Opinion Ceglar

[Carcass]

All you are doing here, like many people on this board, is define 'big games' as games we lose. We absolutely annihilated opposition from stoppages (in terms of scores from stoppages) last year. In the grand final our rucks controlled where the ball went even though Sandilands won a lot of hitouts. There is more to rucking than winning hit outs. Hale in particular was sensational in the finals series but sure re-define big games as games we lose and then you can never be wrong

1st V 2nd isn't a big game?

Keeping a spot in the top 4 isn't a big game?

All you were doing here is trying to use stats as back up for an argument/opinion, as always.

Here's one for you then - We won all the stats the stats people on here and in the media love trotting out, yet we still lost. Can you tell us why without using our outs since the stats clearly say we should have won and won easily.

 

[Taskmaster]

1st V 2nd isn't a big game?

Keeping a spot in the top 4 isn't a big game?

All you were doing here is trying to use stats as back up for an argument/opinion, as always.

Here's one for you then - We won all the stats the stats people on here and in the media love trotting out, yet we still lost. Can you tell us why without using our outs since the stats clearly say we should have won and won easily.

One stat that is a horse sh.t stat is Hit Outs. What a load of crap!

 

[Jason Dunstall]

What's that olde saying again Brishawk....Lies, damned lies & Statistics....In big games my eyes tell me another story altogether....Too often we seem to end up on the negative end in these games so far as ruck-work & effective clearances as a direct result of their work is concerned....The fact that Lobbe had the same amount as Hale, McEvoy & Ceglar combined is a damning statistic in itself....With 3 rucks to contend with, Lobbe should have been pummelled from pillar to post & yet was by far & away the most effective big man on the ground!....Similarly against Sydney a 2 bit hack called Derickxs (Not sure bout the spellin) was able to hold his own against our vaunted duo of Hale & McEvoy. Then there was the smashing that Simpson & McIntosh handed out to us when we played Geelong!

Sorry....But my eyes are the best gauge for a players contribution & worth on the field....Too often in these big games are rucks are either smashed or merely break even against an opposition ruckman for whom they should be taking to the cleaners!....That all comes back to game day strategy, the coaching staff directly responsible for the rucks & the freshness & workloads of these players themselves in being able to perform on the day to the best of their abilities!

You're right, we haven't had a dominate ruck since Salmon. Why? Call it bad luck, bad recruiting, whatever.

But we have to do the best with what we have, & considering the lack of a dominating ruck, we've been going ok.

When McEvoy was announced as coming to the club I watched a few saints games on fox to see what was coming & was very unimpressed. Hale toweled him up last year! He did ruck all day & took some good contested marks in most of the games I watched, but his tap work is average at best.

IMHO Ceglar is already well in front of him as a tap ruck & has shown a bit around the ground too for a bloke who's played bugger all senior footy. He will never have the size/mass of a Lobbe or similar so may always get pushed around at stoppages.

Maybe Lowden is the answer, but the club seems reluctant to play him & there must be a reason ???

Just my opinion of course

 

[MrFujiMoto]

What's that olde saying again Brishawk....Lies, damned lies & Statistics....In big games my eyes tell me another story altogether....Too often we seem to end up on the negative end in these games so far as ruck-work & effective clearances as a direct result of their work is concerned....The fact that Lobbe had the same amount as Hale, McEvoy & Ceglar combined is a damning statistic in itself....With 3 rucks to contend with, Lobbe should have been pummelled from pillar to post & yet was by far & away the most effective big man on the ground!....Similarly against Sydney a 2 bit hack called Derickxs (Not sure bout the spellin) was able to hold his own against our vaunted duo of Hale & McEvoy. Then there was the smashing that Simpson & McIntosh handed out to us when we played Geelong!

Sorry....But my eyes are the best gauge for a players contribution & worth on the field....Too often in these big games are rucks are either smashed or merely break even against an opposition ruckman for whom they should be taking to the cleaners!....That all comes back to game day strategy, the coaching staff directly responsible for the rucks & the freshness & workloads of these players themselves in being able to perform on the day to the best of their abilities!

Well that aint Monkeys fault. If the players go to water in big games, then Monkey can't do much to arrest that. Other than maybe tell them he will eat their kids if they don't perform. Now if a normal mere mortal said that you would normally laugh it off but if Monkey is saying it, I reckon it would carry some weight...Pardon the pun

 

[Jason Dunstall]

I actually understand the rationale behind that and kind of agree, but if you’re going to do it then just bloody do it, which we didn’t.

Playing the 3 should have had Hale out of the FORWARD POCKET (yes it is an actual position for any kids on here not over the age of 25), nowhere else, not Half forward where he is often lurking. McEvoy in the hole in front of the big blokes to take contested marks to help a short defence, nowhere else, not up on the wing, stay in the effing hole. And of course Cegs in the ruck.

This would actually work against a lot of teams and i’d do it against WC if we don’t have at least Lake back by then, but it must be like I’ve said and they can’t “roam” from their positions. Ceg is a good enough contested mark to be relieved by Hale and go to the FP, which means McEvoy, who is supposed to be able to run all day can stay in the hole in defence, at worse it makes teams on the fast break have somebody big they have to kick over!!!!!!! Not to mention making their power forwards lead elsewhere, atm they just lead straight past or straight over the top of Hodge, or Burgs, or Birch, or Suckling when they are all “rotating” as the loose.

The problem is we don’t do it this way, we play the 3 and they are here there and everywhere on the field with this “must be able to play multiple roles“ shit. Well these 3 when in the side aren’t versatile enough to do that, but they can play 1 in the ruck, 1 out of the FORWARD POCKET and 1 loose behind the ball, we all know which ones are suited for which positions, except our coaches it sometimes seems.

The only one who should be “roaming” around the ground is whoever is in the centre at that time and he just needs to stop the opposition ruckman from taking marks through that centre corridor or been used as the get out clause from defence.

I hate saying it, but the effing handbags are already onto and in front on this one as well.....Simpson (ruck), McIntosh (forward/backup ruck) and Blicas (another tall loose behind the play who can pinch hit ruck)...but they set it up exactly like I have said and don’t fiddle with it every 3 minutes like we do. Plus they had the kid Vardy go down with a knee as well (forward/ruck)...They always have 3 talls in defence no matter what and as a minimum... is it any wonder we can't score against the bastards esp when they also have 2 dozen 189cm quick HBF hiding behind the ball as well.

The main diff is none of our 3 rucks have the mobility of Blicas for the behind the ball set up.

Is that you Gary?

No?

With the outs we have at the moment & mate & I discussed this exact set up during the week.

Great minds think alike? Fools seldom differ? It's all a matter of degrees.....

 

[Brishawk]

1st V 2nd isn't a big game?

Keeping a spot in the top 4 isn't a big game?

All you were doing here is trying to use stats as back up for an argument/opinion, as always.

Here's one for you then - We won all the stats the stats people on here and in the media love trotting out, yet we still lost. Can you tell us why without using our outs since the stats clearly say we should have won and won easily.

It was one game. You cannot extrapolate a trend from one game. All the previous poster did was pick out 3 losses, declare them all big games and then 'demonstrate' a perceived trend as if it existed in all games. That is to ignore the season long trend which continued through the finals series last year.

Without the detailed stats in front of me I can only rely on my memory but I would be surprised if Port didn't register an enormous number of goals from our turnovers. We conceded a big lead early due to being flogged in the clearances but we clawed it back through a big turn around in the clearances despite losing the hit outs. Our game is built around winning clearances and we look a lot worse when we are losing them so naturally people will question our clearance players when we lose but to turn that around and say we are not good at clearances and our rucks are duds just ignores the fact we have been a dominant clearance team for more than 12 months.

 

[Easy Slips Catch]

Happy with the way Cegs is coming along. His tap work could well develop into a serious weapon. Most ruck contests end up with the ball being indiscriminately slapped, at least when Cegs does get a clear hit he makes it a clear winner. His running mark on the lead was first rate, kick was crap but he can kick straight.

Surprised some supporters cannot enjoy watching one of our players improve. Sad really.

 

[Carcass]

It was one game. You cannot extrapolate a trend from one game. All the previous poster did was pick out 3 losses, declare them all big games and then 'demonstrate' a perceived trend as if it existed in all games. That is to ignore the season long trend which continued through the finals series last year.

Without the detailed stats in front of me I can only rely on my memory but I would be surprised if Port didn't register an enormous number of goals from our turnovers. We conceded a big lead early due to being flogged in the clearances but we clawed it back through a big turn around in the clearances despite losing the hit outs. Our game is built around winning clearances and we look a lot worse when we are losing them so naturally people will question our clearance players when we lose but to turn that around and say we are not good at clearances and our rucks are duds just ignores the fact we have been a dominant clearance team for more than 12 months.

What do you need the stats for? You pretty much have said it right here.

The only thing I’d add is they did what the handbags do to us when we got the centre clearances back on our terms – they superflooded which caused some turn overs because we fail at taking contested marks (except for Gunston) and then run and gunned to their smalls in a totally open forward line.

This for me was the most annoying part about it because once again this simple tactic was not able to be stopped/beaten by our tactics. When it comes to this it doesn’t matter who our outs are, because it’s a tactic not better players beating lesser players – a tactic!!

And yes we clawed our way back through a turn around in the clearances - this happened when Cegs went into the ruck and McEvoy was out - the hitout numbers (stats) don't tell the story of the why or how this happened.

Don’t forget that champion data is 50% owned by this afl commission for a couple of reasons I won’t go into.

Anyway go Cegs.

Oh and how was Hale's TAP to Lewis for that goal...worth more then a few marks around the ground I'd say, but that's just MO.

 

[hawksalltheway]

Cegs looked pretty good in 2nd half...took a nice contested mark, competed well in the centre, pretty happy with his game

if i am not mistaken, we were thrashed in clearances in the first qtr, but ended up in front by games end?

 

[Collins-Langford-Ayres]

Continues to develop. Concerned his ceiling is not that far away though.

 

[NICE1]

Pre

Continues to develop. Concerned his ceiling is not that far away though.

Precisely my concern also. What can he add to his game, which will elevate him to something more than a decent depth ruckman?

 

[Procrastinator35]

All you are doing here, like many people on this board, is define 'big games' as games we lose. We absolutely annihilated opposition from stoppages (in terms of scores from stoppages) last year. In the grand final our rucks controlled where the ball went even though Sandilands won a lot of hitouts. There is more to rucking than winning hit outs. Hale in particular was sensational in the finals series but sure re-define big games as games we lose and then you can never be wrong

So, Apart from Freo, which 'other' games besides Port, Geelong & Sydney are 'Big Games"????.....I like the blanket generalisation you also throw in there in order to toss my argument aside!

I am doing far more than this....I'm suggesting a fundamental change in direction & strategy in how we use our ruckmen more effectively by constantly rotating them for 'games' that suit them accordingly & to also aid & assist them in recovery so that they are 'Cherry Ripe' for the 'Big One's'!

I expect more than this from you Brishawk.....Far more!

 

[Dewnior]

McEvoy & Hale both look tired & spent to me Carcass....Our use of our ruck stocks truly beggars belief at times....We have both Ceglar & Lowden ready & able to step in and fill a role so as to keep both Hale & McEvoy fresh for the big ones....

Not sure if SRS. Didn't they both just have the week off?

 

[Procrastinator35]

Not sure if SRS. Didn't they both just have the week off?

Totally serious there Dewnior.....Indeed, after a 4 week run of 6 day breaks....My suggestion/premise pertains to an entire seasons workload Dewnior, but cheers for your input there all the same sport.

If you'd like a serious discussion on the matter instead of an instagram dial-it-in-post-it-note, then let me know.....Elsewise I'll treat your off the cuff remark with the derision it deserves!

 

[Baz_hawk]

I think we have a lot to work with. Ruck man always prosper late and really what he needs is some consistant time at AFL level. Some guys will go back to VFL and work harder for another chance and Cegs would be the same but it must be tough to step in for one game only to be cut for the next one. He's gonna need at least 3 or 4 consecutive games just to find his feet and adapt to the speed and physicality of the game, its quite a lift from the VFL.

 

[Brant]

Precisely my concern also. What can he add to his game, which will elevate him to something more than a decent depth ruckman?

What will McEvoy add to elevate himself from a terrible Ruckman to 'Decent Depth'? We love McEvoy for his 'round the ground' efforts but I'd be surprised if he takes more than 2.5 contested marks per week.

Doesn't matter now I guess - we have him - we may as well get behind him. Same as with Ceglar.

 

[robiecampbellbrown]

How is Lowden going at Box Hill?

 

[Dewnior]

Totally serious there Dewnior.....Indeed, after a 4 week run of 6 day breaks....My suggestion/premise pertains to an entire seasons workload Dewnior, but cheers for your input there all the same sport.

So you think Hale and McEvoy are tired because they have to endure an entire season's workload?

Do you mean in the first 10 rounds or are you including the preseason too?

 

[Procrastinator35]

So you think Hale and McEvoy are tired because they have to endure an entire season's workload?

Do you mean in the first 10 rounds or are you including the preseason too?

Blind Freddy could see that Hale & McEvoy were tired last Saturday night!.....My point is that we have 4 able bodied Rucks all in good form & fitness ATM, so why the hell are we not utilizing this asset to its maximum, by resting our better ruckman in games where only 1 or neither of them are needed? When Ceglar & Lowden are more than capable of filling the role for a good 6 games each during the season proper!

This necessitates taking each game as it comes & weighing up the strengths & weaknesses of the opposition so far as when its appropriate to do this!....So Hale & Ceglar one week, then if its a relatively tough game we switch to McEvoy & Hale, then McEvoy & Lowden, then Hale & Ceglar etc, etc, etc. Obviously if the opposition has 2 seasoned big bodied rucks then we go with ours....However, in games where the opposition only has 1 ruck or a relatively young & inexperienced ruck then why exhaust our first string when the 2nd string is ample to fulfil the requirements?

The new cap on interchange has meant that rucks also do not receive the same amount of 'down-time' in order to recover; hence the need for rotation of our rucks over the entire course of the season!....The fact our club has not yet seen this as an obvious & necessary step has me perplexed to say the least!

What this constitutes is a lack of flexibility, fore-thought & lateral thinking; all things which our staff are paid well to do & yet are failing in miserably so far as our rucks & Veterans are concerned this year under the new interchange cap format!

 

[The BIG X]

Vote 1 Procrastinator as our new Activities Officer

 

[Easy Slips Catch]

How is Lowden going at Box Hill?

The amount of petty nit picking against Cegs is the best indicator of how he is travelling.

 

[BlackByrd]

Back on topic...

Ceglar has been really impressive at VFL level this season and has played okay at AFL level in his limited chances. Thought he had a quiet first half on the weekend but did get himself into the game and finished with 15 odd disposals which is usually a pretty good game for a ruckman. Ruckwork needs a little improvement but on the whole he is showing some very positive signs. Should have another opportunity this week if McEvoy can't get up for the GWS game

 

[Brishawk]

So, Apart from Freo, which 'other' games besides Port, Geelong & Sydney are 'Big Games"????.....I like the blanket generalisation you also throw in there in order to toss my argument aside!

I am doing far more than this....I'm suggesting a fundamental change in direction & strategy in how we use our ruckmen more effectively by constantly rotating them for 'games' that suit them accordingly & to also aid & assist them in recovery so that they are 'Cherry Ripe' for the 'Big One's'!

I expect more than this from you Brishawk.....Far more!

You suggested we use our ruck stocks to rest players despite McEvoy already missing a game and our whole team just coming off a bye. How much more cherry ripe are they going to be if they play even less games in the lead up? If they played badly on Saturday it was not for lack of rest. And to be frank, it was Hale who helped get things going in the middle after McEvoy was subbed. Didn't look tired at all in the second half and in the first quarter we barely had the ball so its hard to see what influence Hale was expected to have up forward. McEvoy was injured in the first quarter but played until half time. That might have had something to do with him playing like a lame duck.

 

[Hawker55]

Back on topic...

Ceglar has been really impressive at VFL level this season and has played okay at AFL level in his limited chances. Thought he had a quiet first half on the weekend but did get himself into the game and finished with 15 odd disposals which is usually a pretty good game for a ruckman. Ruckwork needs a little improvement but on the whole he is showing some very positive signs. Should have another opportunity this week if McEvoy can't get up for the GWS game

The problem is though he didn't really ruck much. He spent most of the first half in the forward line and intermittently rucked once McEvoy went off. I don't blame him for not being Roughead, but I don't think he's ever going to be anything other than depth.

 

[Suckling2Gunston]

How is Lowden going at Box Hill?

Constantly named in the best this season, and to be fair so has Grimley. Just watched a small highlights package of last weekend's game and both were very good again. Grim launched a nice 60m+ goal on the run.

It's why Ceglar playing baffles me personally. Inb4 "hurr durr I'm glad you're not coaching".