Laycock

[angus6]

Well who are the ruckman out there at that moment that we could get that would want to leave and maybe because there not getting senior game time.

Will Minson??? (dogs)
They have Darcy and Street playing.

Steven King/Blake (Cats)
Will king get back into the senior team? I know he is old and injury prone but he would not be too bad to get untill we maybe develop another option.

Blake as he would probably come out if king does come back into their team.

There is just a few options. Is this the type of player you are talking about?

 

[Longy413]

Maric, Meeson.

Maybe Minson or Deluca.

McDonald might be worth looking at. Or a more seasoned type in a state league.

 

[Crave]

What do we do though?

We've clearly got two ruckman that both benefit from being the "main man" and playing the majority of the game in the ruck.

The bonus is we can leave Paddy down back for the time being.

Well, competition between Hille and Laycock will be welcomed and healthy if we're to move forward.

Not sure if Hille has it in him to get better, but if Laycock continues to improve....Hille will be forced to, to which we can only benefit from this.

 

[bossco]

Well, competition between Hille and Laycock will be welcomed and healthy if we're to move forward.

Not sure if Hille has it in him to get better, but if Laycock continues to improve....Hille will be forced to, to which we can only benefit from this.

Why do we need competition between Hille and Laycock, they are both in our best 22. The competition should come from players below which at the moment there are no ruckmen challenging.
"If laycock continues to improve .... Hille will be forced to" What a silly statement, if he hasn't got improvement in him, how can you force it out of him? Make up your mind. Hille is good. If Laycock improves to be better than hille we will have a very potent ruck combination.

 

[Tarkyn_24]

Hille's a good mark anyway. He might meake your attack even stronger.

Hille, Lloyd, Lucas, Johns. Very potent​

 

[ant555]

Just as an interesting side note , Laycock said on the Bomber Show a few weeks ago that he prefered to play out most of the gane as he felt he struggled to get his rythem going when he only had minimal game time.
Now he has got his fitness levels up with a number of games in a row we will get a good guide on what he can do. Previously he hadnt been able to string games together.

 

[Crave]

Why do we need competition between Hille and Laycock, they are both in our best 22. The competition should come from players below which at the moment there are no ruckmen challenging.
"If laycock continues to improve .... Hille will be forced to" What a silly statement, if he hasn't got improvement in him, how can you force it out of him? Make up your mind. Hille is good. If Laycock improves to be better than hille we will have a very potent ruck combination.

How about you buying yourself a clue. Both of them excel as our number one ruckman, neither is able to maintain that high level by pinch hitting when the other needs a spell in the forward pocket/bench.

And not to mention you contradicting yourself with the second line Ive highlighted, if Laycock becomes better than Hille, can only mean Hille is going backwards as a footballer/ruckman.

In 2000, we were on top of our game as every player worthy of senior selection was hungry to retain their spot in our all conquering team.

I wouldnt expect you to remember a particular article about Michael Prior (as I dont believe you have the capacity to think that far back) whereas a teammate (or opponent) commented on how hard Prior was hitting contests, with such ferociousness and intensity in an attempt to force selectors to take notice and retain him in the side.

Cant wait for your 'silly' comment to justify your opinion. Reminding you your batting average on here is quite deplorable with your 'Lets re-sign Bolton' thread. Keep punching, chump.

 

[Crave]

Just as an interesting side note , Laycock said on the Bomber Show a few weeks ago that he prefered to play out most of the gane as he felt he struggled to get his rythem going when he only had minimal game time.
Now he has got his fitness levels up with a number of games in a row we will get a good guide on what he can do. Previously he hadnt been able to string games together.

That just justifies my opinion on Laycock requiring maximum gametime. If Hille is slotted back into number one ruck status, how are we expected to have such a great ruck combination if the other barely gets his teeth into a game.

Lets see what 'bossco' has in reply. Lets hope he pops up before 830pm as Sunday nights just arent funny any longer.

 

[Slattery_20]

We also have Watson that can play tall forward.

Ah ha ha
And Jimmeh's a ruckman
Seriously mate don't give me that

If Fletch and Mal are out, we have McPhee, Lee, Ryder, Johns, Bradley and Welsh can play somewhat taller. We could also add Daniher to that and if it's a long term injury, we have Chartres on the rookie list.

And we might trade Maguire and Glass next year, but I don't think we will. Future is future, it's not here yet

Well that's fair enough on the ruckman - but the problem is clubs tend to hold on to the guys they think are close to making a great leap forward. Almost more valuable than guys who have made that step

 

[Let's Fly Jetstar!]

Laycock is one of our best sets shots for goal EVER!!!

 

[ant555]

Ah ha ha
And Jimmeh's a ruckman
Seriously mate don't give me that

You do know Watson played a lot of his VFL footy as a forward and kicked 5 goals from CHF against Port in a VFL semi final.

 

[Longy413]

Ah ha ha
And Jimmeh's a ruckman
Seriously mate don't give me that

I don't suppose you recall the role Jobe played in his first final?

Obviously not, otherwise you wouldn't have made yourself look like a complete tool.

And we might trade Maguire and Glass next year, but I don't think we will. Future is future, it's not here yet

Has the point that we've got more forward and back depth than we do in the ruck been completely missed by you?

 

[BurnleyBomber]

Laycock isn't as bad as what everyone makes him out to be. He's had chronic leg injuries and he's put on muscle since last season so he's probably a little top heavy. His confidence is really low at the moment, so everyone just needs to wait for one good game from him. It won't be too far away.

Soon enough he'll be taking contested pack marks and everyone will be singing his praises.

In regards to his engine, well his engine is actually pretty good. He can run all day. His speed is an obvious problem but that can't be changed.

I remember saying this in the 'laycock the lumbering dinosaur' thread from late April.

 

[Tarkyn_24]

I remember saying this in the 'laycock the lumbering dinosaur' thread from late April.

Try any Tarkyn Lockyer thread

 

[BurnleyBomber]

What has Tarkyn Lockyer got to do with Jason Laycock? Call me an idiot but I just don't get it.

I was just pointing out how spot on my prediction was. That's all.

 

[AJ_2000]

Laycock has always been a likely type ever since the ANZAC day game a few years ago when he ripped the Pies apart. He has great touch for a big guy, especially when the ball is on the deck.

His ability to win a clearance at the stoppage is a big plus, along with the pack marking. His set shots are unreal. That goal before half time was a ripper.

Give him more game time, especially in the ruck and he will be a clear number 1 at the club.

 

[NathanS]

Apparently the senior players rate him highly - they've seen him do things a player his size shouldn't be able to. He's still quite young, and just needs an uninterrupted pre-season to get some form coming in; a lot easier then trying to create it mid-season.

 

[Slattery_20]

I don't suppose you recall the role Jobe played in his first final?

Obviously not, otherwise you wouldn't have made yourself look like a complete tool.

I do remember his first AFL game (2003?), got about two handballs playing up forward. I do remember the AFL games he rips it up in the guts, except when he has to have a set shot... maybe he has some value up forward but nowhere near the value to the team as a clearance player

Has the point that we've got more forward and back depth than we do in the ruck been completely missed by you?

Not quite, but we've only got 40-odd spots. We simply can't have 6 or 8 ruckmen, I think 4 is about the right number
Hille
Laycock
To my mind Keps and Ryder are really not quite there as ruckmen, and play better footy as KPP - leaving one possible spot. Now what would be the point in picking up a player who would expect to play some 1sts games, when there's already two guys ahead of him, and one (Paddy) who (IMHO) will be our #1 ruckman in two years?
Where's our depth in defence anyway? The two full backs, then Ryder who is CHB/ruck, then ???? Bolts? Keps? Joel Reynolds? Debutantes?

 

[andrew4443]

Channel 7 said last friday that laycock was very similar to mcintosh except he hasnt had his break out year yet. This IMO is very true..laycock needs more time on ground and shouldnt be switched form forward to ruck as often, as well as spending a lot of his time on the pine.

 

[andrew4443]

Apparently the senior players rate him highly - they've seen him do things a player his size shouldn't be able to. He's still quite young, and just needs an uninterrupted pre-season to get some form coming in; a lot easier then trying to create it mid-season.

Needs another season in the weights room and some practice in the ruck. Very accurate kick, as he showed that on friday with a pearler!

 

[danzan22]

Channel 7 said last friday that laycock was very similar to mcintosh except he hasnt had his break out year yet. This IMO is very true..laycock needs more time on ground and shouldnt be switched form forward to ruck as often, as well as spending a lot of his time on the pine.

He looks excellent up foward, his pack marking is terrific. He reminds me a bit of Salmon in that way.

 

[Longy413]

I do remember his first AFL game (2003?), got about two handballs playing up forward. I do remember the AFL games he rips it up in the guts, except when he has to have a set shot... maybe he has some value up forward but nowhere near the value to the team as a clearance player

Where did I say Watson could be a permanent forward?
Where did I say he could be moved out of the midfield?

Not quite, but we've only got 40-odd spots. We simply can't have 6 or 8 ruckmen,

Where did I say we should have 6 or 8 ruckman on our list?

Now what would be the point in picking up a player who would expect to play some 1sts games, when there's already two guys ahead of him

Because it makes our list better, because improving your list isn't just about improving your best 22. It's adding depth, it's creating competition for spots.

What's the point in drafting Leroy Jetta when Lovett and Davey are ahead of him? Because drafting Jetta is an insurance for the future, because you might just get a player that in the future could be in your best 22.

That whilst he's not in the best side, puts pressure on Lovett and Davey to ensure they know that as soon as they have a run of bad form, there is a bloke that is ready to replace him.

What's the point in drafting Gumbleton when we have Lloyd and Lucas?

DEPTH, FUTURE.

You don't just draft/trade/recruit to add to your best 22, you don't draft/trade/recruit just for the following year.

We have two ruckmen on our list, that isn't enough. We need another one.

Where's our depth in defence anyway? The two full backs, then Ryder who is CHB/ruck, then ???? Bolts? Keps? Joel Reynolds? Debutantes?

McPhee, Neagle, Johns, Lee, Welsh, Mark Johnson, McVeigh, Slattery, Bradley, Ryder.

Joel Reynolds???????

 

[stander]

McPhee, Neagle, Johns, Lee, Welsh, Mark Johnson, McVeigh, Slattery, Bradley, Ryder.

Joel Reynolds???????

I believe he was referring to key postion backmen- ie Fletcher Michael and Ryder- the only key position backman in your list is Ryder. The rest don't qualify, hence his opinion on lack of depth.

 

[Longy413]

I believe he was referring to key postion backmen- ie Fletcher Michael and Ryder- the only key position backman in your list is Ryder. The rest don't qualify, hence his opinion on lack of depth.

His opinion is flawed.

Lee, Neagle, Johns, Lucas, Bradley, Gumbleton, Bolton, McPhee are all much better equiped to play tall back than our next lot of "ruckmen" are to play in that positions.

I'd be be much happier entering a game if Fletcher, Michael and Ryder were out with Lucas, McPhee and Lee/Neagle filling key back spots and Johns/Gumbleton playing forward in Lucas' spot, that I would with Bradley and Bolton playing in the ruck should Hille, Laycock and Ryder all be unavailable.

 

[Longy413]

We also have Chartres and Dick on the list.

Much better options than McKinnon.