News Grundy must step up to dislodge Witts: Bucks

[TradeDraft]

If there's one criticism I have of Bucks it's the continued effort to find "the next Leigh Brown".

Grundy's had his few weeks in the VFL, time to bring him back in and play two rucks again, it's quite clear that Witts himself can't run out games either at the moment as number 1 ruck so we need both of them in the seniors. We won more games with Witts and Grundy in the side than we have with one ruckman and White as secondary ruck.

White can even stay in the team and play as a third proper forward (next to Cloke and Elliott) but we have played our best footy this year when the 2 young rucks have shared the load.

Agree, Last QTR Witts got Dominated by Jacobs and that is 1 of the Main Reasons we Lost.

Agree Buckley trying to find the next Leigh Brown have been Disasters and has Ruined the Teams Structure.

Agree we played our best footy when both Grundy and Witts where in the AFL Team

 

[Big Bryza]

So you Be say Witts better Than Grundy

Don't be a dick.

 

[Big Bryza]

I'd be happy if they put Grundy out to pasture now and made him run 30 km a day, 7 days a week, for 6 months.

Grundy has 0 tank... and it has cost him his spot in the team.

Run Forest Run.

I know you're being a tad facetious but that'd be the fastest way to gaining a long term injury.

 

[Smoky]

I know you're being a tad facetious but that'd be the fastest way to gaining a long term injury.

And not doing something about his lack of tank has cost him his spot in the side.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Tank or no tank, they should play Grundy instead of White.

White is miles ahead for that second ruck spot at present.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

And not doing something about his age has cost him his spot in the side.

EFA

 

[MagpieBat]

Agree, Last QTR Witts got Dominated by Jacobs and that is 1 of the Main Reasons we Lost.

Agree Buckley trying to find the next Leigh Brown have been Disasters and has Ruined the Teams Structure.

Agree we played our best footy when both Grundy and Witts where in the AFL Team

Wasn't this per say, as it was trading out the 2nd forward in the 3 talls structure (Dawes) and not replacing him, therefore reducing the forward line structure to a 2 talls setup and placing the workload of two men onto our Leigh Brown replacement (Lynch). It was only once Reid was switched forward that the forward line started working to its optimum. Even Lynch played better footy in that structure.

Similar thing happened first half of this year. Without Reid, we played 2 ruckmen and utilized White in the position he played his best footy at Sydney in (and ironically, wasn't recruited to play at Collingwood) - 2nd forward. Yet for some reason, Buckley decided to drop that structure and go back to 2 talls. No surprise that White's form suffered, and so too that of Grundy when he played as 2nd tall/2nd ruck in White's place.

Unless it's a sopping wet day or we have injuries stopping it, we should remain playing 3 tall forwards. Especially with the young state of our ruck division...

 

[Big Bryza]

And not doing something about his lack of tank has cost him his spot in the side.

You're very naive to think that way. Grundy had no pre season when he arrived at the end of 2012. He completed the pre season leading into this current season but as anyone with knowledge realises it takes most ruckmen 4-5 years to run out games at full capacity.

 

[jmac70]

White is miles ahead for that second ruck spot at present.

White is hopeless. Whilst Grundy has been struggling he is the long term answer and I would rather see him in the side.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Witts - four preseasons
Grundy - one preseason.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

White is hopeless. Whilst Grundy has been struggling he is the long term answer and I would rather see him in the side.

As I have said before, Witts and Grundy need to prove themselves as forwards before we can play both of them in the same team. White is a whipping boy and not all of it is fair.

 

[jmac70]

As I have said before, Witts and Grundy need to prove themselves as forwards before we can play both of them in the same team. White is a whipping boy and not all of it is fair.

As I said, my preference is to play both Witts and Grundy because I think it will benefit the team in the long term. I don't see White as being much more than back up. If the season is officially over after Sunday we may as well play as many young players as possible.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

I agree we need to expose both of them as much as possible to senior football for the long term. But we shouldnt be thinking long term while the season is still live. We still need to pick the best 22 and in my expert opinion our best 22 has one specialist ruck and three key forwards.

 

[rand corp]

Grundy really needs to work on his aerobic capacity

 

[jmac70]

I agree we need to expose both of them as much as possible to senior football for the long term. But we shouldnt be thinking long term while the season is still live. We still need to pick the best 22 and in my expert opinion our best 22 has one specialist ruck and three key forwards.

You can have Sunday but after that it's time to see who can play and who needs an early operation.

 

[DAWESOME!!]

We're not forgetting that Grundy has been even more of a non-entity the last few times he has played instead of White, are we?

White kicked two goals vs Adelaide and was ok in the ruck. He does that, I'm happy.

 

[jmac70]

We're not forgetting that Grundy has been even more of a non-entity the last few times he has played instead of White, are we?

White kicked two goals vs Adelaide and was ok in the ruck. He does that, I'm happy.

Your easily pleased.

11 disposals
2 goals (both in the first half)
5 clangers
1 mark
9 hit outs
1 tackle
45% disposal efficiency

For a guy playing as a ruck/forward those figures are very low. The two goals hide what was a very poor game. Grundy could do better than that, even with half a tank.

 

[rustyg70]

Get rid of the bloody sub rule and go back to 4 on the pine.
If a coach wants to hold one player back incase on an injury, so be it.
But having the sub rule and interchange cap is just rediculous.
It;s either one or the other, and I'm all for 4 on the bench.
That allows every player selected to be able to get game time, instead of 1 quarter of footy followed by a rigorous training program once the game has finished.
I heard or read somewhere this was bought up when Gillion invited the coaches to dinner a week or two ago, and most voted to get rid of the sub rule.
This would allow teams to field two genuine rucks and two genuine tall forwards.

 

[Rorzza]

I am of the opinion as some that we should be playing them both right now and Grundy should play that forward role that chops out in the ruck. Witts was beaten soundly against Adelaide and the week before against Essendon.

Both Grundy and Witts are just not quite ready to take on the number 1 ruck week in week out. So play both of them why not?

West Coast have shown for a long period know that you can play two monster rucks, one resting in the forward line plus maintain a tall forward set up that has forward pressure and can score heavily.

Grundy just needs to improve his forwardline skills and I see the best place to do that in the AFL. When they drop Grundy back to the VFL they play him as the number 1 not key position forward. Gualt could quite easily play that ruckman role who goes forward which will also develop his game.

Grundy and Witts together in the same team not one or the other, someone tell Nathen he has git it wrong.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

West Coast have shown for a long period know that you can play two monster rucks, one resting in the forward line plus maintain a tall forward set up that has forward pressure and can score heavily.

Have they even made finals with this structure?

 

[Rorzza]

Have they even made finals with this structure?

2011,2012

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

2011,2012

Collingwood went deeper without that structure. Theres no right or wrong excpet to say whem Witts and Grundy can become effective around the ground like Cox and Nicknat then they will both get a game. Its a blessing and a curse that our two rucks are of a similar age. Blessing that maybe wi will have a combination for the next 5-7 years. Curse that we have to develop them consecutively and still be competitive.

What we really need out of that West Coast lineup is a Darling type.

 

[scruffydog]

If there's one criticism I have of Bucks it's the continued effort to find "the next Leigh Brown".

You're right.

There's only one solution: Bring back THE Leigh Brown!

 

[Rorzza]

Collingwood went deeper without that structure. Theres no right or wrong excpet to say whem Witts and Grundy can become effective around the ground like Cox and Nicknat then they will both get a game. Its a blessing and a curse that our two rucks are of a similar age. Blessing that maybe wi will have a combination for the next 5-7 years. Curse that we have to develop them consecutively and still be competitive.

What we really need out of that West Coast lineup is a Darling type.

You design a game plan that utilizes your list strengths not because of trends or what you think is right. We did not have two young gun ruckmen in 2011, 2012, we do now. The challenge for Buckley is to come up with a game plan that utilizes our strengths and that is in two or three years time we are going to have two dominant power ruckmen, and that game plan development can start this week end.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

We dont have two gun ruckmen now. Try making that claim on the man board, you'll be laughed out of town.

We have two potentially gun ruckmen. Until they start clunking marks and kicking goals on a regular basis they are useless as a combination. Its one or the other for the time being.