The rise.... and RISE of Marc Pittonet

[madbluboy]

Firstly, he is not rucking alone.

Depending on the day, he has either Young, Harry or Jack or a combination of them rucking with him.

Secondly, that leads into why we are better, because team balance allows us to play smaller by comparison.
We are basically too tall even when we play 1 ruck.
Harry, Charlie and Jack up forward
Weitering, Young and McGovern down back......and we wanna play Kemp in there somewhere as well.
Pitto in the ruck.
Thats at least 7 talls in the side....and you want to add an 8th in TDK.
The more talls you have, the less smalls you have.
The less smalls you have, the more work they are required to do.
The more work they are required to do, the more fatigued they get.
The more fatigued they get, the more we fall in a hole and get overrun......and lose.

Our team is not lacking in ruck work with Pitto there.
It is not lacking in tall, marking targets to kick long too.
So why do we need to add another ruck into the side? What actual benefit does it give us?

TDK is more athletic and is more likely to take a hangar. But over the course of a game, how much does he actually offer the team in terms of output?
Look, if he was a true ruck/forward and kicking goals and getting 20+ touches around the ground, we'd find a spot for him. But he doesn't and isn't.

I've already shown that our results this year are not dependent on how many rucks we play, but the strength of our opposition.
0-3 against top 6
1-1-1 against middle 6
3-0 against bottom 6.

Thats about as definitive as you can get as to why we are winning or losing....not because we are playing 1 ruck or 2....or LOB...or Plowman or anyone else.

So, by what measure are we better with 2 rucks?

Show the other 22 games.