We need to talk about our rucks.

[supersaints]

I have a lot of old posts (and differences of opinian) about rucks with a now retired poster and one of my posts showed that we were a bit below the average on ruck stocks in 2016, almost every team had at least the same or more .

I'll make the point (as I did dozens of times) that getting rid of our ruckmen (like most suggested) would have us in a lot worse position than we are .....the issue being that we need at least four ( I know I'll be howeld down, but we need two that can play anytime during this season ( we had that with Hickey and Longer we need another two in development) sadly third man
up changed everything ... in Hickeys good year we still got over 30% of our tap outs from third man up... of teams teams with no dominant ruck Geelong had higher I think we were third. Melbourne only bothered to go third man up 3% of the time ... now that should tell you something About how dominant Gawn was in 2016... For those that did not notice he was more dominant in 2017... Hello anybody home !

I can try to find the stats ....( I think I quoted them once) but the teams with big bodied dominant rucks were down to about 4% of hit outs from third man up! Surely anyone can see the discrepancy ... Third man up has basically put an end to Hickeys game at AFL level ... unless he develops some huge body strength ...
I'm hopefully ( but not convinced ) that Pierce getting a season playing VFL , may develop s bit quicker than he was. I know one ex ruck coach who was adamant in time he will be the best of them all.

While everyone is screaming out for " mobile ruckman" have a good look at Geelongs current position , I believe their slide is at least partly due to not having a dominant ruck and relying on " mobile" rucks Exactly what posters are after !!!

So I was Very adamant we keep Longer when most followed BMs desire to get rid of him.. how do you think we would go now if you all got your wish... we would be stuffed

Times have moved on but Hawthorn played two genuine rucks during their sucessful era .. and they sort of did alright ...

Maybe Marshalls the man ... don't don't be surprised if we use our war chest on a dominant ruck... we would have s*** in the finals if Gawn played for us last season

[sunsaint]

I think you forget that Geelong have Zac Smith who is an even bigger telephone pole than longer
The difference with Zac is that he can mark, dispose by foot and kicks goals - as backups on the day blicavs and Stanley can hold their own
But the big difference with Geelong is that hitouts matter little when you have clearance kings in Dangerfield and Selwood

[samoht]

As we don't have mobile big men with high football ability/IQ like a Jacobs, Kruezer, Stefan Martin or Gawn, etc.. (and as Hickey is injured or out-of-sorts most of the time, and we don't have faith in Pierce and think Marshall is not ready yet, etc..) - I think we need to think laterally and utilise someone who is a regular player and who is mobile, who has a football brain and who gets 20 possessions around the ground on a regular basis - a 190 cm player who can jump and compete in the ruck as our main ruckman - they don't need to be 2 metre tall monoliths and they don't need to win half the hitouts.

The clearance players do most of the clearance work, anyway - the ruck hitout numbers don't translate into clearances - there's an insignificant correlation, if any.
I mean how many times have we seen a ruckman win 30 more hitouts than the opposing ruckman - yet their team still loses the clearances by a fair margin.

I think we would have done better against Brisbane if we played Dunstan instead of Longer (not to replace him in the ruck, of course) and had Acres , Bruce and maybe also another tall regular player alternating in the ruck. We would have had 20 more useful possessions around the ground (and the Lions would have had 20 less = potentially a 40 possession turnaround gain), 1 more play maker (Dunstan) on the ground, and another 300 metres plus gained.
All I see is positives.

[spert]

The recruiters/ coach have dropped the ball on the rucks. I just get a feeling that Richo and Hickey might not be communicating that well. Hickey is too talented to be playing poor footy and should by rights be in the senior team. Longer is a GOP at best and only offers a bit of physicality in his favour. Any ruck his size who cant take consistent pack marks or mark from kick ins, is a liability in the AFL. I think Hickey and Marshall are the ones who should be up and about as our ruck choices.

[samoht]

Looking past all the ruckmen, Hickey, Longer etc... (until they sort themselves out and prove themselves worthy).

Might be lateral or foolish thinking on my part ? ....
Anyway, next week we can potentially be 40 possessions better off (in turnaround terms), have 1 more play maker on the ground (by playing Dunstan) and gain 300 metres plus.... by giving all our monolithic, underperforming and out-of-sorts or not-ready-yet ruckmen a rest (by using Acres , Bruce and another tallish regular player in the ruck, instead).

[stonecold]

We went from having no rucks to then having a lot of rucks. Hickey and Longer are different players but were equally vying for the one spot. I liked that. Then Pierce developed and got a game and so too, Holmes. Then Marshall was drafted. I thought our ruck depth - just through weight of numbers alone (i.e. competing for spots) was looking up. Now we don't have Holmes, Pierce re-rookied, Hickey in no man's land, Longer is largely useless and means we're playing one short and so, on balance, I can't see how playing Marshall would make us a worse team. He's younger and can also push forward. I think he'd give us much more balance as a team - Longer would have been an even money bet in the dinosaur days let alone modern fast footy.

Basically - playing Longer kills our midfield and defence. He rarely wins hitouts to advantage and also, gives away lots of free kicks at stoppages. This then kills our defence.

Just play Marshall and deal with it (unless Hickey miraculously finds his 2016 form)

In your opinion, of course!!!!!

[nw7]

Hickey needs a few games in a row, just like Billy got last year. Yes he was terrible against Essendon but I feel he has a huge upside if he gets a chance. Hickeys best is much better than Billy Longer. I love the effort Billy puts in but he's just a liability to the team.

[Crossy66]

The coach doesnt seem to agree with your assessment. Worth noting that Saints offered up Hickey for a trade year before last and no takers. Atleast 2 clubs enquired about Billy and were told he isnt going anywhere. It would be good if our loyal band of supporters stopped slagging our own players such as Billy, Paddy etc, the coaches as well and just , well... supported the team. Its ok to have a view and to express it, but alot of what gets posted on here is hateful.

[sunsaint]

we have already done this one
Its not dis-loyal to support one stkilda player over another
And it certainly is not dis-loyal to comment on what the games best players offer in comparison to what we put on the park
The aim of the game is to improve so we might, just maybe get a crack at the flag
Isnt that what we all want?

[Crossy66]

No problem favoring one player over another. I have an issue with "completely useless, a liability, waste of space, we're playing one man down" etc etc. Go back and have a look at some of the crap from last year. Similarly, take a look at posters re Paddy and the love for Petracca... a bloody melbourne player!. Its not all posters, but there are quite a few on here that need to think about what they type. Of course you can comment on "wouldnt it be wonderful if Nic Nat, Gawn etc came to us" no problem if you want to dream about that, but, Atleast this year, they're not coming!
In any case, the ruck is not where i would spend our recruiting dollar. Give me a couple of silky mids, start kicking straight, and we will be in it up to our necks.
Lets keep it positive!

[sunsaint]

hmmm but Nic Nat will be available next year
but like Fyfe he wont leave WA