06-29-2024, 01:01 AM
You can rewrite history to back up your argument. Thats fine.
Even IF we take your side of the debate, what we did with no rucks would not have been expected by you, or anyone else in the AFL....certainly nowhere near the margin it is.
Going back and reading the pre-matches, the in-games and post games at that time gives us great insight.
In fact MBB laid down the gauntlett in terms of importance of rucks going into those game and turned around with how (un)important they are based off those efforts.
The fact that occured with 0 rucks shows its possible.
Obviously, when you have 1 ruck its better.
Having additional rucks after that simply has diminishing returns in terms of how much influence they have in the ruck. (simply spend less time there by comparison to 1).
So it comes down to a matter of how good are they around the ground.
Which comes down to how much better (or worse) are the 2nd ruck compared to a specialised position player who would be getting squeezed out as a result.
Almost by definition, shoehorning a ruck into another position is going to be less effective.
So why do it for limited improvement in the actual ruck......when we can dominate sides without one at all?
Even IF we take your side of the debate, what we did with no rucks would not have been expected by you, or anyone else in the AFL....certainly nowhere near the margin it is.
Going back and reading the pre-matches, the in-games and post games at that time gives us great insight.
In fact MBB laid down the gauntlett in terms of importance of rucks going into those game and turned around with how (un)important they are based off those efforts.
The fact that occured with 0 rucks shows its possible.
Obviously, when you have 1 ruck its better.
Having additional rucks after that simply has diminishing returns in terms of how much influence they have in the ruck. (simply spend less time there by comparison to 1).
So it comes down to a matter of how good are they around the ground.
Which comes down to how much better (or worse) are the 2nd ruck compared to a specialised position player who would be getting squeezed out as a result.
Almost by definition, shoehorning a ruck into another position is going to be less effective.
So why do it for limited improvement in the actual ruck......when we can dominate sides without one at all?