Ruckmen - part #4

[Kane McGoodwin]

OK, time for everyone to select our team.

What I'm going to do is poll the players in 4 parts & get you to select your side. Remember you can't pick a player listed in more than once

1. Defenders- pick your 7 players.
2. Forwards - pick your 7 players.
3. Midfield - pick your 6 players.
4. Ruckmen - pick your 2 players (1 starters + 1 reserve).

If your player is not listed, then pick 1 player less & make note of the player in your post.

I will probable then poll the bench after everyone has picked their selected starting 18 (ie. the 16 players who missed out with the most votes).

Hope this works...

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Biglands & Clarke - no brainer.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by Kane McGoodwin
Biglands & Clarke - no brainer.

Ditto

 

[Damp Squarie]

Rhett & Matty

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18
Ditto

Not sure that is a good thing though Stiffy as we need some competition for ruck spots. Hopefully Hudson proves a master stroke.

 

[Scotty's_Girl]

Biglands and Clarke

 

[DaveW]

Clarke

Biglands

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by Kane McGoodwin
Not sure that is a good thing though Stiffy as we need some competition for ruck spots. Hopefully Hudson proves a master stroke.

I agree. We really should get some competition into our rucking stocks. If you look at Port they have 3 ruckmen and all 3 are fighting for a spot and all 3 are very capable ruckman. Hopefully Hudson gets to be a gem and really provides some competition for Rhett and Doc. That way it keeps the pressure on these blokes to perform week in week out and they know if they have a bad game they will not get one next week.

 

[lozstar]

Biglands and Clarke.

 

[macca23]

At this stage, this one's easy.

Biglands and Clarke.

Wouldn't it be nice if Hudson embarrassed all of us for not putting him in there.

 

[noddy]

Originally posted by Kane McGoodwin
Biglands & Clarke - no brainer.

Yep,

But with Clarke to come under the pump from Hudson as the season progresses

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Hmmm, some people have problems counting...

BTW, out of interest, who voted for Hudson & Kreuger?

 

[napsyd]

Clarke and Biglands

 

[footychick]

Im going with the marjority on this one, Biglands and Clarke for me

 

[Crow Boy]

Biglands & Clarke - no contest at this stage

 

[jc67]

I don't think a lot of people on this board actualy saw Josh kreuger play last season for the bays.
He was the one that i was really hoping they would get with a late pick.
He is a lot better that you guys seem to think, his taps need work but just what the doctor ordered for around the ground.
he will develop into a long term player, remember he's replaced ben marsh he dont have to be that good to be an improvement.
Oh has guts too.

 

[naughty monkey]

Originally posted by jc67
I don't think a lot of people on this board actualy saw Josh kreuger play last season for the bays.
...<snip>...

I did, and for your benefit I'll say it again.
He started behind at least Smith, Golding and Griffiths at Glenelg. 'nuff said.

imo, the only reason he played in the league team at all this year was because of the knee injury to Golding, and Griffiths inability to follow instructions in general play.

I have no problem with Freddy as a KPP, he certainly has the athleticism and maybe the potential for that at AFL level. But what staggers me is that the AFC keep on insisting that he is a ruckman and that's why they drafted him.

Apparently they believe they can teach anybody to be a top quality tap ruckman. I don't agree with them.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by naughty monkey
I have no problem with Freddy as a KPP, he certainly has the athleticism and maybe the potential for that at AFL level. But what staggers me is that the AFC keep on insisting that he is a ruckman and that's why they drafted him.

My point all along

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by jc67
remember he's replaced ben marsh he dont have to be that good to be an improvement.

I disagree. Ben Hudson is a replacement for Marsh. Krueger is the development player while Hudson is considered to be a ready made recruit.

 

[jc67]

Originally posted by naughty monkey
I did, and for your benefit I'll say it again.

Thanks, i proberbly should have searched b4 posting,a habit thats hard to learn.

Originally posted by naughty monkey
imo, the only reason he played in the league team at all this year was because of the knee injury to Golding, and Griffiths inability to follow instructions in general play.

it dont matter how a chance comes up its what you do with it.

Originally posted by naughty monkey
I have no problem with Freddy as a KPP, he certainly has the athleticism and maybe the potential for that at AFL level. But what staggers me is that the AFC keep on insisting that he is a ruckman and that's why they drafted him.

Dunno if they are insisting??
How many times do you hear of a player thats a certian position player and then goes on to play plenty in another position?
Kreuger can play,
the game that impressed me was the last of the season vs west, he lost a lot of taps but played loose stopped plenty took a few grabs and kicked 1 or 2 goals(not sure) i think he played a bit (10min)as chf in that game too.

Originally posted by naughty monkey
Apparently they believe they can teach anybody to be a top quality tap ruckman. I don't agree with them.

not anyone, this lad has talent and guts.
i am not certian hes gunna make it all i was saying is i think he's being underated on this board, give him 2 years.

Who predicted Johncock before he played?? not me, anyway after his 1st game i was sold.

 

[jc67]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18
I disagree. Ben Hudson is a replacement for Marsh. Krueger is the development player while Hudson is considered to be a ready made recruit.

correct, i was just insinuating that he's a better prospect than Marsh.

i hope neither of them get a game as 1st or 2nd ruck next year anyway.
i hope the 2 weve got are in good enough nic for a full season

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

No real surprise that Biglands & Clarke got the nod.