- Joined
- Apr 4, 2013
- Posts
- 13,670
- Reaction score
- 16,890
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
With a sample size of two games watched so far (Freo on TV, GWS vs Swans live) there's not really much I can take out of what 2014 football will represent, but there was one thing that really stood out for me - how important the ruck battle was.
Sandilands is a given - when he plays well Fremantle rarely lose - and he played a great game. Hannath was not spectacular but he played a reasonable enough game in support, allowing Sandilands to go forward and be dangerous (Freo's first goal came about because Collingwood's defenders shat themselves at Sandi and Pav's presence there).
But at the GWS vs Swans match, the most enthralling battle was how Mumford cracked open Pyke's head and feasted on the goo inside. It may only be because Mumford wanted to show up his old club, but it was a dominant performance. Not only that, but Giles played a reasonably high quality game in support - he stretched the Swans defence and could have kicked two goals himself.
By contrast, Sydney went in with one ruckman, who by game's end looked like he wanted to die. And while Collingwood had two genuine ruckmen, they were both much less experienced and physically imposing than the Sandilands/Hannath duo.
It made me wonder that in spite of all the talk at how capping rotations would mean going in with two genuine ruckmen would see sides being out run by their opponents, whether actually something counter-intuitive was happening. That less midfield rotations actually meant that having a solid ruck 1-2 division was more important, not less.
While capping at 120 is still allowing for an enormous number of rotations, it is still a pull back from the increasing trend over the past few years. And given that midfield dominance is often simply a function of how many players you can swarm around the ball, a limitation on how refreshed the midfielders will be during a game changes that aspect.
If instead a team can't reliably send a fleet of midfielders to every stoppage, doesn't it then become a case where one-on-one battles begin to matter more? And given that the one-on-one battle begins in the ruck, would it not then follow that a solid ruck division matters more, and that two genuine ruckman becomes an advantage over just one?
It will be interesting to see how it pans out over the season, but it is rare that two decisive victories so early in the season are so heavily influenced by the big ruckmen - usually that is left for finals when everyone is tiring.
tl;dr - Has capping the rotations at 120 played directly into Freo's hands, given the side's excellent ruck division?
Sandilands is a given - when he plays well Fremantle rarely lose - and he played a great game. Hannath was not spectacular but he played a reasonable enough game in support, allowing Sandilands to go forward and be dangerous (Freo's first goal came about because Collingwood's defenders shat themselves at Sandi and Pav's presence there).
But at the GWS vs Swans match, the most enthralling battle was how Mumford cracked open Pyke's head and feasted on the goo inside. It may only be because Mumford wanted to show up his old club, but it was a dominant performance. Not only that, but Giles played a reasonably high quality game in support - he stretched the Swans defence and could have kicked two goals himself.
By contrast, Sydney went in with one ruckman, who by game's end looked like he wanted to die. And while Collingwood had two genuine ruckmen, they were both much less experienced and physically imposing than the Sandilands/Hannath duo.
It made me wonder that in spite of all the talk at how capping rotations would mean going in with two genuine ruckmen would see sides being out run by their opponents, whether actually something counter-intuitive was happening. That less midfield rotations actually meant that having a solid ruck 1-2 division was more important, not less.
While capping at 120 is still allowing for an enormous number of rotations, it is still a pull back from the increasing trend over the past few years. And given that midfield dominance is often simply a function of how many players you can swarm around the ball, a limitation on how refreshed the midfielders will be during a game changes that aspect.
If instead a team can't reliably send a fleet of midfielders to every stoppage, doesn't it then become a case where one-on-one battles begin to matter more? And given that the one-on-one battle begins in the ruck, would it not then follow that a solid ruck division matters more, and that two genuine ruckman becomes an advantage over just one?
It will be interesting to see how it pans out over the season, but it is rare that two decisive victories so early in the season are so heavily influenced by the big ruckmen - usually that is left for finals when everyone is tiring.
tl;dr - Has capping the rotations at 120 played directly into Freo's hands, given the side's excellent ruck division?
