The rise.... and RISE of Marc Pittonet

[ElwoodBlues1]

They are your thoughts and opinions, but the stats doesn't back that up.

Look at the games when we play 2 rucks and look at the TOG for those 2 rucks.
Now compare that to when we play 1 ruck and compare the TOG of that ruck and whichever alternative ruck we are going with, be that SOJ, Harry or Young.

The latter 3 always play 85+ TOG....and the ruck is 80% or more as well. - So we are basically taking up about 15% + 20% TOG between our rucks on the bench - 35%
When we play 2 rucks, they are both at about 60% TOG.....with 1 basically on the bench for almost half a game. So that is 40% + 40% TOG missing, which is taken up by a ruck on the bench - 80%

The first scenario allows our bigger blokes/rucks to spend more time on ground....and has 1 less big bloke there to begin with.....so little blokes get the bench and higher rotations
The second scenario has bigger blokes/rucks taking up 1 spot on the bench for 80% of the game...and makes us bigger overall.....so less smaller blokes to choose from.....and even less rotations as well.

2nd scenario is playing 2 rucks, it puts more pressure on an already struggling midfield given them less people rotating as well as less rotations through the bench. THIS is my whole issue. Team balance is thrown out by playing 2 rucks and forcing little blokes to struggle more.
If TDK (or Pitto) could hold down a key spot.....then all this magically goes away. But neither can, which is why its an issue.
So if we can choose one of our 'other' big blokes to give us a chop out in the ruck, then we don't get handicapped by playing 2 rucks who can't do anything else. The only 'issue' with that is how much we suffer by playing a part time ruckman in those instances.
Now, as i showed, SOJ is our most effective ruckman (compared to Harry, Young, Cripps) in terms of winning hitouts to advantage....and he is only slightly behind TDK in that area. SOJ is also much better at clearances and kicking goals as well.

So THAT is why SOJ is my preference to play the 2nd ruck role. Not because of the number on his back, the name on his locker and/or birth certificate. If someone else can do the same thing. Be my guest. More than happy for them to have it. Nobody else is doing that role as well as he has. Clearly the MC have come to similar conclusions as they've been doing it for a couple years now. Perhaps your issue is with them?

I thought Collingwood got a clear advantage in the ruck especially when Jack was matched up on Cameron as the two second stringers and looked very slow. Maybe thats just one game and the Pies are slicker than most teams and made Jack look bad but for me it has to be horses for courses when Jack plays ruck. ie I dont want him rucking vs Gawn/Grundy at the MCG but maybe vs Sydney who will only have Hickey and some young kid whose name escapes me he will be better suited.

[DJC]

I thought Collingwood got a clear advantage in the ruck especially when Jack was matched up on Cameron as the two second stringers and looked very slow. Maybe thats just one game and the Pies are slicker than most teams and made Jack look bad but for me it has to be horses for courses when Jack plays ruck. ie I dont want him rucking vs Gawn/Grundy at the MCG but maybe vs Sydney who will only have Hickey and some young kid whose name escapes me he will be better suited.

I thought Jack battled hard and his second efforts were good as usual.  However, he got absolutely hammered both in the physical contests and the outcomes by the Collingwood rucks, and the Bulldog rucks the week before.  And he doesn't get to choose when the opposition second stringer gives the first ruck a spell.  Pitto was off the ground for longish periods leaving Jack to compete against the first rucks.  Apart from handing the opposition rucks and mids an advantage, rucking Jack affects his work as a third tall.

Young is a much better option as back up ruck, provided we're prepared to let his work in defence suffer and have cover from Kemp (or Jack).

I agree with a horses for courses approach but playing two genuine rucks can cause problems for the opposition ... but not if we continually rest one ruckman on the bench.

[ElwoodBlues1]

I thought Jack battled hard and his second efforts were good as usual.  However, he got absolutely hammered both in the physical contests and the outcomes by the Collingwood rucks, and the Bulldog rucks the week before.  And he doesn't get to choose when the opposition second stringer gives the first ruck a spell.  Pitto was off the ground for longish periods leaving Jack to compete against the first rucks.  Apart from handing the opposition rucks and mids an advantage, rucking Jack affects his work as a third tall.

Young is a much better option as back up ruck, provided we're prepared to let his work in defence suffer and have cover from Kemp (or Jack).

I agree with a horses for courses approach but playing two genuine rucks can cause problems for the opposition ... but not if we continually rest one ruckman on the bench.

Agree with all that, if we play two genuine ruckman then they do need to be used to advantage better than we have .
Im interested in seeing how TDK could work out at CHB and how Young could be used as a second ruckman.
I feel we have played Jack out of form and he has become ineffective as a forward as a result...this whole Shaun Grigg tactic worked one year for Hardwick but I havent seen it work for Richmond or anyone else since and it was based on Grigg rucking vs the opposition part timer but now clubs are smarter and wait for the opportunity to run their prime ruckman vs your part timer and I think that tactic is null and void now unless its genuine part timers vs genuine part timers.

[kruddler]

Agree with all that, if we play two genuine ruckman then they do need to be used to advantage better than we have .
Im interested in seeing how TDK could work out at CHB and how Young could be used as a second ruckman.
I feel we have played Jack out of form and he has become ineffective as a forward as a result...this whole Shaun Grigg tactic worked one year for Hardwick but I havent seen it work for Richmond or anyone else since and it was based on Grigg rucking vs the opposition part timer but now clubs are smarter and wait for the opportunity to run their prime ruckman vs your part timer and I think that tactic is null and void now unless its genuine part timers vs genuine part timers.

If TDK can play CHB, then our problems are solved.

I'm not sure the likelyhood of that though.

[LordLucifer]

If any of you saw Young playing ruck for the Dogs when they were plagued by injury would not be suggesting he be used as a second ruckman at all.

[DJC]

If any of you saw Young playing ruck for the Dogs when they were plagued by injury would not be suggesting he be used as a second ruckman at all.

That may be so, but you can’t judge players on what they may have done or not done in another team and a couple of seasons ago. Young did quite well as our second ruck this season, and that’s all that matters.

I don’t think that you should ask a key defender to add ruck to their task list, and I think that Young is much better value as a defender, but he’s streets ahead of Jack as a ruckman.

The best options for our second ruck spot are De Koning, Young, Mirkov, O’Keeffe, Lemmey, daylight, and then Jack.

[kruddler]

PLAYER A
13 disposals
4 marks
18 Ruck Contests
5 Hitouts
0 hitouts to advantage
0 tackles
2 clearances
1.0 goal.behind
82% TOG

PLAYER B
12 disposals
3 marks
16 ruck contests
3 hitouts
2 hitouts to advantage
7 tackles
2 clearances
0.1 goal.behind
78% TOG


Player A is the great white hope playing against a poor team
Player B is a hack playing against the best team in the comp.

Player A = TDK this week, shows the reason why we need to play 2 rucks.
Player B = SOS last week a terrible game worthy of dropping.
Come again??

When i tell you there is SFA between them in terms of output, SOJ holds his own in the ruck and offers more pressure around the ground (7 tackles vs 0)

I really hope TDK kicks on....but he needs to give us more

[madbluboy]

Player C (On more $ than A+B combined)

8 disposals
4 marks
0 ruck contests
0 hitouts
0 hitouts to advantage
1 tackles
0 clearances
0.3 goal.behind
94% TOG

[Gointocarlton]

Player C (On more $ than A+B combined)

8 disposals
4 marks
0 ruck contests
0 hitouts
0 hitouts to advantage
1 tackles
0 clearances
0.3 goal.behind
94% TOG

If we had a KPF in the 2s who even resembled a KPF, you'd 100% drop H this week. He'll survive only because of that and the amount of injuries we copped last night.

[Professer E]

Maybe they're all rubbish and we're playing in the electrical noise zone stats-wise below the threshold of a meaningful response.