The rise.... and RISE of Marc Pittonet

[ElwoodBlues1]

Just to recap, we have one of the best clearance players in the comp who was labelled the extractor.  You could ruck a crap ruckman to him, provided the ball hits him, and Cripps gets the clearance, then that's a tap to advantage correct?  Add Walsh, and im not sure it says much about any of our rucks capabilities over the last little while. 

I know what I see on game day, and against North, it was Goldstein monstoring us.  Against Adelaide it was O'Reilly. 

For all this debate going round in circles, our rucks dont dominate, they put in a respectable performance.

That goes for TDK, Pitto, or JSOS, but Pitto at this stage is the one that probably plays best on my subjective viewing of football. 

THERE< screw what the stats show.

Our rucks will never be dominating rucks like the best in the comp, we are looking for that Stanley/Blicavs type effort where they break even and try and be handy around the ball.
Frampton had nearly as many hitouts as Marshall last week but got slaughtered around the ground and I want more from TDK/Pitto around the ground than worrying too much about hitouts. We have a good midfield full of contested mids and Id like to think we can still win our fair share of ball even losing the ruck contests.
If Marshall gets 25 possies again this week then we will be up against it so its up to TDK and Pittonet to prevent that happening more than winning every ruck contest imo.

[LP]

THERE< screw what the stats show.

If you ignore the tap stats and watch everything else they do, you'll come to the very same conclusion.

That is a tell about the value of tap stats! ;D

[kruddler]

Yet the commentators cite hitout to advantage stats during the commentary  :-\

I suspect that the stats just aren't available to the punters.

Yes, but its somewhat retrospective.

Rather than at the time.

[kruddler]

If you ignore the tap stats and watch everything else they do, you'll come to the very same conclusion.

That is a tell about the value of tap stats! ;D

Which is your opinion.

I'm debated many different people who are making many different arguments.

To combat you...
Jack does more around the ground than TDK does.

If you ignore the flashes of high marking ATTEMPTS that TDK makes....there is very little substance to the rest of his game.
He looks good, but doesn't actually do much.

Jack looks average, but does more than you think.
If i wasn't commenting on the clearance stats he was getting during the game, would anyone have noticed? 2nd and 3rd efforts, smothers etc don't show on a stat sheet, but SOJ never dies wondering.....TDK is a ball watcher.

[kruddler]

I was replying to the post game, but thought it'd be best here....

Just watched the Voss presser. Said Tom De Koning was ill earlier in the week and couldn't train.

Did we miss him today?

Did anyone at any point in time think, "Geez, i wish we had TDK right now"

For all the talk about 2 rucks, TDK vs Jack etc.....we didn't miss him one bit.

Guess how many ruck contests Jack Silvagni was in today?
*tick tock tick tock*
Times up!
Answer: ZERO. Did not contest a single throw-in, ball up or centre bounce.

FWIW, Pittonet dominated - 61 ruck contests, 27 hitouts, but a massive 18 hitouts to advantage!
But how does that compare? Well TDK has had a total of 24 hitouts to advantage in 5 full games this year.

For those playing at home....
Young took 13 ruck contests - 7 hitouts and 4 hitouts to advantage!
Harry took 4 ruck contests - 1 hitout, none to advantage
Cripps took 1, for 1 and none.

Pittonet rucks for 77% of the ruck contests. From the other 23% our 'hacks' 18 ruck contests, won half with 9 hitouts, and 4 went to advantage.
TDK last week had 57 ruck contests, 17 hitouts, but only 4 went to advantage.
Our backups were as effective as TDK, despite have 1/3 the amount of attempts TDK had last week.

Surely, you can see what i've been saying that TDK offers us little that we cannot get elsewhere and until he steps up and lives up to his athletic freakish abilities, he is not worth playing.

[madbluboy]

I agree with all of that.

I didn't want Jack in the ruck. He's too small and too slow to bring any x factor in there.

[madbluboy]

Young was a ruck at the Dogs

[kruddler]

I agree with all of that.

I didn't want Jack in the ruck. He's too small and too slow to bring any x factor in there.

My whole point is that you don't need 2 rucks. I've said that all along.

I think Jack brings plenty playing there, 6 clearances last week for example, but i'm not bothered if he doesn't play there. You can pretty much put anyone there.

Before Charlie went on his coleman medal winning season, i'd suggesting putting him there for a chopout. Same with Cripps.

Basically how today went, was McKay take it forward, Young take it back, Pittonet to take as many as he can get too.
We can do that every week and use the spot on the bench that TDK keeps warm on a smaller option to give us more run.

People hear 'ruck' and think jumping at centre bounces. That is only about 20% of the ruck contests and that only occurs at the start of the quarter and after goals. You can ensure Pittonet takes every single one of them relatively easily by bringing him onto the ground after a goal is scored, or obviously playing him there if he is already on. Majority of the ruck work is throw ins and throw ups when the rucks are side by side. Its a glorified marking contests that anyone can do.

Say no to 2 rucks!

Of course the other thing is with TDK out, Pittonet gets more ruck time and uses his tapwork to great advantage....so the mids gets better service as a result of TDK not playing as well.

Look, it all sounds very harsh on TDK, but i've got nothing against him, he just hasn't grown into the ruck (or any other position) like we would've liked. As a result, he isn't in our best 22.

[Professer E]

Amen

[kruddler]

Been a few days and not a single person has gone into bat for TDK.

Perhaps people are starting to see what i see in terms of ruck balance, output, importance?

If rumours of TDK being out on the sauce are anything to go by, i fear the lad may never 'see the light' until its too late.