The Great Ruck Debate.

[ElwoodBlues1]

Just as an aside....
When Melbourne traded for Grundy i said it was silly and the only benefit to them was that the Dees wouldn't have to play against Grundy anymore.
They were the 2 best rucks in the game.
They played best as #1 rucks and did little else around the ground - granted Gawn had/has improved his efforts up forward.
Dees worked out pretty quickly that they made the wrong call and 12 months later the 2nd best ruck in the game was sent packing for all the same reasons i'm listed here.
You can't have 2 #1 rucks in the same side. If they can't play a different position, it doesn't benefit the side.

Agree...everyone got carried away when Gawn and Jackson were front and centre of Melbournes premiership win but that was a one off season and playing two very good No1 rucks in the same team rarely works and has a knock on effect of limiting rotations, positional changes etc when most of your interchanges will be mids/wingers resting.
For us its even more critical to not sacrifice, pace and mobility given we are not a quick team and have a slower group of mids than most.
If we had two TDK's then I would be more inclined to play two ruckman in games where I thought we may get an advantage but I wouldnt do it every game either given the composition of our team.