Changes for Sydney Swans?

[King_Tredrea]

Doing the whole “3 non-ruckmen sharing the ruck duties thing” doesn’t work. We know this.

If Frampton doesn’t come in now, why the * do we bother having any ruckmen other than Ryder on our list.

 

[PJ Power]

We’ve got to give Frampton a try if he’s fit.

As much as I admired the game of Westhoff yesterday, keeping our basic structures forward and behind the ball is very important. I didn’t like seeing Dixon taken away from the forward line, and don’t think he rucked well anyway.

Give Ryder an autologous blood or PRP injection to speed up his recovery process, and let Frampton have a couple of weeks in the AFL team to see what he’s got.

 

[Powerade 08]

This is Frampton's 4th year under Ken. He's certainly shown enough to be worthy of selection and arguably would have been picked ahead of Marshall if he stayed fit at the end of last season.

Sounds familiar.... you really know how to pick em.

FWIW I'd bring him in, but he's only going to be the sacrificial lamb ala Redden. He can't win a hitout in the SANFL and even Ladhams got opportunity ahead of him in the preseason.

 

[Janus]

Richmond didn't have to rip Nankervis out of another position where he is an elite 2 way mismatch to get him to play ruck.

You're ignoring the main thrust of my argument.

I'm quite happy with the combo of Dixon/Westhoff/Howard rotating through the ruck if you look at the ruck position in isolation. It's fine. If Ryder is out we're not going to have a dominant ruckman and we'll have to deal with that one way or the other.

My problem is taking some of our most important players out of their positions to get beaten in the ruck week in week out. It gives them less rest, it burns them out more quickly, it makes them more susceptible to injury.

If it were September i'd be against blooding a new ruckman. In round 2, get him in the side. He certainly showed enough last year prior to his injury.

And you're missing the main thrust of mine.

If he can defend, great, bring him in.

If he can't, you bring in someone who can (McKenzie) and you tell the makeshift rucks that the team needs them in that position for now. You don't defend, you don't play. I'm not going to try him or give him a go if he can't do fundamental team aspects, because it lets the entire side down on the basis of what? Keeping two players in their favoured positions?

Good teams bring in players based on their position, because they can only play one way. Look at Adelaide with Lynch and Smith missing - ******* horrible. Great teams adapt to the best players they have available and turn a perceived weakness or flaw into a strength.

Just remember - last year, without Watts, Marshall, Rockliff and Motlop, and playing Hombsch, Clurey and Jonas in defence, we beat Sydney by 28 points. And that was when they had Naismith rucking.

In other words - I'll trust the judgement of Ken and the match committee. If they think Frampton is the best course of action, I'll agree with it because they think he can do the job and won't be a defensive liability.

If they don't...I'll understand too, because team defence is more important than individual players. It operates as a unit, not based on individual performance. There is absolutely nothing stopping Howard or Westhoff moving with the ball like every ruck in the league does.

Let me put it another way: If the match committee don't pick Frampton, he'll be delisted at the end of the year. Because four years in the system should be enough for him to learn ours. And that's all I'm worried about - whether he actually can execute our system.

 

[King_Tredrea]

Sir William is contracted until the end of ‘19

 

[raman]

The good thing about this Ryder injury is that melt day will be a proper melt day this week regardless of which way we go.

 

[Janus]

The good thing about this Ryder injury is that melt day will be a proper melt day this week regardless of which way we go.

I'll be cool as ice, cause I don't care either way I think we'll smash Sydney regardless.

 

[Schulzenfest]

The good thing about this Ryder injury is that melt day will be a proper melt day this week regardless of which way we go.

Potentially, but both arguments have merit here. I don’t think I’ll melt too hard whether we pick Frampton or not.

I would really like to see McKenzie in for the SCG game though, and it’s difficult to see how we do that without throwing Doogs into the ruck.

 

[drcollossimo]

Potentially, but both arguments have merit here. I don’t think I’ll melt too hard whether we pick Frampton or not.

I would really like to see McKenzie in for the SCG game though, and it’s difficult to see how we do that without throwing Doogs into the ruck.

It will be surreal to have a halfback take a mark at CHB and legitimately be able to get a decent inside 50 from it..

 

[El_Scorcho]

Sounds familiar.... you really know how to pick em.

FWIW I'd bring him in, but he's only going to be the sacrificial lamb ala Redden. He can't win a hitout in the SANFL and even Ladhams got opportunity ahead of him in the preseason.

He's not going to dominate in the ruck but he can actually move, puts his body on the line and has good skills. He certainly won't be gassed 10 minutes into the 2nd quarter like Redden was.

I'm not expecting him to be a world beater, i'd just like to protect Dixon, Howard and Westhoff rather than waste them in the ruck where they'll be no better than Frampton.

 

[nadsee]

Potentially, but both arguments have merit here. I don’t think I’ll melt too hard whether we pick Frampton or not.

I would really like to see McKenzie in for the SCG game though, and it’s difficult to see how we do that without throwing Doogs into the ruck.

Have no problems with McKenzie.

But Howard is the only one I can see that matches up on Franklin..

 

[nadsee]

I'm not expecting him to be a world beater, i'd just like to protect Dixon, Howard and Westhoff rather than waste them in the ruck where they'll be no better than Frampton.[/QUOTE]

100% Agree. Perfect scenario to play Billy.

 

[pip_]

Assuming that Polec plays and Frampton comes in, who else comes out? (given Gray comes in as well)

Do we benefit from going in taller against Sydney?

 

[BIG DADDY]

OUT Ryder
IN R Gray

Use Dixon/Westy in ruck

 

[John the Butcher]

Lets use Wines in the ruck

 

[Visenfest]

He's not going to dominate in the ruck but he can actually move, puts his body on the line and has good skills. He certainly won't be gassed 10 minutes into the 2nd quarter like Redden was.

I'm not expecting him to be a world beater, i'd just like to protect Dixon, Howard and Westhoff rather than waste them in the ruck where they'll be no better than Frampton.

Exactly right. If Billy was basically Matthew Lobbe around the ground, then no don't pick him. But, Frampton can contribute to a competent standard around the ground so I don't think we will lose anything in terms of structure and shape by picking him.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Frampton or Ladhams in for Ryder and Robbie in for Sam.

We have finally got our tall forwards right so don't stuff around with Dixon having to ruck more than a few minutes here and there. Leave Doogie in Defence. In late October I said he was in our best 16 players as I dont believe in a best 22. The best 16 get picked every week the other 6 fluctuate. Doogie on Buddy is the match up we need. The Hoff has proved once again he's in the best 16 and you play him on the wing and then move him to where we need him.

Replace Ryder with a ruck and give them 2 games against the Swans and Lions to find out how good they are.

 

[JUSTWORK]

Gray for Gray

And one of our rucks must come in for Ryder, sure we have guys who can pinch hit but Westhoff cant do it all day, not way would i want Dixon doing it all day and Howard is to important at CHB. Only question is Frampton, Ladhams or Hayes. You'd assume Hayes who has the most potential isn't ready, not often do first year rucks plays, short of Grundy i cant think of any of the top of my head who have done it well. so Frampton or Ladhams ? didnt Ladhams touch up Frampton in the internal trial ? I do worry at Framptons tap work and hit-outs ? at-least with Naismith out they wont be up against the swans #1 ruckman.

 

[NEGAN]

Assuming that Polec plays and Frampton comes in, who else comes out? (given Gray comes in as well)

I will be fuming if it's Barry, logic imo points to Sam.

 

[MALTSY]

Have no problems with McKenzie.

But Howard is the only one I can see that matches up on Franklin..

I thought that too.. but didnt Clurey do a pretty good job on him last time? I might be wrong. Clurey and Howard will need to tackle Franklin and Reid.

 

[Shaucob_Burjan]

Assuming that Polec plays and Frampton comes in, who else comes out? (given Gray comes in as well)

Do we benefit from going in taller against Sydney?

Sam Gray based on form

 

[CharlieKelly]

Frampton for Ryder
R. Gray for S. Gray

 

[badbeats]

Round 1 selection - yes finally, 3 tall forwards, Dixon + Watts + Marshall will work wonders together and kick heaps of goals.
Round 1 results - 8.6 out of 16.14

Round 2 - lets completely change our structure!!

 

[philthy05]

And you're missing the main thrust of mine.

If he can defend, great, bring him in.

If he can't, you bring in someone who can (McKenzie) and you tell the makeshift rucks that the team needs them in that position for now. You don't defend, you don't play. I'm not going to try him or give him a go if he can't do fundamental team aspects, because it lets the entire side down on the basis of what? Keeping two players in their favoured positions?

Good teams bring in players based on their position, because they can only play one way. Look at Adelaide with Lynch and Smith missing - ******* horrible. Great teams adapt to the best players they have available and turn a perceived weakness or flaw into a strength.

Just remember - last year, without Watts, Marshall, Rockliff and Motlop, and playing Hombsch, Clurey and Jonas in defence, we beat Sydney by 28 points. And that was when they had Naismith rucking.

In other words - I'll trust the judgement of Ken and the match committee. If they think Frampton is the best course of action, I'll agree with it because they think he can do the job and won't be a defensive liability.

If they don't...I'll understand too, because team defence is more important than individual players. It operates as a unit, not based on individual performance. There is absolutely nothing stopping Howard or Westhoff moving with the ball like every ruck in the league does.

Let me put it another way: If the match committee don't pick Frampton, he'll be delisted at the end of the year. Because four years in the system should be enough for him to learn ours. And that's all I'm worried about - whether he actually can execute our system.

Frampton is probably as mobile as any ruckman. His strength is his ability around the ground. His weakness is his ability to win hitouts and in that case he isn't going to be much worse than westhoff / Dixon / Howard.

So bringing in frampton we lose neglible in ruck ability , do excellent around the ground with a frampton westhoff combo. I mean that combo will kill sydneys around the ground right.

I don't get what we lose by bringing in frampton. What is the risk? How is that risk greater than playing westhoff as first ruck (losing his freedom to roam and hurt teams which traditionally happens when we lock him down) losing chb we need to cover buddy and risking an injury to a recent acl sufferer and risking our key forward with last injury history.

 

[VineValerian]

Billy's tap work is not great. He mistimes his leaping a lot. But he has some toe (ran down Petrenko one game) and physically is one powerful unit.

Swans best rucks will be missing, and Billy boy can certainly clunk contested marks at SANFL level.

Worth a try for a short time, hoping Paddy comes good soon. At least it doesn't disrupt our structures too much.

SCG is a small ground, so less room and space to work in. I can see the Swans making it a contested game and bottling it up. We will not get the run and carry like we did against Freo.