The Big Hairy Cat

[chapmanmagic35]

With Kingy and Otto at full fitness, where will the Big Hairy Cat play?

 

[Strawberry Pancakes]

Half Back/Midfield, just like last season?

 

[thehoff]

Half Back/Midfield, just like last season?

Correct - Was brilliant in the midfield. He was just what we needed in there with his grunt and hardness.

 

[Sean Sheep]

Surely after the finals series Moons has carved his niche in the midfield playing a Ruck rover type role?!!

 

[WestCat]

He'll probably play the saem role of floating defender/midfielder/forward that he did towards the end of the season. He provides the crash and bang which we missed when Beamer left.

 

[tusk]

Just let him float around the halfback line and up the ground like he did in the Melbourne final. That was probably the best game I've ever seen the man play.

 

[chapmanmagic35]

Just let him float around the halfback line and up the ground like he did in the Melbourne final. That was probably the best game I've ever seen the man play.

True, he was sensational against Melbourne.

His last few games were fantastic.

 

[Scabletooney]

can i ask...whats the difference between a ruckrover and a rover?

 

[BlueNWhite]

rucking

 

[LifeSpan-Void]

Just let him float around the halfback line and up the ground like he did in the Melbourne final. That was probably the best game I've ever seen the man play.

after the melbourne game he said he loved being able to pick up the easy kicks, and leave the responsibility of CHB for Harley. He said it with a smirk

 

[catempire]

after the melbourne game he said he loved being able to pick up the easy kicks, and leave the responsibility of CHB for Harley. He said it with a smirk

I don't blame him!

But seriously, he was that good doing it with flair and aggression that he'll definitely play that role again in 2006 when we can afford it.

 

[lifes_a_blast]

Half Back/Midfield, just like last season?

he should rotate in their, throughout the 2006 season, he was sensational in the last few games with that role.

 

[answerman]

can i ask...whats the difference between a ruckrover and a rover?

Not much in this day and age where there's a lack of tradiational rover types. The ruck rover was expected to be a more robust 'inside' player with fantastic strength and endurance. I think it was Barassi who became the modern template for the ruck rover. The rover in the tradional sense is smaller and much quicker with the ability to read the ball off the packs and great finishing skills. Very much an outside player, although they were often found on the bottom of packs. I think the traditional play would be for the ruck rover to get in the pack to get the ball out to the rover who would kick to a leading forward. Another play would be for the rover to receive the hit out or hand pass from the ruckman and run forward of the play. Farmer and Goggin epitomised this type of play.

Ruck rovers would be 178cm-185cm traditionally with the average rover being 165cm-178cm. These days, probably the best rover going around is Luke Ball and he's 183cm (6ft in the old scale)!!! For us we have G Ablett (182cm), Chappy (179cm) and even Ling (189cm!!!!) playing as rovers. In the 80's Ling would have been a CHF. I'm pretty sure he's the same size as Terry Daniher who was a premiership CHF for Essendon. Now, Ling is either a flanker or a bullocking ruck rover type who plays as a rover.

Hope that helps!

 

[WestCat]

Not much in this day and age where there's a lack of tradiational rover types. The ruck rover was expected to be a more robust 'inside' player with fantastic strength and endurance. I think it was Barassi who became the modern template for the ruck rover. The rover in the tradional sense is smaller and much quicker with the ability to read the ball off the packs and great finishing skills. Very much an outside player, although they were often found on the bottom of packs. I think the traditional play would be for the ruck rover to get in the pack to get the ball out to the rover who would kick to a leading forward. Another play would be for the rover to receive the hit out or hand pass from the ruckman and run forward of the play. Farmer and Goggin epitomised this type of play.

Ruck rovers would be 178cm-185cm traditionally with the average rover being 165cm-178cm. These days, probably the best rover going around is Luke Ball and he's 183cm (6ft in the old scale)!!! For us we have G Ablett (182cm), Chappy (179cm) and even Ling (189cm!!!!) playing as rovers. In the 80's Ling would have been a CHF. I'm pretty sure he's the same size as Terry Daniher who was a premiership CHF for Essendon. Now, Ling is either a flanker or a bullocking ruck rover type who plays as a rover.

Hope that helps!

I never knew that, I always thought the centre had the task of getting his hands dirty and dishing the ball out.

 

[Tweak Talent]

Lets hope King, Ottens and Blake can handle the rucking duties for most of the year, so as cam can be used in his Half Back/Midfield role which he plays so effectively.

 

[answerman]

I never knew that, I always thought the centre had the task of getting his hands dirty and dishing the ball out.

Well.... yes and no. Greg Williams, the best centerman I ever saw was definitely an inside player, but he had to be with his pace. However, when Ablett Snr played in the centre (vs West Coast in.... 91? 92? in Perth) he kicked 5 goals. He was never an inside player. I saw Peter Featherby kick 5 goals against Collingwood at Waverly in Rnd 1 1982 and he was way too light to be an inside player. He was a marathon runner who could play football exceedingly well.

When I think of ruck-rovers I picture Mark Ricciuto, Garry Hocking, Michael Voss as ideal but these types are always balanced by the taller running ruck-rovers like Michael Tuck, Wayne Campbell, Nathan Buckley and Joel Corey.

A friend of mine (who as a teenager was on Richmond's list but did his knee and never made it to the highest level) plays on the ball and in the centre for Narre Warren. He explained to me that the centreman plays to a diamond formation- meaning that he ventures out to the wings, CHF and CHB but typically he stays in the centre square. The rover and ruck rover are required to follow the ball.... which is why I sucked in my only game as a rover. Too much running required!

Who plays centre consistently these days? Del Santo? He's not a bullocking ruck-rover like Mark Ricciuto or Garry Hocking, but certainly a clever dodger and weaver with excellent disposal by hand and foot like Paul Couch.

The traditional rover/ruck-rover/centre positions were mostly done away with in the 90's when West Coast beat us twice with about 15 ruck-rover types spread all over the ground. Our ruck-rovers were Bairstow and Hocking but in '92 Blight played Bairstow on the wing on Matera and in 94 both Bairstow and Hocking were injured. Bairstow was a hard player but not as physically intimidating as Hocking. We couldn't match WC's physical pressure.

There are exceptions, though. I may but wrong but I think Dean Kemp played as a true ruck rover. He copped a lot of head injuries, though and never seemed fazed by it. A very tough competitor by all accounts.

Ruck rovers are supposed to be real hard nuts who are physically intimidating. None of our players have the physical presence to scare the opposition, unless Mooney goes on the ball - and look what a difference he makes when he is playing as a ruck-rover! He goes from Big Hairy Cat to Big Scary Cat!

Anyway, these days players are simply listed as "onballers" or "key position". Even the flankers have to spend time on the ball - look at Ablett, Chappy and SJ.

Great topic!