Opinion Changes vs Geelong

[Del165892]

You don’t think it’s more then correlation that playing two rucks for the first half of last year allowed our midfield to dominate and freed up English to be a scary threat around the ground? And when he was going solo for the 2nd half of the year our midfield struggled and so did he.

I’m not saying it was the entire causation but pretty important.

I don't think there's sufficient reason to think that playing two rucks was the causal factor for our change in form. We also started copping a lot of injuries at the same time that we started losing. Yes, Stef was one of those injuries, but there were some other really significant ones like Dunks and Adz. Also, when English returned from his concussion he was extremely poor, even when playing entirely forward. That's nothing to do with playing two rucks or one ruck, because Lewis Young was taking the ruck and English was still terrible, obviously still not quite right.

 

[ScottyDogg]

I don't think there's sufficient reason to think that playing two rucks was the causal factor for our change in form. We also started copping a lot of injuries at the same time that we started losing. Yes, Stef was one of those injuries, but there were some other really significant ones like Dunks and Adz. Also, when English returned from his concussion he was extremely poor, even when playing entirely forward. That's nothing to do with playing two rucks or one ruck, because Lewis Young was taking the ruck and English was still terrible, obviously still not quite right.

Time will tell or Bevo will drop Sweet and we will never know.

 

[Angak]

I guess we could prove or disprove the benefit with stats - does anyone know if during the periods of English not rucking are we scored against more or less? Win or lose more clearances? Correlated with significant changes in momentum? Could justify Sweet if for example we’re defensively better 1-2+ goals and kick 1-2 more goals

This would be awesome. I'm sure one of our data analysts at the club has done this analysis but would be really cool to see.

 

[Golden_6]

This is simply one of those games our midfield just has to dominate. Geelong probably has the worst ruck combination in the league and have a reasonably mediocre centre square lineup of Guthrie, Parfitt, Stephens, Atkins & Selwood. It’s just a non-negotiable that we need to destroy them in there in order to win.

Also the other key is choosing the best option with our forward 50 entries and not falling in love with a Naughton centric approach.

 

[Angak]

You don’t think it’s more then correlation that playing two rucks for the first half of last year allowed our midfield to dominate and freed up English to be a scary threat around the ground? And when he was going solo for the 2nd half of the year our midfield struggled and so did he.

I’m not saying it was the entire causation but pretty important.

Having Stef rucking for 80% game time with English forward for 80% worked really well. Primarily because English is an excellent 3rd tall option. If Bevo chose to play Sweet as the primary ruck with English forward that would make more sense. But we know that ain't happening anytime soon.

 

[doggies ftw]

On the weekend English played 80% game time in the ruck. Which meant that Sweet was either forward/bench for 80% of the game. Sweet is a non-factor as a forward which means we are playing with a man down for basically 80% of game time. This was also English's first game back, I'd imagine his % of game will increase to 85-90%.

So the argument some on here are making ( correct me if I'm wrong) is that having Sweet play ruck for 10-15% of game time over a Buku/Cordy/O'Brien etc. is so much more significantly better that we are willing to play with a man short for the other 85-90% of game time Sweet is not required to ruck ?

This risk vs reward of playing Sweet just doesn't add up. Not to mention that he doesn't apply any forward half pressure so we are more susceptible to conceding on transition.

And what about games like the blues just a few weeks ago which it’s pretty safe to say we would have been a very good chance of winning had we had support for English. Can he really ruck 90% of game time vs good ruck duos? Can anyone? All well and good to do it up against Jamison (who?) and Williams but what about Pittonet/De Koning, Marshall/Ryder, Darcy/Lobb, Gawn/Jackson, all the good sides this year…

Also how is playing with Sweet out of the ruck one man down but Cordys not? People act like Sweets keeping out Lobb or Marshall when it’s just not the case

 

[Fossie 32]

You don’t think it’s more then correlation that playing two rucks for the first half of last year allowed our midfield to dominate and freed up English to be a scary threat around the ground? And when he was going solo for the 2nd half of the year our midfield struggled and so did he.

I’m not saying it was the entire causation but pretty important.

More than coincidence

 

[Angak]

And what about games like the blues just a few weeks ago which it’s pretty safe to say we would have been a very good chance of winning had we had support for English. Can he really ruck 90% of game time vs good ruck duos? Can anyone? All well and good to do it up against Jamison (who?) and Williams but what about Pittonet/De Koning, Marshall/Ryder, Darcy/Lobb, Gawn/Jackson, all the good sides this year…

Also how is playing with Sweet out of the ruck one man down but Cordys not? People act like Sweets keeping out Lobb or Marshall when it’s just not the case

Your analysis of why we lost the Carlton game is flawed. We got smashed around the ball in the first and second quarters where fatigue was a non issue for English. In fact we started taking ascendancy in the midfield towards the end of the 2nd quarter and continued our comeback in the 3rd and 4th quarters. Bevo in the post game also mentioned that our midfield didn't adjust to what Carlton were doing in the midfield until later in the game and that is ultimately what cost us.

Also all the ruck combos you've mentioned play a secondary role well. For example when Pittonet is injured Carlton play Jack Silvagni at 194cm as the pinch hit ruck instead of bringing in a ruckman who can only play one role.

 

[D Mitchell]

What's your beef with JUH it seems personal

No beef at all, a massive disappointment. He played 6 very poor games earlier this year, showed nothing, it should have been no more than 3. It's fair enough to give someone a few games to show something but 6 was absurd. In the Twos for the last 3 (?) games and at last a good game somewhere near the level of unrealistic adulation. I like MD's lateral thinking.

 

[Foxman98]

And what about games like the blues just a few weeks ago which it’s pretty safe to say we would have been a very good chance of winning had we had support for English. Can he really ruck 90% of game time vs good ruck duos? Can anyone? All well and good to do it up against Jamison (who?) and Williams but what about Pittonet/De Koning, Marshall/Ryder, Darcy/Lobb, Gawn/Jackson, all the good sides this year…

Also how is playing with Sweet out of the ruck one man down but Cordys not? People act like Sweets keeping out Lobb or Marshall when it’s just not the case

The combos you’ve named are all players who win the ball and take contested marks around the ground and kick goals when forward. Sweet doesn’t do that. West Coast we’re taking advantage of it and going coast to coast running off him imagine a team that isn’t dreadful like Geelong with Tom Stewart playing on him

 

[Foxman98]

We need the extra height and bulk of Sweet simply for our defenders to help out with Hawkins.

Will make a big difference to English if he is not spending all his time covering for our outmatched defenders.

Also will cause Geelongs small defence some issues.

So we need to play Sweet for 3 throw ins Geelong might get inside 50 that there’s no guarantee he’s in the right position to take?

 

[Foxman98]

I think taller forwards taking the ruck duties (Cordy for example) puts everyone under pressure.
At times on Saturday Sweet rucked while English sat behind or in front of the ball where he was able to impact the game.

Sweet is limited I know, but I believe he is a much better option in the ruck than a Cordy or Dinkley.

Just my thoughts.

KM

Obviously he’s better in the ruck but the ruck position isn’t that important that you waste a position for 80% of the game for 15 ruck contests when you can just set your midfield up defensively which we are very good at hence we’ve been a top clearance team for years

 

[Doggy]

No beef at all, a massive disappointment. He played 6 very poor games earlier this year, showed nothing, it should have been no more than 3. It's fair enough to give someone a few games to show something but 6 was absurd. In the Twos for the last 3 (?) games and at last a good game somewhere near the level of unrealistic adulation. I like MD's lateral thinking.

Doesn't sound that way

 

[doggies ftw]

Your analysis of why we lost the Carlton game is flawed. We got smashed around the ball in the first and second quarters where fatigue was a non issue for English. In fact we started taking ascendancy in the midfield towards the end of the 2nd quarter and continued our comeback in the 3rd and 4th quarters. Bevo in the post game also mentioned that our midfield didn't adjust to what Carlton were doing in the midfield until later in the game and that is ultimately what cost us.

Also all the ruck combos you've mentioned play a secondary role well. For example when Pittonet is injured Carlton play Jack Silvagni at 194cm as the pinch hit ruck instead of bringing in a ruckman who can only play one role.

Mm yeah we were smashed around the ball early, as Pittonet demolished English in the center and even De Koning got well on top as English had zero support. Sweet plays that game and we win, I’ve got zero doubt about that.

Yes they do so what? We don’t have anyone that does, all those ruck duos are duos which are going to absolutely smash English one out in the ruck, if we could bring in Lobb we would. Cordy is not that lmao. You’re saying English can ruck 90% game time against those duos?

 

[doggies ftw]

The combos you’ve named are all players who win the ball and take contested marks around the ground and kick goals when forward. Sweet doesn’t do that. West Coast we’re taking advantage of it and going coast to coast running off him imagine a team that isn’t dreadful like Geelong with Tom Stewart playing on him

Does Cordy do that then?

 

[Some Idiot]

Matty Scarlett is pulling back on the jumper this weekend to take 10,000 intercept marks again

Bring back Johnno to kick 8 on him

 

[goodcop badcop]

The combos you’ve named are all players who win the ball and take contested marks around the ground and kick goals when forward. Sweet doesn’t do that. West Coast we’re taking advantage of it and going coast to coast running off him imagine a team that isn’t dreadful like Geelong with Tom Stewart playing on him

Can you give some specific examples of plays when they ran off Sweet? The big guy had 14 pressure acts, only Macrae, Williams, Libba, Bont and McComb had more.

Not convinced he's bad defensively and West Coast ran all over him. The pressure rating of our entire team was considered average which suggests our entire team let West Coast out too easily.

 

[Whoyagot]

Dual rucks is the way of the future. “Truck” Ratten really started it in 2020 with Ryder and Marshall and Melbourne copied them. It’s time we get on board with Timmy and Sweety. Hope bevo can stop being so stubborn and take a leaf out of Ratten’s book.

 

[Del165892]

Dual rucks is the way of the future. “Truck” Ratten really started it in 2020 with Ryder and Marshall and Melbourne copied them. It’s time we get on board with Timmy and Sweety. Hope bevo can stop being so stubborn and take a leaf out of Ratten’s book.

I think you'll find that it was actually Bevo who invented the two-ruck strategy (TRS). He started it in 2016 with his Roughead and Campbell TRS, but tweaked it to the premiership winning TRS of Roughead and Boyd.

 

[Munnez]

On the weekend English played 80% game time in the ruck. Which meant that Sweet was either forward/bench for 80% of the game. Sweet is a non-factor as a forward which means we are playing with a man down for basically 80% of game time. This was also English's first game back, I'd imagine his % of game will increase to 85-90%.

So the argument some on here are making ( correct me if I'm wrong) is that having Sweet play ruck for 10-15% of game time over a Buku/Cordy/O'Brien etc. is so much more significantly better that we are willing to play with a man short for the other 85-90% of game time Sweet is not required to ruck ?

This risk vs reward of playing Sweet just doesn't add up. Not to mention that he doesn't apply any forward half pressure so we are more susceptible to conceding on transition.

I guess the opposing question is how many goals do we leak as a consequence of our part time ruck getting slaughtered? And is the risk vs reward changed due to this factor

 

[Mahama]

Mm yeah we were smashed around the ball early, as Pittonet demolished English in the center and even De Koning got well on top as English had zero support. Sweet plays that game and we win, I’ve got zero doubt about that.

Yes they do so what? We don’t have anyone that does, all those ruck duos are duos which are going to absolutely smash English one out in the ruck, if we could bring in Lobb we would. Cordy is not that lmao. You’re saying English can ruck 90% game time against those duos?

My recollection from that game is Pittonet did have some ridiculous number of hitouts to advantage in the first quarter (like 7 maybe?), but that our goals were conceded mostly because of bad turnovers and terrible defending of long kicks inside 50.

... And just had a skim through the first half goals on Kayo. Carlton got only 2 goals directly from ruckwork/clearances (both against English), but so did the Bulldogs (1 involving Hannan as the ruck funnily enough). The rest of their goals were indeed from turnovers or them rebounding from defensive 50. Also one of the turnovers leading to a Carlton goal started with a hitout from English down the throat of one of our players. It's all very subjective, but it's a stretch to say we lost because of getting demolished in the ruck, so I don't see Sweet making much of a difference.

Anyway, I'm still keen to see Buku as second ruck. Was very good there in the VFL, and has shown much more than Cordy (and obviously Sweet) as a forward.

 

[doggies ftw]

My recollection from that game is Pittonet did have some ridiculous number of hitouts to advantage in the first quarter (like 7 maybe?), but that our goals were conceded mostly because of bad turnovers and terrible defending of long kicks inside 50.

... And just had a skim through the first half goals on Kayo. Carlton got only 2 goals directly from ruckwork/clearances (both against English), but so did the Bulldogs (1 involving Hannan as the ruck funnily enough). The rest of their goals were indeed from turnovers or them rebounding from defensive 50. Also one of the turnovers leading to a Carlton goal started with a hitout from English down the throat of one of our players. It's all very subjective, but it's a stretch to say we lost because of getting demolished in the ruck, so I don't see Sweet making much of a difference.

Anyway, I'm still keen to see Buku as second ruck. Was very good there in the VFL, and has shown much more than Cordy (and obviously Sweet) as a forward.

Fair enough you’re probably right I’d have to watch it back, I just remember walking away on the night thinking a big part of the reason was how badly we were dominated in the ruck & in the middle

 

[VogonProsthetnic]

So we need to play Sweet for 3 throw ins Geelong might get inside 50 that there’s no guarantee he’s in the right position to take?

We don’t want Cordy or a tired English trying to ruck against Hawkins deep in their forward line. In fact I don’t want Cordy rucking at all- check out what happened when Witt’s went against Cordy late in the quarters v Gold Coast.

 

[VogonProsthetnic]

I think you'll find that it was actually Bevo who invented the two-ruck strategy (TRS). He started it in 2016 with his Roughead and Campbell TRS, but tweaked it to the premiership winning TRS of Roughead and Boyd.

He also pioneered the ‘drop your AA ruckman (Minson) and back up (Roughead) and bring in a part timer (Acce Cordy) instead strategy. Worked brilliantly for one quarter I recall.

 

[Pugz89]

Will be very interesting how Scott instructs De Koning to play on Naughts. Does he tell him to attempt to hold/block Naughton or back himself in and play his natural game. Im not sure De Koning is the type to play that physical man on man style. Might give Naughts some opportunities.

I'd imagine he will engage Naughts and hope Stewart comes across as third man. Blitz will probably also float back at different times I'd imagine.