AFL Rd 2 2023 Post Game Prognostications Carlton vs Geelong

[rocky]

And yet a ruckman can jump with a knee into his opponent’s chest and that’s kosher, even though that puts the opponent out of the contest. When a whistle goes in a rucking duel, I hold my breath as I usually have no idea which way it will go.

UNLESS  you are a Carlton Ruckmen. Perplexed that TDK was fined $3000 for putting his knee into Stanley at a ruck contest,  WTF? Someone remind me what penalty Freo's Darcy got for going at Pitto (no eyes on the ball) with his knee and effectively putting him out for the year??

[Mav]

To be fair, though, TdK didn’t jump into Stanley. He was like a martial artist executing a knee strike while keeping his back foot grounded. That’s a different beast.

[Gointocarlton]

UNLESS  you are a Carlton Ruckmen. Perplexed that TDK was fined $3000 for putting his knee into Stanley at a ruck contest,  WTF? Someone remind me what penalty Freo's Darcy got for going at Pitto (no eyes on the ball) with his knee and effectively putting him out for the year??

Looking at it a few times it was a clumsy act that resulted in Stanley going off the ground and subbed. A fine is about right.

[Lods]

I have TOG there and he actually spent more time on the ground than Pittonet.

The reason i stacked him up against TDK + Pittonet is because everybody is raving about how well our 2 rucks did, and (some) people are calling for Jack to be dropped off the back of that effort.

Sure, stats aren't everything but but its seems they offered very similar output (all 3) and i'm not sure you could isolate 1 over another.

FWIW, Jack had team high 2 marks on lead
Jack had team high 2 goal assists
Team high tackles inside 50.

To go with 0.2, so far from the worse on the ground.

That's probably where it gets a bit confusing.
If we only play one of our main ruckmen  Jack takes the position of second ruck.
But Jack's not a ruckman. That's not his position.
But he can play multiple roles.
In some respects his versatility counts against him.

We have taller bigger players at both ends who would probably provide a better ruck contest than Jack but we can't afford that luxury for specialist players.
So Jack's the sacrificial lamb when we play one ruck.

When Pittonet played I thought ,good...Jack can play more his natural role. But he didn't really shine.

Jack's one of my favourite players, because he always gives 100%
I'd have him in my team most weeks.

I said before he seems a bit out of sorts, but that's only speculation on my part.
He may have a bit on his mind. His dad copped a hammering in the press last week. It's hard for a son to ignore that criticism especially when his 100th game was at the core of the issue.

So it boils down to this.
If we play two rucks, and we probably should (Pittonet ,especially needs game time), it's not TDK or Pitto that Jack's competing with...it's other players.
Was he injured on Thursday?
The match report suggests not.
If not,then it was decided that he offered the least in value at that point of the game, with that opposition.
With others pushing for selection that puts him in the danger zone.
If not Jack, then who goes out?
We may not make any changes.
There may be a specific role for Jack against GWS.
Selection this week will be interesting.

[LoveNavy]

Watching the replay, I noticed:

Ed was everywhere. Not necessarily directly impacting but applying pressure in some form

The small fwds looked to be on a pressure mission. Fisher laid a couple of important tackle. He was joined by the ferocious Jack russell-like small  Durds. They acknowledged each others efforts as if it was set play.
Along with H roming far and wide to mark everything near the centreline, it was like a perfect execution of a well drilled fwd line for those exact conditions

The gut running and well executed defensive acts of Acres and Hollands were important

Young's mark against Jezza was enormous. He had composure to burn

Perhaps we're finally learning how to close out the close ones

It's been said many times. It's about doing the ordinary things well. Not the extraordinary. We did the ordinary things perfectly to get the 4pts against a terrific opponent
Although that depends how you rate the Cats ?

[PaulP]

Jeremy Cameron has touched up plenty of defenders with more experience, more fame and a bigger pay packet than Young.

[LoveNavy]

I said before he seems a bit out of sorts, but that's only speculation on my part.
He may have a bit on his mind. His dad copped a hammering in the press last week. It's hard for a son to ignore that criticism especially when his 100th game was at the core of the issue.

So it boils down to this.
If we play two rucks, and we probably should (Pittonet ,especially needs game time), it's not TDK or Pitto that Jack's competing with...it's other players.
Was he injured on Thursday?
The match report suggests not.
If not,then it was decided that he offered the least in value at that point of the game, with that opposition.
With others pushing for selection that puts him in the danger zone.
If not Jack, then who goes out?
We may not make any changes.
There may be a specific role for Jack against GWS.
Selection this week will be interesting.

I agree about Jack. He's seemed a bit down. He wears his heart on his sleeve and appears a bit ..... hurt, for want of a better word.

Maybe he's burdened emotionally, or is carrying an injury. I think he's out of contract this year. He recently got engaged. Competition for spots is heating up, and his dad is back in the recruitment game! That's a fair bit going on. I hope Jack finds his place and his mojo.

[kruddler]

That's probably where it gets a bit confusing.
If we only play one of our main ruckmen  Jack takes the position of second ruck.
But Jack's not a ruckman. That's not his position.
But he can play multiple roles.
In some respects his versatility counts against him.

We have taller bigger players at both ends who would probably provide a better ruck contest than Jack but we can't afford that luxury for specialist players.
So Jack's the sacrificial lamb when we play one ruck.

When Pittonet played I thought ,good...Jack can play more his natural role. But he didn't really shine.

Jack's one of my favourite players, because he always gives 100%
I'd have him in my team most weeks.

I said before he seems a bit out of sorts, but that's only speculation on my part.
He may have a bit on his mind. His dad copped a hammering in the press last week. It's hard for a son to ignore that criticism especially when his 100th game was at the core of the issue.

So it boils down to this.
If we play two rucks, and we probably should (Pittonet ,especially needs game time), it's not TDK or Pitto that Jack's competing with...it's other players.
Was he injured on Thursday?
The match report suggests not.
If not,then it was decided that he offered the least in value at that point of the game, with that opposition.
With others pushing for selection that puts him in the danger zone.
If not Jack, then who goes out?
We may not make any changes.
There may be a specific role for Jack against GWS.
Selection this week will be interesting.

I've gone on about the 2 rucks plenty of times, so i'll give my short version.

Play 2 rucks and Silvagni and we see the TOG% we saw on Thursday - 1 of them take up a spot on the bench for the entire game
Play 1 ruck + Silvagni and it allows us to play an extra small, more rotations for all.
Play 2 rucks and no silvagni and you lose a bit of firepower/pressure up forward....resting ruck forward is a good theory, but we don't get much out of those 2.

My preference....
Pitto and SOS. Pitto play 80% of the ruck. SOS gives him a chop out but plays mainly down forward. It simply gives us more run through the middle, while not sacrificing up forward.

As for who should come out.....i'd prefer a ruck.
I think Cowan could be up for a rest.
Also think we might want to potentially lose a small forward as we are carrying 3, plus fisher.

In short, nobody DESERVES to be dropped, so you pick a team that helps you win the game. Don't go too tall, too small, too injured etc.

[madbluboy]

Jack is not a ruckman. If he rucks we lose.

[Lods]

I've gone on about the 2 rucks plenty of times, so i'll give my short version.

Play 2 rucks and Silvagni and we see the TOG% we saw on Thursday - 1 of them take up a spot on the bench for the entire game
Play 1 ruck + Silvagni and it allows us to play an extra small, more rotations for all.
Play 2 rucks and no silvagni and you lose a bit of firepower/pressure up forward....resting ruck forward is a good theory, but we don't get much out of those 2.

My preference....
Pitto and SOS. Pitto play 80% of the ruck. SOS gives him a chop out but plays mainly down forward. It simply gives us more run through the middle, while not sacrificing up forward.

As for who should come out.....i'd prefer a ruck.
I think Cowan could be up for a rest.
Also think we might want to potentially lose a small forward as we are carrying 3, plus fisher.

In short, nobody DESERVES to be dropped, so you pick a team that helps you win the game. Don't go too tall, too small, too injured etc.

So essentially Kruds you don't see TDK as part of our future.
That's fair enough, no doubt some good compensation for us, but...
It will be a rather bizarre situation where clubs come with big money for a player who can't make the best 23.