- Joined
- Aug 15, 2009
- Posts
- 6,875
- Reaction score
- 11,646
- AFL Club
- West Coast
I've been enjoying your gif game Sneh. Looking forward to seeing what you can produce in-game meltdown when the season gets going.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

I've been enjoying your gif game Sneh. Looking forward to seeing what you can produce in-game meltdown when the season gets going.
I’ve got Cameron on the watchlist as well, he doesn’t rely on hitouts and ruck contests to score well, and his ability to float back and forward and take marks is very handy. Crap bye but he’s a good pick, either him or English if I don’t go with Jackson (Jackson has to keep that mooted midfield role he may get)With Xerri or instead of ?
Basically i think my R1 will be between Grundy, English and Xerri (leaning Xerri for the early run and no bye).
R2 between Jackson, Briggs and maybe Sweet if he's number one ruck.
Can't justify getting two big dogs this year.
We are really guessing on who will go up or down based on the new rules. However, I think the players who currently score well from floating back behind the play will be the most affected as they will be less able to do this. That is, teams want their ruckmen at ruck contests - not 60m behind the ball unable to get to a throw-in in time to compete. I think choose the ruckmen who will be at the most contests.I’ve got Cameron on the watchlist as well, he doesn’t rely on hitouts and ruck contests to score well, and his ability to float back and forward and take marks is very handy. Crap bye but he’s a good pick, either him or English if I don’t go with Jackson (Jackson has to keep that mooted midfield role he may get)
A fallacy. The SCG's playing surface is now the same size as the Gabba and 5 x 5 metres smaller than the MCG. It's been increased with ground works since 2007.I'm going with Grundy because the SCG is smaller and he can get to more contests
![]()
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
McAndrew trained with the A team and ROB B team for crows today whe they split in prep for tomorrows internal trial
Very interesting and if named not only is he on all beaches rd 1 as a basement priced option, it would offer some amount of security if choosing a riskier R2 (or cover if a premium due with the byes)
50k over basementMcAndrew trained with the A team and ROB B team for crows today whe they split in prep for tomorrows internal trial
Very interesting and if named not only is he on all beaches rd 1 as a basement priced option, it would offer some amount of security if choosing a riskier R2 (or cover if a premium due with the byes)
ROB is probably the ruck that’s gonna be really affected by the rule changes so it makes senseMcAndrew trained with the A team and ROB B team for crows today whe they split in prep for tomorrows internal trial
Very interesting and if named not only is he on all beaches rd 1 as a basement priced option, it would offer some amount of security if choosing a riskier R2 (or cover if a premium due with the byes)
McAndrew trained with the A team and ROB B team for crows today whe they split in prep for tomorrows internal trial
Very interesting and if named not only is he on all beaches rd 1 as a basement priced option, it would offer some amount of security if choosing a riskier R2 (or cover if a premium due with the byes)
If these ruck changes are that significant, it could potentially prematurely end some current rucks careers.ROB is probably the ruck that’s gonna be really affected by the rule changes so it makes sense
Plus he’s been rubbish for three years
Yeah I assumed he would be basement but if he’s named 1st ruck you have to take that (I actually can’t afford him right now50k over basement
)A fallacy. The SCG's playing surface is now the same size as the Gabba and 5 x 5 metres smaller than the MCG. It's been increased with ground works since 2007.
On the contrary, I wouldnt be too surprised if teams tell their main ruckman to sit behind the play more often, letting a bigger mid or a more athletic tall do a few ruck contests, to give the main ruckman a bit of a break.We are really guessing on who will go up or down based on the new rules. However, I think the players who currently score well from floating back behind the play will be the most affected as they will be less able to do this. That is, teams want their ruckmen at ruck contests - not 60m behind the ball unable to get to a throw-in in time to compete. I think choose the ruckmen who will be at the most contests.
If some teams take that approach, I'd avoid their rucks. They may get a few intercept marks, but the ruckman at the ruck contest is going to score more than the one sitting behind the play. In this situation, the ruckman effectively becomes an intercept defender, and those guys don't get anywhere near the numbers that ruckmen do.On the contrary, I wouldnt be too surprised if teams tell their main ruckman to sit behind the play more often, letting a bigger mid or a more athletic tall do a few ruck contests, to give the main ruckman a bit of a break.
Like Gawn or Cameron types who are great at marking would probably do pretty well sitting behind the play while they just get someone who can compete to contest the ruck.
Depends on the situation, how fast the play is etc and what other options clubs have to contest the ruck.
I dont mean in every scenario, but just more often.If some teams take that approach, I'd avoid their rucks. They may get a few intercept marks, but the ruckman at the ruck contest is going to score more than the one sitting behind the play. In this situation, the ruckman effectively becomes an intercept defender, and those guys don't get anywhere near the numbers that ruckmen do.
It's been a while since I've watched Briggs play. Isn't he the less athletic type that probably won't make it to every ruck contest?I dont mean in every scenario, but just more often.
Really depends how quickly the umps go to throw the ball up.
Imo theres 2 options for clubs:
1. They have a really athletic ruckman who can cover the ground like a midfielder while doing 80% game time, a Luke Jackson, TDK, Tim English type
2. They dont have that athletic ruckman, so they need 2 genuine ruck options in their 23 and they might go into a sort of zone setup at times, or like I said one sits a kick behind the ball depending on the game state
If I go an expensive ruckman it will be an athletic type, not trusting X who relies on being at every stoppage tackling, not Gawn, not Grundy etc
English or Jackson really are the only ones for me as R1 options for now.
Currently ive got Briggs R1with McAndrew and Visentini at R2/3
hes just too underpriced to ignore imo, unless Madden playsIt's been a while since I've watched Briggs play. Isn't he the less athletic type that probably won't make it to every ruck contest?
Then the AFL will bring in a rule to pay a free against a player who takes too long to get up...so players will stop the opposition from getting upIt won't take long for the players to realise that if they get up slow, it will give the big fella's a chance to get there.
DC isn’t being talked about enough as a viable option, his ability to float to defence and take marks and around the ground is handy, and Origin showed in some form the ruck rules didn’t affect him too muchRolling with Cameron and Jackson atm.
I think Cameron will be the guy this year - not married to Jackson at R2 though and may go more budget by the time it starts.
Visentini named as solo ruck for Port, no Sweet?![]()
I just dont like the early bye, and upside probably isnt there much. Agree he doesnt have the same downside as most of the other top ruckmenDC isn’t being talked about enough as a viable option, his ability to float to defence and take marks and around the ground is handy, and Origin showed in some form the ruck rules didn’t affect him too much
He’d be my R2 though, X has to stay with that opening run
Shiiiiiiiiiiiii it’s gonna be a nervous pick, I won’t be confident with a red dot r3 if I do itVisentini named as solo ruck for Port, no Sweet?![]()