Post BF Upgrade Feedback - Click Here

Remove this Banner Ad

Opinion Ceglar

  • Thread starter Thread starter tashawk
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Was just thinking. If our key defensive stocks suffer any more, can we somehow utilise our rucks ? Cegs and bigboy are quite mobile, and if we could use three speedsters - hill hartung smith to counterbalance, it might come off
 
Stratton_Gun said:
Very harsh to say Haley is satisfied with the flag and has put the cue in the rack. He is in his 30's now ya know
Click to expand...

I just call em as I see em mate......

I reckon the club has learnt from the 08 Flag, that a fresh injection of new & hungry players is vital in maintaining the push for further success.....Unlike 2009, we have ample experience in our squad, so form alone should dictate who plays....Hales' current form does not warrant selection.

We have 3 other equally capable ruckmen who are playing far better than he is.
 
Pessimistic said:
Was just thinking. If our key defensive stocks suffer any more, can we somehow utilise our rucks ? Cegs and bigboy are quite mobile, and if we could use three speedsters - hill hartung smith to counterbalance, it might come off
Click to expand...
Not a chance IMO, mate.

We are as consistently strong as we are at the moment because we maintain our structure/plan & replace individuals. Eg. Lake out = Cheney in etc. That way, 21 guys stay the same & the actual loss is the difference between Lake & Cheney. If we play an extra ruckman in defence & drop our runners back there to support then we're affecting the games of 3 or 4 players through only 1 change. The loss wouldn't just be the Lake minus Ruckman in defence, but also the run we'd lose from Smith/Hill/Hartung etc. I reckon we're far better off going the way we have been & replacing guys with other guys, but holding the plan.

In saying that, if it were Schoey that went to defence & the Ruckman went forward then I think we'd be better off, but the Port game (I think) showed that to be ineffective as our Ruckmen are just too slow as actual forwards (fine as resting ruckmen). We'd probably be better off playing Lowden/Grimley as FF than 3 of Hale/BB/Cegs, I think.
 
Stratton_Gun said:
Very harsh to say Haley is satisfied with the flag and has put the cue in the rack. He is in his 30's now ya know
Click to expand...

Exactly. After 30 a player can drop off very quickly. Sure I think there's an element of the hunger going but I doubt he's given up, it's just the body isn't as willing anymore.

To be honest it wouldn't surprise me if he either retired at the end of the year OR came back in for Finals and did a good job.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

The times we looked vulnerable in the middle against the crows were later in the game & BB was getting a hiding from Jacobs, maybe he had run out of juice?
When Cegs was back on the ball we immediately looked more competitive at stoppages.
Cegs ruck work is definitely superior to BB's. He leads at the ball well in the forward line & others have said, not too reliable on the kicking front!
I think BB will have to be playing well, because if Hale finds form again the coaches may run with Cegs as #1 & Hale as back up/forward....
 
Is it just me or do McEvoy and Hale time their jump in the ruck way too early?

With Ceglar he's got a great vertical leap and more often then not he will win the hit-outs. One thing about Ceglar that I like is his follow up work around the ground. When you look at Ceglar he may look slow, but he's much more agile then you think.
 
I did a little analysis on our ruckmen.

We have 4 players in the top 40 for hitouts per game in the AFL. Ceglar, McEvoy, Hale and Lowden. These are their rankings throughout the top 40 ruckmen in different stats per game.

nNgMxyi.jpg


Note 1: Ceglar, McEvoy and Hale's are out of players that have played 5 or more games. Lowden includes players with any amount due to playing only one game himself.

Note 2: I mucked up with Hale's goals, he should be 4th.
 
Ceglar has been fantastic. What I like the most is we pinched him from Collingwood. I know they were not related but I feel we are doing better so far with Ceglar than Collingwood are with Young. I wish Young all the best sort of...
 
GOHORCS said:
Ceglar has been fantastic. What I like the most is we pinched him from Collingwood. I know they were not related but I feel we are doing better so far with Ceglar than Collingwood are with Young. I wish Young all the best sort of...
Click to expand...
I was watching the Essendon vs Collingwood game the other night and saw Young do the worst squib I have ever seen on a footy field ...
He basically ran past the ball to avoid body contact but it was so obvious the commentators were dumb founded.

He is zero loss.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

GOHORCS said:
Ceglar has been fantastic. What I like the most is we pinched him from Collingwood. I know they were not related but I feel we are doing better so far with Ceglar than Collingwood are with Young. I wish Young all the best sort of...
Click to expand...

Its hawthorns superior ruck development. Monkey !!
 
WWSD said:
Is it just me or do McEvoy and Hale time their jump in the ruck way too early?

With Ceglar he's got a great vertical leap and more often then not he will win the hit-outs. One thing about Ceglar that I like is his follow up work around the ground. When you look at Ceglar he may look slow, but he's much more agile then you think.
Click to expand...

Ceglar = 204cm
Hale = 201cm
Mcevoy= 200cm

They could be just trying to compensate for that extra inch or two. Im guessing it makes a bit of diff.
 
Last edited:

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom