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

[Cromulant]

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.

Our opponents are risking their unicorn in there.

 

[Coopers]

Berry has a big jump on him apparently.

He did one near the 50 on the wing randomly in the collingwood game

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

There's a Shaun Grigg niche role there if any of our players want some extra job security.

Maybe T Murray will make the spot his own, but more likely (imho) is that we'll be looking for ways to get whoever is squeezed out by Rankine back into the 23. And with Curtin plus maybe Draper to follow. Spots become precious.

Butts? N Murray? Fogarty? Berry? Hinge? None of them particularly suited on the surface but it's only a handful of minutes per game vs the opposition No 2 and means that for example that Pedlar stays in

Or do we utilise that we have two players capable of being a first choice ruckman and play them 100% with a tag team approach, rotating every few games?

 

[Vader]

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.

Both have done the job before.

Thilthorpe is arguably our most valuable player, and certainly our most valuable tall. He is therefore the last player we want to be exposed to increased risk unnecessarily.

Tex & Nick Murray are both less valuable/important than Thilthorpe, and should thus be given the job before we even consider risking Thilthorpe. The fact that they've both done the job before is just an added bonus.

 

[AFC979810]

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

What percentage chance do you think there is of a ruckman getting injured at a CBA?

If TT has 200 CBA's - how big is the risk?

 

[Vader]

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

Well under than 1%... but if you want him doing 10 ruck contests per game, the odds begin to add up.

Historically, there were about 4-6 ruckmen struck down with PCL injuries every year, until the AFL changed the rules. I don't want Thilthorpe to be one of them, and the easiest way of preventing this is not to have him jumping at centre throw-up ruck contests.

Yes, every footballer is exposed to the risk of injury, every time they set foot on the field. However, there is no need to expose our most valuable player to UNNECESSARY and INCREASED risk.

 

[Velvet George]

What percentage chance do you think there is of a ruckman getting injured at a CBA?

If TT has 200 CBA's - how big is the risk?

Don’t know, sample size this year is too small, but we know they changed the rules years back because of the injuries, so there was some risk.

Why don’t you suggest Cook does it?

 

[Vader]

Our opponents are risking their unicorn in there.

That's their decision. It's not a reason for us to risk our unicorn unnecessarily.

 

[Velvet George]

Well under than 1%... but if you want him doing 10 ruck contests per game, the odds begin to add up.

Historically, there were about 4-6 ruckmen struck down with PCL injuries every year, until the AFL changed the rules. I don't want Thilthorpe to be one of them, and the easiest way of preventing this is not to have him jumping at centre throw-up ruck contests.

Yes, every footballer is exposed to the risk of injury, every time they set foot on the field. However, there is no need to expose our most valuable player to UNNECESSARY and INCREASED risk.

Especially when you don’t rate the position, seems odd

 

[Cromulant]

That's their decision. It's not a reason for us to risk our unicorn unnecessarily.

Its conservative thinking is what it is.

If we are insistent on playing 2 rucks, then theres not that much added risk by that 2nd ruck being RT for a week.

 

[Coopers]

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

The maths cannot be hard.

Inputs:

• Back when jumping around was a thing the AFL had 5 PCL injuries in the season they stopped it (is that right?)
• There are something like 20 center bounces per game on average.
• Seasons have 9*23 = 207 games.

Over the full season, assuming the same same ruckman competes at every center bounce it's a 5/18 = 27.7% chance that any ruckman that contests every center bounce for the season will cop the injury.

Also:

• 5/207 = 0.024 = 2.4% chance the injury happens to a ruckman in any given game.
  • 1.2% chance of it being our ruckman.
• Any individual contest you have a 0.0024/20 = 0.00012 = 0.012% chance of the injury happening:
  • So 0.006% for it being our ruckman.

So if filthy does say 20% of them for the length of the season we are exposing him to a 0.006% chance for each individual contest and a cumulative 5.54% this injury over the length of the season.

 

[AFC979810]

Especially when you don’t rate the position, seems odd

Its not when the risk is almost 0.

So Vader says high end is 6 PCL injuries per year for ruckman. Considering there are about 6,210 CBA's per regular season with 2 ruckman attending each. So 6 injuries per 12,420 contests. Thats a .0483% chance.

I am happy to roll that dice in order to avoid sitting a guy on the bench the entire game and potentially costing us a win.

 

[Velvet George]

Its not when the risk is almost 0.

So Vader says high end is 6 PCL injuries per year for ruckman. Considering there are about 6,210 CBA's per regular season with 2 ruckman attending each. So 6 injuries per 12,420 contests. Thats a .0483% chance.

I am happy to roll that dice in order to avoid sitting a guy on the bench the entire game and potentially costing us a win.

You don’t double the contests because 2 ruckman attend, it’s still only 6210 contests.

Why not Cook?

 

[AFC979810]

You don’t double the contests because 2 ruckman attend, it’s still only 6210 contests.

Math isnt my strong suit. But I there are 6,210 contests with 2 separate ruckman attending - you need to double it as there are 2 ruckman with injury risk at each contest.

Why not Cook?

Cook is 190cm. Remember 2009 when Cale Hooker and NLM were Essendon's rucks?

I would be happy to have Murray / Tex / Butts at the CBA's instead of TT if the club honestly thought the risk was too much for TT.

 

[Velvet George]

Math isnt my strong suit. But I there are 6,210 contests with 2 separate ruckman attending - you need to double it as there are 2 ruckman with injury risk at each contest.



Cook is 190cm. Remember 2009 when Cale Hooker and NLM were Essendon's rucks?

I would be happy to have Murray / Tex / Butts at the CBA's instead of TT if the club honestly thought the risk was too much for TT.

But it doesn’t matter if you lose clearances

 

[AFC979810]

But it doesn’t matter if you lose clearances

It doesn't really - I mean look at us against Collingwood.

Last 4 games - Games we won clearances 0-2. Games we didnt win clearances 2-0. But your analysis that if we didnt win the clearances in last years final we would have lost by more is solid.

 

[Velvet George]

It doesn't really - I mean look at us against Collingwood.

Last 4 games - Games we won clearances 0-2. Games we didnt win clearances 2-0. But your analysis that if we didnt win the clearances in last years final we would have lost by more is solid.

So why not Cook then?

 

[OzSparrow]

Bond is a kid in his 13th game against Collingwood at the G. FFS, he was pretty bloody good (with three glaring exceptions). Same as Berry. His finishing isn't great, but his in and under grunt is very good and he works really well with McAndrew. You all carry on when Nicks won't play the kids, and when he does, you carry on because they make mistakes. You can't have it both ways. IMO you don't drop Berry for Rankine. Pedlar was very quiet with the exception of one very good goal. He'd be the one to make way for mine.

Whats your thoughts on dropping Soligo for Rankine? Nobody seems to be talking about this obvious like for like change.
Jake even rested in the forward line in the second half just like Ranks.
He only had 14 touches (7 contested) at a 64% DE and only spent 60% of the game on the ground.
He looked underdone to me and I think he should get his fitness back after his medical incident in the SANFL.

 

[OzSparrow]

Spot on. Stop Bont, win game.

I think they have a few more weapons than him.
English is an elite ruck and their mids are ranked easily in the Top 4 in the AFL.
They have stacks of offensive weapons and can score quickly. Not so sure about their defense (they leaked over 100 points against Lions but only 50 points against Giants - go figure)
Bevo is a much better coach than Nicks IMO.
They are also usually blessed by umpires.
They match up well against us and this will be a shootout I think.
It will be a close one if we get over the line. I'm not confident we will.

 

[AFC979810]

So why not Cook then?

This is how it ends up. This is how it always ends up.

You take it to extremes. I say rucks don't matter - you hear "why not play a goldfish instead of McAndrew if it doesn't matter".

 

[AFC979810]

Bond is a kid in his 13th game against Collingwood at the G. FFS, he was pretty bloody good (with three glaring exceptions).

Here I was listening to you preach about how you had calmed down - now you are saying FFS?

But in seriousness - Bond was not good. The eye test showed it. He was terrible in the air, not great with the ball in hand (that miskick at the end of the 1st half).

Not sure how the Wheelio player ratings work - but according to them he has had the 4th worst start to the year out of 431 AFL players that have started the season.

 

[jenny61_99]

Here I was listening to you preach about how you had calmed down - now you are saying FFS?

But in seriousness - Bond was not good. The eye test showed it. He was terrible in the air, not great with the ball in hand (that miskick at the end of the 1st half).

Not sure how the Wheelio player ratings work - but according to them he has had the 4th worst start to the year out of 431 AFL players that have started the season.

FFS - is like saying for goodness sake. Only in Jenny speak. I have calmed down. Bond wasn't the best I've seen him, but he wasn't as bad as you are saying either. I'd like to see them persist with him.

 

[jenny61_99]

Whats your thoughts on dropping Soligo for Rankine? Nobody seems to be talking about this obvious like for like change.
Jake even rested in the forward line in the second half just like Ranks.
He only had 14 touches (7 contested) at a 64% DE and only spent 60% of the game on the ground.
He looked underdone to me and I think he should get his fitness back after his medical incident in the SANFL.

I'm not loving it, but I get with the shorter turnaround and limited pre-season, it's not that bad a call from the club.

 

[AFC979810]

FFS - is like saying for goodness sake. Only in Jenny speak. I have calmed down.

Ha ha ha - I know. Just playing the villain.

Bond wasn't the best I've seen him, but he wasn't as bad as you are saying either. I'd like to see them persist with him.

I thought he shouldn't have been selected, was bad on the night and should be dropped this week.

I was really surprised that he was ranked 427 out of 431 players this season. Does anyone know where Wheelio get their rankings from?

 

[Cromulant]

I'm not loving it, but I get with the shorter turnaround and limited pre-season, it's not that bad a call from the club.

If it means weve learned the art of player management after running guys into the ground last year, im all for it.