AFL Rd 15 2024 Post-Game Prognostications Carlton vs Geelong

[blueianh]

Crash, how is it a weakness in our game?
How often does the #2 ruck turn a game on its head or provide the difference? They simply don't.

The only thing that worries me with solo rucking TDK - or Pitto or any other ruck is what happens if they go down early.  I have always believed you need a second ruck you can live with rucking for the bulk of the game if your number 1 goes down - don't need them to win but just not be a liabilty.  And then someone to give them a bit of a chop-out.  If that person gets beaten but it's only for brief spells then so be it.  And hopefully they make a contest in the ruck and/or add value at ground level whist they ae relieving in the ruck.  The problem is Pitto is only any good in the ruck.  Cant rest him anywhere but bench.  Most teams who run 2 rucks only have 1 big forward and rest the rucks forward.  When we run Pitto in the ruck and TDK forward with Charlie and Harry we become top-heavy even given they are all mobile and athletic.  I would not have thought this but the evidence seems clear,  Perhaps faster and more defensively minded small forwards than what we had in earlier this year might help this.  Suppose we rotated Williams, Cincotta, Fogarty and Cottrell as small forwards - there would be plenty of speed and defensive pressure there and they have shown the ability to hit the scoreboard more than I would have expected.  Might TDK  and the 2 KPF work then?  I'd like to trial it before finals time.  The worry of going 1 ruck into a grannie is multiplied - a ruthless opponent might just "awkwardly" cannon into TDK very early on and leave rucking say Harry for 80-90% game time with chop-out from Crippa/Kennedy - and against a top flight ruckman that would be a huge worry.  Of course if Hudson O'Keeffe or Harry Lemmey were to come on maybe they could factor into the equation, but whilst I like both (and Liam McMahon from our VFL list for that matter) they are fair way off AFL ready and in the case of O'Keeffe long term injured.

The benefit of a 2nd ruck is to give the 1st ruck a chop out because it is ASSUMED that when the 1st ruck is resting, that a mid/KPF rucking hurts our game to the extent that we will sacrifice another player on the ground to make that time less damaging.
That time is 20-25% of the game. Max.

Lets look at last night.
Harry+Cripps+Kennedy+Weitering combined for a total of 34 ruck contests. They combined for 9 hitouts (2 to advantage).
Blicavs was geelong '2nd ruck'. He attended 43 ruck contests and managed 12 hitouts (2 to advantage).

Our 'backup rucks' are competing against opposition 'backup rucks' and holding their own in that very specific area of hitouts.
I don't think i need to point out that our clearances certainly do not decrease when we play a backup ruck as half the time they are the first to the ball because they know exactly where it is going first.....or they tap to themselves.

Don't want to use last nights game?
Try last weeks.
Harry+Cripps+Kennedy = 30 contests - 4 hitouts - 2 to advantage
vs
2m Peter as 'backup ruck' = 27 contests - 13 hitouts - 2 to advantage.

So our hack mids drew even with 2m Peter in the ruck.

Question: So why are we suffering with our mixed bag of backup rucks?
Answer: We are not.

We MIGHT be able to increase our ruck dominance by adding a second ruck, but that would decrease our effectiveness in another area of the game as we dop someone to make way for them. What will we actually gain?

Now, as you all know, i've certainly got nothing against Pittonet....and he was in terrific form this year including his last game before injury, BUT we simply do not need 2 rucks.
I don't care if its Pitto.
I don't care if its TDK.
Choose 1, and stick to it. Its working.

The reason we have played 2 rucks to this point in time (IMO) is to try and jumpstart TDK so he can reach the point he has now. We all knew he had it in him, we just needed to see it. He's producing it, there is no need to babysit him anymore.
Let him ruck.