The Great Ruck Debate.

[LP]

Last week Melbourne won easy with no rucks. Comes down to your ones on the ground, not those contesting the tap.

Are you somehow asserting our Cripps, Walsh, Cerra, Hewett, Kennedy midfield need no ruck at all?

How big is the square, will our lot even get within a stride of the opponents collecting the pill before it leaves the square?

What good Harry and Charlie if they never get a fast break clearance, what percentage of Harry and Charlie's goals come from the fast break, in a game or over a season?

What's the goal scoring average difference between a losing season and a winning season, 2, 3, 4, more or perhaps less?

In how many games have we had close victories, would that change without at least some fast breaks?

For reference, I read somewhere an interesting analysis, it equates the worth of fast centre breaks, the more you have the higher your score, and the faster the playing surface the higher the average worth of the fast break. At most major AFL venues a fast break equates to about +1pt, that is a genuinely useful stat, because it's a global average no matter the team selection, the more fast breaks you get the more you score.

When a team surrenders centre square breaks, it's not a zero sum loss, it's a gain for the opposition. That's the losing or gaining momentum part of the argument, being a placeholder just isn't good enough.

It would be interesting to know the value of stoppage clearances, but as far as I know that stat has never been collected, I suppose it's much much harder to define.