The Great Ruck Debate.

[kruddler]

What the figures show is that TOG is largely independent of whether we play one or two rucks.

For example, round 20 of 2023 against the Pies, Tom was 85% and Pitto was 76%.  In the elimination final against the Swans, Tom was 71% and Pitto was 61%.  In round 18, Tom, as the sole ruckman, was 78%.  In round 9, as sole ruckman, Pitto was 78%.

This season, in round 1, Tom was 77% as sole ruckman.  In round 16, Pitto was 75% as sole ruckman.  In round 9, it was close to your figures with Tom on 74% and Pitto on 73%.  Excluding Cerra and Hewett, we had seven other players whose TOG ranged from 72 to 79%.  Mitch McGovern and Matt Kennedy combined to spend the equivalent of half a game for one player on the bench. 

In round 20 of 2023, excluding Cerra and Dow, we had nine players spend more or roughly the same time on the pine than our ruck duo.  That must be unsustainable ... or is having players on the bench for a quarter of the game only a problem when they're ruckmen.

Time spent on the bench is insignificant provided time on the ground is productive.  For example, in the round 20 game against Collingwood, Martin and Motlop were on the bench for a little under and a little over a quarter respectively but they combined for 5 goals and 4 tackles.  Tom and Pitto didn't have great games but they were competitive.  Cameron and Cox would have had a picnic if we had gone in with one ruck.

I'm not having this debate with you.
I've ran the figures and that was the outcome.

You can cherry pick a couple games and show whatever you like. Do it over seasons (and eliminate games where someone was injured and/or subbed out) and there is a clear pattern

Its on this site somewhere if you care to look.

Its only a small part of the debate anyway. Their ineffectiveness around the ground, compared to a mid alternative, and the TOG shows how much time on bench they are hogging AND how much of the game we are trying to hide them away somewhere else as well.