Stanley as number 1 ruckman.

[Sons_of_a_Gun]

This is something thats bothered me for quite a while, the coaching staff have taken a risk twice that i know of this year to play Stanley as the number 1 ruck and drop Zac Smith.

It should have cost us 2 games when 2nd gamer Brayden Preuss and First gamer Luke Ryan absolutely killed Stanley in the middle.

How could the coaches possibly consider to do this again. Surely Zac Smith HAS to play and if Stanley is in the side its as the 2nd tall forward and back up ruck.

Anyone else as frustrated by this as me?

 

[The Casey Cat]

Except Smith wasn't dropped this time just rested. I don't think the club has any doubt as to who the number one is. Just hoped Stanley could get us through one week against a shit team against a debutant at home. His inability to do so probably means next time Buzza or Abbot will get the chance.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Mystery solved.

 

[patience]

In reply to the thread title; that's a big no from me.

 

[Footy_Fan2007]

Shocking ruckman and even worse forward. No spot for him.

 

[STPer18]

I think the club realises that if Smith goes down we're royally rogered. Managing Smith through the year so he doesn't break down when we need him most is likely the cause of Stanley filling in both yesterday, and whenever he eventually does in the future. Unless something drastic changes it's Smith #1 and Blicavs #2.

 

[iameviljez]

I think we might know more when Sean Darcy plays again next week, but overall I agree in that Stanley doesn't seem great unless he's getting that third-man-up chopout. I admit, I read too much into Braydon Preuss chopping Stanley up, as Preuss then went on to beat Mumford the following week.

Next week, with Stewart out and Stanley getting towelled up, it may yet be The Buzz...

 

[Deep]

I think we might know more when Sean Darcy plays again next week, but overall I agree in that Stanley doesn't seem great unless he's getting that third-man-up chopout. I admit, I read too much into Braydon Preuss chopping Stanley up, as Preuss then went on to beat Mumford the following week.

Next week, with Stewart out and Stanley getting towelled up, it may yet be The Buzz...

At least we can use the debut as an excuse if it doesn't go well. I have faith in the Buzz long term though

 

[Sons_of_a_Gun]

Except Smith wasn't dropped this time just rested. I don't think the club has any doubt as to who the number one is. Just hoped Stanley could get us through one week against a shit team against a debutant at home. His inability to do so probably means next time Buzza or Abbot will get the chance.

I know it said illness when he was replaced from the emergencies, but it definitely said he was omitted when out of the side originally. I know this because i couldnt believe my eyes when i saw it. I sure hope we dont see him outta the side again.

 

[Catgirl]

I know it said illness when he was replaced from the emergencies, but it definitely said he was omitted when out of the side originally. I know this because i couldnt believe my eyes when i saw it. I sure hope we dont see him outta the side again.

Didn't Scott address that earlier in the season, that the club sometimes has to list players as omitted rather than managed/rested due to league policy/restrictions? Dangerous loophole to exploit I'd have thought anyway.

 

[STPer18]

I know it said illness when he was replaced from the emergencies, but it definitely said he was omitted when out of the side originally. I know this because i couldnt believe my eyes when i saw it. I sure hope we dont see him outta the side again.

Scott has come out previously and stated that if you list someone as 'managed' on the team sheet you can't name them as an emergency. The only way to have Smith as an emergency should something happen to Stanley or Blicavs pre-game was to 'omit' him. Seems really stupid because you should be able to rest someone but bring them as an emergency just in case something happens in the warm-up.

 

[The Casey Cat]

I know it said illness when he was replaced from the emergencies, but it definitely said he was omitted when out of the side originally. I know this because i couldnt believe my eyes when i saw it. I sure hope we dont see him outta the side again.

Because it has to say that so we can bring him in if Stanley has a training accident at some point leading up to the game. Was just covering our arse while trying to give him a rest at the same time.

 

[cats_09]

I know it said illness when he was replaced from the emergencies, but it definitely said he was omitted when out of the side originally. I know this because i couldnt believe my eyes when i saw it. I sure hope we dont see him outta the side again.

He was omitted because that way we could keep him listed as an emergency. Under AFL rules, if we listed Smith as managed/ill (whichever the case was) he would have been unable to be listed as an emergency, so if come Saturday or Sunday morning Stanley gets up, falls over his own feet and bumping his head meaning he was unable to play, we couldn't have re-called Smith from the emergency list and instead gone in with Blicavs as our #1 ruck.

By listing him as omitted he was available for a late re-call if required. Same has happened with others including Menegola (GC game), this year who have been listed as omitted only to be named as an emergency should they be required.

 

[FredLeDeux]

Didn't Scott address that earlier in the season, that the club sometimes has to list players as omitted rather than managed/rested due to league policy/restrictions? Dangerous loophole to exploit I'd have thought anyway.

Scott has come out previously and stated that if you list someone as 'managed' on the team sheet you can't name them as an emergency. The only way to have Smith as an emergency should something happen to Stanley or Blicavs pre-game was to 'omit' him. Seems really stupid because you should be able to rest someone but bring them as an emergency just in case something happens in the warm-up.

Because it has to say that so we can bring him in if Stanley has a training accident at some point leading up to the game. Was just covering our arse while trying to give him a rest at the same time.

He was omitted because that way we could keep him listed as an emergency. Under AFL rules, if we listed Smith as managed/ill (whichever the case was) he would have been unable to be listed as an emergency, so if come Saturday or Sunday morning Stanley gets up, falls over his own feet and bumping his head meaning he was unable to play, we couldn't have re-called Smith from the emergency list and instead gone in with Blicavs as our #1 ruck.

By listing him as omitted he was available for a late re-call if required. Same has happened with others including Menegola (GC game), this year who have been listed as omitted only to be named as an emergency should they be required.

Has anyone ever heard a sensible, or even plausible, reason for this rule?

 

[Sons_of_a_Gun]

Ahhhh i see. I wasnt aware of that rule. Seems crazy for sure. Bring him back ASAP please Scotty!

 

[Catgirl]

Has anyone ever heard a sensible, or even plausible, reason for this rule?

You broke the chain! [emoji35]

 

[Vdubs]

Stanley has not come to our club as a #1 ruckman. It was explained as a recruiting move to get a tall marking forward who could also play in the ruck effectively as a backup. Stanley does this well enough in my pov. He has shown more than glimpses of brilliance, and currently may be a little low on confidence, but I don't perceive him as a real weakness.
As I said last week, Darcy is a true #1 ruckman, very good at his craft already.
Stanley has a difficult task as a hybrid player. He will always be a #2 ruck unless covering for an injured/rested/managed Smith.
Smith is our true #1 ruckman.

 

[cats_09]

Has anyone ever heard a sensible, or even plausible, reason for this rule?

Has anyone ever heard of any sensible or even plausible reason for any rule the AFL introduces?

 

[Nickoo]

Stanley has not come to our club as a #1 ruckman. It was explained as a recruiting move to get a tall marking forward who could also play in the ruck effectively as a backup. Stanley does this well enough in my pov. He has shown more than glimpses of brilliance, and currently may be a little low on confidence, but I don't perceive him as a real weakness.
As I said last week, Darcy is a true #1 ruckman, very good at his craft already.
Stanley has a difficult task as a hybrid player. He will always be a #2 ruck unless covering for an injured/rested/managed Smith.
Smith is our true #1 ruckman.

Yay some a sensible thoughtful post. I was about to look up what height the young freo player is because he looked 10-15cm's taller and looked a specialist ruck over Stanley who is a fwd who can play ruck. Good observation on confidence; I thought same.


Go cats!

 

[FredLeDeux]

Yay some a sensible thoughtful post. I was about to look up what height the young freo player is because he looked 10-15cm's taller and looked a specialist ruck over Stanley who is a fwd who can play ruck. Good observation on confidence; I thought same.


Go cats!

Darcy is listed at 201cm, Stanley at 200cm.

 

[Seeds]

Stanley is a second ruck and by far the best one we have. He had 3 goals and over twenty hit outs as a second ruck in a losing side just two weeks ago. It's the only time he has played that position all year and he was one of our best players that game.

 

[cats_09]

Stanley is a second ruck and by far the best one we have. He had 3 goals and over twenty hit outs as a second ruck in a losing side just two weeks ago. It's the only time he has played that position all year and he was one of our best players that game.

He played as second ruck in our loss to Essendon in round 8. His figures that day were 10 disposals, 5 marks, 1 behind (from virtually in front about 20/30m out), 1 tackle and 15 hitouts. So it's not the first time this year he has partnered Smith in the ruck, but as a team we have struggled the two times they have partnered up, especially early in matches.

And in Stanley's 6 games this year he has kicked 3 goals, all from virtually in the goal square against the Eagles, while he has kicked 5 behind of which most were gettable, especially if he is going to be playing between forward and ruck.

 

[Sttew]

Shocking ruckman and even worse forward. No spot for him.

He seems to be a 4th Qtr specialist; that's the only time of the game where he shows any urgency

 

[Ricky Vaughn]

Stanley is a second ruck and by far the best one we have. He had 3 goals and over twenty hit outs as a second ruck in a losing side just two weeks ago. It's the only time he has played that position all year and he was one of our best players that game.

Blicavs out performs him in the No. 2 ruck role, and needed to take over the no. 1 ruck role on the weekend to save him from further humiliation.

Stanley should be backing up Ryan Abbott in the VFL, until we can trade or delist him at years end.

 

[Nickoo]

Darcy is listed at 201cm, Stanley at 200cm.

He obviously jumps high that young bloke.


Go cats!