Kurt Tippett

[Caramelas13]

Kurt must be left at full-forward permanently. He is to the Adelaide Football Club what Nick Reiwolt is to St Kilda. Using him in the ruck is just wasting his true talent. Having him in the team as our 2nd ruckman is robbing our forward line of a focal target. It annoys the crap out of me how we sacrifice Kurt in the ruck casue Griffen can't do what he's paid to do. Griff has had enough chances in the past few years and we keep getting loose change out of him year in year out. For gods sake, play Maric & Sellar this week and keep Kurt at Full Forward for the whole game.

 

[taylor_walker_13]

No point leaving him in the forwardline if he is never going to see the footy, he needed to ruck last night as Griffen was a **** and Maric was left back in Adelaide.

 

[Allbetsroff]

The thing is, if Adelaide aren't winning the ball in the middle it doesn't matter who they have up forward.

 

[Symesy15]

No point leaving him in the forwardline if he is never going to see the footy, he needed to ruck last night as Griffen was a **** and Maric was left back in Adelaide.

Maric actually went over to Perth - which confused me, if he's fit - PLAY HIM! If he needs game time, leave him in Adelaide to play for the Magpies. Still can't get over that we didn't play him because we shouldn't have to put Tippett in ruck, especially when half of our forward line is on the injury list!

 

[-CG-]

No point leaving him in the forwardline if he is never going to see the footy, he needed to ruck last night as Griffen was a **** and Maric was left back in Adelaide.

Actually Maric was in the stands watching

 

[Riggy1]

No point leaving him in the forwardline if he is never going to see the footy,

this.
it's exactly the same as Freo last year
they couldn't get the ball up forward so they just played Pavlich in the midfield just to get him into the game, and perhaps (PERHAPS) influence the result

 

[Thumpy]

Quite simply, don't play Griffen anymore. Maric is by far the better ruckman and with him in the team, there is no need to move Tippett from the FF position.

 

[Mismatched]

No point leaving him in the forwardline if he is never going to see the footy, he needed to ruck last night as Griffen was a **** and Maric was left back in Adelaide.

The thing is, if Adelaide aren't winning the ball in the middle it doesn't matter who they have up forward.

Well the fact that we managed only 1 less inside 50(44 to 43) than Fremantle suggests that getting the ball forward wasn't really the issue. But when we barely manage half the scoring shots from essentially the same number of forward 50 entry's, having our number 1 ruckman spending at least half his game time in the ruck is far from ideal. Especially when he's our forward who is least dependent on perfect entry into the forward 50.

Going into this game with Tippett as our second ruck, especially considering we were lacking Porplyzia, Knights and Burton from our best forward 6 and were going up against Sandilands none the less, was an absolutely disgraceful decision.

 

[dylan123]

Why exactly was Maric not in the side? I thought it may have been due to an injury but if we flew him up that cant be the case. I cant see how Griffin could get ahead of him in the rucking order for round 1

 

[Stiffy_18]

The only problem for us is that Tippett is our best ruckman AND key forward. We could really do with Tippett as a key forward and as a #1 ruckman.

I prefer to keep him inside 50 (and doing the rucking inside 50) and we have to make do with the ruckmen we have.

However, I don't think the Freo game is a real indicator of what we plan to do. We were short handed in the ruck department so Tippett was ALWAYS going to play in the ruck. This was more apparent because of 2 things

1. Griffin's incompetence in the ruck
2. Our inability to get the ball inside 50 to Tippett and as a result he wasn't seeing much of it.


I think our preferred option is to have Maric and Moran/Griffin/Sellar etc in the ruck and Tippett playing as a key forward and rucking inside 50.

Due to our injuries and lack of good ruckman we are force to throw Tippett on ball as a 2nd ruckman and make Walker our primary option while Tippett is in the ruck or on the bench.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Why exactly was Maric not in the side? I thought it may have been due to an injury but if we flew him up that cant be the case. I cant see how Griffin could get ahead of him in the rucking order for round 1

Its really not that hard to understand.

Maric is over his injury but he is not match fit. He would have blown up in the first quarter againt Sandilands.

However we had NO other option. We absolutely neede to fly him over to Perth as a cover. If Griffin fell over his shoelaces at the training run at Subiaco then Maric would have come in as a back up to Tippett. If we didn't cover that scenario and it happened, we would be in even bigger shit. Tippett would have needed to play as a ruckman full time and he would have no back up.

Maric was taken over as an emergency to cover a possible scenario because its not easy to get him over the at a short notice or even if it was, he would have played a game for Port and would be in no shape for a hitout against Freo.


If we had any other ruckman that was fit and a decent match up against Sandilands (eg Moran) then Maric would not have travelled to Perth and he would have lined up for Magpies in the SANFL.

 

[Mismatched]

The only problem for us is that Tippett is our best ruckman AND key forward. We could really do with Tippett as a key forward and as a #1 ruckman.

I prefer to keep him inside 50 (and doing the rucking inside 50) and we have to make do with the ruckmen we have.

However, I don't think the Freo game is a real indicator of what we plan to do. We were short handed in the ruck department so Tippett was ALWAYS going to play in the ruck. This was more apparent because of 2 things

1. Griffin's incompetence in the ruck
2. Our inability to get the ball inside 50 to Tippett and as a result he wasn't seeing much of it.


I think our preferred option is to have Maric and Moran/Griffin/Sellar etc in the ruck and Tippett playing as a key forward and rucking inside 50.

Due to our injuries and lack of good ruckman we are force to throw Tippett on ball as a 2nd ruckman and make Walker our primary option while Tippett is in the ruck or on the bench.

But how hamstrung in this respect were we? Maric was obviously fit enough to be named as an emergency, so we'd have to assume he was fit enough to play. I could accept that we were maybe a little worried about his fitness, he might have had a couple of lighter weeks thanks to his injury, but then we had James Sellar play in the SANFL, he only had a broken hand so its not like he couldn't continue to work on his fitness whilst injured. We also had McKernan too, who at the very least he would have given us a contest in the ruck, which was all we could ask our ruckman to do anyway.

I'd argue our forward line stocks were far more compromised thanks to their lack of Knights, Porplyzia and Burton(That group kicked well over a hundred goals between them last year) than our ruck department in terms of personel and was in far greater need of Tippett's services.

We were going to struggle to win the rucks no matter who was in there, so why do we compromise our most dangerous forwardline asset, to just reinforce a lost cause?

 

[Stiffy_18]

But how hamstrung in this respect were we? Maric was obviously fit enough to be named as an emergency, so we'd have to assume he was fit enough to play. I could accept that we were maybe a little worried about his fitness, he might have had a couple of lighter weeks thanks to his injury, but then we had James Sellar play in the SANFL, he only had a broken hand so its not like he couldn't continue to work on his fitness whilst injured. We also had McKernan too, who at the very least he would have given us a contest in the ruck, which was all we could ask our ruckman to do anyway.

I'd argue our forward line stocks were far more compromised thanks to their lack of Knights, Porplyzia and Burton(That group kicked well over a hundred goals between them last year) than our ruck department in terms of personel and was in far greater need of Tippett's services.

We were going to struggle to win the rucks no matter who was in there, so why do we compromise our most dangerous forwardline asset, to just reinforce a lost cause?

With all due respect but if we are selecting 196 cm James Sellar or Shaun McKernan (who has stuggled so far this year) against 211 cm Sandilands you have lost before you even rock up to the ground to play.

At least if Tippett goes into the ruck, you Have Walker, Hentschel and Stevens to hold down the forth. If Sellar or McKernan go into the ruck aginst Sandilands, that pretty much like playing a player short.

With Sandilands you need height AND leaping ability or height and physical play. Sellar and McKernan don't have the height nor the experience to tackle Sandilands.

 

[Mismatched]

With all due respect but if we are selecting 196 cm James Sellar or Shaun McKernan (who has stuggled so far this year) against 211 cm Sandilands you have lost before you even rock up to the ground to play.

At least if Tippett goes into the ruck, you Have Walker, Hentschel and Stevens to hold down the forth. If Sellar or McKernan go into the ruck aginst Sandilands, that pretty much like playing a player short.

With Sandilands you need height AND leaping ability or height and physical play. Sellar and McKernan don't have the height nor the experience to tackle Sandilands.

Look I agree, Sellar and McKernan wouldn't have been ideal, this still leaves Maric though, and the problem that nothing was going to be ideal. We were going to be smashed in the ruck no matter who we put there. Instead we conceded one of our biggest advantages/weapons for very little gain. In fact, as CG has pointed out elsewhere, Tippett's lax checking of Sandilands actually cost us on multiple occassions.

Griffin, Tippett, Maric, Sellar, McKernan, no matter who we had in the ruck the result was always going to be a big loss. So why not just accept this create a similar advantage for us in our forward line, where Tippett could monster the Fremantle defenders. I'm sorry, I really just don't see how Tippett playing in the ruck against Sandilands is worth more to us than Tippett playing as a full time forward.

We clearly didn't have too big an issue getting the ball up forward, considering we only lost the I50 count by 1 and yet barely managed half as many scoring shots. So obviously Walker, Hentschel and Stevens couldn't just "hold the fort". To counteract Sandilands we needed to play to our strengths, something we did really well at the end of the year, instead we played right into Fremantle's.

 

[SellarStardom]

My god, people are saying we could have played McKernan, the guy isn't mch of a ruckman as shown in the NAB and would have been killed by Sandilands. I have said already but in terms of rucking Griffin was beat in the centre (pretty normal across the league) but did alright in the stoppages and throw ins. His poor performance was the around the ground work and his lack of competitiveness, he wasn't alone but was certianly poor.

Maric and Griff should have played and will this week.

I am more intereted in seeing Sellar playing as a lead up CHf forward this week not as a Ruck

 

[cmndstab]

Going into this game with Tippett as our second ruck, especially considering we were lacking Porplyzia, Knights and Burton from our best forward 6 and were going up against Sandilands none the less, was an absolutely disgraceful decision.

100% agreed. I thought Stevens was going to be our backup ruck, but that didn't happen - and it may as well have because he was almost invisible in whatever position he was playing. I'm not even sure what position he was playing!


Tippett is a fine ruck but the reality is the instant he leaves our forward line, we are weaker for it. I don't care how much he brings to our ruck, it is never as much as he brings to our forward line.


If we are required to play him in the ruck because we have literally no options left available to us, there has been a serious lack of planning.

 

[Mismatched]

My god, people are saying we could have played McKernan, the guy isn't mch of a ruckman as shown in the NAB and would have been killed by Sandilands. I have said already but in terms of rucking Griffin was beat in the centre (pretty normal across the league) but did alright in the stoppages and throw ins. His poor performance was the around the ground work and his lack of competitiveness, he wasn't alone but was certianly poor.

Maric and Griff should have played and will this week.

I am more intereted in seeing Sellar playing as a lead up CHf forward this week not as a Ruck

How is this any different to what happened anyway? McKernan at the very least would have given a contest, oh and trust me, McKernan is a far better ruckman than you give him credit for. Not that I'm necessarily saying he should have, I would have him 3rd in line behind Maric and Sellar, but still better than conceding Tippett to the ruck.

 

[Stiffy_18]

How is this any different to what happened anyway? McKernan at the very least would have given a contest, oh and trust me, McKernan is a far better ruckman than you give him credit for. Not that I'm necessarily saying he should have, I would have him 3rd in line behind Maric and Sellar, but still better than conceding Tippett to the ruck.

McKernan would NOT have given a contest simply because he is too short and too weak for Sandilands. At least Griffin has the height and the leap so he at least had a decent chance to at least contest. McKernan is too short (15 cm shorter than Sandilands, not even comparing the wingspan of the 2 players) and certainly not strong enough to go at it with Sandilands. Same goes for Sellar.

I am not too concerned that we got belted in the ruck, that was ALWAYS going to happen. What I am concerned about is that our midfield was smashed and our defensive pressure and workrate were no where near good enough all over the ground.

We get smashed in the ruck every time we come up against Sandilands but we still end up winning most of the time. This time, its the impact in other areas that was just not up to par.

As for Tippett in the ruck discussion, I think Walker held the fort more than capably when Tippett was in the ruck. In fact, he played his back patches of footy when he was our go to target inside 50 and Tippett playng in the ruck.

 

[KingJames23]

We also had McKernan too, who at the very least he would have given us a contest in the ruck, which was all we could ask our ruckman to do anyway.

Sandilands would have eaten McKernan as his pregame meal.

 

[cmndstab]

We should have brought in Donnelly to stand in the WA sun at just the right angle to reflect it into Sandilands' eyes. Then when he's going "ahh, my eyes!" and shielding his face, Donnelly drops to the ground to get out of the way of the real footballers and Dangerfield goes in and gets the ball.

 

[arrowman]

Tippett is a fine ruck but the reality is the instant he leaves our forward line, we are weaker for it. I don't care how much he brings to our ruck, it is never as much as he brings to our forward line.


If we are required to play him in the ruck because we have literally no options left available to us, there has been a serious lack of planning.

Quoted for truth.

When you go up against Sandilands with a weakened ruck division, you rove to Sandilands. Which we did not. Putting your most threatening forward into the ruck is not the answer.

PS I noted during the third quarter (I think it was) that a Crows player ran towards the forward 50 and then passed off, apparently because he had no target. Why? Because Tippett was rucking, and behind him, and even Walker was in defence.

 

[thebirdman 24]

We should have brought in Donnelly to stand in the WA sun at just the right angle to reflect it into Sandilands' eyes. Then when he's going "ahh, my eyes!" and shielding his face, Donnelly drops to the ground to get out of the way of the real footballers and Dangerfield goes in and gets the ball.

Good idea for our next trip to subiaco

 

[amer]

My god, people are saying we could have played McKernan, the guy isn't mch of a ruckman as shown in the NAB and would have been killed by Sandilands. I have said already but in terms of rucking Griffin was beat in the centre (pretty normal across the league) but did alright in the stoppages and throw ins. His poor performance was the around the ground work and his lack of competitiveness, he wasn't alone but was certianly poor.

Maric and Griff should have played and will this week.

I am more intereted in seeing Sellar playing as a lead up CHf forward this week not as a Ruck

Nah McKernan can ruck, he's just green at this stage (more so than his SANFL form made him appear).

 

[johnnypanther]

I am not too concerned that we got belted in the ruck, that was ALWAYS going to happen. What I am concerned about is that our midfield was smashed and our defensive pressure and workrate were no where near good enough all over the ground.

.

and if we go back through our losses, the above is a common theme.

 

[Cap]

I am not too concerned that we got belted in the ruck, that was ALWAYS going to happen. What I am concerned about is that our midfield was smashed and our defensive pressure and workrate were no where near good enough all over the ground.

This is the part that concerned me, Mick Malthouse has made a career out of losing the ruck and has beaten us many times in the same situation. We didn't adjust our game play to take into account the potential flogging in the hit-outs we were going to get.