Zac Smith vs Rhys Stanley

Remove this Banner Ad

Stanley V Smith ?

The way I see it right now - from what I have seen from the 3 JLT practise games - play Stanley ahead of Smith. Now really Stanley, even with his leap, is really too short to be a first ruckman IMO. Smith has the height and size to be a first ruckman - but his performances do not inspire me. Sure he did not cost a lot to get and was definitely worthy of a trial - but I am unsure it will work out at this stage,

I would play Stanley with Blitz and go for the greater mobility it gives us - even though that is not a strong ruck set up.

Stanley every now and then has a really good game and Blitz may get back to his best if he plays as a ruckman.

If Smith is not beating the opposition ruckmen regularly then he cannot be in the team - just makes us too tall and slow.

But this statement clearly indicates we have issues with our rucks again !!! Since Ottens it has been a nightmare for us we just cannot seem to overcome.

We could have had Grundy but over looked him (I am unsure on Grundy but I think he has more upside than Smith) and the Toby Nankervis was on the market. He was a good get for the Tigers - and I think I would have been very happy to have him as our first ruckman. Plus finally another Nankervis in a Cat's jumper ! Just an honest hard goer.

Makes it hard on our midfield, which has its own issues, to be competitive at centre square bounces with a small ruck duo. So that is one reason I, and it seems some others, think we may slide a bit this year.

Our recruiting seems to be a bit off over the past few seasons with a couple of exceptions. The strike rate does not seem to be there as it was.

PS. May I be utterly wrong and Smith comes good and starts to become one of the better first ruckman in the league.
 
Stanley V Smith ?

The way I see it right now - from what I have seen from the 3 JLT practise games - play Stanley ahead of Smith. Now really Stanley, even with his leap, is really too short to be a first ruckman IMO. Smith has the height and size to be a first ruckman - but his performances do not inspire me. Sure he did not cost a lot to get and was definitely worthy of a trial - but I am unsure it will work out at this stage,

I would play Stanley with Blitz and go for the greater mobility it gives us - even though that is not a strong ruck set up.

Stanley every now and then has a really good game and Blitz may get back to his best if he plays as a ruckman.

If Smith is not beating the opposition ruckmen regularly then he cannot be in the team - just makes us too tall and slow.

But this statement clearly indicates we have issues with our rucks again !!! Since Ottens it has been a nightmare for us we just cannot seem to overcome.

We could have had Grundy but over looked him (I am unsure on Grundy but I think he has more upside than Smith) and the Toby Nankervis was on the market. He was a good get for the Tigers - and I think I would have been very happy to have him as our first ruckman. Plus finally another Nankervis in a Cat's jumper ! Just an honest hard goer.

Makes it hard on our midfield, which has its own issues, to be competitive at centre square bounces with a small ruck duo. So that is one reason I, and it seems some others, think we may slide a bit this year.

Our recruiting seems to be a bit off over the past few seasons with a couple of exceptions. The strike rate does not seem to be there as it was.

PS. May I be utterly wrong and Smith comes good and starts to become one of the better first ruckman in the league.
Disagree.
Even last week against Essendon, admittedly a junk game, they were quoting some bizarre % of hitouts, and hitouts to advantage, being way in our favour, but we did not capitalise.
S & S can do well enough in the ruck, and it is not a problem area. Our problem is the MF IF Danger and Selwood are not in there- we are frankly impotent- not enough grunt, too one-paced. Motlop, Cocky may be our rescuers, but the others are just not ever going to be that A Grade type mid. Guthrie's return might help.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top