands now we need more than just a first ruck. We also need a key back and midfielders. We can’t get all that in this draft.
If we took a punts on Gardiner (if fit to ruck only) and Aka - all subject to price - then drafted a young mid and key back (or forward we could send down back) then we might have a shot for the next 2 years. Other than that we probably have to go back to the drawing board and set up for 3 to 5 years time which of itself would be a tough ask.
This season is not over but right now we would have to be very lucky with results going our way and Rocca and Tarrant striking top form and sustaining it while not having any injuries.
At the end of this year some big decisions need to be at our club re in and off field personnel.
My biggest question is should we go all out for a flag in the next 2 years and then face an inevitable rebuild from early in the draft, should we take the slow and steady approach and just use the mid range at best picks we will get or should we sell off our experience for a big influx of draft picks? Who are the keys to our next tilt if we don’t win it this year? In my mind it’s Clement and Presti as the veterans and Didak, Fraser, H. Shaw, Swan, Thomas and Pendlebury as the nucleus of the younger/mid aged group with a heck of a lot of new blood. Maybe Rusling will be a major force but we won’t know that until next year at best.
Timmy from Thomastown
15 Aug 2006, 18:00
Trent Knobel?
Can't get a game as Pattison has gone past him. Although we need him for deapth/cover.
If you need depth, keep Stafford for another year.
If he's still on contract, you might have to foot some of the bill, because IIRC Knobel wasnt cheap when you recruited him
Bentleigh
15 Aug 2006, 18:08
Walker for Knobel done!
No thanks.
3rd round draft pick?
Timmy from Thomastown
15 Aug 2006, 18:22
No thanks.
3rd round draft pick?
Maybe.
Rowe?
I’m really struggling with Rowe. Half of me says cut him lose. The other half says there have been glimpses. Too few mind you but he’s not at the top of the offload list just yet. A trade for Noble? Maybe worth considering. I don’t really rate Noble that highly though. What I would love our club to do is set someone the specific task of watching all the ruckman outside of the obvious untouchables and concentrating on the ones around the 23 mark with limited opportunities to come up with a list of targets and try and prise one out of his club and then work a deal.
Coin_Toss
15 Aug 2006, 19:19
Maybe.
Rowe?
You gotta be joking - Rowe for Knobel, even I can laugh that off...
Bentleigh
15 Aug 2006, 19:30
Maybe.
Rowe?
I would think not.
RFC would rather continue to develop a White, JON, Hartigan, Meyer etc.
Again this, at the end of the day could be silly because Stafford is on his last legs and we need him to provide cover in the ruck department.
I’m really struggling with Rowe. Half of me says cut him lose. The other half says there have been glimpses. Too few mind you but he’s not at the top of the offload list just yet. A trade for Noble? Maybe worth considering. I don’t really rate Noble that highly though. What I would love our club to do is set someone the specific task of watching all the ruckman outside of the obvious untouchables and concentrating on the ones around the 23 mark with limited opportunities to come up with a list of targets and try and prise one out of his club and then work a deal.
Knobel is only 25/26.
No doubt, he is not a superstar but from what you seem to be saying he suits your needs. Last season he was top 10 in the league for hitouts. Big unit at 204cm/106kg. Not so much as what Knobel would do for the club but how he'd benifit Fraser.
Lockyer24
15 Aug 2006, 19:44
All we need is a ruckman who can get on the park 22 games a year, win some hitouts and generally be a a big nuisance dropping back defensively and bashing about
Would love to put Josh forward for the last few weeks before the Finals, along with Rusling and create a super-mobile forward line, the opposite of what it is right now with Witch Hat Rocca
Unfortunately with C Cloke injured, Richards injured and Fanning not coming on don't think we can
Lonie_from_50
15 Aug 2006, 19:56
Every week he looks absolutely stuffed. Vomiting every 2nd game. We desperately need a 2nd ruckman to help him out.
Is he at risk of retiring at 28-30?
Josh has had a very very big season, however, he is coming off a season last year which saw his fitness drop, but then again, was ready for a big pre-season which he had.
In 2006, Fraser has played every game, and even though in the second half of the season we haven't had a Guy Richards or a David Fanning (despite his only appearance v Frem, R15), Fraser has been our main ruckman in the long end of the season. However, Josh Fraser gets benched every game for a breather, and the resistance of him resting in the forward line has been limited as when he needs a rest it is on the pine, and not in the forward line. He has spent some occassions down there though, but not as much as we would have expected. Fraser is playing just under 82% game time, which is reasonable I guess. Anthony Rocca and Travis Cloke have done centre bounce work.
So, saying that, it is all about resting the big man for a week to prevent his match sickness I guess, and the second ruckman isn't vital. It hasn't exactly worked wonders, and it doesn't need to be done to help Josh.
Cassius_Clay
15 Aug 2006, 20:03
Josh has had a very very big season, however, he is coming off a season last year which saw his fitness drop, but then again, was ready for a big pre-season which he had.
In 2006, Fraser has played every game, and even though in the second half of the season we haven't had a Guy Richards or a David Fanning (despite his only appearance v Frem, R15), Fraser has been our main ruckman in the long end of the season. However, Josh Fraser gets benched every game for a breather, and the resistance of him resting in the forward line has been limited as when he needs a rest it is on the pine, and not in the forward line. He has spent some occassions down there though, but not as much as we would have expected. Fraser is playing just under 82% game time, which is reasonable I guess. Anthony Rocca and Travis Cloke have done centre bounce work.
So, saying that, it is all about resting the big man for a week to prevent his match sickness I guess, and the second ruckman isn't vital. It hasn't exactly worked wonders, and it doesn't need to be done to help Josh.
See that 82% doesnt really justify the work he does because he'd spend at least 90% of that time in the ruck. Way more than any other ruckman IMO and I rekon his disposals prove that.
Him not being in the forward line has hurt us alot. Having Rocca, Fraser, Tarrant and Cloke all in the mix would be unstoppable.
The extra ruckman would do 3 things.
1. It would keep Fraser on the ground more as he'd be playing up forward alot more. Instead of roatating between Ruck and the bench he'd be rotating up forward.
2. Fraser would then be fitter every game and would be more effective then he is now, especially in the ruck.
3. The other ruckman whoever it may be would hopefully a Jolly type who'd give our midfield first use of the ball.
Anyway Travis Cloke is just too small to be a ruckman and Anthony doesnt have the tank IMO.
vinnie_vegas69
15 Aug 2006, 20:04
Knobel is only 25/26.
No doubt, he is not a superstar but from what you seem to be saying he suits your needs. Last season he was top 10 in the league for hitouts. Big unit at 204cm/106kg. Not so much as what Knobel would do for the club but how he'd benifit Fraser.
I'd definitely take Knobel on for a 3rd round pick - He's exactly the kind of player we need.
Just a solid body to take the pressure off and perhaps give us some ascendancy in the hit-outs.
Lonie_from_50
15 Aug 2006, 20:07
I agree on all things sort of there Scott, but as I said, 82% gametime, being 90% ruck, meaning 3/4 of the game in the ruck with 1/5 on the bench resting probably is fair enough for a ruckman, to spend 3/4 of the game in the ruck...so I don't think that exactly burns him out as much as it would playing 2/3 ruck and 1/3 forward.
Timmy from Thomastown
15 Aug 2006, 21:03
Unfortunately with C Cloke injured, Richards injured and Fanning not coming on don't think we can
Fanning has to get another chance. He proabbly doesnt deserve it but we need to take the risk.
CarnthePies
15 Aug 2006, 21:50
Fanning needs to come back in as a backup. Malthouse is killing Fraser.
Did you not see him against Freo? AWFUL!
Bring in C Cloke, that's who I'd bring in.
CarnthePies
15 Aug 2006, 21:50
I want Mckee back, I liked him :(
DJ Black @ White Blood
15 Aug 2006, 23:10
I agree on all things sort of there Scott, but as I said, 82% gametime, being 90% ruck, meaning 3/4 of the game in the ruck with 1/5 on the bench resting probably is fair enough for a ruckman, to spend 3/4 of the game in the ruck...so I don't think that exactly burns him out as much as it would playing 2/3 ruck and 1/3 forward.
The short answer is if we dont get a reliable back up ruckman / yes fraser is going to burn out.
Timmy from Thomastown
16 Aug 2006, 08:57
Did you not see him against Freo? AWFUL!
Bring in C Cloke, that's who I'd bring in.
C Cloke is out for a month. Richards too is unsighted. Fanning has to come in as theres no other choice. Everybody can play one bad game, and while I dont hold out a great deal of hope for Fanning in the medium term,at least he's fit and in reasonable form in the VFL. Fraser needs a backup, especially while Tarrant and Rocca are out of form and he's capable of holding down a spot in the forward line. He cant do that if we dont have a second ruck.
unfortunatly i think the pies are burning josh fraser but there is really noone else to change with him that is going to have some kind of influence in the middle.
For a ruckman he covers as much ground as a ruck rover and very few big men have the engine to run with josh all day.
Maybe the pies can throw a life line at michael gardiner,at 27 has atleast 4 or 5 years in him and imagine josh and michael swapping in a forward pocket,would be very hard to match up on.
It might even sort out our forward line troubles maybe a big man in the goal square and bucks leading out of the square would make a 2 pronged attacked at fullforward.
I want Mckee back, I liked him :(On the list when we lost 2 grand finals. One of the reasons we didn’t win one. Not good enough. Simple as that.
I would think not.
RFC would rather continue to develop a White, JON, Hartigan, Meyer etc.
Again this, at the end of the day could be silly because Stafford is on his last legs and we need him to provide cover in the ruck department.
Knobel is only 25/26.
No doubt, he is not a superstar but from what you seem to be saying he suits your needs. Last season he was top 10 in the league for hitouts. Big unit at 204cm/106kg. Not so much as what Knobel would do for the club but how he'd benifit Fraser.I see Knoble as a slightly better version of McKee in the ruck and a slightly worse version of McKee around the ground. In a pinch he might be a worth a shot IF we delisted/traded 3 of Richards, Fanning, Hall and Walker AND we got another young ruckman via the draft or rookie list. I would rather do as I said and search high and low for an underappreciated under exposed talent than go for the worn out old process of recycling someone’s discard. When you look at ruckmen you need to look further than hit out stats. The important aspect they can add to the game plan is the ability to hit the ball to midfielders in some space so when they clear the centre it is quick and precise. That is what would make our forward set up very lethal and what is very hard to stop for 4 quarters. At the point we are at right now that is too big an ask for the short term I suspect but you never what is out there unless you actually try and we have been remiss to date. If we can’t unearth a ruckman in 7 years we either do not value the role or we don’t have the people with the skills to make a judgement in that type of player.
Cassius_Clay
16 Aug 2006, 11:26
On the list when we lost 2 grand finals. One of the reasons we didn’t win one. Not good enough. Simple as that.
But he was good enough to get us into a GF :confused:
Timmy from Thomastown
16 Aug 2006, 12:38
But he was good enough to get us into a GF :confused:
He played his part especially in the QF against Port, but at the end of the day we got smashed in the ruck when it counted.
But he was good enough to get us into a GF :confused:
McKeeingwood just couldn't win that elusive premiership.
WakeUpTaz
16 Aug 2006, 21:14
i still think maxwell should go in the ruck to let josh rest
no i was being serious
crazy_pugsly
16 Aug 2006, 22:32
my dream in the future is for fraser to turn in to an adam goodes type player, meaning playing as a ruck rover rather than a ruck...it would take so much physical pressure off his body and he would be amazing for the team. who the **** will take his place in ruck though...**** its gonna happen
my dream in the future is for fraser to turn in to an adam goodes type player, meaning playing as a ruck rover rather than a ruck...it would take so much physical pressure off his body and he would be amazing for the team. who the **** will take his place in ruck though...**** its gonna happen
fraser woudl be useless as an onballer well nto useless but better off in the forward line very dangerous in the air and can go on long leads
gormanisahack
16 Aug 2006, 22:50
i believe most of the damage was done to Josh Fraser when he was drafted in his first 3 years played pretty much as a ruckman in a tenagers body, we crucified him in those years before the grand finals. ATM i believe if josh could bulk up some more and stay super fit he plays his best football when he spends the majority of the game in the ruck and is the only ruckman in the team.