Darren Jolly

[Thommo 42]

Don't get me wrong, I'd have him BOG today or bloody close to it. Outstanding game from the big man today.

My question is this.

Jolly had 20 disposals, kicked 4 goals and had 17 hitouts.

We lost the clearances and both opposition ruckman had more hitouts than Jolly and overall we had just over half as many hitouts.

Now, lets imagine Fraser played a game, had 25 disposals, kicked 3 goals and had 15 hitouts. We get smashed in the clearances and also have less hitouts.

Do people here think they would universally be praising Fraser, or would it have been "another good game from him, but his primary role is in the ruck and he got beaten in the hitout stats again and we lost the clearances"

This is not a Fraser apologist thread, Jolly is clearly superior and has made us a better side. It's just something I noticed while watching the game, Jolly was consistently not getting his hand on the ball at ruck contests and we've always loved to get into Fraser about the same thing, and qualified any good games he had with 'got beaten in the ruck though'

He may not be capable of ever doing this again, so its not a call for him to be recalled either - just a reminder that when looking back he wasn't as bad as people make out, not even close.

 

[smiddaz123]

My issue with Fraser was that he wasn't just not getting the tap, he was making it far too easy for the opposition ruckman. He'd get thrown around like a doll and the opposing ruckman could control the tap without much pressure.

If Jolly isn't winning the taps, he's still making it difficult for the opposing ruckman. That's the main difference for me.

 

[Kirby]

Jolly was outstanding today.

Until Fraser produces a decent performance this is mute. It's up to Josh.

 

[didaka]

Jolly has presence, Fraser doesn't.

 

[Pie eyed]

Don't get me wrong, I'd have him BOG today or bloody close to it. Outstanding game from the big man today.

My question is this.

Jolly had 20 disposals, kicked 4 goals and had 17 hitouts.

We lost the clearances and both opposition ruckman had more hitouts than Jolly and overall we had just over half as many hitouts.

Now, lets imagine Fraser played a game, had 25 disposals, kicked 3 goals and had 15 hitouts. We get smashed in the clearances and also have less hitouts.

Do people here think they would universally be praising Fraser, or would it have been "another good game from him, but his primary role is in the ruck and he got beaten in the hitout stats again and we lost the clearances"

This is not a Fraser apologist thread, Jolly is clearly superior and has made us a better side. It's just something I noticed while watching the game, Jolly was consistently not getting his hand on the ball at ruck contests and we've always loved to get into Fraser about the same thing, and qualified any good games he had with 'got beaten in the ruck though'

He may not be capable of ever doing this again, so its not a call for him to be recalled either - just a reminder that when looking back he wasn't as bad as people make out, not even close.

The difference is Jolly has just done this. Fraser has not and is yet to have a dominant game this season.
If Fraser was kicking 3-4 goals a game no-one would give a rats arse if he never won a tap out to be honest.
The unfortunate thing is he has not.
If you think I'm in the trade Fraser camp though you'd be wrong. I want to him to hit some form and have not written him off at all.
With him and Jolly in form we are a 10% better side and a genuine flag danger.

 

[Thommo 42]

thats not what I'm talking about.

I'm not referring to Fraser vs Jolly or recalling Fraser in any capacity. I'm just pointing out an inconsistency in our feedback of a good performance, when we still lost the ruck and the clearances.

I've never believed hitout stats anyway, I think they are rubbish, but thats another matter altogether!

 

[StillWaiting5689]

My issue with Fraser was that he wasn't just not getting the tap, he was making it far too easy for the opposition ruckman. He'd get thrown around like a doll and the opposing ruckman could control the tap without much pressure.

If Jolly isn't winning the taps, he's still making it difficult for the opposing ruckman. That's the main difference for me.

This, the only ruckman that can treat Jolly like Fraser gets treated every game is Sandilands. The thing to remember is losing a hit out isn't the same as getting completely pwned in the hitouts.
Going up against a strong ruck duo like cox and nicnat it probably wouldn't be expected he win the hitout count which is why it was important for him to make up for it in other areas and provide contests, which he did and was BOG.

 

[Nardz]

im not sure that jolly really got beaten in the ruck

he had 16 hitouts, natanui and cox had 17 each.

the difference is that brown only had 4...

im not sure how many brown contested for compared to cox/natanui, it's likely that jolly did probably win less than 50%, but he didnt do too bad

 

[Thommo 42]

I think everyone missed the premise of the thread.

I don't want Fraser to be recalled, I'm not even talking baout his current form.

I'm just pointing out that Jolly is being lauded BOG in a game that we lost the ruck and lost the clearances in, because of his efforts around the game and kicking goals. Fraser has done the same thing (years before, obviously not this season) and still been criticised about losing the ruck battle.

Clearly Fraser is nowhere near our best 22, that is not what the thread is about.

I'm just wondering if we are now happy for our ruckman to get a bit of ball around the ground, float forward and kick goals, but still get beaten in the ruck contest. As we have never been happy with this situation in the past, but itppears that we are now.

 

[Heater39]

Jolly also did what a ruckman should do around the ground by taking contested marks and also going forward and kicking goals. If Fraser played a game like Jolly tonight, people wouldn't be criticising his ruckwork, they'd be praising his overall game.

Btw I think you're underrating Jolly's ruckwork tonight, I would say he at least broke even with Cox and NicNat, they just dominated Leigh Brown which boosted their hitouts.

 

[Pie eyed]

thats not what I'm talking about.

I'm not referring to Fraser vs Jolly or recalling Fraser in any capacity. I'm just pointing out an inconsistency in our feedback of a good performance, when we still lost the ruck and the clearances.

I've never believed hitout stats anyway, I think they are rubbish, but thats another matter altogether!

LOL
I get what you meant...

and agree.

Fraser would be judged differently.

My post may have been a bit obscure as I'm full of good quality Savignon Blanc right about now........ __________________

 

[The Royal Sampler]

I see your point, but Jolly was outmarking the opposition ruckman, rather than being outmarked by Peter Bell in the defensive goalsquare.

Josh is a tall guy who is very good at the small man stuff.
Jolly is a ruckman who is very good at the job he's actually in the team for, and at least decent at the small man stuff to boot.

 

[Thommo 42]

Btw I think you're underrating Jolly's ruckwork tonight, I would say he at least broke even with Cox and NicNat, they just dominated Leigh Brown which boosted their hitouts.

He ruckled solo, both opponents had more hitouts, we had less clearances.

Pretty much sums up Fraser's rucking career for a decade really.

Unfortunately, Fraser no longer gets the bal or kicks goals either, I just thought it was interesting that we're suddenly happy to lose the ruck.

 

[Thommo 42]

I see your point, but Jolly was outmarking the opposition ruckman, rather than being outmarked by Peter Bell in the defensive goalsquare.

I would expect more intelligent discussion from you TRS. That is one of the more overrated incidents of all time. Anyone who has played football at any level knows that a ball kicked ot advantage side like that should generally be marked by the bloke protecting the space, regardless of size. If he was outmarked overhead from a 50/50 ball, that would be worth noting.

Josh is a tall guy who is very good at the small man stuff.
Jolly is a ruckman who is very good at the job he's actually in the team for, and at least decent at the small man stuff to boot.

I didn't see him outmark his opposing ruckman much, he took some good marks, but usually Cox/Natanui were elsewhere. As stated previously, this is not a commentary on the quality of his game, its a small insight to the massive double standards applied to a fee of our selected scapegoats over the years.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

You're right, but the fact remains that Jolly is a far better ruckman than Josh. Josh at his best is an excellent mix of part-time ruckman and part-time forward. We need a full-time ruckman. It may not always be reflected in the stats, but Jolly can provide a contest in a way that Josh can't, which is what is expected of someone in the role of a ruckman.

Josh is a smart player who knows where to run to get involved in the match, and because his footskills are excellent, and his hands at ground level are exception for a big guy, he can be a very damaging player too. Where Josh is lacking, unfortunately, is pretty much the meat-and-potatoes of being an AFL ruckman; contested marking, hitouts, spoiling, and providing a physical presence.

 

[Thommo 42]

Sure, no arguments here.

But yet our new and improved AFL ruckman has still consistently been beaten in the ruck this year.

I guess my point is that its not all about the hitout stats.

Oh, and I feel that you are underselling the ruckwork of Fraser from years gone by (despite what the hitout stats tell you)

 

[soho]

wonder if fraser or wood should have played, given the weagles have 2 solid rucks...

fraser's problem has always been that he just looks old and slow and disinterested... even if his stats matched jollys, his performance would have LOOKED worse, and easier to criticize...

 

[mattys123]

What I noticed tonight was, no matter who won the ruck contest, it rarely had an impact on who actually won the clearance.

In the 3rd quarter, where we "turned the tide" and won a lot of centre clearances, Cox actually won a lot of the ruck taps, yet we cleared the ball because we restricted the likes of Priddis and Selwood.

Ruckman in a pure "ruck sense", as in hitouts to advantage and just plain hitouts, are highly over rated.

But if you can find a ruckman that can go forward (or back) and have an impact on the scoreboard or at least play a definitive role, then they become "priceless".

To the OP regarding Fraser, I get your point, you have to remember one of Fraser's best ever games was the 02 GF, where he went forward and kicked goals, and had plenty of the ball, despite being smashed in the ruck.

I can see a similarity of sorts between Fraser "in his prime" and Jolly "in his prime", the main difference is Jolly's prime has been longer both in time and consistency, and Jolly is still in his prime, at a similar age to Fraser.

The question I ask is would we be a premiership contender without Jolly?
(My answer is No by the way).

 

[Football God]

They should rotate ruck/forward line/bench but only if fraser can improve in the vfl. atm we are doing better with one ruckman, i reckon we should leep it that way.

 

[PieLebo87]

Yeah but Thommo, when was 25 possies and 3-4 goals from Fraser not a good game? Anyone that ever argued that wasn't a good game from a ruckman is out of their minds, even if it meant Fraser didn't win the hitout count.

Plus, as others have mentioned earlier, Jolly has an extra 5 kgs and presence.

A bonus that works in Jolly's favour is that he cost us a late 1st round pick, where as Fraser cost us a #1 pick.

 

[Thommo 42]

Yeah but Thommo, when was 25 possies and 3-4 goals from Fraser not a good game? Anyone that ever argued that wasn't a good game from a ruckman is out of their minds, even if it meant Fraser didn't win the hitout count.

you only need to read any thread about josh Fraser for the last decade to see that it was never enough. In fact many blame him for 02/03 because we were beaten in the ruck, yet he was close to our best player over those 2 games.

 

[Jedi01]

Now, lets imagine Fraser played a game, had 25 disposals, kicked 3 goals and had 15 hitouts. We get smashed in the clearances and also have less hitouts.

Do people here think they would universally be praising Fraser

Yes.

Let it go dude, Fraser has got what he deserves over the years.

 

[WakeUpPies]

you only need to read any thread about josh Fraser for the last decade to see that it was never enough. In fact many blame him for 02/03 because we were beaten in the ruck, yet he was close to our best player over those 2 games.

I am going to repeat whats already been said in this thread but when was the last time Josh had a game like this?

People hang shit on Fraser because he has rarely had a good game since 2005 or 2006.

If Josh played this he would be praised....People even praised his VFL performance, come on.

 

[2TONE]

wtf do you people want 65 hit outs 54 tackles 12 goals . Jolly has made the pies 100% better than what fraser and wood could have done combined. The damage that this guy is about to do in september will the defining factor. Also hit outs are overated, even if a player was to have say 40 hit outs how many actually go to advantage.... its all about the contest, presence, and aggression, all of which only a handful of ruckman have got , we have one of the best at all these things. jolly, ball, pendle,swan,didak, this talk of no stars is laughable and opposition fans fantasy land stuff. like dids said in h/ sun yesterday concerning sepetember our best is good enough..

 

[Bay Pie]

My issue with Fraser was that he wasn't just not getting the tap, he was making it far too easy for the opposition ruckman. He'd get thrown around like a doll and the opposing ruckman could control the tap without much pressure.

If Jolly isn't winning the taps, he's still making it difficult for the opposing ruckman. That's the main difference for me.

This.

Jolly rarely actually concedes a tap to advantage by the opposition ruckman. Josh does.