Review R1: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly vs. Collingwood

[mcleod at 50 lines it up]

Good fun reading this thread, I'm not sure we have the team to win it with our midfield, but that was about a good a round 1 start as you could expect given the our history with Collingwood and the mcg, the bulldogs look the team the beat so far so should be an exciting game this week to see how we measure up.

 

[Golumless]

Hes 23 and has played 80 games.

He's not at his ceiling yet.

Dude. He's put up a top 10 player in the comp season last year.

Saying there's more ceiling to grow into at this point is just ignoring reality, which is Thilthorpe showed he's already so far ahead of the competition that the laws of diminishing returns just means that whatever tweaks he makes are not going to have any genuine impact (outside of potentially allowing him to stay at the peak for longer).

Disagree Thilthorpe is at his ceiling.

He will have even better years than last season.

Probably he will, but that's because we're treating Thilthorpe as an elite footballer instead of a bit-part player by getting him out of the 2nd ruck role.

How Thilthorpe plays now is on Nicks and co and if can we get everything else around him right. He's upheld his end of the bargain and has become the elite player to build around. How someone performs is not fully independent to everyone else.

 

[Cromulant]

Probably he will, but that's because we're treating Thilthorpe as an elite footballer instead of a bit-part player by getting him out of the 2nd ruck role.

How Thilthorpe plays now is on Nicks and co and if can we get everything else around him right. He's upheld his end of the bargain and has become the elite player to build around.

Who's treating Thilthorpe as a bit part player ??

You have some weird views. Him playing a 2nd ruck role isnt him being a "bit part player" at all.

It won him a AA jumper.

 

[NSolis]

Who's treating Thilthorpe as a bit part player ??

You have some weird views. Him playing a 2nd ruck role isnt him being a "bit part player" at all.

It won him a AA jumper.

Not bit part, but certainly we are now making team structure decisions around Thilthorpe where last year we were not. Selecting Murray is pretty much 100% about maximising Thilthorpe's impact, as he could easily do the relief ruck work.

 

[Cromulant]

Not bit part, but certainly we are now making team structure decisions around Thilthorpe where last year we were not. Selecting Murray is pretty much 100% about maximising Thilthorpe's impact, as he could easily do the relief ruck work.

I get thats what we're doing, and I dont think it is something we should do all the time.

I dont think playing Filthy in the ruck for a week or 2 here and there is a terrible thing.

 

[cmndstab]

Here you go:

Some nice pickups and handballs for sure, and some excellent ruckwork. Marking around the ground definitely could stand to improve but hopefully he's got some improvement left.

Lol that it shows his first handball after winning HTB that dribbles off his hand and misses the target 3m away

 

[FR0GGY]

Lol that it shows his first handball after winning HTB that dribbles off his hand and misses the target 3m away

Yeah that wasn’t great

 

[Golumless]

Disagree Thilthorpe is at his ceiling.

He will have even better years than last season.

And none of it will be due to Thilthorpe developing as a player.

As said, performance doesn't happen in a vacuum.

Who's treating Thilthorpe as a bit part player ??

You have some weird views. Him playing a 2nd ruck role isnt him being a "bit part player" at all.

It won him a AA jumper.

Absolutely we were and in no way shape or form did it win Thilthorpe a AA jumper. That was done by Thilthorpe ahead of the ball.

The moment a player rotations is contingent on others, they are a bit-part player in a lineup.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

And none of it will be due to Thilthorpe developing as a player.

As said, performance doesn't happen in a vacuum.


Absolutely we were and in no way shape or form did it win Thilthorpe a AA jumper. That was done by Thilthorpe ahead of the ball.

The moment a player rotations is contingent on others, they are a bit-part player in a lineup.

What?

You said Thilthorpe has reached his ceiling.

Imo, there is no way he has & will have better years than last year.

Bookmark it!

 

[Southerntakeover]

What?

You said Thilthorpe has reached his ceiling.

Imo, there is no way he has & will have better years than last year.

Bookmark it!

He's like five years younger than the average key forward actually hits their prime

 

[FR0GGY]

TT should be able to kick 80 a year if we can supply him.

 

[AFC979810]

A great win. But a Round 1 win so we need to take it with a grain of salt. I'm not sure how good Collingwood is going to be this year. Their list might have finally hit the wall.

That said, there's a lot of improvement to come from the underdone players. Ah Chee will be better for the run. He has a truckload more to offer. Keays looked like he was running on the spot a few times, most unlike him.

I thought we played the first half like a rope-a-dope. Very Brisbane like. If we'd tried to play fast the whole game we would have run out of gas like Freo did. When we've tried to control the tempo over the last few years, a lot of the time we got too defensive too soon and ended up losing games we should have won. This time I thought we got it about right. Signs of maturity from the coach down.

The use of Filthy as an occasional midfielder who can mess with the opposition's CBA strategies, get his own get clearances and then go forward and lose his matchup could end up being the golden ticket to a flag.

I think it was the perfect start. No injuries, a win away at the MCG vs an opponent we have been historically bad against whilst missing our 2nd most important player.

I admit Collingwood was a weaker side than we faced in the finals. Moore was massive for them last year (13 intercepts and 4 contested marks). Our Key Forwards struggled last year with him in the backline (FOG/TT had 1 mark inside 50 in the final against Collingwood and 5 this game.

It was an even spread too. We had contributions from last years role players - Milera, Cumming, Cook, who were far improved on last year.

Not bit part, but certainly we are now making team structure decisions around Thilthorpe where last year we were not. Selecting Murray is pretty much 100% about maximising Thilthorpe's impact, as he could easily do the relief ruck work.

How we used him last year was perfect and it's exactly how we can use him this year. Last year 19 of his 25 games he had 5+ hitouts. Thats how we should use him this year.

 

[AFC979810]

These close games are about moments.

In the final - it was TT running into an open goal and shitting his pants with almost 16 minutes to go. We had the momentum - if he kicks a goal there it brings it to 12 points and we have all the momentum (having kicked 4 of the last 5).

In this one. It was 10 minutes to go. Collingwood had just kicked the last 4 in a row to get it to within 12 points. They got the ball inside 50 and from the stoppage - Rachele won the hard contested clearance and effectively the game. He does what many have been critical of him for - and won the contested ball - got it on the boot. Tex marks, gets 50 and finds FOG who slots it to push it back to 18 points.

 

[Velvet George]

I think it was the perfect start. No injuries, a win away at the MCG vs an opponent we have been historically bad against whilst missing our 2nd most important player.

I admit Collingwood was a weaker side than we faced in the finals. Moore was massive for them last year (13 intercepts and 4 contested marks). Our Key Forwards struggled last year with him in the backline (FOG/TT had 1 mark inside 50 in the final against Collingwood and 5 this game.

It was an even spread too. We had contributions from last years role players - Milera, Cumming, Cook, who were far improved on last year.




How we used him last year was perfect and it's exactly how we can use him this year. Last year 19 of his 25 games he had 5+ hitouts. Thats how we should use him this year.

I don’t get it, you don’t rate rucks and clearances, yet you want to play our best player in the ruck with new ruck rules that see players jumping into each other. Doesn’t compute.

 

[AFC979810]

I don’t get it, you don’t rate rucks and clearances, yet you want to play our best player in the ruck with new ruck rules that see players jumping into each other. Doesn’t compute.

I don't think its that hard to understand.

Its pretty easy - by using TT for 10 ruck contests a game, Tex for 5 and Nick Murray for 5 - we don't have to play a 2nd ruckman like Toby Murray (20 ruck contests in 32% TOG). Allows us an extra runner.

TT averaged 16 ruck contests a year last year as a forward and kicked 60 goals and was an All Australian. I am 100% fine with that usage.

 

[Velvet George]

I don't think its that hard to understand.

Its pretty easy - by using TT for 10 ruck contests a game, Tex for 5 and Nick Murray for 5 - we don't have to play a 2nd ruckman like Toby Murray (20 ruck contests in 32% TOG). Allows us an extra runner.

TT averaged 16 ruck contests a year last year as a forward and kicked 60 goals and was an All Australian. I am 100% fine with that usage.

It is. You don’t rate what rucks do. What you’re continuing to ignore is the change in ruck rules, why do you think the club has stopped using TT in the ruck? It’s because of the risk of injury with ruckman jumping into each other. So any amount of centre ruck work is a risk, which brings me back to my point, why are you prepared to risk our best player for a football task you don’t rate?

 

[FR0GGY]

It is. You don’t rate what rucks do. What you’re continuing to ignore is the change in ruck rules, why do you think the club has stopped using TT in the ruck? It’s because of the risk of injury with ruckman jumping into each other. So any amount of centre ruck work is a risk, which brings me back to my point, why are you prepared to risk our best player for a football task you don’t rate?

I think the risk thing is pretty minor, he’s just as good a chance to be injured at FF, isn’t that where he injured his knee in the first place?

 

[AFC979810]

It is. You don’t rate what rucks do.

Correct.

What you’re continuing to ignore is the change in ruck rules, why do you think the club has stopped using TT in the ruck? It’s because of the risk of injury with ruckman jumping into each other.

So any amount of centre ruck work is a risk, which brings me back to my point, why are you prepared to risk our best player for a football task you don’t rate?

C'mon.

Well my first point is that the reason I want TT as a forward rather than a ruckman is 95% because his impact is so much greater inside forward 50. The other 5% is bashing and crashing in ruck for heavy loads will increase his risk of injury.

But that being said let's look at the numbers and the risk of injury. There have been 14 matches played so far this year with an approximate average of 30 Centre Bounces per game. So there have 420 centre bounces with 2 ruckman attending each. Thats 840 chances of injury to a ruckman. How many have been hurt so far?

I am suggesting that TT attend 10 ruck contests per game. Which in reality at most would be 6 CBA's per game (Darcy has 9 in two games). So if he attends 6 per game - thats a total 150 Centre Bounce attendances per season.

The risk of him getting hurt at one of those would be considerably less than 1%. It is absolutely tiny compared to the benefit of not carrying a worthless 2nd ruckman.

Why would the Bulldogs risk Darcy if the injury risk was so high?

 

[Vader]

If it's a choice between Thilthorpe and having no ruckman at all at the centre ball-up, then obviously I'm going with Thilthorpe - and I'm telling him to jump, because having a ruck who doesn't jump is effectively the same as having no ruckman at all (especially against English).

However, given the choice of Thilthorpe against any of our other alternatives - N Murray, Tex, Butts, ROB, Turray, Maley - I'm going with the alternative, due to the knee injury risk that the AFL re-introduced with the new ruck rules.

I'm happy for Thilthorpe to contest ruck stoppages around the ground, which don't involve players leaping into each other with the inherent dangers associated with frontal knee clashes - but I never want to see him jumping in a centre throw-up ruck contest unless we have literally no other alternatives.

Players will always be exposed to the risk of injury while playing the game. However, that is no excuse for deliberately & unnecessarily exposing them to increased risk, which is what playing Thilthorpe as our back-up ruckman entails.

 

[Cromulant]

If it's a choice between Thilthorpe and having no ruckman at all at the centre ball-up, then obviously I'm going with Thilthorpe - and I'm telling him to jump, because having a ruck who doesn't jump is effectively the same as having no ruckman at all (especially against English).

However, given the choice of Thilthorpe against any of our other alternatives - N Murray, Tex, Butts, ROB, Turray, Maley - I'm going with the alternative, due to the knee injury risk that the AFL re-introduced with the new ruck rules.

I'm happy for Thilthorpe to contest ruck stoppages around the ground, which don't involve players leaping into each other with the inherent dangers associated with frontal knee clashes - but I never want to see him jumping in a centre throw-up ruck contest unless we have literally no other alternatives.

Players will always be exposed to the risk of injury while playing the game. However, that is no excuse for deliberately & unnecessarily exposing them to increased risk, which is what playing Thilthorpe as our back-up ruckman entails.

Nick Murray ?? A guy with as bad knees as Tilthorpe when we're already down our best KPD ?? Youve gotta be kidding.

Throwing Tex in at CB ?? Even more mad.

 

[119others]

Dude. He's put up a top 10 player in the comp season last year.

Saying there's more ceiling to grow into at this point is just ignoring reality, which is Thilthorpe showed he's already so far ahead of the competition that the laws of diminishing returns just means that whatever tweaks he makes are not going to have any genuine impact (outside of potentially allowing him to stay at the peak for longer).



Probably he will, but that's because we're treating Thilthorpe as an elite footballer instead of a bit-part player by getting him out of the 2nd ruck role.

How Thilthorpe plays now is on Nicks and co and if can we get everything else around him right. He's upheld his end of the bargain and has become the elite player to build around. How someone performs is not fully independent to everyone else.

not sure if being serious. last year was tt's first quality year of afl. less than 100 games, still young. historically most dominant kpf do not reach peak until long after 23 - not sure why tt would be different

if you cant see he will be better, likely much better, over coming years thats a very weird view imo. talked about as being one of the future 2m men in the afl - probably more than double his current wage.

 

[AFC979810]

If it's a choice between Thilthorpe and having no ruckman at all at the centre ball-up, then obviously I'm going with Thilthorpe - and I'm telling him to jump, because having a ruck who doesn't jump is effectively the same as having no ruckman at all (especially against English).

However, given the choice of Thilthorpe against any of our other alternatives - N Murray, Tex, Butts, ROB, Turray, Maley - I'm going with the alternative, due to the knee injury risk that the AFL re-introduced with the new ruck rules.

I'm happy for Thilthorpe to contest ruck stoppages around the ground, which don't involve players leaping into each other with the inherent dangers associated with frontal knee clashes - but I never want to see him jumping in a centre throw-up ruck contest unless we have literally no other alternatives.

Players will always be exposed to the risk of injury while playing the game. However, that is no excuse for deliberately & unnecessarily exposing them to increased risk, which is what playing Thilthorpe as our back-up ruckman entails.

What percentage do you think there is of a ruckman injuring their knee at a CB?

 

[Velvet George]

Correct.


C'mon.

Well my first point is that the reason I want TT as a forward rather than a ruckman is 95% because his impact is so much greater inside forward 50. The other 5% is bashing and crashing in ruck for heavy loads will increase his risk of injury.

But that being said let's look at the numbers and the risk of injury. There have been 14 matches played so far this year with an approximate average of 30 Centre Bounces per game. So there have 420 centre bounces with 2 ruckman attending each. Thats 840 chances of injury to a ruckman. How many have been hurt so far?

I am suggesting that TT attend 10 ruck contests per game. Which in reality at most would be 6 CBA's per game (Darcy has 9 in two games). So if he attends 6 per game - thats a total 150 Centre Bounce attendances per season.

The risk of him getting hurt at one of those would be considerably less than 1%. It is absolutely tiny compared to the benefit of not carrying a worthless 2nd ruckman.

Why would the Bulldogs risk Darcy if the injury risk was so high?

Why did they change the rules to stop jumping?

So you’re prepared to risk our best player in a position you don’t rate, makes sense

 

[Velvet George]

I think the risk thing is pretty minor, he’s just as good a chance to be injured at FF, isn’t that where he injured his knee in the first place?

It’s still a risk, but you rate ruck work and clearances so I can understand you thinking the risk is acceptable, AFC I don’t think rates rucks and clearances

 

[moogerfooger]

Players will always be exposed to the risk of injury while playing the game. However, that is no excuse for deliberately & unnecessarily exposing them to increased risk, which is what playing Thilthorpe as our back-up ruckman entails.

Yep. Thilthorpe is a unicorn and you don't risk them under any circumstances. If the price is having a 2nd ruck sitting on the bench for 2/3 of the game then so be it.

It's also a bit harsh to judge T Murray after one game. Give him a few more to see what he's capable of.