AFL Rd 22 2023 Pre Game Prognostications Carlton vs Melbourne

[ElwoodBlues1]

Did you see how StKilda got their first goal? First Crack highlighted Pittonet's poor effort, also highlighted why Fisher is only a back up.

Yep Pittonet didnt follow his man back quick enough and needs to show more effort but I thought his ruckwork was better than TDK he had 23 hitouts/3 marks to TDK's nine hitouts and 1 mark...didnt see what others see in the greatness of TDK's game at all.

[Blue Moon]

There is an old boxing saying that you take out your opponents legs by attacking their body.  Pittonett attacks the body of opposing ruckman and takes out their legs which allows TDK to use his athleticism to advantage.
On Saturday's match. Melbourne might be in a bit of form but Carlton's form is better. We are due to beat these guys and if we turn up with the right attitude we should do it.

[kruddler]

The failure in analysis here continues to be the idea that one ruck or the other is the only correct answer, when it is pretty much obvious to most fans that the two are complimentary as Voss outlined in his post match presser.

I suspect in the vast majority of cases, both will be a stronger option than either in isolation.

I realise that might be sad news for some fans who have favourites, perhaps even 3rd wheels they favour that are struggling for a slot to fill, but it's AFL it's not meant to be easy and it certainly isn't fair!

Failure in analysis, or failure in comprehension?

I've agreed with you that the compliment eachother, i always have. That is not part of the debate.

"A luxury we cannot afford" and "Better team balance without" is the take home points of this debate you, and others, are missing.

Read this slowly.....
If we play 2 ruckman, will our efforts in the ruck be better than we play 1 ruck? Absolutely they will.
Depending on who else is in the side (ie key forwards/backs) can the 2 ruckman potentially hurt our overall team balance and overall team performance as a result...that is, make us too tall? Certainly can.

Now we've got that cleared up....for the 99th time...back to the actual debate.

Is the team better off by playing....
1 ruck, and 2 key forwards, 2 key backs and a 3rd forward and a 3rd back.....(7 talls + 15 smalls)
or
2 rucks, and 2 key forwards, 2 key backs and a 3rd forward and a 3rd back.....(8 talls + 14 smalls)

I would 100% say we get better overall performance from the first option.
Our ruck performance will be down, but our pressure rating will be higher and give us more benefit.

1 ruck is sufficient to compete to an acceptable level.
2 rucks mean our ruck area is obviously better.
3 rucks mean its even better
4 rucks means its better again.

With the addition of additional rucks, that area is strengthened, but other areas are weakened.
We literally won games without a single ruck, so clearly their importance is overstated.

If your 2nd ruck/backup ruck can not hold down another position on merit, then "its a luxury we can't afford"
Right now, we don't have Harry or Jack up forward so
For "team balance" we can clearly play 2 rucks. Without them, we are not 'tall enough', which is the opposite problem to what we have when everyone is fit.

[madbluboy]

Yep Pittonet didnt follow his man back quick enough and needs to show more effort but I thought his ruckwork was better than TDK he had 23 hitouts/3 marks to TDK's nine hitouts and 1 mark...didnt see what others see in the greatness of TDK's game at all.

Darcy had a million hit outs the other week against us but just like pittonet he had no influence.

[kruddler]

Yep Pittonet didnt follow his man back quick enough and needs to show more effort but I thought his ruckwork was better than TDK he had 23 hitouts/3 marks to TDK's nine hitouts and 1 mark...didnt see what others see in the greatness of TDK's game at all.

Forget about hitouts, that includes ones that go to 50-50 contests and even to the opposition.

HTA was Pittonet 10, TDK 3.
FWIW Marshall also had 10.....even though he attented 19 more ruck contests and had 7 more hitouts than Pittonet, end result was same. 10 each to advantage.

[shawny]

Forget about hitouts, that includes ones that go to 50-50 contests and even to the opposition.

HTA was Pittonet 10, TDK 3.
FWIW Marshall also had 10.....even though he attented 19 more ruck contests and had 7 more hitouts than Pittonet, end result was same. 10 each to advantage.

Can you provide the complete stats of last weeks game of Marshall, Pitt and TDK?

While pits ruck craft is very good the game doesn’t end after the hit out.

While TDK doesn’t have Pitts ruck craft yet but is superior imo in all other aspects after the bounce which imo makes him more valuable to the team.

I’m ok with both in the line up as I can see his value in wearing ruckman down to enable TDK to have a period where he can influence the game which is great I just get very frustrated with Pitts lack of footy smarts when being too loose when dangerous rucks float forward and he is jogging 5 metres behind and can’t get to the contest.

[Lods]

Forget about hitouts, that includes ones that go to 50-50 contests and even to the opposition.

HTA was Pittonet 10, TDK 3.
FWIW Marshall also had 10.....even though he attented 19 more ruck contests and had 7 more hitouts than Pittonet, end result was same. 10 each to advantage.

Is that HTA a statistic that's even worth worrying about.

In  Pittonet's case it's a little over 2 a quarter
In TDK's case a little under one a quarter.

After the first possession there's no guarantee where the ball ends up, so essentially, a play that has such limited impact on a game is pretty irrelevant.

[kruddler]

Is that HTA a statistic that's even worth worrying about.

In  Pittonet's case it's a little over 2 a quarter
In TDK's case a little under one a quarter.

After the first possession there's no guarantee where the ball ends up, so essentially, a play that has such limited impact on a game is pretty irrelevant.

Its worth worrying about more than hitouts is it not?

The way i think about it is like this. Its an oversimplification, but it holds true over time (even if individual contests don't always hold true)

There is a 50-50 contest Pittonet wins you that contest 20% of the time.
TDK about 9% of the time.
Marshall was halway inbetween at 14%.
57% of contests has no winner.

So from all the non-HTA contests (57%) you have a 50-50 battle from your mids that they must win. Lets say they win 50% of them only. So 28% is won by your midfield.

Overall, your rucks won you 29% of the contests and your mids won you 28% of the contests.

Again, its an oversimplification, but you can see how important getting that head-start is from the ruck.

Overall we have won half from ruck, half from mids.

[kruddler]

Can you provide the complete stats of last weeks game of Marshall, Pitt and TDK?

While pits ruck craft is very good the game doesn’t end after the hit out.

While TDK doesn’t have Pitts ruck craft yet but is superior imo in all other aspects after the bounce which imo makes him more valuable to the team.

I’m ok with both in the line up as I can see his value in wearing ruckman down to enable TDK to have a period where he can influence the game which is great I just get very frustrated with Pitts lack of footy smarts when being too loose when dangerous rucks float forward and he is jogging 5 metres behind and can’t get to the contest.

I've summarised parts of it already. Its there for all to see on the AFL stats.

The TDK boosters always point to Pittonets shortcomings after the ruck contest, which is fair, but at the same time fail to acknowledge that TDKs numbers after the contest are nothing to write home about either.
About a month ago, TDK averaged 1 more disposal a game, and played 8% more game time. They were essentially averaging the same around the ground.

TDK gets more ball forward so his stats are a bit more skewed to marks on lead, inside 50's etc, but they are far from spectacular.

....which is why i continually bring up the fact that we can't carry 2 rucks who don't do enough around the ground.

Pittonet gets our mids first use 10% of the time more than TDK.

[pinot]

I've summarised parts of it already. Its there for all to see on the AFL stats.

The TDK boosters always point to Pittonets shortcomings after the ruck contest, which is fair, but at the same time fail to acknowledge that TDKs numbers after the contest are nothing to write home about either.
About a month ago, TDK averaged 1 more disposal a game, and played 8% more game time. They were essentially averaging the same around the ground.

TDK gets more ball forward so his stats are a bit more skewed to marks on lead, inside 50's etc, but they are far from spectacular.

....which is why i continually bring up the fact that we can't carry 2 rucks who don't do enough around the ground.

Pittonet gets our mids first use 10% of the time more than TDK.

..and conceding goals to his opponent and lack of scoreboard pressure the other way?

10% more than X when X was playing in another position doesn't make much sense.