Pre-Game Possibilities: AFL Rd 4: Carlton vs Gold Coast

[ElwoodBlues1]

I dont know about that.  Lobbe and Phillips are one trick ponies from where I sit, and they are only passable at that trick.  I dont think they can play as forwards, and any attempt to do so would halve our effectiveness.

This is where Rowe might have been a better option  to keep.

Anyway, I digress.  Without Kreuzer we are simply towelled up too much in the ruck.  Sinclair smashed us by himself on saturday with very little support.

Sinclair was BOG, had 3 brownlow votes in the previous game vs the Swans....Kreuzer was his opponent...

[kruddler]

I'll take it step further...

Bulldogs, despite that, won the centre clearances 14-8 and overall 44-30. So much for the big tapout advantage. Just have the mids in the centre square ready.

I've been banging on about that for a while now. There simply is no need for 2 ruckmen, they are just not dominant enough in the modern game. McKay as a key forward is more than capable of standing in as a ruck when required. I'd happily throw Jones, McGovern (both good leap) and even Charlie as backup rucks if required, obviously Casboult too if he is playing (which i prefer not). The amount of contests they'd have any meaningful contact in (centre square mainly) is minimal, and the rest of the ruckwork is nothing more than a push and shove like a marking contest. Very little chance of injury.

Yet the benefits of not carrying an extra ruckman around the ground, and with rotations that frees up, certainly will make a difference to your team.

[ElwoodBlues1]

Nankervis, Lycett/Ryder and Sinclair all were influential against us....you can play one ruckman only for sure but there is one caveat...they have to be Good ruckman....not C and D grade hackers...

[flyboy77]

I dont know about that.  Lobbe and Phillips are one trick ponies from where I sit, and they are only passable at that trick.  I dont think they can play as forwards, and any attempt to do so would halve our effectiveness.

This is where Rowe might have been a better option  to keep.

Anyway, I digress.  Without Kreuzer we are simply towelled up too much in the ruck.  Sinclair smashed us by himself on saturday with very little support.

We should have targetted Preuss hard.....he's wasting his time at the Dees.

Young, huge and has mongrel.

[WASurfer]

Agree fly...it doesn't seem to be an area we've worried about too much in the last 3-4 years (draft or trade period) despite Kreuzer and Phillips being injured all the time. We are infinitely better when Kreuzer is in the team. Not sure we've got too many tall defensive options to be ripping Jones out of there and running him in the ruck and McKay just gets pushed off the ball too often in ruck contests. Despite his kicking, his best value to us right now is as a marking forward.

[kruddler]

Nankervis, Lycett/Ryder and Sinclair all were influential against us....you can play one ruckman only for sure but there is one caveat...they have to be Good ruckman....not C and D grade hackers...

....or more to the point, no point playing 2 c-grade ruckmen.

[Professer E]

WTF we didn't chase Preuss hard beggars belief. Perfect fit for us.

[crashlander]

  Marchbank is a potential game winner.  He was very good against the Tigers in round 1 last season.  Hence his premium status.  The fact that we play him underdone (every single time he has returned from injury thus far) is the only reason he is unreliable because he gets hurt again.

Marchbank shouldnt have played EOS on saturday.  We dropped a player learning the caper but was otherwise fit in Garlett, only to play a bloke returning from injury.  This is the same old, same old for us, we do it every single time in an effort to ensure injured players stay injured (see Mitch McGovern and his "hamstring" injuries which will be linked to his pre season back injury).

Leave your ruck complaints out of it.  We have no fit ruckmen.  EOS.

Actually, it looks like we now have 3 'fit' ruckmen. Exactly how fit they are is an interesting conundrum, but all three will be available.
Last year Kreuzer got smashed by Witt, but he wasn't 100% fit. It the game in Qld Kreuzer didn't play. I think we rucked Lobbe that day. Phillips played in neither through injury.
Who we play this time will be very interesting.

As for Preuss, the only reason I can think of as to why we were not interested is the potential in de Koning. And he does have it in spades. Also there are a number of really good ruck prospects coming through the U18's.

[kruddler]

Actually, it looks like we now have 3 'fit' ruckmen. Exactly how fit they are is an interesting conundrum, but all three will be available.
Last year Kreuzer got smashed by Witt, but he wasn't 100% fit. It the game in Qld Kreuzer didn't play. I think we rucked Lobbe that day. Phillips played in neither through injury.
Who we play this time will be very interesting.

As for Preuss, the only reason I can think of as to why we were not interested is the potential in de Koning. And he does have it in spades. Also there are a number of really good ruck prospects coming through the U18's.

I can think of another. He didn't want to come here, and only wanted to go to Melbourne.

[laj]

Actually, it looks like we now have 3 'fit' ruckmen. Exactly how fit they are is an interesting conundrum, but all three will be available.
Last year Kreuzer got smashed by Witt, but he wasn't 100% fit. It the game in Qld Kreuzer didn't play. I think we rucked Lobbe that day. Phillips played in neither through injury.
Who we play this time will be very interesting.

As for Preuss, the only reason I can think of as to why we were not interested is the potential in de Koning. And he does have it in spades. Also there are a number of really good ruck prospects coming through the U18's.

Kreuzer pulled out late in round 2 last year. Witt played on Casboult.