Richards vs. Bryan Debate Now Settled!

[buckstheking]

Bring back Monkhorst...ASAP

 

[Thommo 42]

Bryan is on a 2 year deal which has been said ad nauseum. He isn'y going anywhere.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

If ruckmen took 6-8 years in the system to hit their stride, no-one would recruit ruckmen, they'd just be content to shark the opposition's hitouts.

 

[MarkT]

Richards has been on our list for a long time. We knew he was ordinary. Bryan may well have been worth a punt but he is small for a ruckman and having been on an AFL those that make the decisions should have had a good gauge. Fraser is a fully know quantity. He rarely beats his opponent in the ruck and hardly ever has effective tapwork. Being a good follower, albeit weak overhead for a man of 2 meters, does not win you ruck contests and get you quality clearances.

MM will not be held accountable for his 8th consecutive monumental botching of the ruck. MM is made of Teflon.

 

[MarkT]

We won the ruck pretty comprehensively IMO Friday night.

How can you win the ruck comprehensively and tap the ball to Foley and co.? If you win the ruck comprehensively the ball is tapped to your mids and often when they are on the move. Getting some taps is not winning comprehensively. What it is is “proving” stupid theories about the irrelevance of ruckman by using the example of crap ruckman that don’t influence games with ruckwork.

 

[Palmer Stoat]

How can you win the ruck comprehensively and tap the ball to Foley and co.? If you win the ruck comprehensively the ball is tapped to your mids and often when they are on the move. Getting some taps is not winning comprehensively. What it is is “proving” stupid theories about the irrelevance of ruckman by using the example of crap ruckman that don’t influence games with ruckwork.

Buckley and Burns used to rove to opposition ruckmen during our GF years when Fraser and McKee rarely tapped the ball effectively. That's one of the reasons why Keating in the GFs smashed the ball 20m forward at every opportunity and rarely tapped it -- to negate the work of Buckley, Burns and co at stoppages. Our mids, through homework and ability, were terrific at roving to the opposition. Even great ruckmen like Lade and Cox aren't able to tap it down the throat of their mids more than a few times per match. I maintain, like Jabso, that our ruckmen won in the ruck on Friday night. It was our utter lack of intensity and sharpness at ground level that left us unable to capitalise.

 

[MarkT]

PS, it only takes a couple of class taps a game and not letting the opposition ruckman tap where he wants it to make a big difference.

Buckley and Burns did win the ball from losing or break even rucks - and we lost two grand finals. 2003 as you said. In 2002 look at the time on periods in each quarter when Brisbane got goals and conseuctive clearances. That's where we lost a flag. McKee battled but ability told.

 

[HFF]

I think Fraser will be a key forward for us in the future so I reckon we need to get quality ruckman till than and develop them. Once Rocca is gone Fraser will be a key forward for us and will see him play his best football.

After watching On the Couch tonight, Robert Walls made a good point. To have a good ruck combination you need a ruckman that contests and wins hit outs and a ruckman who is very good around the ground. Dean Cox is in his own league atm because he can do both. However, Josh is probably the second best around the ground ruckman, what we need is someone who can dominate or at least give us first crack at getting the ball. Eg. Lade, McIntosh, Charman etc.

Josh battles hard and at times some of his taps are brilliant but generally he gets beaten in this area because of a lack of that back-up ruckman. I do not want to see Josh spending 'too much time' in our forward line because his work around the ground is invaluable but it is obvious that we definitely need someone to help Josh out.

 

[shawthing09]

After watching On the Couch tonight, Robert Walls made a good point. To have a good ruck combination you need a ruckman that contests and wins hit outs and a ruckman who is very good around the ground. Dean Cox is in his own league atm because he can do both. However, Josh is probably the second best around the ground ruckman, what we need is someone who can dominate or at least give us first crack at getting the ball. Eg. Lade, McIntosh, Charman etc.

Josh battles hard and at times some of his taps are brilliant but generally he gets beaten in this area because of a lack of that back-up ruckman. I do not want to see Josh spending 'too much time' in our forward line because his work around the ground is invaluable but it is obvious that we definitely need someone to help Josh out.

I think thats something that has been the general consensus all year. That we are after a tap ruckman. I also think around the ground josh is as good as Cox, Cox is a better overhead mark but thats about it

 

[Palmer Stoat]

PS, it only takes a couple of class taps a game and not letting the opposition ruckman tap where he wants it to make a big difference.

Buckley and Burns did win the ball from losing or break even rucks - and we lost two grand finals. 2003 as you said. In 2002 look at the time on periods in each quarter when Brisbane got goals and conseuctive clearances. That's where we lost a flag. McKee battled but ability told.

Yes, I agree with all that. I think it's absurd how long we've been undermanned in the ruck and how little we've done about it. And yes, I also agree that the absence of a decent ruck cruelled us in the GFs.

My real point was that on Friday night we won in the ruck but lost at ground level to Richmond. I was using the Buckley and Burns 02/03 examples to illustrate that this win-in-the-air-but-lose-on-the-deck scenario was plausible. Collingwood used to compensate, just as Richmond did on Friday, at ground level for the fallibilities of its rucks. As you point out, when it counts against the best opposition, this tactic probably isn't going to work. But my point was restricted to what happened against Richmond.

I also agree that one or two decisive taps per quarter can be of immense value.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

We only barely won the ruck. Fraser had fewer hitouts to advantage than a developing KP forward in Pattison. That's an absolute indictment on our ruck division. If you go over to the Richmond board, see how many of them think of Pattison as a ruckman, he's like a taller version of Shannon Cox in that sense.

 

[MarkT]

PS I understand where you are coming from but this all goes to what I have been saying for years about Fraser. He has no presence in the ruck. When he gets decent numbers he still almost always has minimal impact and I can’t recall a single game he has turned around. He has beaten Everitt a few times possibly because he has run him ragged and fatigued him. Hille smashed him and he is the world’s dopiest looking dinosaur. When we get quality taps we can talk about winning the ruck. At present we are hoping for reasonable numbers against mugs and to avoid a belting in the ruck against quality while praising mediocrity.

If we really won well in the ruck we would have directed to our mids. It is all self perpetuating. If you win quality taps your mids are in different positions and performing different roles. Our mids expect to break even in the rich at best and play accordingly. It is no way to feed a hungry forward line. Potentially we could have Cloke, Reid and Dawes waiting for supply. If these guys are quality then FFS get a ruckman that is about 200% better than Josh Fraser to make their job easier.

 

[Palmer Stoat]

PS I understand where you are coming from but this all goes to what I have been saying for years about Fraser. He has no presence in the ruck. When he gets decent numbers he still almost always has minimal impact and I can’t recall a single game he has turned around. He has beaten Everitt a few times possibly because he has run him ragged and fatigued him. Hille smashed him and he is the world’s dopiest looking dinosaur. When we get quality taps we can talk about winning the ruck. At present we are hoping for reasonable numbers against mugs and to avoid a belting in the ruck against quality while praising mediocrity.

If we really won well in the ruck we would have directed to our mids. It is all self perpetuating. If you win quality taps your mids are in different positions and performing different roles. Our mids expect to break even in the rich at best and play accordingly. It is no way to feed a hungry forward line. Potentially we could have Cloke, Reid and Dawes waiting for supply. If these guys are quality then FFS get a ruckman that is about 200% better than Josh Fraser to make their job easier.

Yes, no argument from me on that score.