Prediction Geelong’s ruck/onball setup

[Gavin Excell]

Put Jenkins in the ruck, then. If we throw Sav in the ruck at his stage of development we may as well open a rehab room in his name. Nic Naitanui has played barely than 30 games in the past 3 seasons.

Jenkins ruck?

nooooooooooooo

 

[Landgraft]

Jenkins ruck?

nooooooooooooo

Jenkins is a better ruck option than Fort right now imo. He's probably going to do ruck relief if/when he plays this year because it's been a constituent feature of his game.

 

[goyoucatters]

Plan b for the coaches is blicavs. After 6 years are we still in denial about plan b?

I'm in denial about the efficacy of it, most definitely.

The two positional moves that most spell doom for us this year are:

(a) someone other than Rhys (Sav excepted) in the ruck; and
(b) Blitz moved away from a KPD role.

So the combination of both of these disastrous moves in one 'masterstroke' would again be a monstrous act of villainy that just about franks our demise.

And, yes, I am absolutely terrified that it is going to happen again.

Which was the whole point of my original post.

 

[goyoucatters]

I wholeheartedly agree with you on this, but am a little torn too.

It starts with my belief that a forward structure of Hawkins, Jenkins and Sav will be too cumbersome and won't work.

So that gets me to wondering about putting Sav in the ruck..... He has a leap, and could improve the quality of supply to our mids.

If that happens, do they then get the ball up forward quicker, where Hawkins and Jenkins are lurking?

It's a strategy that I'd genuinely like to see trialled for a couple of consecutive games......but yeah, if they won't do that then Stanley, and no one but Stanley.

I too think it is highly doubtful this structure will work for us. And I do believe Esava could be amazing in the ruck if his body was up to it. But I anticipate that he is still too raw (and probably not up to scratch aerobically) to handle the role this year.

So, for me, it's Rhys in the ruck and Toma & Esava as the combo up front. With Jenkins as the injury reliever in either of the KPF roles, if and when necessary.

However, I do fear incessant tinkering will leave the question of preferred structure up for grabs until late in the season yet again. And, if that happens, you can only pray that they stumble on the right mix for any finals we might play.

Of course, the recent history in that respect is far from promising.

 

[Drunkcat]

If we need a ruckman we can just go back to Danger again lol

 

[Partridge]

Plan b for the coaches is blicavs. After 6 years are we still in denial about plan b?

Even better than that. After 6 years without any success at all to recommend it.

 

[Cataholic]

I too think it is highly doubtful this structure will work for us. And I do believe Esava could be amazing in the ruck if his body was up to it. But I anticipate that he is still too raw (and probably not up to scratch aerobically) to handle the role this year.

So, for me, it's Rhys in the ruck and Toma & Esava as the combo up front. With Jenkins as the injury reliever in either of the KPF roles, if and when necessary.

However, I do fear incessant tinkering will leave the question of preferred structure up for grabs until late in the season yet again. And, if that happens, you can only pray that they stumble on the right mix for any finals we might play.

Of course, the recent history in that respect is far from promising.

Exactly how I feel.

And I too have little faith in them getting the structure right

 

[TheWoodenSlug]

It's a relatively ugly reality, for sure.

But, if they are not prepared to throw Rata in there (who could be anything in that role, despite his obvious prowess up forward as well), they simply must stay the course with Rhys. He is miles ahead of the next best option at the club. Which is damning him with the very faintest of praise, I know.

So, the 2020 ruck philosophy must be as simple as:

Plan A - play Rhys
Plan B - play Rhys
Plan C - see plan A

Posters here will suggest that we're looking very ordinary in there if that's the strategy. Which might be the case.

For me, though, it's even more the case that we will struggle to even be ordinary in the ruck if they mess with it beyond that.

Fort is not the answer to any question that playing in the AFL is currently asking. And the options beyond that don't bear thinking about in any way.

Lock. Rhys. In.

Yep, this is basically what I've been thinking since the end of last year's trade/draft period.

Stanley:

 

[CatToTheFuture]

It's a relatively ugly reality, for sure.

But, if they are not prepared to throw Rata in there (who could be anything in that role, despite his obvious prowess up forward as well), they simply must stay the course with Rhys. He is miles ahead of the next best option at the club. Which is damning him with the very faintest of praise, I know.

So, the 2020 ruck philosophy must be as simple as:

Plan A - play Rhys
Plan B - play Rhys
Plan C - see plan A

Posters here will suggest that we're looking very ordinary in there if that's the strategy. Which might be the case.

For me, though, it's even more the case that we will struggle to even be ordinary in the ruck if they mess with it beyond that.

Fort is not the answer to any question that playing in the AFL is currently asking. And the options beyond that don't bear thinking about in any way.

Lock. Rhys. In.

Agree, we can't afford to get cute. If he's getting slammed then the mids need to adapt because it ain't changing

 

[BORIS332]

Stanley reminded us all tonight just why chris Scott was forced to play Blicavs in the ruck against Collingwood in the finals. He’s incredibly unreliable. His best is great. His worst is pitiful. He has the intensity of a wet lettuce at times and yet will occasionally split a pack. And then there’s the midfield. For all the whining about constable, he was no saviour tonight. He’s slow and still doesn’t defend enough for my liking. Atkins works hard but he’s just not clean or polished enough for my liking. And he’s mid 20’s so what he shows now is what he’s got.

we honestly need to bite the bullet and start playing Ratugolea as our first ruckman. Jenkins as the second tall forward and let Stanley sit in the VFL. If there’s an emergency, we break that glass.

and as for the midfield. Narkle showed a bit tonight, but s**t we missed Selwood, Steven (hopefully) Parfitt, Duncan and daft I say it, a fit cockatoo. Parfitt and cockatoo tackle with aggression and run hard both ways. As does Selwood, and steven is lightning quick.

I 100% agree the Stanley experiment is over. He's 29 now, he's not going to ever be competent. Also agree that Esava needs to head into the ruck with our midfield rotations including Danger, Selwood, Guthrie, Steven, Parfitt, Narkle, and Atkins in that order.

Cockatoo will never come good, let's be realistic. Constable is behind each of the aforementioned players and needs to find a second position, the days of rotating purely mid-bench are over. I like Fogarty but he needs to get a clear run from injury. Menegola is a liability in big games with his atrocious skills and decision-making but could find a spot as a defensive wingman. Cooper Stephens needs a season in the VFL. Jacob Kennerley is coming in hot.

 

[Partridge]

I'm in denial about the efficacy of it, most definitely.

The two positional moves that most spell doom for us this year are:

(a) someone other than Rhys (Sav excepted) in the ruck; and
(b) Blitz moved away from a KPD role.

So the combination of both of these disastrous moves in one 'masterstroke' would again be a monstrous act of villainy that just about franks our demise.

And, yes, I am absolutely terrified that it is going to happen again.

If it makes you feel better, it's likely to not happen again until early September. And only when the opposition have a gun ruckman.

Good thing is there's a slew of fortune tellers around here to tell us how it would have panned out, so it can never be a mistake.

 

[goyoucatters]

If it makes you feel better, it's likely to not happen again until early September. And only when the opposition have a gun ruckman.

Good thing is there's a slew of fortune tellers around here to tell us how it would have panned out, so it can never be a mistake.

The blank evidence of watching the game is that we lost both in the ruck and down back as a consequence of dropping Rhys and moving Blitz.

So even if Rhys gets mauled in that game (given Blitz certainly did), we would have at least had an AA-quality KPD playing in his best position. Instead, the decision became a monumental lose-lose for the team in two significant roles on the ground, and was the biggest single factor in a selection sense that cost us on the night.

In the light of all that, I would dispute that there is a 'slew' on here who would advocate the ruck selection for the QF was anything other than a 'mistake'. I don't think I could name you even half a dozen posters who would believe that.

However, I do concede that, slew or otherwise, nothing about a 'majority view' on here will potentially stop the club from making the same atrocious decision later this season. After all, in a finite MC, not even a slew is required to prevent what I consider to be collective madness taking hold.

 

[Partridge]

The blank evidence of watching the game is that we lost both in the ruck and down back as a consequence of dropping Rhys and moving Blitz.

So even if Rhys gets mauled in that game (given Blitz certainly did), we would have at least had an AA-quality KPD playing in his best position. Instead, the decision became a monumental lose-lose for the team in two significant roles on the ground, and was the biggest single factor in a selection sense that cost us on the night.

That's the bit that's particularly annoying - because Stanley actually did play on Grundy in Round 1. And he did negate him. And we won. So that's a coach or match committee completely ignoring results from the same year at the same venue versus the same opponent with the same player. Beyond insanity.

 

[4quarter_cat]

I don't think it could have been put better Partridge. (Maybe you could have bolded the underlined word, to add even more emphasis)

 

[Partridge]

I don't think it could have been put better Partridge. (Maybe you could have bolded the underlined word, to add even more emphasis)

Consider it done.

 

[goyoucatters]

That's the bit that's particularly annoying - because Stanley actually did play on Grundy in Round 1. And he did negate him. And we won. So that's a coach or match committee completely ignoring results from the same year at the same venue versus the same opponent with the same player. Beyond insanity.

You can suggest (as some do here) that it's about a wildly arrogant coach who is determined to win with the funkiest approach known to the AFL, just to demonstrate his mastery of all things.

I think it's far more likely that it actually reflects a measure of insecurity from our decision-makers about our approach, with an innate fear that our personnel and game plan will not be enough when the heat truly goes on. This then results in wild moments of 'what if...', where the MC seems to take the view that we could throw the opposition out entirely by changing vital elements of our own structure at the most critical juncture.

Whereas it appears to be doing nothing more than enacting confusion and uncertainty amongst our own group, while the opposition revels in our collective hesitancy (and their own settled structures) to reel off game-altering bursts that obliterate our chances rapidly and irrevocably.

I do understand that everyone associated with coaching at the club has forgotten more about the caper than I have ever known. But I do believe that one non-negotiable element of every successful coach's kitbag must be an unwavering commitment to their game-style and strategy that lasts for as long as it is successful. As it is, the club now seems to, having hit upon strategies that put us in a strong position when compared to our opponents, then abandon the course regularly for no foreseeable reason than to tinker with some of the very elements that have engendered success. Seems like a mindset driven by fear of 'the other' rather than faith in what we can call our own.

Last year's early season form (and the cliff we then plunged over later in the H&A) as well as the obtuse selection policy operating throughout the 2019 finals are supreme examples of this to me.

Don't like it. Don't understand it. And certainly don't discount seeing it happen yet again in 2020.

 

[CatRiot]

Do we have a list vacancy to grab a Ruck in the SSP?

I guess even if we did, we know no Rucks outside our list are currently training with the club, so I guess the ultimate answer is no.

 

[Gavin Excell]

Keep throwing up names we don't have an AFL quality first ruck on the list,it will be adhoc again for this season unfortunately.

In defence of Scott, who could have predicted we would have another year of sub standard rucks.

 

[Catsmaninamerica]

Jackson thurlow selection is ageing like a $2 bottle Of Spumante.

 

[TheWoodenSlug]

That's the bit that's particularly annoying - because Stanley actually did play on Grundy in Round 1. And he did negate him. And we won. So that's a coach or match committee completely ignoring results from the same year at the same venue versus the same opponent with the same player. Beyond insanity.

Not to mention Stanley had just beaten - or at the very least broken even with - another good ruckman in Kreuzer the week before:

Stanley: 35 hitouts, 15 disposals, 2 marks, 4 tackles, 1 goal (also a great tap to Dangerfield at the opening bounce, directly resulting in a goal)
Kreuzer: 34 hitouts, 11 disposals, 1 mark, 2 tackles, 0 goals

The week before that Blicavs was smashed in the ruck by Martin in a 1 point loss up in Brisbane - at least 2 of their goals coming directly from a Martin hitout.

The coach/match committee ignored a lot of things in making that call, most notably common sense.

 

[Partridge]

You can suggest (as some do here) that it's about a wildly arrogant coach who is determined to win with the funkiest approach known to the AFL, just to demonstrate his mastery of all things.

I think it's far more likely that it actually reflects a measure of insecurity from our decision-makers about our approach, with an innate fear that our personnel and game plan will not be enough when the heat truly goes on. This then results in wild moments of 'what if...', where the MC seems to take the view that we could throw the opposition out entirely by changing vital elements of our own structure at the most critical juncture.

Whereas it appears to be doing nothing more than enacting confusion and uncertainty amongst our own group, while the opposition revels in our collective hesitancy (and their own settled structures) to reel off game-altering bursts that obliterate our chances rapidly and irrevocably.

Edited for brevity, but excellent post.

I don't think it's arrogance, although Scott does a hell of a job of impersonating that at times. I think it's ultimately uncertainty. I think there are very, very few players Scott really trusts. Everyone else can be moved or shuffled about - Henderson or Taylor up forward for instance, Stanley dropped - depending on Scott's mood. It does nothing for team cohesion, and it results in bizarre moves being tried in finals that rarely if ever work.

Our ruck stocks are a perfect demonstration of this. Before the Qualifying Final last year, we had four fully fit ruckmen on the list - Stanley, Smith, Fort, and Abbott. You can query the last two, that's fair enough. But Stanley was in form, and Smith although he's hot and cold can play. Neither have ever had Scott's full confidence and you can just bet Stanley still doesn't. Even though he's our best ruckman by a mile.

That to me is as big a problem as any. Not trusting players to develop in positions and being far, far too enamoured of his favourites. Can't see either of those things changing.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

I 100% agree the Stanley experiment is over. He's 29 now, he's not going to ever be competent. Also agree that Esava needs to head into the ruck with our midfield rotations including Danger, Selwood, Guthrie, Steven, Parfitt, Narkle, and Atkins in that order.

Cockatoo will never come good, let's be realistic. Constable is behind each of the aforementioned players and needs to find a second position, the days of rotating purely mid-bench are over. I like Fogarty but he needs to get a clear run from injury. Menegola is a liability in big games with his atrocious skills and decision-making but could find a spot as a defensive wingman. Cooper Stephens needs a season in the VFL. Jacob Kennerley is coming in hot.

I really doubt Sav has the tank to play 1st ruck week In week out but I could be wrong.

I doubt the ruck option we need is on our list but I hope I'm wrong on that too.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Do we have a list vacancy to grab a Ruck in the SSP?

I guess even if we did, we know no Rucks outside our list are currently training with the club, so I guess the ultimate answer is no.

no we don't.

 

[Hinkley29]

I am convinced that SDK was drafted to be the ruckman of the future.

Doesn’t help us short term, but I reckon we will see him in the ruck in the VFL sooner rather than later.

 

[goyoucatters]

I think it's ultimately uncertainty. I think there are very, very few players Scott really trusts.

One of the very frustrating aspects of this reality is his insistence on just throwing his preferred players around to fill whatever role is up for grabs, rather than going for the 'next cab' at the club who has some experience in that position.

Of course, you can't simply pitchfork in a whole bunch of greenhorns from the twos if you have multiple players go down in key positions. But his seeming obsession with just moving the pieces he 'trusts' into all sorts of demonstrably unsuitable roles across the ground is as infuriating as it is predictable.

Key example is us continuing to play a minimum of eight defenders every week rather than balancing the side more reasonably between attack and defence. And it means players are regularly asked to step into unfamiliar roles just so that the same names can appear on the team sheet.

Even at U11's level, you start to figure out that some players are only suited in one role or in one segment of the ground. And yet we cast players around the place at the truly critical moments, somehow believing that their general footy smarts (despite their inexperience in that particular role) will be enough to secure success against good quality and well balanced opposition line-ups. The results of this approach have become all too painfully predictable.

And as the latest funky move shows up on the ground, we're surely in a place now where part of our team's mindset is 'here we go again...' And at the very same time, the opposition is probably thinking 'here we go again!'

It's almost as if the phrase 'too clever by half' was invented to describe the m.o. of our MC when the heat goes on.

Please. Just. Stop.