Opinion Seaby as FF?

[Onetonylockett]

Would this be such a bad idea? The man can take a decent pack mark

 

[grimlock]

We need him to be in the ruck at the moment with Mumford out for a month or so.

 

[Ed_Gein]

no i don't think it's a bad idea at all. when mumford comes back i think he should stay in the forward line and pinch hit in the ruck to give mumford a bit of a rest. other teams have a player that has that sort of role being kreuzer, roughead etc.. and he is a better option than white imo.

 

[SM]

Didn't take the mark in 05.

 

[gaylordia]

Would this be such a bad idea? The man can take a decent pack mark

yes it is. he takes one pack mark and you want to move him to ff?
in the first half seaby was pathetic in the ruck. luckily he lifted in the 2nd or i think he'd be in the reserves this week.

 

[HoneyBadger35]

Hey guys, not really up with how your Ruck depth is at the moment but i can say of Seaby that he was always our most accurate big man. Always felt more confident if he had a set shot as opposed to lynch, cox, hunter or gardiner in our 04-06 years.

 

[SM]

yes it is. he takes one pack mark and you want to move him to ff?
in the first half seaby was pathetic in the ruck. luckily he lifted in the 2nd or i think he'd be in the reserves this week.

Not likely, he'll stay in until Mummy is right, we just have no other back up with Pyke floundering.

 

[Ed_Gein]

yes it is. he takes one pack mark and you want to move him to ff?
in the first half seaby was pathetic in the ruck. luckily he lifted in the 2nd or i think he'd be in the reserves this week.

so you say 'yes' it is a bad idea to move him to full foward, but to back it up you comment on how pathetic he was in the ruck?

 

[Dangas]

Not quick enough off a standing start, White would be ideal, however having LRT, White, Seaby and Mumford is the B22 is too much height

 

[Onetonylockett]

I would have Seaby over White at FF anyday even if he didn't ruck at all. The fact that he can ruck is a bonus

 

[The King!]

Dont think he deserves to be dropped its worth a go. Mumford is proabably better forward though

 

[barry fu]

Goodes at FF before any other, outside of Reid The Restricted. Bird, Parker Perfect and Kennedy allow this.

Bish Bash Bosch - BLOODS are in buisness!

 

[Sydney Bloods]

I think we're approaching the stage where we can place Goodes up fwd for most of the game.

I think FU is no to something.

 

[Onetonylockett]

Dont think he deserves to be dropped its worth a go. Mumford is proabably better forward though

But Mumford would play in the Ruck.....

 

[The King!]

But Mumford would play in the Ruck.....

yeah I know, just meant Mumford is superior in both positions ruck and forward to Seaby.

I think Seaby has done nothing wrong in his games for us so give him a shot in the same side as mummy

 

[scottwade]

yeah I know, just meant Mumford is superior in both positions ruck and forward to Seaby.

I think Seaby has done nothing wrong in his games for us so give him a shot in the same side as mummy

I thought Seaby was a fine competitor for us on the weekend, up against 3 Hawthorn rucks and he has filled in well for Mummy, during the latter's absence.

However I don't think there is a logical conclusion that because Seaby has done well as a ruck we should retain him in the side as (primarily) a FF upon Mummy's return.

Mumford is clearly a better ruck than Seaby.
Mummy rucks for 75%+ of the time, so we need less a second dedicated ruck than we do a forward who can fill in for Mumford in the ruck for the remaining <25%.

Seaby took a nice grab up forward on the weekend, but if he doesn't mark the ball up forward he is not great at ground level and it would be too easy for most defenders to run off him.

With Mumford out, Seaby is currently our best option in the ruck, but when Mummy is fit, IMO we have better options for FF/back up ruck than Seaby.

We shouldn't reward him for doing well in one role by comprising the team in another.

 

[MC Bad Genius]

Didn't take the mark in 05.

As soon as I saw the opening comment, I wanted to post that photo. But you've stolen my thunder and I won't ....

What the hell.

But I feel bad for him. He actually is a pretty good player. Not particularly versatile, but even after struggling to have an impact in the first half on the weekend, he worked his arse off and got himself into the game. You've gotta respect the effort he put in to turn his own game around. And while he might not have racked up stats, it still was an integral part of the Swans resurgence.

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

Was a big fan of Pyke but do you guys think this will be his last year? he doesnt seem to be in Longmire plans.

 

[Gongswan]

Mummy and Seaby in the same side has been tried and failed. Will not happen again unless we are destroyed by injury etc

 

[Jack2Jack]

goes ok in the ruck, but not at FF. Takes the odd mark but is too slow to get away from most full backs and not aggressive enough in the air (or even around the ground, doesn't seem to like to throw his weight around like the really good big men do). A good full back would get hold of him more often then not.

Seaby's a solid back up for Mummy but unless the bench goes back out to 4 that's probably all he can be.

 

[legend166]

Mummy and Seaby in the same side has been tried and failed. Will not happen again unless we are destroyed by injury etc

That's not true at all. Mumford and Seaby have played 8 games together. 6 were at the beginning of 2010, and we won 5. At that point they were looking like the dominant ruck duo of the comp.

Since Seaby broke his ankle, they've played twice in the same side. Once was when Seaby was the sub in round 1 2011, which everyone agrees was stupid. The next was against Carlton and we were beaten convincingly.

So that's a record of 5-1-2.

I don't know if it would be successful any more, but the idea that it's been tried and failed just isn't accurate.

I doubt it will ever happen though. It's clear at this point that LRT is favoured as the second ruck/forward. And he's done a pretty good job at it.

 

[Gongswan]

That's not true at all. Mumford and Seaby have played 8 games together. 6 were at the beginning of 2010, and we won 5. At that point they were looking like the dominant ruck duo of the comp.

Since Seaby broke his ankle, they've played twice in the same side. Once was when Seaby was the sub in round 1 2011, which everyone agrees was stupid. The next was against Carlton and we were beaten convincingly.

So that's a record of 5-1-2.

I don't know if it would be successful any more, but the idea that it's been tried and failed just isn't accurate.

I doubt it will ever happen though. It's clear at this point that LRT is favoured as the second ruck/forward. And he's done a pretty good job at it.

2010, different rules, we were playing 2 ruckmen all the time back then. As u say, unless we go back to 4 interchange players, not going to happen