Rd 17 : Pre Game polite and refined discourse - Blues v Eagles

[blue4life]

I make it because it's right. When you're right you can keep saying it.

Right or wrong, Bolton doesn't seem to agree with you.

[DJC]

My issue is we still have two ruckmen and just one key forward. Given our ruckmen are useless when not on the ball we are essentially playing with 17 most of the time as you can only play one of them on the ball at any one time. Jaksch will have Casboult's problem of being one out against the opposition defence. We been pumped each time we've had two rucks and just one key forward. This time it's a young player still developing and building strength.

I agree about only having one key forward - Jaksch is up against it from the start - but there's nothing wrong with playing two ruckmen.  However, ours are each spending a third of the game on the bench because they are not effective as forwards.  We need to come up with a better way to use our ruckmen and/or find ruckmen who can be a genuine forward target in support of our key forwards.

[DJC]

Agree.

Casboult is 'good' because he can take a mark.
Personally, i like him because he runs through opposition players.

As far as a key forward you can rely on.....nope.

We're on the same page there Kruddler 

[blue4life]

Casboult is 'good' because he can take a mark.

So could Brad Fisher, in fact he took more marks per game than Casboult and had a higher goal average.

Personally, i like him because he runs through opposition players.

He's well ahead of Fisher on that score, Fish couldn't knock a sick chook off a fence.

[kruddler]

I make it because it's right. When you're right you can keep saying it. Try it. Two rucks has been a deadset failure, please don't tell me otherwise. Your selective stats won't change a thing. Please don't bore us with them and just watch the game instead. That'll tell you more. Nothing like a scoreboard to tell us a story. Two rucks, one key forward, struggle to kick 7-8 goals, two key forwards, started at 10 then worked it's`way to over 100pts with 6 wins from 7 games. Back to two rucks, one key forwards, back to kicking 7 goals from 51 forward 50 entries. Your stats pale in comparison with those...lol.

Jones is a target, take the pressure off the other key forward and kick a goal or two. It spreads the defence instead of them going to the single key forward. Opens up the 50 and allows others to hit the scoreboard too not to mention straightening us up as we go forward. Called structure. Surely you grasp that concept. It's simple and results have proved it this year. We know he's not that good but he is way better value and having a ruckman running around doing nothing. They are useless up forward or anywhere else when off the ball.

Like I said, When did things change for us this year? When we picked a 2nd key forward. We started winning and started kicking bigger scores. We did even better again when we played just Kreuzer most of the day with back up from Casboult, as we have the last few years. Both play alot better. If you haven't seen that then we're just wasting our time here. That's the stat that matters. Try real stats.

I understand the point you are trying to make. However, what is it exactly the Jones does that make defenders follow him, that playing a second ruck doesn't do when they are playing forward?

Why is Jones 'so good' at taking a defender when our ruckmen are not capable of doing?!

Jones is a rubbish forward who has been lucky enough to play in our 4 wins.....considering the teams tackling pressure was through the roof during that period (no thanks to Jones i might add) he was afforded more opportunities to kick goals than our current 'forwards' have had.

You see a correlation (Jones plays and we win) and you see that as 'proof' without looking any deeper into it. Then you say it a million times to try and convince everyone else its right. Which by now, you believe 100%.

There were plenty of other things happening during our wins, that are not happening now.
Walker+Everitt were contributing.
Cripps was at the top of his game....playing injured now IMO
Murphy was playing (mostly).
The team were tackling like men possessed and working for eachother.
This resulted in both more numerous and more quality inside 50's, which resulted in more shots on goal, and thus goals.....of which Jones got some benefit for.

[DJC]

I understand the point you are trying to make. However, what is it exactly the Jones does that make defenders follow him, that playing a second ruck doesn't do when they are playing forward?

Why is Jones 'so good' at taking a defender when our ruckmen are not capable of doing?!

Our ruckmen tend to be stationary and attract balls kicked on top of their heads.  The defenders come over the top and punch the ball clear and often to their team's advantage.  While I am a critic of Jones because he doesn't create enough opportunities as a forward target, he does hit contests at speed, smashes packs and brings the ball to ground in a more random way that should favour our small forwards (if they were any good).  His opponent has to stay with him because he knows the basics of forward play.

Our ruckmens' opponents can zone off because they know that, if a ruckman does become a target, the ball will coming on top of their head and they will be able to spoil.

[LP]

Our ruckmen tend to be stationary and attract balls kicked on top of their heads.  The defenders come over the top and punch the ball clear and often to their team's advantage.  While I am a critic of Jones because he doesn't create enough opportunities as a forward target, he does hit contests at speed, smashes packs and brings the ball to ground in a more random way that should favour our small forwards (if they were any good).  His opponent has to stay with him because he knows the basics of forward play.

Our ruckmens' opponents can zone off because they know that, if a ruckman does become a target, the ball will coming on top of their head and they will be able to spoil.

Jaksch should take note!

[Gointocarlton]

I make it because it's right. When you're right you can keep saying it. Try it. Two rucks has been a deadset failure, please don't tell me otherwise. Your selective stats won't change a thing. Please don't bore us with them and just watch the game instead. That'll tell you more. Nothing like a scoreboard to tell us a story. Two rucks, one key forward, struggle to kick 7-8 goals, two key forwards, started at 10 then worked it's`way to over 100pts with 6 wins from 7 games. Back to two rucks, one key forwards, back to kicking 7 goals from 51 forward 50 entries. Your stats pale in comparison with those...lol.

Jones is a target, take the pressure off the other key forward and kick a goal or two. It spreads the defence instead of them going to the single key forward. Opens up the 50 and allows others to hit the scoreboard too not to mention straightening us up as we go forward. Called structure. Surely you grasp that concept. It's simple and results have proved it this year. We know he's not that good but he is way better value and having a ruckman running around doing nothing. They are useless up forward or anywhere else when off the ball.

Like I said, When did things change for us this year? When we picked a 2nd key forward. We started winning and started kicking bigger scores. We did even better again when we played just Kreuzer most of the day with back up from Casboult, as we have the last few years. Both play alot better. If you haven't seen that then we're just wasting our time here. That's the stat that matters. Try real stats.

Mate I dont quite get your theory. There has been games with 2 rucks that we have won and lost so I am not sure there is a pattern. We have also lost with one ruckman (eg NM). See below:
Rnd 5 Freo Win Kruezer and Phillips (2 Rucks Played)
Rnd 6 Ess Win Kruezer and Phillips (2 Rucks Played)
Rnd 7 Coll Win Kruezer  (1 Ruck Played)
Rnd 8 PA Win Kruezer  (1 Ruck Played)
Rnd 9 NM Loss Gorringe  (1 Rucks Played)
Rnd 10 Geel Win Kruezer and Gorringe (2 Rucks Played)
Rnd 11 Bris Win Kruezer and Gorringe (2 Rucks Played) 
The Rnd 12, 14, 15, 16 we have lost every game with 2 rucks playing

[kruddler]

Our ruckmen tend to be stationary and attract balls kicked on top of their heads.  The defenders come over the top and punch the ball clear and often to their team's advantage.  While I am a critic of Jones because he doesn't create enough opportunities as a forward target, he does hit contests at speed, smashes packs and brings the ball to ground in a more random way that should favour our small forwards (if they were any good).  His opponent has to stay with him because he knows the basics of forward play.

Our ruckmens' opponents can zone off because they know that, if a ruckman does become a target, the ball will coming on top of their head and they will be able to spoil.

I understand the theory behind it, what i am suggesting is that Jones doesn't actually run/present as much as people suggest and that our rucks are not as stationary as people suggest.

What happens if, when Jones plays next, that we get done by 10 goals much in the same fashion as we do now? Has Jones lost touch? Or is it as it truly is, the team has dropped off and Jones is not our saviour.

[kruddler]

Mate I dont quite get your theory. There has been games with 2 rucks that we have won and lost so I am not sure there is a pattern. We have also lost with one ruckman (eg NM). See below:
Rnd 5 Freo Win Kruezer and Phillips (2 Rucks Played)
Rnd 6 Ess Win Kruezer and Phillips (2 Rucks Played)
Rnd 7 Coll Win Kruezer  (1 Ruck Played)
Rnd 8 PA Win Kruezer  (1 Ruck Played)
Rnd 9 NM Loss Gorringe  (1 Rucks Played)
Rnd 10 Geel Win Kruezer and Gorringe (2 Rucks Played)
Rnd 11 Bris Win Kruezer and Gorringe (2 Rucks Played) 
The Rnd 12, 14, 15, 16 we have lost every game with 2 rucks playing

Rowe was essentially our 2nd ruck in the PA game.