Should we play richards,bryan,fraser at the same time

[daics cousin]

For our forward line to have the luxury of Josh floating down there,we need to have our ruck options covered.Do you guys believe we should be playing richards,bryan,josh in the same team week in week out this year ?

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Yes I believe we should play all three, as long as their form warrants it of course. Richards should beat the brunt of the ruck duties. Bryan can play back as well as forward, Fraser can play forward and around the ground, so that gives us some flexibility to cover a lot of contingencies if we get injuries or get beaten in match-ups.

 

[jimmy35]

Yes , sometimes .

 

[nick_savo]

I dob't see the point playing 3 ruckmen. 2 would be good so we can have Fraser in the forward line.

 

[Palmer Stoat]

I wouldn't be in favour. A third ruck at the expense of an extra runner doesn't seem like a wise swap to me. If during a match we want to play Fraser forward, well, we should play our second-stringer in the ruck. If the second-string ruck needs to be spelled, Anthony or Trav can spend 10mins in the ruck. Not ideal, perhaps, but a far better mix than sacrificing another runner.

 

[doppleganger]

never

how many sides have plenty of tall players these days???

west coast only really have 4 massive big blokes, cox, seaby, glass, lynch
Sydney perhaps only 3 everitt, jolly, hall

having t.cloke and rocca up forward is actually a fairly tall big forward line already, throw in mids who are strong over head in medhurst and buckley and we dont need anymore tall slow blokes down there, let reid get a go before any of the others as he has pace

fraser should be our number 1 ruck this year, and hopefully dominate

 

[Coin_Toss]

I don't think we can afford to play 3 ruckman!

 

[nick_savo]

its not that we can't afford to but whats the point

 

[Lajon]

Yes I believe we should play all three, as long as their form warrants it of course. Richards should beat the brunt of the ruck duties. Bryan can play back as well as forward, Fraser can play forward and around the ground, so that gives us some flexibility to cover a lot of contingencies if we get injuries or get beaten in match-ups.

he's not a very good backman at all actually. we have needed tall defenders more then any other side in the comp over the last few years and he wasn't able to provide much value down there

 

[Lonie_from_50]

Fraser and Richards is enough, come round one. Rocca and Cloke are more than capable of being back up to the two of them.

 

[MarkT]

At this point neither Richards nor Bryan are senior quality AFL footballers. For that reason we shouldn’t play both. We need to decide who the better ruckman is and give them the opportunity to improve. If they don’t then swap them over. If neither measure up then start again. It’s time we got demanding and a hell of a lot more serious about the ruck.

In principle I don’t agree with 3 ruckmen. It’s a fast running game these days and 3 ruckmen will leave you a runner short. Fraser is a running ruckman but on the bust against the flood his running won’t cut it. He can be an asset going forward or dropping back if he has the time but if we expect him to be a real midfielder against the flood he won’t get off the ground to ruck through the second half. What we need is midfielders to play midfield and a ruckman to play ruck. Fraser would make a good relief ruckman and someone to change the mix up from time to time. I’d much rather have 1 class ruckman to ruck and a tall forward who can ruck to be the second ruckman. Fraser can fill the latter role. We don’t have a player to adequately fill the former role and haven’t had this century or more to the point while Malthouse has coached us.

 

[doppleganger]

At this point neither Richards nor Bryan are senior quality AFL footballers. For that reason we shouldn’t play both. We need to decide who the better ruckman is and give them the opportunity to improve. If they don’t then swap them over. If neither measure up then start again. It’s time we got demanding and a hell of a lot more serious about the ruck.

In principle I don’t agree with 3 ruckmen. It’s a fast running game these days and 3 ruckmen will leave you a runner short. Fraser is a running ruckman but on the bust against the flood his running won’t cut it. He can be an asset going forward or dropping back if he has the time but if we expect him to be a real midfielder against the flood he won’t get off the ground to ruck through the second half. What we need is midfielders to play midfield and a ruckman to play ruck. Fraser would make a good relief ruckman and someone to change the mix up from time to time. I’d much rather have 1 class ruckman to ruck and a tall forward who can ruck to be the second ruckman. Fraser can fill the latter role. We don’t have a player to adequately fill the former role and haven’t had this century or more to the point while Malthouse has coached us.

spot on

with our list as it is no point playing two blokes who would struggle to get a game at other clubs......pick one and go with them

or leave go a bulldogs type situation and go small, with fraser and other blokes like rocca, cloke, wakelin helpin out at a pinch, then we can play some more runners instead of two avergae big blokes

 

[The Royal Sampler]

Yep, what MarkT said.

 

[malteaser]

I reckon we will have to. Once the flood starts, we can not handle it and we only kick low scores, hence Fraser in the forward line will make up for Rocca who can not mark a thing. He is difficult to match up in the Forward line, with his mobilty. Richards and Bryan can rotate off the bench.

 

[Jabso]

We can but I don't think we need to. The only reason we would is if we had significant injuries to our key forwards. Even with Didak, Bux and Rusling out our forward line will still be solid. T.Cloke, Rocca, one of or even both of Reid or Fraser is enough although I wouldn't be worried if we have all 3 in at round 1.

 

[3066]

...he's not a very good backman at all actually...

I agree. I can't see Bryan playing down back at all and really we don't need him down there either. He's gotta play ruck and also the foward option if needed eg rotating with Josh. If he's ever down back it's because he's plugging a hole.

Richards on the other hand only plays tap ruck so if his form isn't good he'll be dropped quite quickly because what else can he do? Has anyone seen him take a pack mark for a tall? I haven't. I've seen him plug a hole down back in training but not a pack mark like Rocca, Cloke, Josh and Bryan can do so there's no way he play back or forward. He is technically our No.1 ruck and by all accounts is the fittest he's been so should be given every bit of support to prove he can be our No1 ruck. C'mon Guy we need you to step up.

Josh has to be 2nd Ruck. He's an absolutely nightmare to match up on when he's playing foward. If he needs to play No1 ruck in certain games then so be it but for the entire season .... no way. We need Josh at the club till he's Bucks' age.

So on saying all of that..... basically IMO if Guy is on song then Bryan will only get a game if we lose a tall forward. I can't see them both playing off the bench because it's a waste not having that spot for a running player. My gut feeling though is that Bryan will become our No1 ruck and will be quite good too. If he still gets beaten in the ruck at least he has a bigger body to crash packs and apparently likes the physical stuff too. He can take a mark and has the 2nd biggest kick in our side just under Rocca.

 

[loki04]

what has Richards shown at all this pre-season (or any other for that matter) that warrants his selection in every game he has been useless, yet on here u would think he has been thrashing ruckman in willy for the past 7 years hes been at the club.
Don't give me oh if he plays a few games in a row crap , becuase last year he had the best pre-season he has had and played 10 games in the seniors straight despite bein crap.


Fraser and Bryan for mine.

 

[Jabso]

what has Richards shown at all this pre-season (or any other for that matter) that warrants his selection in every game he has been useless, yet on here u would think he has been thrashing ruckman in willy for the past 7 years hes been at the club.
Don't give me oh if he plays a few games in a row crap , becuase last year he had the best pre-season he has had and played 10 games in the seniors straight despite bein crap.


Fraser and Bryan for mine.

He has shown he isn't injured and to be honest that's probably good enough. However I'd prefer Bryan at the moment too.

 

[DWil6]

Can't we just play Martin Clark in the ruck? He can drop back and play as a loose man in defence, while getting the centre clearance and kicking long inside 50 to a leading Martin Clark! We could use Fraser off the the bench and Richards and Bryan could run water out to Clark! Just my thoughts on the matter. It's pretty simple guys. It's not rocket surgery!

 

[doppleganger]

It's pretty simple guys. It's not rocket surgery!

what is rocket surgery?

 

[DWil6]

what is rocket surgery?

It's like brains surgery and rocket science.... only different!

 

[BoundforGlory]

what has Richards shown at all this pre-season (or any other for that matter) that warrants his selection in every game he has been useless, yet on here u would think he has been thrashing ruckman in willy for the past 7 years hes been at the club.
Don't give me oh if he plays a few games in a row crap , becuase last year he had the best pre-season he has had and played 10 games in the seniors straight despite bein crap.


Fraser and Bryan for mine.

agree!!!!

 

[GROMM]

agree!!!!

How is it that whilst rucks are supposed to hard to find, most other clubs have guys who will give these 3 a lesson and day of the week? Has Mad Mick been going to the Grant Thomas School of Ruck Theory?

 

[pendles]

I'd probably play Cameron Cloke ahead of Bryan.

 

[toommy]

How is it that whilst rucks are supposed to hard to find, most other clubs have guys who will give these 3 a lesson and day of the week? Has Mad Mick been going to the Grant Thomas School of Ruck Theory?

i think mick had the theory first, when he won his premierships at west coast he had turnbull and harding and hynes in the ruck no house hold names when you think of great ruckman.which makes the mckee trade bewildering we could have got as much value out of some delisted dud.and i think mick is back to that theory for this year as well