04-14-2024, 01:50 AM
(04-13-2024, 10:15 PM)Lods link Wrote:Just on the two- ruck situation. It’s not as cut and dried as some believe. The replacement of a ruck/tall with a small mid-field running player has to be viewed in terms of plusses and minuses.
The gain of the running player must be seem in terms of the cost of what you lose by omitting the tall/ruck. There may be an advantage…but the gap may not be as huge as we may think. Pittonet gave us a bit especially early on…but yes, it may have cost us later in the game.
This is always the debate, and it is clearly not as difficult as some are trying to make out.
TDK rucks for 75% game time when sole ruck. He played 75% game time when he has a backup ruck. He doesnt play more or less, just the position he played.
Harry didn't get a chance to ruck and as a result, went missing for large parts of the game. Despite kicking more goals than normal, he had less influence on the game than more recent efforts. This is a knock on for playing that second ruck.
I've already shown that a ruck took up a spot on the bench for 3/4's of the game. That 75% game time is a full time mid....on light duties - eg Walsh had 76% first game back, Cripps, Hewett, 79%, 80%.
Pitto was off the ground a full quarter more than anyone else (besides injured/subbed players) and TDK was actually next for least amount of game time.
It puts more on the shoulders of others as a result, and the benefit we get from it is not worth it.
Pitto had 6 clearances, only beaten by Walsh (8 ) and Cripps (7). He even kicked a goal. Put Cerra back in the side and he'd get the same amount of clearances (if not more), more possessions and is more likely to kick a goal most weeks as well.
So what benefit did we get from Pitto? A few extra hitouts to advantage....most likely leading to clearances.....which could've been equalled by having another pure midfielder in the team.
So what were the disadvantages....more gametime required by others, less run and pressure around the ball.....which is our strength.
Its nothing against Pitto, same could be said for TDK. Either play Pitto for the whole game, or play TDK for the whole game. No point playing both.
There were 97 ruck contests yesterday.
Including the ball hitting the deck and getting a clearance, each one of them probably takes about 10 seconds on average to work itself out. That equates to just over 16 minutes of game time. What benefit are we getting from the 2 rucks for the remaining 104 minutes of game time? Especially since they one of them are on the bench for 76minutes of that time.
The numbers just don't stack up.
The biggest plus is 'wearing the ruck down'. Which i get and i agree with.
However, our midfield is so good, we can go in there with Jack Silvagni, Harry McKay, Lewis Young, and still draw level (or better) with the clearances. So how much benefit is 'wearing the ruck down' really giving us?