Hurley, Crameri, Gumbleton, Ryder

[saint leo]

Not great compared to Alwyn Davey or the West Coast key forward's you've mentioned?

They don't have to apply immense forward pressure, they need to be competitive enough that they can contribute to the structure of a forward press and/or not allow a direct opponent to do as he pleases.

I would say that without weighting it because they are "talls" Crameri and Hurley are very good, Ryder is good and Hille is probably only average and maybe poor while Gumbleton is an unknown.

Not every single player on the list needs to excel in every aspect of the game. What seems more important to me is the structure that the grand final sides of the last 4 years have gone into games with. Geelong, St Kilda and Hawthorn have had 2 ruckmen and 2 key forwards; while Collingwood has had 2 key forwards, 1 ruckman and a slow, not particularly good at anything third tall forward / second ruck (Leigh Brown).

The impact of the sub rule is simply that if your second ruckman is not mobile enough and/or not suited to playing forward that you have to look at using a forward as the second ruck (it is probably not even accurate to say that it was the sub rule that brought about this thought, it just emphasised the point). It makes sense if you don't have the luxury of selecting Ryder or Hille to play as second ruck.

As far as I am concerned the defensive work of Davey, Jetta, Monfries and Winderlich aside there is no body we could turn to that would do a better job than Ryder, Crameri, Hurley and, based on his attributes, probably Gumby. If this is the case their size is totally irrelevant.

Not as good as the west coast fowards and ruckman.

Size is irrevelant if your forward line works, doesnt matter if its one tall forward or 4. The only potential problem going tall is that means 1 of them will probably not get the ball kicked to them very often meaning there value in the side isnt much. If gumbleton is the 3rd or 4th target then ya might be better off with a small crumbing player but as you say, it depends who that option is??

Ryders pressure is improving, been known to lack intesity at times and still does occasionally but is improving. Havent seen much of gumbleton so we dont really know how it will work until they play together.

We are lucky we have 2 geniune ruckman who can go forward, who know when to lead and kick a goal against a defender. Some ruckman like Kruzer and Jolly can push forward and take a mark against another ruckman but then are totally lost starting forward and having a key defender on them.

 

[fishardansin]

It wont work with Hille or TBell playing alongside 3 KPFs. Personally I hope we see TBell move to number 1 ruck, Ryder as forward/2nd ruck and Hille as depth, playing only when one of the other two are missing.

I actually think Hille would be happy with this as he'd still get at least 15 games a season replacing a ruckman when their injured or even just a tall. For example if Hurley was out he could come in and play forward, if Hooker was injured Hurley could go to CHB, ect ect. Playing around 15 games a season will help him eek a few extra years out of his body.

 

[yaco55]

It wont work with Hille or TBell playing alongside 3 KPFs. Personally I hope we see TBell move to number 1 ruck, Ryder as forward/2nd ruck and Hille as depth, playing only when one of the other two are missing.

I actually think Hille would be happy with this as he'd still get at least 15 games a season replacing a ruckman when their injured or even just a tall. For example if Hurley was out he could come in and play forward, if Hooker was injured Hurley could go to CHB, ect ect. Playing around 15 games a season will help him eek a few extra years out of his body.

OMG

Playing rucks as one of the main two key forwards doesn't work - This is why they are rucks !

 

[fishardansin]

Ryder can. He is not a lumbering giant. I think tonight showed that TBell is the best #1 ruck at the club and can go forward to kick goals. This means our best set up going forward is TBell on the ball, Ryder up forward giving him a break and Hille to come in if either is injured.

Regards playing all three that is possible in the future. If for expample like last year we miss most of our key backs or if all our forwards are out Ryder can play a role KPP at either end and the other two ruck.

Yes it isn't our best possible set up but people have to accept that it is possible that we'll have enough injuries occasionally to our talls that we'll have to play all three.

 

[yaco55]

Fish

Are you stubborn ?

Did you watch Hille's performance tonight ?

Ruck's as permanent forwards play well every 4 or 5 weeks.

 

[fishardansin]

I'm probably stubborn! I was not happy with Hille's performance tonight. Neither was I happy with it last week either.

Seriously though you need to re read what I wrote. I said that playing Hille and TBell in the same team isn't ideal. In fact in current form playing Hille at all isn't ideal. All I said was that there may come a time where we have to play all three because Paddy is filling a hole somewhere else on the field and isn't available to ruck at all.

EDIT: I also said that it is clear to me that TBell has gone well past Hille now. He passed him in the ruck last year. Well his goal scoring performance tonight showed that he's probably gone passed him up there as well. I think our best ruck set up is TBell playing 60% on the ball, 10% up forward and 20% on the bench. Paddy playing 40% on the ball, 50% up forward and 10% on the bench.

My percentages are probably all out but I just mean TBell as starting ruck and Ryder rotating through to give him a chop out and change the way our middle is structured.

 

[Ben the Gooner]

Fish

Are you stubborn ?

Did you watch Hille's performance tonight ?

Ruck's as permanent forwards play well every 4 or 5 weeks.

> Hille plays a bad game
> Proof Ryder can't play that position

 

[Lucrious]

Don't think we'll be seeing Daniher very much next year, he'll likely be developed and eased in through VFL but certainly wouldn't rule him out for a couple of senior games, with Hurley, Crameri and Ryder all in the side with TB and Hille to take the other ruck spot, there's no rush to bring in Daniher, especially now that Gumbleton is capable of playing seniors if needed, but looked lost and tired at times last night, likely send him back to VFL once Ryder and Hurley returns, but great to see him string some games together!

 

[morebeer]

I rekon it will be Hurley, Crameri and Daniher in the forward line, surrounded by smalls. Paddy in the ruck for 80-90%, with Carlisle and Daniher spelling him.

But all this talk about the forward line and thats the least of our problems. Midfield blows and backline minus Fletch also below average.

 

[yaco55]

> Hille plays a bad game
> Proof Ryder can't play that position

Ryder was tried as a sort of forward in the first half of 2011 and he struggled.

Rucks are rucks and forwards are forwards - They are different.

 

[BOMBERS 4 LIFE!!!!]

Need Paddy back.

 

[fishardansin]

Ryder was tried as a sort of forward in the first half of 2011 and he struggled.

Rucks are rucks and forwards are forwards - They are different.

It is worth persisting with. Paddy is very quick, has a super leap and obviously has a decent tank playing in the ruck. Perhaps that tank allows him to one pace the game a lot, but with the right attention in a preseason he can do a bit more strength work and train more for repetitive sprints than long distance running.

Just because he hasn't dominate long periods of the game there yet he has shown in bursts, like 3 goals in a quarter, he is very capable. Especially playing alongside Hurley, Gumby and Crameri who will all spread the defence and allow us to structure up the way we want. If given space to run at the ball he'd be unstoppable, especially as I imagine, Hurley will take their number 1 defender. We shouldn't lose too much for forward pressure either as Paddy and Crameri are quick enough to keep that high working with Jetta and Davey.

I also an thinking that Paddy will still play a fair bit of the game in the ruck.

 

[yaco55]

Fish

Are you suggesting that we play 2 or 3 rucks ?

Playing 2 rucks is fine,but 3 doesn't work.

 

[fishardansin]

Depends who you define as a ruck. If Paddy plays as a 196cm KPP for the game HE'S NOT A RUCK. I mean why doesn't everyone complain about playing Carlisle, Gumby, Hooker and Fletcher with TBell and Hille against Geelong. I mean they're all 196cm or more. So we played 6 rucks on te weekend.

Just because Paddy can and does play in the ruck doesn't mean he should never play the whole game as a KPP. He's done that before at either end to varying success. Of course this isn't our best 22 scenario I'm talking about a time that we may be decimated with injuries. I'd never ever play TBell, Paddy and Hille together if we have the full compliment of KPPs for our structure. That is stupid.

The way TBell has gone from strength to strength over the last year and a bit and Hille has slipped back it should be clear to everyone that TBell and Ryder are our best two rucks. TBell is the bigger body, in both height and weight, so he will do more damage to the opposition ruckman over the course of the game. Paddy's skill set, when properly developed could see him as the most damaging forward/2nd ruck to play the game. It is just too easy to say "oh Paddy likes to meander around the middle so we'll play him on the ball".

We need to get the most out of our list and TBell on the ball with Paddy playing bursts on the ball as well as forward is the best combination, for this year and next. After that we'll see what is happening with them as well as Gumby and Daniher to reasses what is the best line up for us. TBell's performance in the forward line and floating forward against the Cats was fantastic too.

 

[yaco55]

Got it - 2 rucks - Sounds good to me.

 

[fishardansin]

Got it - 2 rucks - Sounds good to me.

Regards the three rucks, I don't think there ever was a game where all three took a centre bounce. Problem was that Paddy was taking some so I'm pretty sure we played some games with Hille as a KPF for the whole game and TBell for large chunks.

The worst situation that came out of having all three was at the dreamtime game last year. Obviously we played like rubbish but early in the last we were still a chance. There was a ball kicked into our forward line between three players and the chase for the ball was on. The three players were the three rucks. Personally I think the biggest issue going forward is Hille. He really hasn't played well for a long time. He has always been a bit of a lumberer but his work rate was good. He just doesn't work hard enough anymore and I'm guessing that has a lot to do with lots of small injuries affecting his training and preseasons. There probably is a bit of protection for him and managing his load. Unfortunately this managment has left him ill prepared to compete properly at AFL level for 4 quarters.

 

[Ben the Gooner]

Ryder was tried as a sort of forward in the first half of 2011 and he struggled.

Rucks are rucks and forwards are forwards - They are different.

Ryder had a lot of issues going on at that time. He could have been playing solo ruck or CHB, positions he dominates, and still struggled then.

I don't agree that there's always a clear separation between rucks and forwards. Daniel Stewart, David Hale, Charlie Dixon, Drew Petrie, Patrick Ryder - all are perfectly capable rucks, all are perfectly capable forwards. They may prefer one position or another, but you wouldn't complain if Petrie played as a pure ruck or Hale played as a pure forward.