| TalkingCarlton http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/ |
|
| Bananaby French and our current ruckmen http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=19732 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | wasthesonofapreacherman [ Tue Jan 22, 2008 10:57 am ] |
| Post subject: | Bananaby French and our current ruckmen |
I was getting stircrazy last night and decided to watch the Fizzer Cup Grand Final of 2005. Posters used to love bagging French repeatedly, but it just reinforced to me how important a ruckman is, and more to the point, it had me pondering how many of these players would've hung around longer had they been playing to a gameplan they believed in. I'm not about to say Pagan was the brunt of all our problems, but it's increasingly more logical players like French left prematurely when in actual fact they could've contributed to the team as it changed and evolved to a better cohesive unit as it's becoming. He was over 200cm's, a good ruckman, relatively mobile, a decent mark and a good kick for goal. He provided far far more than Ackland has at any club, and more than likely ever will in both the rucking department and plugging holes. I even remember him putting in a couple of memorable performances where he would've been listed in our best. If we can develop a ruckman to at least that level in the next couple of years it's going to make life a lot easier for our midfield. We have to be patient as hard as it is after such a long-time since dominating the game. But one thing we have to remember with Kreuzer, Hampson, and Aisake is Bananaby didn't debut until 23 years of age, the same age Dean Cox really made an impact at AFL level. So as frustrating as it could be watching our ruckman develop, anyone bagging them over the next few years need only be reminded of just how hard it is to crack it with the bigboys when you're still growing into your bodies whilst trying to adjust to the pace of the game. Oh yeah, back to the Fizzer Cup game...Fev, Judd and Stevens - STIFFY material. |
|
| Author: | ryan2000 [ Tue Jan 22, 2008 11:22 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Hell i'd happily take DeLuca over Ackland................. ANYDAY! |
|
| Author: | Car17on [ Tue Jan 22, 2008 11:36 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
wasthesonofapreacherman wrote: the Fizzer Cup game...Fev, Judd and Stevens - STIFFY material /quote]
and ryan2000 wrote: Hell i'd happily take DeLuca over Ackland................. ANYDAY! QFMFT I mustn't have been watching too closely coz I don't remember celebrating a Barney goal ... |
|
| Author: | SparkyBlue [ Tue Jan 22, 2008 11:38 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Bananaby - loved him... not exactly agile, not the best around the ground - but definitely the best tap ruckman at Carlton post Harry Madden... Anyone disagree? These days a simple tap ruck doesn't cut it - you need to do your bit around the ground, not just at stoppages. Thats why players like Cox and Goodes are so important to a team. Let's hope K-Dogg fits the mould. 
|
|
| Author: | Donstuie [ Tue Jan 22, 2008 11:40 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Barnaby got the most out of himself, that much we can all agree on. And he always gave his all. A shame he couldn't stay for one more year to help out the young guys. |
|
| Author: | TruBlueBrad [ Tue Jan 22, 2008 11:49 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
SparkyBlue wrote: Bananaby - loved him... not exactly agile, not the best around the ground - but definitely the best tap ruckman at Carlton post Harry Madden...
Anyone disagree? Mark Porter was twice the tap ruckman of anyone at Carlton since Madden. |
|
| Author: | Dukes [ Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Let's face it ... Barnaby wasn't very good. He was a trier but that's it. |
|
| Author: | aboynamedsue [ Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
SparkyBlue wrote: Bananaby - loved him... not exactly agile, not the best around the ground - but definitely the best tap ruckman at Carlton post Harry Madden...
Anyone disagree? These days a simple tap ruck doesn't cut it - you need to do your bit around the ground, not just at stoppages. Thats why players like Cox and Goodes are so important to a team. Let's hope K-Dogg fits the mould. I'd put Ports and Aggot ahead of Barnaby as a tap ruckman. Barnaby was serviceable, and better than Sugar. I even think D-Mac gave us more as a ruckman than Sugar has. I can't remember being more disappointed in a player than I was with Ackland last year (and I wasn't exactly expecting him to be Big Nick either..). DeLuca wasn't really a ruckman, more of a really tall mobile marking forward (but not a particularly good one). We won't be a legitimate flag contender until we have a consistent, bona fide quality AFL ruckman. It will be 2010 before Hampson, Kreuzer, Aisake or Jacobs are possibly near that level. Cloke, Carlos and Ackland will never be at that level (although Cloke and Carlos should be handy key position players that can help out in the ruck). |
|
| Author: | wasthesonofapreacherman [ Tue Jan 22, 2008 1:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
p(12)terg wrote: wasthesonofapreacherman wrote: the Fizzer Cup game...Fev, Judd and Stevens - STIFFY material /quote] and ryan2000 wrote: Hell i'd happily take DeLuca over Ackland................. ANYDAY! QFMFT I mustn't have been watching too closely coz I don't remember celebrating a Barney goal ... I wasn't implying there was a Bananaby goal in that game, I meant it reminded me of how much more he contributed to the team than what we got from our ruckman in 2007. He wasn't a superstar, but he was certainly serviceable, and as the old saying goes, you don't know what you've got 'til it's gone! |
|
| Author: | SparkyBlue [ Tue Jan 22, 2008 1:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
TruBlueBrad wrote: SparkyBlue wrote: Bananaby - loved him... not exactly agile, not the best around the ground - but definitely the best tap ruckman at Carlton post Harry Madden... Anyone disagree? Mark Porter was twice the tap ruckman of anyone at Carlton since Madden. Wholeheartedly disagree. |
|
| Author: | TruBlueBrad [ Tue Jan 22, 2008 1:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
SparkyBlue wrote: TruBlueBrad wrote: SparkyBlue wrote: Bananaby - loved him... not exactly agile, not the best around the ground - but definitely the best tap ruckman at Carlton post Harry Madden... Anyone disagree? Mark Porter was twice the tap ruckman of anyone at Carlton since Madden. Wholeheartedly disagree. On what basis? Lets look at the ruckmen we've had since Harry Allan - effective around the ground Porter - tap ruckman McKernan - forward Hotton - undersized French - good, honest battler, but not effective at centre bounces McLaren - undersized Ackland - undersized Cloke - undersized Hampson - great leap, but limited games and experience Porter was clearly the best tap ruckman of that bunch. The problem was, his tackling aside, he was as effective around the ground as Harry was. |
|
| Author: | nytdog [ Tue Jan 22, 2008 2:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
SparkyBlue wrote: Bananaby - loved him... not exactly agile, not the best around the ground - but definitely the best tap ruckman at Carlton post Harry Madden...
Anyone disagree? These days a simple tap ruck doesn't cut it - you need to do your bit around the ground, not just at stoppages. Thats why players like Cox and Goodes are so important to a team. Let's hope K-Dogg fits the mould. Wholeheartedly disagree. Matty Allan was a fantastic ruckman. Just watch the 1999 season to remind yourself. Remember he came runner up in a brownlow and prior to his injury was having an excellent career. |
|
| Author: | murraycray [ Tue Jan 22, 2008 2:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
SparkyBlue wrote: TruBlueBrad wrote: SparkyBlue wrote: Bananaby - loved him... not exactly agile, not the best around the ground - but definitely the best tap ruckman at Carlton post Harry Madden... Anyone disagree? Mark Porter was twice the tap ruckman of anyone at Carlton since Madden. Wholeheartedly disagree. Wholeheartedly disagree with your disagreement. |
|
| Author: | TruBlueBrad [ Tue Jan 22, 2008 2:41 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
nytdog wrote: SparkyBlue wrote: Bananaby - loved him... not exactly agile, not the best around the ground - but definitely the best tap ruckman at Carlton post Harry Madden... Anyone disagree? These days a simple tap ruck doesn't cut it - you need to do your bit around the ground, not just at stoppages. Thats why players like Cox and Goodes are so important to a team. Let's hope K-Dogg fits the mould. Wholeheartedly disagree. Matty Allan was a fantastic ruckman. Just watch the 1999 season to remind yourself. Remember he came runner up in a brownlow and prior to his injury was having an excellent career. He was talking about tap ruckmen though nytdog. Allan was a good around the ground ruckman and adequate at centre bounces, but didn't get a lot of hit outs and they weren't overly well directed when he did. Mark Porter stood out in his first game, against Essendon* at the G, for his palming of the ball. |
|
| Author: | murraycray [ Tue Jan 22, 2008 4:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Porter should never have been traded. From memory Corey McKernan was brought across as a marking forward, with Matthew Allan rucking around the ground. So Porter goes and Allan breaks down. The thing that has shitted me since then, was Matthew Allan's later admission that he knew at that time, his foot wasn't right. Did Carlton know Allan was iffy ? If so why trade Porter. And I'll draw a long bow here, was Allan told to keep his mouth shut by our good friend David Allison? Surely all Allan had to do was say he wasn't right, the club would have stood by him, and Porter would have stayed. All this was going on about the same time Allison was screwing the club over Allan's contract. Allison's bargaining power would have been greatly diminished if there was doubt about Allan's immediate fitness. I may be totally off the mark with my conspiracy theories, but then again I may not be. Basically , I believe there was more to that whole saga than what has been revealed. |
|
| Author: | chyna [ Tue Jan 22, 2008 5:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Porter was screwed around by Carlton thanks mainly to Matt Allan and David Allison who seemed to have (legend has it as gospel) a clause written into Matt Allan's contract that stipulated he must play as the main ruckman when fit. Look at what happened in the 2001 finals series. OK. Porter was knocked cold against Geelong and Allan brought back for finals after almost a year out, but Porter played in the finals as well and was under-utilised when he had been playing an excellent role as the main ruckman all year in Allan's absence. For mine, Porter was twice the ruckman as Allan was - a good tap ruckman, a long accurate kick and a great pack mark. Allan was an Allison plant! @#$%&! those two cauliflower right off.! |
|
| Author: | bondiblue [ Tue Jan 22, 2008 5:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
If the debate is about the best palmer since Madden, then I would have to say Porter hands down. murracray...I'm still pissed off about the Porter trade, and will always be pissed off with Allison and Allan's team effort to rip off the club. I understand where you're coming from VB. I wasn't a fan of Barnaby...too 70's in his make up. He had a big heart though, but didn't do enough around the ground for mine. I would have preferred to keep him at 200cm giving his 100% for the jumper rather than having 196cm ruckmen who are too short in McLaren, Cloke and (no heart) Ackland .................anyday! Aisake, Hampson and Kreuzer will wash all my troubles away. |
|
| Author: | bondiblue [ Tue Jan 22, 2008 10:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
wtsoapm wrote Quote: If we can develop a ruckman to at least that level in the next couple of years it's going to make life a lot easier for our midfield. Quote: ...one thing we have to remember with Kreuzer, Hampson, and Aisake is Bananaby didn't debut until 23 years of age, the same age Dean Cox really made an impact at AFL level. Quote: So as frustrating as it could be watching our ruckman develop, anyone bagging them over the next few years need only be reminded of just how hard it is to crack it with the bigboys when you're still growing into your bodies whilst trying to adjust to the pace of the game.
Firstly, I think we have midfielders who can extract more from opposition ruckmen than previous: Judd, Stevens, Carrazzo, Gibbs and Murphy. They are good extractors when need be with pace and ability to read the ball. Secondly, do we have the tacklers to halt opposition midfielders?: Bentick, Judd, Stevens, Carrazzo, Walker and Murphy (maybe Hadlee). Body strength and closing speed. High tackle count. How do our ruckmen shape against Cox, Sandilands , Charman, Brodie, Lade, King...? Aisake and Hampson have the height and leap on their side in centre bounces to at least mullify the ball. Kreuzer has the height, but is inexperienced and slight against the big boys. Cloke, Jacobs (Porter like) and maybe Aisake have the strength for the general rucking requiring body on body rucking. So, generally speaking, we have Hampson and Aisake who can take the centre bounces and run their opposition around, hopefully tiring the heavier opposition ruckmen. Cloke is the only big bloke in the seniors with the weight to compete against big ruckmen around the ground, but is very short, especially against Sandilands , Cox and Lade. Cloke's tactic in the few games showed Cloke's is most effective with a collision brand of rucking; but I don't think that'll do his shoulder any good. Conclusion: We're still stuffed in the ruck till the kids grow! Ackland is not the answer. We have no choice imo but to put up with young skinny developing ruckmen to take the reigns of ruck in 2008, and we'll have to wait for another preseason for Aisake to really bulk up, and at least 2-3 more preseasons for Hampson and Kreuzer to get to a competitive size; that's 2010-2011. In the meantime we have to throw the challenge of athleticism against opposition ruckmen in 2008. As long as they are more competitive than Ackland and produce better results than the shorter Cloke, they should be given a go. We must be mindful that they will get tired in the second half playing in the ruck. Question is, should we keep the second nominated rookie spot open for Jacobs to step up to throw a fresh and bigger body into the ruck especially during the second half of the season? Alternatively we may have to resort to shorter 195-196 cm ruckmen in Ackland and Cloke when the kits need a break. High altitude training fix the problem? 5% better? |
|
| Author: | 16 flags [ Tue Jan 22, 2008 10:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Allan & Porter are the standouts - many good points made in this thread. The problem was that neither of them lasted very long at Carlton or their other clubs. Both are in their early 30s now - still younger than Madden was in the 95 GF. |
|
| Author: | nytdog [ Wed Jan 23, 2008 12:02 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
TruBlueBrad wrote: nytdog wrote: SparkyBlue wrote: Bananaby - loved him... not exactly agile, not the best around the ground - but definitely the best tap ruckman at Carlton post Harry Madden... Anyone disagree? These days a simple tap ruck doesn't cut it - you need to do your bit around the ground, not just at stoppages. Thats why players like Cox and Goodes are so important to a team. Let's hope K-Dogg fits the mould. Wholeheartedly disagree. Matty Allan was a fantastic ruckman. Just watch the 1999 season to remind yourself. Remember he came runner up in a brownlow and prior to his injury was having an excellent career. He was talking about tap ruckmen though nytdog. Allan was a good around the ground ruckman and adequate at centre bounces, but didn't get a lot of hit outs and they weren't overly well directed when he did. Mark Porter stood out in his first game, against Essendon* at the G, for his palming of the ball. hey Brad, yeah I understand the argument, but in my opinion Allan dominated both around the ground and hit outs in 1999. He matured that year as a ruckman and had a very bright future ahead of him until injury. Remember that ruckman peak at a later age and if it wasnt for his injuries, 1999 would have just been his spring board into ruck domination. Remember he averaged nearly 30 hit outs a match in 99 and his direction was just fine. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC + 10 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|