1 Ruck or 2 ??? The Midfield Performance Misconception!

[Libba39]

I was at ground level last night. Not sure many of you realise how small our forward line was. Sam De Koning is 2.04cm ffs. Made Naughts look like a flanker.

We need to pick horses for courses. Sweet rucking means English starts forward giving their defenders a severe headache. This would have made a huge difference in the first qtr. English also ran out of gas and Stanley jumped all over him in the last.

Btw I know we came back but doubt we would have got within cooee of them had Stewart not gone off.

 

[footscray1973]

Tim is now a far better follower than forward. His around the ground work is his point of difference. Yes it did not work as well the Cats mobile rucks but it will against most. Sweet is purely a tap ruckman and is quite good at it but he is irrelevant around the ground. Unfortunately playing both is not the best option. Sweet has to improve his for ward craft.

schache should be in as the 2nd ruck/fwd/def. yes he is not great in ruck but he has a good footy iq and provided relief to Tim. We need his fwd craft because Naughts has none. Khamis is not ready yet. I would play Schache, Naughts and JUH in fwd line. JUH also has fwd craft.

i think the midfielder and the rucks are irrelevant now. It is about getting the team structure right so we have a functioning fwd line. Blind freddy can see it but Bevo cannot which is a worry

By and large I don't disagree. But Khamis can't run out a game, so using him as 2nd forward AND backup ruck last night is the direct comparison to Sweet playing IMO. Sweet is the better option for the ruck role, Khamis should be playing forward.

I know lots on here are saying it, and I agree - Sweet instead of McComb last night improves so many parts of our overall team game. Or if it's Schache, he's a better forward than Sweet and Khamis, and better than Khamis as a backup ruck (not saying much, but there it is(.

So IMO its:
Khamis/McComb vs Khamis/Sweet vs Khamis/Schache

Only the Sweet combo reduces team mobility and flexibility, Schache is mobile and tall.

 

[Dog 36]

By and large I don't disagree. But Khamis can't run out a game, so using him as 2nd forward AND backup ruck last night is the direct comparison to Sweet playing IMO. Sweet is the better option for the ruck role, Khamis should be playing forward.

I know lots on here are saying it, and I agree - Sweet instead of McComb last night improves so many parts of our overall team game. Or if it's Schache, he's a better forward than Sweet and Khamis, and better than Khamis as a backup ruck (not saying much, but there it is(.

So IMO its:
Khamis/McComb vs Khamis/Sweet vs Khamis/Schache

Only the Sweet combo reduces team mobility and flexibility, Schache is mobile and tall.

Pretty simple therefore won’t happen

 

[Mutt]

So play an extra tall forward then? That's nothing to do with the 2nd ruck.

He said an extra tall/backup ruckman. And it's everything to do with the 2nd ruck...it's what he is arguing we need. Not necessarily a forward but most likely as when resting they might give Naughton some relief from being the only tall forward.

Not advocating specifically for Schache... but someone like him that can swing forward or back and take significant ruck minutes to allow English to play more in the forward line is what we need. A second ruckman.

 

[BEaston]

He said an extra tall/backup ruckman. And it's everything to do with the 2nd ruck...it's what he is arguing we need. Not necessarily a forward but most likely as when resting they might give Naughton some relief from being the only tall forward.

Not advocating specifically for Schache... but someone like him that can swing forward or back and take significant ruck minutes to allow English to play more in the forward line is what we need. A second ruckman.

Again I'll explain my posts to you.

I was tying his point back to the thread title/topic. The issue raised was Naughton getting triple teamed... that's nothing to do with a 2nd ruckman and more to do with forward structure. This thread is about the selection of 1 or 2 rucks.

 

[footscray1973]

Again I'll explain my posts to you.

I was tying his point back to the thread title/topic. The issue raised was Naughton getting triple teamed... that's nothing to do with a 2nd ruckman and more to do with forward structure. This thread is about the selection of 1 or 2 rucks.

It's linked though. 2 rucks, English can push forward and ease the focus on Naughton.

 

[Mutt]

Again I'll explain my posts to you.

I was tying his point back to the thread title/topic. The issue raised was Naughton getting triple teamed... that's nothing to do with a 2nd ruckman and more to do with forward structure. This thread is about the selection of 1 or 2 rucks.

Seriously, discussions with you are like playing stab the eel.

 

[BEaston]

It's linked though. 2 rucks, English can push forward and ease the focus on Naughton.

That's one way to change the forward structure yes. But I think it's pretty evident English is our best ruckman by far and we want to maximise his time spent there.

If we want additional tall forward, say Schache, we could have Hannan or someone else rucking to keep that forward structure. It's not really the point of this thread though.

 

[BEaston]

Seriously, discussions with you are like playing stab the eel.

I don't think what i said is that hard to understand or unclear but if you feel that way I'd be fine if you stopped trying to pick holes in every post I make then.

It's almost becoming a weekly basis where you try to invalidate a point I've made only for me to have to break it down for you to a more basic level.

 

[Maverick Dog]

Any combination we all have discussed here is an improvement it what Bevo is doing. That is a concern. The structure is wrong playing only 1 player above 194cm as a fwd and no relief ruckman.

Darcy is hopefully the solution but he is sometime off, but seeing how bad our structure is up forward he may come in sooner than later.

With possibly JUH, Bruce and Darcy available next season i think we need to consider the Naughton to the backline again maybe best for team balance. I expect JUH to be match fit after having his first full season of footy in 3 years will be a sold contributor. If Bruce does not comeback ok then Naughts stay forward.

This team is ready to contend for a flag now. Just need to get the pieces in the right place for what makes us stronger.

 

[Mutt]

I don't think what i said is that hard to understand or unclear but if you feel that way I'd be fine if you stopped trying to pick holes in every post I make then.

It's almost becoming a weekly basis where you try to invalidate a point I've made only for me to have to break it down for you to a more basic level.

You "...have to break it down for me to a more basic level"? Right...

If you think I'm picking on you, maybe you should reflect on the fact that you and many who post on here (including me) have diametrically opposed views on the coach and a range of other football-related matters. It's hardly surprising that at times I'll respond to a post of yours where I think you've missed the point that another poster is making.

You ignore that I have liked and agreed with more of your posts than I've ever been critical of.

You quote and disagree with others' posts very, very regularly on here. Stop being precious.

 

[BEaston]

You "...have to break it down for me to a more basic level"? Right...

If you think I'm picking on you, maybe you should reflect on the fact that you and many who post on here (including me) have diametrically opposed views on the coach and a range of other football-related matters. It's hardly surprising that at times I'll respond to a post of yours where I think you've missed the point that another poster is making.

You ignore that I have liked and agreed with more of your posts than I've ever been critical of.

You quote and disagree with others' posts very, very regularly on here. Stop being precious.

No issue with any of that at all. You keep doing you and I'll keep explaining to you when you've missed my point.

It was more that if that engagement was a frustrating experience for you (stabbing an eel?) then feel free to let em go through to the keeper. Or not, either way I don't mind.

 

[BEaston]

Just to clarify the picking holes comment was not about disagreeing on something but more the instances when you reply to me saying I'm discussing a point nobody has made, only for me to find clear instances where people have made the point I'm discussing. Has happened several times now. But yeah all good mate.

 

[_Mike_]

Come on folks,

Most are in agreement that the club has a gap in its ruck/stoppage capability.

No need to escalate, I get many of us are peeved with what we saw play out last night but keep your comments in check and above the line thanks

 

[acker]

Come on folks,

Most are in agreement that the club has a gap in its ruck/stoppage capability.

No need to escalate, I get many of us are peeved with what we saw play out last night but keep your comments in check and above the line thanks

All well and good - but when Bevo decides to move the furniture for the sake of moving the furniture after two 200cm Rucks successfully helped in an interstate 100 + point win the natives have a right to be concerned about his selection policy or habits

English had 4/5 weeks out and was coming off a 6 day break and interstate trip, it's not like the Dogs didn't have plenty of mediocre 182cm players who could've been cut instead of Sweet

On another matter perhaps a conversation about the performance our new midfield coach and old defensive coach (Bubba) should be undertaken as well

 

[_Mike_]

All well and good -

But not a valid reason for posters to take pot shots at each other in disagreement

 

[acker]

But not a valid reason for posters to take pot shots at each other in disagreement

I agree with that Mike - I think it's raw but people need to seperate robust criticism and debate from getting personally snarky with each other

 

[TMoney22]

We are in big trouble when Bruce comes back. Surely we won't be chopping out the ruck coming back from his knee. Bont/Dunkley it is

 

[acker]

We are in big trouble when Bruce comes back. Surely we won't be chopping out the ruck coming back from his knee. Bont/Dunkley it is

When Bruce comes back surely the ruck needs to be settled as English/Sweet ...

 

[CountryDog5]

So play an extra tall forward then? That's nothing to do with the 2nd ruck.

It's all related mate. What I'm saying is we either need another ruck in the team, or a tall forward that can ruck just purely to assist with our team structure. As CB pointed out last night, in essence this thread started off as "1 or 2 rucks, do our clearances change" which is a no according to raw stats. (I'd argue the quality of our clearances drop when we don't have a recognised ruckman in the middle but that's another topic to mindlessly argue over). Besides that, the bigger topic that most folks are arguing about is whether playing someone like sweet, or schache is worth the poor output around the ground for the benefit they provide to the rest of the team. Naughton is the one who benefits most by having another tall option down there, because it allows English to rest forward rather than go to the bench. Not sure you quite understood my post, because the "extra tall forward" should ideally be the one pinch hitting in the ruck when English needs a spell. As much as I wasn't keen at all, Lobb makes more and more sense to target at end of year. Not only can he be a dangerous forward he can help in the ruck, and like CB was strongly arguing, it shouldn't affect our raw clearance stats. Darcy will be our man in future but we won't see that for another 2 or 3 years pass and we no longer have Libba, Keith, Bruce etc. Time is running out to play our best structure in my opinion so we need to find someone soon or we'll have wasted some prime talent.

On SM-G781B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[acker]

When Bruce comes back surely the ruck needs to be settled as English/Sweet ...

I disagree - I think the amount of midfield depth the Dogs have you play the extra ruck, even if Bruce comes back English and Sweet can rest in the Forward Pocket at times drawing a tall opposition Defender from the Naughton/Bruce contests

 

[AJARWA]

I was at ground level last night. Not sure many of you realise how small our forward line was. Sam De Koning is 2.04cm ffs. Made Naughts look like a flanker.

We need to pick horses for courses. Sweet rucking means English starts forward giving their defenders a severe headache. This would have made a huge difference in the first qtr. English also ran out of gas and Stanley jumped all over him in the last.

Btw I know we came back but doubt we would have got within cooee of them had Stewart not gone off.

Agree re horses for courses.

Are English's 20 possessions a game more valuable than 3 or 4 goals playing forward/ruck and drawing a key defender away from Naughton?

I really don't think we need another midfielder atm when our forward line looks impotent against the best defences in the league.

 

[doggiesin08]

Agree re horses for courses.

Are English's 20 possessions a game more valuable than 3 or 4 goals playing forward/ruck and drawing a key defender away from Naughton?

I really don't think we need another midfielder atm when our forward line looks impotent against the best defences in the league.

20 disposals is English’s lowest number for the year, he’s averaging 22 disposals a game. Meanwhile at the lower end of “3 or 4 goals” he would probably win the Coleman most years.

I’m all for comparisons but those are not close to the right numbers.

 

[adogsfan5]

I think the worst part of all this is - we clearly looked our best in 2021 when Tim was playing deep forward and causing some chaos for defenders with his height which then allowed Bruce and Naughton some freedom.

Not only have we been without Bruce, we’ve also taken English out and not even replaced him with someone his size inside 50.

So we played our best footy tall, with Stef Martin in, yet for some reason we can’t even manage to replicate something similar to that..

And the reasons seem to be:

• Don’t want to upset Tim before he re-signs as he wants to be #1.
• Sweet can’t play forward. (Even though we managed to play Stef plus Tim last year and Stef is the worst forward I’ve seen).
• We can sacrifice ruck minutes for Bont, Dunks and Buku.

 

[acker]

I think the worst part of all this is - we clearly looked our best in 2021 when Tim was playing deep forward and causing some chaos for defenders with his height which then allowed Bruce and Naughton some freedom.

Not only have we been without Bruce, we’ve also taken English out and not even replaced him with someone his size inside 50.

So we played our best footy tall, with Stef Martin in, yet for some reason we can’t even manage to replicate something similar to that..

And the reasons seem to be:

• Don’t want to upset Tim before he re-signs as he wants to be #1.
• Sweet can’t play forward. (Even though we managed to play Stef plus Tim last year and Stef is the worst forward I’ve seen).
• We can sacrifice ruck minutes for Bont, Dunks and Buku.

I don't think Sweet has been given enough of a crack with game time to see what he's like as a resting forward or defending ruck.

I do know Bont carrying a shoulder injury, Dunkley had a serious shoulder injury and if he keeps getting put in the ruck colliding with rucks 15cm taller and 15kilos heavier than him, there is a high chance Buku will also cop an injury.

We have an abundance of 182cm types struggling to get much ball who could make way for a second ruck