| TalkingCarlton http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/ |
|
| Rucks http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=30584 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | BigKev [ Sat Aug 20, 2011 7:26 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Rucks |
Like most people here, and football follows generally, I reckon I know best about pretty well everything to do with football. Except one thing. I seem to be clueless when it comes to evaluating the performance of ruckmen. Oh I can tell that if our ruckmen hits it down one of our midfielders throats he's done well, but that's pretty rare. In fact often as not in that situation the ball came off the opponents hand or it was a disputed tap. I'm asking for opinions. I'm hearing that Warnock is doing well in the ruck, but what I see is him making very little contribution around the ground. He rarely takes a mark of any sort let alone one in a pack. I reckon O'Halpin would almost certainly contribute much more ... but he's crap in the ruck isn't he? Is he? Hammer is, I guess, somewhere in the middle - probably wouldn't be as good as O'Halpin around the ground, but would be a better ruckmen. So what do you think? Seriously, do you think that the difference in the ruck performances is that significant? |
|
| Author: | jimmae [ Sat Aug 20, 2011 8:17 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rucks |
I would think Hammer on his form pre-injury would perform the best in both categories. I'm not seeing what others are Warnock, because I don't feel there's much guile in his taps. |
|
| Author: | Sugarcane [ Sun Aug 21, 2011 10:10 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rucks |
Let's rate them out of five across 3 attributes ... tapwork, around the ground, forward play. Warnock Tapwork 4 Around the ground 1 Forward play 1 Kruezer Tapwork 3 Around the ground 3 Forward play 2 Hampson Tapwork 3.5 Around the ground 3 Forward play 3 I tend to agree that Hampson has perhaps the most upside of the 3. Has pace, leap, and doesn't mind the tough stuff. I know Kruezer is coming back from a knee reco, but he is struggling. Struggles up fwd like Warnock, and in my view doesn't seem as quick as Hammer and doesn't have the sort of leap Hammer has. It's a fascinating issue, and we won't be a top four side and a genuine contender until our rucks start delivering around the ground and up fwd. Right now Warnock and Kruezer are close to useless in the air. Personally I think Hampson and Yarran could be our X factors in the finals, if the coach is prepared to roll the dice and use them both fwd of centre ??!! |
|
| Author: | BigKev [ Sun Aug 21, 2011 10:46 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rucks |
I agree with both those comments. Interesting though that neither of you, sugarcane in particular, considered O'Halpin in the ruck. I suppose my thinking is would he be good enough to neutralise the opposition ruckmen? Given our midfield are good enough to shark anything lose anyway ... might be an option. |
|
| Author: | Sugarcane [ Sun Aug 21, 2011 11:46 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rucks |
I see some merit in setanta but I thnk he makes too many fundamental errors and is neither a top ruck nor forward |
|
| Author: | keogh [ Sun Aug 21, 2011 11:51 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rucks |
Hampson should come in for Warnock. End of story. And we should have kept Jacobs and not gone after Warnock who showed very little at freo anyway In terms of recruiting we are in the positive with great rookie oicks but Warnock and McLean seemed destined for the horror draft stories |
|
| Author: | Pafloyul [ Sun Aug 21, 2011 12:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rucks |
keogh wrote: Hampson should come in for Warnock. End of story. And we should have kept Jacobs and not gone after Warnock who showed very little at freo anyway In terms of recruiting we are in the positive with great rookie oicks but Warnock and McLean seemed destined for the horror draft stories Rookies should be the icing on the cake, not the cake itself. I see the lack of a presence in the middle stages of the draft as the origin for why we are being held back a bit. We are trying to squeeze out a bit too much from a few players whereas in an idealistic situation we'd be copping on the chin a few complaints of letting go a few players too early and taking it in our stride. I agree that Warnock and McLean were probably picked to fill gaps when we were trying to hasten our development. |
|
| Author: | bluedog [ Sun Aug 21, 2011 1:14 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rucks |
Good thread. I'm told that the ruck is the first position you pick. However, if they're no good around the ground or up forward, I'd take Brett Backwell any day over some goose who might just happen to fluke it down someone's throat.  Speaking of Brett, and for those who've not seen the interview: http://www.blueseum.org/tiki-index.php?page=Brett+Backwell |
|
| Author: | Kouta [ Sun Aug 21, 2011 1:26 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rucks |
keogh wrote: Hampson should come in for Warnock. End of story. And we should have kept Jacobs and not gone after Warnock who showed very little at freo anyway In terms of recruiting we are in the positive with great rookie oicks but Warnock and McLean seemed destined for the horror draft stories I see Jacobs's reputation has grown after he left Carlton...I guess it helps if you beat up GC raw rucks to have 47 hitouts...Warnock's good games against Jolly have been forgotten... Warnock and Kreuzer were hitting it to a midfield that was thoroughly beaten on Friday night. I honestly don't see where Jacobs fit into our best 22 with Kreuzer, Warnock and Hampson better alround players. McCarthy addresses more needs than Jacobs. |
|
| Author: | Juddy&theKruezers [ Sun Aug 21, 2011 2:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rucks |
Not sure why we are talking about Jacobs as he wanted out....in any case over the course of the year it has become apparent that Hammer is our No. one ruck....the second ruck position should go to someone who offers more than just tapwork....so Robbie as yet doesn't fit the bill....for now he is a back up ruck only....Kruze or even Carlos (and I'm not his biggest fan) offer more as the second ruck option.... |
|
| Author: | jimmae [ Sun Aug 21, 2011 2:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rucks |
keogh wrote: And we should have kept Jacobs and not gone after Warnock who showed very little at freo anyway Jacobs showed that he could win and direct taps, and was a slow plodder who could hold a mark. He's been inconsistent at Adelaide as well because his lack of athleticism hurts his play. He's the kind of bloke who'd be rated higher if he completely controlled stoppages, but he'd probably need to be about 10 cms taller and 5 - 10 kilos heavier at least to pull that off. |
|
| Author: | Conundrum [ Sun Aug 21, 2011 4:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rucks |
jimmae wrote: keogh wrote: And we should have kept Jacobs and not gone after Warnock who showed very little at freo anyway Jacobs showed that he could win and direct taps, and was a slow plodder who could hold a mark. He's been inconsistent at Adelaide as well because his lack of athleticism hurts his play. He's the kind of bloke who'd be rated higher if he completely controlled stoppages, but he'd probably need to be about 10 cms taller and 5 - 10 kilos heavier at least to pull that off. As against Warnock who intentionally pulls out of marking contests despite his athleticism. Not prepared to put his body on the line. Watched him hold back from contesting a mark waiting for the packs to form before jumping from behind and effectively out of a marking contest countless of times. Hamspon has a long way to go but way more upside as he is prepared to put his body on the line. Despite winning more hit outs Warnock had the same number of hit outs to advantage as his rucking opponent. |
|
| Author: | keogh [ Sun Aug 21, 2011 4:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rucks |
Kouta wrote: keogh wrote: Hampson should come in for Warnock. End of story. And we should have kept Jacobs and not gone after Warnock who showed very little at freo anyway In terms of recruiting we are in the positive with great rookie oicks but Warnock and McLean seemed destined for the horror draft stories I see Jacobs's reputation has grown after he left Carlton...I guess it helps if you beat up GC raw rucks to have 47 hitouts...Warnock's good games against Jolly have been forgotten... Warnock and Kreuzer were hitting it to a midfield that was thoroughly beaten on Friday night. I honestly don't see where Jacobs fit into our best 22 with Kreuzer, Warnock and Hampson better alround players. McCarthy addresses more needs than Jacobs. You obviously dont remember the final against the Swans last year. |
|
| Author: | Big Kahuna Boot [ Sun Aug 21, 2011 5:06 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rucks |
^^^^ ..really?, cos in that final Knockers was also good, getting hitouts to advantage and in the 2nd Q going fwd and marking and kicking two vital goals to keep us in it before the judd inspired 3rd Q surge.. |
|
| Author: | keogh [ Sun Aug 21, 2011 5:19 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rucks |
I guess its a waste talking about this, but I thought at the time Warnock had shown @#$%&! all and jacobs a fair bit when Sam left.He wanted to go home and be a number one ruckman. Jacobs is a good solid ruckman who has got better again this year at Adelaide. There are better ruckman but worse ones as well. One being Warnock whose effort friday night was insipid. The one ants game I went to last year was against Werribee where Warnock was next to useless, but was picked the next week at Jacobs' expense. Sam would have wanted out after that with kreuz and Hammer there as well. And Jacobs wasnt hopeless during this time. Seriously what is so good about Warnock. I guess thats the issue. Hammer hopefully will come in at his expense |
|
| Author: | Sugarcane [ Sun Aug 21, 2011 6:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rucks |
Look Warnock is only in the side bec of his tapwork, he is useless in the air and not hard enough in general. At some stage though something has to give. I just hope the club don't play favourites, it should be on merit. Kruezer shouldn't get a game just bec he is a no.1 pick and chose to stay at the club ahead of going to GWS. Similarly, Warnock shouldn't keep his spot just bec he is good at hit outs and nothing else. Competition breeds success. Among other things, Warnock needs to harden up and take more marks; Kruezer needs to take more marks; and Hampson needs to improve his goal kicking. |
|
| Author: | Navy Blue Horse [ Sun Aug 21, 2011 8:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rucks |
How about Hammer and Warnock as the rotating rucks, and Kreuze roaming the ground doing what he wants? Let the opposition worry about him. |
|
| Author: | Donstuie [ Sun Aug 21, 2011 9:04 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rucks |
We were raped by the Crows in the Jacobs trade. We knew his worth, and I reckon so did they but hid behind the whole "he's your 4th string ruckman" bollocks to screw us over. That we managed to get McCarthy with the pick was pure fortune on our part and I still can't believe it happened. |
|
| Author: | SurreyBlue [ Sun Aug 21, 2011 9:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rucks |
Agree Don. Really quite pathetic from Jacobs as well. |
|
| Author: | BigKev [ Sun Aug 21, 2011 9:40 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rucks |
Sugarcane wrote: Look Warnock is only in the side bec of his tapwork, he is useless in the air and not hard enough in general. At some stage though something has to give. I just hope the club don't play favourites, it should be on merit. Kruezer shouldn't get a game just bec he is a no.1 pick and chose to stay at the club ahead of going to GWS. Similarly, Warnock shouldn't keep his spot just bec he is good at hit outs and nothing else. Competition breeds success. Among other things, Warnock needs to harden up and take more marks; Kruezer needs to take more marks; and Hampson needs to improve his goal kicking. This is where I'm coming from. Is our current model wrong? One bean pole for taps and one mobile ruck*. I'm thinking we might be better served with two mobile rucks. Hammer has teased a lot with his ability as has O'Halpin, but at the moment I reckon O'Halpin has shown more, (if only he'd stop getting injured just when he starts to get some confidence). Kruezer and O'Halpin rotating ruck/forward line would certainly give us a lot more big man power and physical presence than Kruezer and Warnock. *Kruezer I think is doing enough. If nothing else he will fiercely contest a loose ball. I'd be very confident about him in 2012 with a good pre-season behind him. I'm not so confident about Warnock's future. He teased us with his performance in the elimination final against Sydney last year - I'm still waiting to see that form again. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC + 10 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|