First Choice Ruckman

[Nige_Bix]

Another thread eluded to the point about Rhett Biglands maybe being dissatisfied with his amount of game time and standing in the team - with the possibility he could look elsewhere in 2004.

I certainly hope he doesn't but as a matter of interest, who would people regard as out 1st choice ruckman.

Also - is it better to one dominating big man who rucks all day or to have two in the 22 sharing the load - and if so what is the best way to manage them?

 

[DaveW]

Originally posted by dezzmo
I certainly hope he doesn't but as a matter of interest, who would people regard as out 1st choice ruckman.

Matthew Clarke. Best ruckman in the league.

Also - is it better to one dominating big man who rucks all day or to have two in the 22 sharing the load - and if so what is the best way to manage them?

Definately two. Why work one ruckman into the dirt when the duties can be shared?


On Clarke... I was absolutely furious with the treatment he got from the umpires today. The number of soft gifts that Cox recieved was astounding.

 

[SNIPER_]

Clarke for me, He's so damn consistant. unlike Biglands who goes through bursts

 

[Leaping Lindner]

Tom Leahy.

 

[DaveW]

Originally posted by Leaping Lindner
Tom Leahy.

Peter Darley.

 

[Leaping Lindner]

Originally posted by DaveW
Peter Darley.

If we are talking post WW2 I concur.

 

[Stiffy_18]

BEN MARSH!!!!!!!

Seriously Matthew Clarke. As far as tapwork goes there is no peer to Matthew Clarke. He is a master at that aspect of the game.

I would rate Biglands as a better ruckman around the ground, something he is really improving on lately. Seen that screamer today??????

For the actual structure of the team I reckon Clarke is better suited to being a 1st choice ruckman for us. Biglands can consider himself unlucky because he would start for a lot of other teams. It was good to see that he got a bit more ground time today and he rested in the forward line a bit.

In a couple of years time, when he reaches his peak of development, Biglands will be our number 1 ruckman.

 

[Damp Squarie]

Rhett Biglands.
Rough Tough and Hard to Bluff.

Sure; Clarkeys the ultimate tap ruckman and has other fine attributes such as scrapping in a stoppage; but I like Rhetts strong marking, great chase and tackle game so Im giving him my vote.

SIGN HIM NOW

 

[RaDaR ReiLLy]

I'd laugh if someone voted for Marsh- they'd have to be drunk!!!

 

[Nige_Bix]

RE Marsh..

.. Well I had a couple or three when I did the thread - as he's our only other ruckman -as Stiffy keeps reminding us - I thought I should include him - you never know someone might actually vote for him - [and hopefully would be genuine about it] - although 95% of this group are very anti-Marsh.

 

[Jerome]

Originally posted by RaDaR ReiLLy
I'd laugh if someone voted for Marsh- they'd have to be drunk!!!

This highlights an interesting little situation we will have to face in the next few months.

What to do with Marsh. What or who can we get for him? His time is neary up, we're gonna hve to deal with him soon. If he plays well in the SANFL finals that may boost his value a bit - if someone wants him.

If not we are gonna have to trade really well. Signing up Roo, Burton, Reilly, Goodwin and hopefully McLoud has secured our key midfielders for a few years. We may have to cut a second tier midfielder - Schuback Gallagher or Doughty to get a decent big bloke.

 

[DaveW]

Marsh is staying put.

 

[Jerome]

Originally posted by DaveW
Marsh is staying put.

That concept does not fill me with confidence in the AFC.

He has got to be trade bait. He is not getting a game and its in the best interest of both parties if he looks elsewhere.

His days of being a young ruckman with potential are over and we need to get something for him.

 

[DaveW]

Originally posted by Jerome
That concept does not fill me with confidence in the AFC.

Why not? Would you'd rather go into 2004 with no ruck depth?

He has got to be trade bait. He is not getting a game and its in the best interest of both parties if he looks elsewhere.

Nah uh. He was up for trade last year, and there were no takers. We won't get anything in return for Marsh.

His days of being a young ruckman with potential are over and we need to get something for him.

Ruckmen can take a long time to develop. And Marsh isn't as bad as everyone makes out. He's a decent tap ruckman and he proved that in his one AFL match against Hawthorn this year. By all reports he's steadily improving at Westies under Shaun Rehn.

Even if we do draft a young ruckman, its incredibly unlikely that such a player would be ready made for AFL. We have to keep Marsh at least one more year for the sake of our depth if nothing else.

Let's not forget everyone wanted Perrie delisted at the end of last year (except for me ). I see Marsh as the next Perrie; give Benny the opportunities and he'll repay the faith we've had in keeping him on the list.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Originally posted by DaveW
Marsh is staying put.

Dave, I'm with Jerome on this one. I have had enough of seeing Marsh play dud-games in AFC colours. I would like him delisted even if it meant taking the risk on drafting a couple of raw ruckmen. IMO, trading/drafting for another ruckman must be a priority for AFC. Also, I think we may need to look at trading a few of our fringe midfielders (eg. Doughty & Gallagher) who would do OK with a side with a less-quality midfield ... particularly given the likes of Reilly are probably going to come through next year (& Stiffy as part of the midfield mix).

Back to the question, I'm not going to pick either Clarke or Biglands, as they compliment each other well. Wish Clarke would wear a glove though to improve his marking (like Pitman did).

 

[Stiffy_18]

Well I am with DaveW on this one. Unless we can get a better ruckman in return, Marsh is staying put. I have closely followed his progress this year and most of the time we here traet him harshly (myself included). Looking at him last year and this year there has been an improvement in his game. His tapwork is getting better and he is definetly better than Clark in field marking.

Marsh was OK in a game against Hawthorn before he got injured. He is still troubled by that knee injury. He wanted to get back ASAP and actually did much more work than was required and his knee has gone backwards. Marsh will stay put. No one is going to give you a decent ruckman for Doughty and Gallagher put together and there is only 2 maybe 3 ruckman that might be worth drafting this year.

I would rather have Marsh as our 3rd ruck than go in with a young kid that might never make it. Its all about list balance.

 

[DaveW]

Let me sum up again...

Marsh's trade value: NONE
Adelaide's ruck depth: POOR
Cost of keeping Marsh: NOTHING

Conclusion: Marsh stays

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Originally posted by DaveW
Let me sum up again...

Marsh's trade value: NONE
Adelaide's ruck depth: POOR
Cost of keeping Marsh: NOTHING

Conclusion: Marsh stays

Marsh's trade value: NONE
Marsh's playing value: NONE
Cost of keeping Marsh: MY F'ING SANITY!!!

 

[DaveW]

It's not as if Marsh will be taking the spot of a superstar or a promising youngster. Heck, we went into the 2003 season a player short. We just need to keep him there until we have better ruck depth.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Originally posted by DaveW
It's not as if Marsh will be taking the spot of a superstar or a promising youngster.

How do you figure that out? I would prefer an unknown potential ruckman on our list rather than Marsh who will never make it & is wasting a valuable spot on our list.

 

[DaveW]

Originally posted by Kane McGoodwin
How do you figure that out?

Our list was one short this year.

Originally posted by Kane McGoodwin
I would prefer an unknown potential ruckman on our list rather than Marsh who will never make it & is wasting a valuable spot on our list.

Why not both?

And I disagree that Marsh is wasting his spot. He's the back-up ruckman and he can hardly prove himself if he isn't given the opportunities.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by DaveW
Our list was one short this year.

Still is.

Kane McGoodwin, we could carry 40 players on our list this year but we only carried 39 so Marsh wasn't taking anyones spot and chances are he won't either.

QUESTION: What is more important, having some sort of ruckman depth even if its poor or having only 2 ruckman capable of playing AFL football??????

Trust me, if Calrke and or Biglands go down, all of a sudden Ben Marsh doesn't look too bad. One thing is for sure, I don't want another repeat of the year when Mark Stevens and Ian Perrie are our ruck division because of the injury.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18
Still is.

Kane McGoodwin, we could carry 40 players on our list this year but we only carried 39 so Marsh wasn't taking anyones spot and chances are he won't either.

QUESTION: What is more important, having some sort of ruckman depth even if its poor or having only 2 ruckman capable of playing AFL football??????

Trust me, if Calrke and or Biglands go down, all of a sudden Ben Marsh doesn't look too bad. One thing is for sure, I don't want another repeat of the year when Mark Stevens and Ian Perrie are our ruck division because of the injury.

Our list could have been 1 short for salary cap reasons.

My point is Marsh is a waste of space & I would prefer a youngster instead of him - even if meant we had to play Stevens, Perrie, Kenny or Skipworth in the ruck if we desperate! However, we should be looking to trade / draft a couple of ruckman as a priority for 2004.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by Kane McGoodwin
However, we should be looking to trade / draft a couple of ruckman as a priority for 2004.

The only ruckman that will be up for trade tis year are: Street, McKee and Allen and to be brutally honest I much rather have Marsh on my list.

SO lets get this straight, If there is a ruckman in the draft that is worth mid 2nd round pick at best, it your turn to pick late in the 1st round, Do you go for the best available or do you take a punt on that ruckman, because you fear that he might not be around your 2nd pick comes up??????

What we should do and what is realistically possible are 2 very different things.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Let's get this straight - Marsh is not up to AFL standard & is wasting a valuable spot on our list. What is the point in keeping someone who will not make it. Better of drafting someone with unknown potentil.