+- Carlton Supporters Club (http://new.carltonsc.com)
+-- Forum: Princes Park (http://new.carltonsc.com/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: Robert Heatley Stand (http://new.carltonsc.com/forum-14.html)
+--- Thread: The rise.... and RISE of Marc Pittonet (/thread-4788.html)
Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet - DJC - 06-29-2023
(06-29-2023, 02:19 AM)LP link Wrote:Personally, I think it's quite wrong to think of this as 1st / 2nd ruck, it's old fashioned thinking.
Positions in modern football are more role based than having "a leader", no matter who does it they have to be capable in the role, and it's pointless trying to make some weird claim that TDK isn't capable relative to SoJ! :o
As I see in classic social media mnemonics the current situation looks like this for ruck options;
Pitto / TDK >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mirkov >>> SoJ / Young
Now in context of the above, most VFL watchers will tell you Mirkov isn't ready for AFL:!
Mirkov's heart condition takes him out of contention but I'd have Young level pegging with a healthy Mirkov, O'Keeffe next in line, followed by Lemmey with Jack bringing up the rear.
Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet - LP - 06-29-2023
(06-29-2023, 05:08 AM)DJC date Wrote:As much as I like Silvagni's passion and endeavour, he's not a ruckman and we're far more competitive with Pitto and Tom rucking in tandem.Fans fear for SoJ so they are creating scenarios to try and give him a way forward, in actual fact that's destroying the blokes career because it's plain as day he's failing at it, he is never going to be a bull like Pitto and he is not athletic like TDK.
I think SoJ would be fine if people stopped talking him up as a ruck option and we just let him play the roles he is suited to play.
Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet - LP - 06-29-2023
(06-29-2023, 05:11 AM)DJC date Wrote:Mirkov's heart condition takes him out of contention but I'd have Young level pegging with a healthy Mirkov, O'Keeffe next in line, followed by Lemmey with Jack bringing up the rear.Yes, I was ignoring Mirkov's health as hopefully a short term issue, and just referring to ruck viability.
Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet - crashlander - 06-29-2023
With Pitto out with a PCL and Tom de Koning a huge question, we could be going into this game ruckless.
Do we play Lemmey? We're getting that desperate.
Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet - kruddler - 06-30-2023
(06-29-2023, 05:48 AM)LP link Wrote:Fans fear for SoJ so they are creating scenarios to try and give him a way forward, in actual fact that's destroying the blokes career because it's plain as day he's failing at it, he is never going to be a bull like Pitto and he is not athletic like TDK.
I think SoJ would be fine if people stopped talking him up as a ruck option and we just let him play the roles he is suited to play.
Is it at all possible for you to debate the 2nd ruck scenario WITHOUT going into SOS conspiracy theories?
You've tried twisting the debate in all sorts of directions in terms of TDK vs SOS, but the only reason SOS was even in the debate is because that was who was playing at the time.
The same debate can be had with TDK for Young, McKay, Cripps....whoever.
Take home point is TDK is not delivering and cannot legitimately hold down any other position on the ground. As a result its in our best interests to play someone who can. Up to this point, its largely been SOS. At one point, it was Young. We've used Harry when deep forward and even Cripps has contested a few as well. Its not a matter of WHO plays the 2nd ruck position as long as its not 2 dedicated rucks, it doesn't help the team.
Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet - kruddler - 06-30-2023
(06-29-2023, 05:08 AM)DJC link Wrote:The problem with those analyses, forgetting the somewhat flaky data, is that the context is ignored; if our midfielders are down, clearances will be down.
I took another look at the Gold Coast game and there was a stark change in the number of clearances we won when our midfield got on top. It had little to do with hitouts won or hitouts to advantage.
Before looking at the numbers, there's no reason not to consider this game. Pittonet was passed fit, he rarely uses his left hand in ruck contests and he took part in more ruck contests than De Koning; 52 to 43.
You wanna talk about flaky data, then use 1 game where you felt the need to point out Pittonet was 'passed fit', clearly knowing he wasn't fit enough. Backed up by the fact he is out with a knee this week despite playing the entire game last week. So not only was he NOT fit going in (hand) he got injured during the game (knee) and kept on fighting through anyway.
Despite all of this, in terms of rucking ability, the 2 rucks ended up on a par.
THAT, together with the article (i think someone owes me some credit for the idea) clearly shows the difference in talent between the 2 rucks.
Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet - kruddler - 06-30-2023
(06-29-2023, 12:22 AM)madbluboy link Wrote:2 wins in 2 years. Spin it any way you like, Pittonet can't do it on his own. Actually our best two wins this year against Geelong and Gold Coast, TDK was first ruck with Pitt supporting him.
Collingwood couldn't win in April for about 5 years running at one stage.
They should never play a game in a month ending in 'L' because it ends up being an 'L' for them.
This is a case of correlation. We both know that the 2 just happen to coincide and actually have no say in the end result.
This is the same in this case as your stats show.
I showed different data that showed, much more definitively, that the result of a match was not about who was in the team but who we were playing against. Play against a top team and you lose. 1 ruck, 2 rucks, 23 rucks, didn't matter.
Play against a low ranked team and you win, again, #rucks was irrelvent.
THAT is causation. Opposition team strength determines the result....not the number of rucks we played.
Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet - madbluboy - 06-30-2023
By what measure is our "team balance" as you call it better with just Pittonet? That's all I want to know.
Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet - kruddler - 06-30-2023
(06-30-2023, 04:40 AM)madbluboy link Wrote:By what measure is our "team balance" as you call it better with just Pittonet? That's all I want to know.
How many times do i need to say the same thing?
Go have a look at how much time they spend on the bench when there is 2 of them playing. The first 3 games they played together, they averaged about 60-65% game time each. So that means that we have 1 ruck on the bench for 70-80% of the game.
Essentially meaning we are playing 1 down on the bench for 3/4's of a game.
So because we have basically 1 spot on the bench held up by a resting ruck, all our other players are having to play more game time than we'd like to cover.
What has been our issues most of the year? Largely its been (a lack of) run, chase, pressure and tackling. Now its clear our rucks are not going to improve that area of the game, but our already tired midfield were lacking in that area too. If we gave them another player to rotate through (in place of that 2nd ruck chilling out on the bench) then we have 1 more player to provide that pressure and at the same time give fresher legs to the other mids.
We could rest them deep forward, but once the ball hits the deck, with our 3 talls, we lack the run, chase, pressure and tackling and the balls gets swept away very easily.
So for team balance, we are able to get more run, chase, pressure and tackling by not playing 2 rucks because we generally have 1 of them sitting on the bench for 3/4s of a game.
In turn, we miss a ruck for 1/4 of the game (at most) which we can fill from a variety of other areas, be that SOJ, Young, Harry, Cripps...
If we didn't have Harry then TDK could line up at FF/CHF and give Pittonet a chop out when required and there isn't an issue.
But Harry up forward is better than TDK there.
Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet - LP - 06-30-2023
(06-30-2023, 05:03 AM)kruddler date Wrote:How many times do i need to say the same thing?That stat doesn't change regardless of whoever is the 2nd ruck, SoJ or Young aren't a cure for it.
Go have a look at how much time they spend on the bench when there is 2 of them playing. The first 3 games they played together, they averaged about 60-65% game time each. So that means that we have 1 ruck on the bench for 70-80% of the game.
Essentially meaning we are playing 1 down on the bench for 3/4's of a game.
So because we have basically 1 spot on the bench held up by a resting ruck, all our other players are having to play more game time than we'd like to cover.
I'd even assert, that to be competitive in the ruck and on the ball in the ruck, SoJ and Young probably needs more time resting than genuine 1st rucks, otherwise they becomes a liability when they move into other areas of the field.
If our two genuine rucks get 30-35% game time to rest, they can go that much harder when they are on the field, that lets them match it with teams like Melbourne, or better teams like Gold Coast. It's pretty obvious, quality over quantity.