The Great Ruck Debate.

[kruddler]

I assume it will be better in the 1's because it's those players we want Tom to develop an understanding and cohesion with. It's a non-event now anyway...I doubt he'll play VFL again.

I don't see him as only a forward but more a ruck- rover /utility type when he's not rucking-(forward and back). He can also do that Silvagni role now but probably better if we're playing two rucks.

You can get cohesion on the training track though. You want to put that into practice in games, being the #1 target in VFL would get more practice than 3rd banana in the 1's.

In looking at things like wins and pressure ratings have you taken into account the quality of the opposition.
Where was the opposition on the ladder when we played two rucks and lost or played none and won?
What was our pressure ratings when comparing high ladder and low ladder opposition

I've done a million different analysis of these, a lot of it will be littered through these threads. Some of it you can still find the stats and work through the logic of it, some of it are really only relevant at the time.
For instance, pressure ratings are very difficult to find. However, in the moment there is often graphs, stats, trends and discussions around them which can be found highlighting these exact things. I'm sure you could try and find a lot of the analysis from trawling through old footy shows and pre-shows if you had the time.

In terms of opposition and talent you are up against, that is easier to check. I actually did a recent analysis for LP (which he ignored)

R16 - 2023 -
Carlton vs Hawthorn
No Pittonet. No De Koning.
Young, Silvagni, McKay used in the ruck.

Hitouts
Hawthorn - 61
Carlton - 27

Result - Carlton wins by 60 points.

R17 - 2023
Carlton vs Fremantle (@Fremantle)
No Pittonet. No De Koning.
Young, Silvagni, McKay used in the ruck

"We are going to get monstered by Darcy and get spanked"

Hitouts
Fremantle - 70 (Darcy 58!)
Carlton - 18

Result - Carlton wins by 53.

Tell me again why we need 2 rucks to cover for the 1 ruck on the off-chance he gets injured.

We don't even need 1 ruck. In fact we have an average winning margin of over 9 goals when we don't have a ruck.
Just because Geelong lost by the same amount last night and didn't have one doesn't prove anything other than Geelong are crap right now.

So to go back to your quote....
"Heeding the warning of the potentially devastating result of not having a ruck is unequivocal."
The only devastating results i see is on the scoreboard when we demolish the opposition!

That was 'then' would it still be the case that Silvagni offered more. I'm not sure there's a place for Jack other than on the bench

All of your debates above are coming from the 'now' whereas i am summarising from the 'then'.

Thats the thing, its a moving goal post.

Maybe Jack improves? Maybe TDK goes backwards? Maybe we recruit a better 3rd tall forward option or repurpose someone we already have?
What any of that will do to our team balance depends on what our team balance is at the time.

Again, i'm not playing any favourites. If Jack doesn't play again. So be it. If TDK plays the next 200 games straight, so be it.
Whatever is best for the team is best for me.