There you go again with an "absolute" once again. That's "simply" not true.

If TDK is holding his marks and kicking straight, we do win with 3 talls. Hence the example I gave you of the Dees game, and the GWS as proof.

If you compiled all your posts loaded with inaccurate information, you would see there's pages of talk talk talk. I feel the need to address that.

Mate, I don't care which way Vossy chooses. Ive made that clear "In Vossy I trust". I would like the discussion to be based on possibilities based on truths, and not rely on a simple stat as the be all to end all, because its not.

We get the W/L stat because that's all I've heard since it was the lead headline run by Hoyne for SEN a few months back, but some posters have taken that as gospel because Hoyne's says so, or they don't want to discuss and debate, or, they don't get basic stats, or just plain gullible to headlines made at 'click bait' SEN.

If we compiled all the posts making that single point made over the last few months, instead of reasonable discussion and debate, there would be pages and pages of that. There are no absolute answers: things change by the week. Preferences, and opinions are respected. I know and respect the preference of posters. Ive acknowledged there's no right or wrong. Its great to have a personal preference, based on personal 'gut feel' or "THE stat", but don't tell me the one stat, or made up (inaccurate) numbers, or non factual statements are the be all to end all in the debate. We shouldn't just close the thread because one stat says so.

Of course W/L stat is important. Who says its not? But there's more to the discussion that one single stat. Its not as simple as one stat line. No way Vossy and the MC would look at the W/L stat and think that's the be all to end all. Thats all I'm bringing to the table: possibilities.

We can stop the discussion any time you like, as long as there's no made up facts, and absolutes, because the game changes by the week. I'm an ex Marketing Exec and I can tell you countless stories of the market place's penchant for "smoke and mirrors" we created, and they were always based on the numbers, or by leaving out all the facts...you know the ones, the ones which are not aligned with our desired outcome: uptake.

Sadly we shouldn't need to have this discussion till TDK is back. So, I'll leave the rest to Vossy. I'm glad bender created this thread, because from now on, when I don't agree with assertions made I can refer this thread for more information on the "other side of the coin".

What I do know is we are all support the best team in the AFL, regardless of our preferences. Go Blues.

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue

i'm only reading your 1st sentence.

you just don't get it mate. 3 key forwards isn't about attack & kicking goals. it's about defense. team defense, team pressure and of course turnover. there is a mountain of empirical data for GF playing (and winning teams) and their "winning" profile. it's irrefutable. only an idiot would try - but here we are.


with pittonet and tdk, we're not producing the kind of defensive pressure and turnover that wins imnportant games of footy. we've done it exactly once. and that was the gws game earlier this year. in all of last year and this, that's the only game we've had the kind of elite 4-qtr pressure that leads to turnover.

we beat Dees last year on pure guts and willingness and hunger for the ball. ie that has never been a sustainable model for finishing top 4 over a 24 game season, winning finals or prelims or GF's. structure and system eventually, always, beats guts and determination.

Braithy and BB
surely you just agree to disagree
Enough is enough
I once had a similar discussion about the wholesome nature of Nick Stevens on and off the field
I was obviously on the side of negativity
I reckon I won that argument based on his domestic views of women and swimming pools in Mildura

Actually I think I prefer Pitto as the sole ruck and TDK as the sub because TDK adds more flexibility as a sub. It oil make more sense to swap out Pitto for TDK in the last quarter than TDK for Pitto. If someone else is swapped out for TDK ( for whatever reason) then TDK can play as a fwd, or even an onballer.

Well that's one way to minimise the impact of a bloke who has already been a matchwinner/BOG on several occasions this year!

Ironically, the Norf game if anything turned me more against the idea of Pitto/TDK as sub than towards it, because it demonstrated that TDK is pure @#$%&! tough nugget who can still turn a game in our favour with a busted foot. On Saturday's evidence I'd be even more confident playing TDK as solo ruck in a grand final, knowing they'd need to literally snap him in half to get him out of the game. Who cares how anyone feels the day after #17 (up to a point!)?

Play two rucks if it makes sense for the match situation, e.g. H/CC is out or for an opponent like Gawn where Pitto's thuggery has proven dividends.

a ruck as a sub ... just when i think we've scaled the heights of stupidity, i look up and see some more.

There you go again. If anyone disagrees with you, they are an idiot. If Vossy selects 2 rucks, he doesn't want to win.

We won the games I mentioned partly because TDK held his marks and kicked his goals.

What am I suppose to say? That it didnt happen? How do I say it and be nice to you with the style of expression?

I get football. I get the point you're making. I respect that part. I respect the possibilities. All possibilities. Is that OK?

Coaches are smart cookies, they can make things work. Things you didn't expect and even things that you can't notice happening?

The point is there are no absolutes. If the 3 talls are marking, the ball is in our hands, not the defenders. When that happens we have a shot at goal.

If we don't mark it we have to fight for it in a 50-50 situation. When switched on and apply pressure, our smalls Fogarty, Owies and Motlop have shown they are good enough to keep pressure on, to win the ball (look at Fogs GA numbers), create a stoppage (we are good at kicking goals from stoppages), or we pressure the defender to create a turnover.

In the case we are off our game, and not bringing the pressure, we let the defender run off at will. This not acceptable, and if we aren't playing the game with right mindset, we are going to lose with TDK as the sole the ruck, with 2 rucks, or no ruck.

You and I can't control which Carlton turns up, but I have faith in the coach and the team circa 2024. That's not idiotic as you have suggested in the past. We have improved as a team, and are better placed this year than we were last year. There's your empirical data. Why shouldn't I have faith in the team?

How do you know who our opponents will be cometh the day? You don't. I don't. I'm not saying TDK will hold his marks as a KPD, I'm saying he can in the big games, but I don't know if its going to happen. I am saying its not impossible. Nothing is impossible. When you grow up you will learn that.

You're studying to be a lawyer. Never say Never. If you doubt your ability to be a great lawyer, don't. Nothing is impossible. Just be careful with absolutes. Your clients may hang you out to dry if you're wrong.

Try say this..."In Voss I trust" ... if you believe it, I mean really believe it, type it 100 times young man. If you don't. What's the point in trying to see light at the end of the tunnel.

Can we drop the idiot accusing stuff? Its a forum for discussion...but lets stick with truths please. Sending you a Kiss emoji

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue

FMD. Now you're suggesting the person who can see the virtues of a ruck as a sub is "stupid". Bwahhhh Bwahhh. Because its not what you want? Throwing your toys out of the cot?

Its just an opinion, in a think tank. The idea has merit, worthy of discussion, as is any idea but you think it may backfire. That's OK, now tell us why it MAY backfire instead of calling out names like stupid or idiot for bringing the idea to the forum.

You don't get it.

I'm not going to do it for you, ie present all the results like I did for 2023 AND 2024 to prove you were wrong and misleading about Pitto's ability to ruck more than 60%..that's what you said. That he's a liability; That's what you said. And, furthermore, you told us we only won 2 games with the 2 rucks last year, which was misleading and false. Well actually, I asked someone to collate the information, because I knew you were wrong and for the integrity of the discussion it was worth bringing to the table.

Why don't you have a look at all our subs this year. Look at: who was the sub, when they were subbed in, who was it for, was it forced, and more importantly, if we had already used our sub, could we still win the game with only 3 on the interchange? re question our stamina and endurance levels. Other than Round Zero when Carroll replaced Doc, you will find some staggering information.

After that, do yourself a favour and come back to us when you find out if there's any evidence of Vossy naming and using a ruckman as THE sub. If you do, do the right thing and apoligise for calling people "stupid", and present it to us, and if your are wrong, present it to us, and apologise for your awful language and disrespect. Note. No one is saying it will happen. No one is satying it can't happen. No one other than yourself, at this stage, is saying it doesn't happen.

After all that have a quick look at all named teams and look for examples of a ruck on a sub, to give you some perspective on your absolutes.

I still love you...only because you barrack for Carlton, but I will show you no love when you abuse innocent Carltonians, Carlton Players and the Carlton Coach. Kissey Kissey

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue

I know your position on the 2 rucks GE and I respect you prefer the one ruck on the field. I have seen that work and its been proven to work.

You know my position. Its simple. If TDK doesn't come back on the game, what then in a Grand Final? I brought that up during match thread whilst it was top of mind, and the commentators started to bring up the same point we have discussed ... the coulda woulda shoulda talk.

TDK displayed something above the human last week; broken foot, and punctured lung. He knew the importance of the win, and how much his absence would help North get over us. He has come of age.

This isn't an attack on your position, but lets be real, TDK is human, and it was touch and go whether he could get by with a punctured lung. I think it was deflated not punctured.

Nevertheless, the debate in this situation, and we've had it before in a game thread, but to serve a purpose in benders (this) thread, its best to put all the ideas and ideals in this thread when purely discussing the 2 rucks, to be or not to be. What happens to our team if TDK is injured and can't come back on as we feared in the first quarter? Its probably the most important conundrum Vossy and the MC would discuss before a GF, as it is in every Carlton forum, podcast or show. In fact, so important is the subject matter in football, today GCS made headlines when Hardwick made the decision to go with 2 rucks in a do or die game, just as a Grand Final would be for us.

Like most of TC and its posters opinions about the future, and past, it is a case of "coulda woulda shoulda" discussion taking place, and its normal to discuss these things as Food for Thought, a bit of fun, a pass the time, a hobby, and shouldn't be used to accuse one is wrong or one is right, because none of us know; Not even those who think they know everything.

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue

2 rucks vs TDK is another scenario worthy for discussion. It has happend and can again in H&A and in Finals. This is no "furphy" as some would like you to believe. There's a very high chance this will actually happen.

That's what forums are about.

Darcy & Jackson vs TDK (possibly in a Preliminary Final, hopefully not)
Cameron & Cox vs TDK (last years premiers winning ruck combo, but TDK is out injured now)
Grundy & Maclean vs TDK (possibly in a Grand Final)

We don't know who we will play in a Prelim or a GF, but if its Freo or Sydney, then ofcourse the discussion will be a "coulda shoulda woulda" discussion because we just don't know.
Every discussion before the game happens is coulda woulda shoulda....its about personal preferences and opinions, not furphies nor facts.

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue

Bloody hell its past 3pm

Lets have a beer

The build up to the game has just begun. Wish I was there.

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue

A very constructive suggestion Bondi .Who could argue with that . Common ground at last .

_________________
All my dangerous friends

sub is an impact position, yeah? so let's select the least impactful position on the ground as our sub?


there was a podcast earlier in the year, i forget who. they were lambasting port and hinkley for using a ruck as a sub and losing the game. then he doubled down and did it the following week as well. against us, i think. and lost again

there were calls for hinkley to lose his job over it.


so ... i'm not throwing my toys out of the cot. i'm just pisstified at some of the suggestions in here




pisstified - the combination of pissed off and mystified.

i nominate this as the official title of this thread.

Mate ,down tools , go and have a beer like Bondi suggested .

_________________
All my dangerous friends

yeah sorry, old bean. i don't literally mean it, just so you know.

tbh ... i'm not sold on voss. an intelligent guy, an excellent communicator. but im not sure his playing traits translate to coaching and a game day tactician.

his stubbornness just about cost him his job last year. it was only a series of injuries that forced him to abandon his contested brand, his possession heavy, slow ball movement, kick down the line to tall timber (and flagrantly ignore turnover) and move to a faster, more mobile, defenisve pressure team that runs and carries and dares.

i got a mate, who knows Michael really well. he says, when we lost our rucks and were using Young, voss was kissed on the dick by an angel. bcos that saved our season, and saved his job. he says it to him all the time.

i guess when he persists with his 2-ruck vision, possession heavy, kick to contests ... his stubbornness boils my piss.

Interesting to note the profile of the most inform team in the comp, who in consecutive weeks has taken the scalps of:

2nd Carlton by 14 points at mutual home ground at Marvel
3rd Geelong by 47 points away at GHBA stadium
1st Sydney by 39 points away at the SCG

Headline in today's Herald Sun re Western Bulldogs

"Three Headed Monster Putting Bulldogs back in Premiership mix".

"Ugle-Jamara's hauls ... put him in the "same sphere as Curnow". He and Naughton pulled in 14 marks and 208cm Darcy was the 3rd" banana (64% ToG), giving English a chop out in the ruck.

At the same time, in the backline they also have 3 KPD's.

Jones 199cm, Lobb 207cm and Khamis (who is only 191cm but played FB on Curnow)

Point is, there is no Golden Rule or Trend with regards to height in forwardline and backline. Its just what can happen and is happening.

Darcy isn't more dangerous than TDK, but imo TDK should be an option to throw into the forwardline to help out aerially, and to stop the opposition releasing a KPD to the forwardline and create a
mismatch for our short Defence; eg NM FB Comden went forward and kicked 3 goals straight, and Ports CHB Esava going forward and kicking 2 goals 1 behing.

Just saying Horses for Courses, is a valid consideration, AND, Western Bulldogs is proving a 3 headed monster is a credible weapon against the very best teams.

We will see what happens when TDK returns

At least we can say we showed more fight than Swans and Geelong.

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue

please don't .... their bigmen are unicorns.

play excellent below the knees, run faster than our smalls, and guys like lobb and jones - failed forwards - go down back and play like the 2nd coming of Bruce Doull.

these team comparisons just don't work. when/if tdk returns pittonet will be punted as far away from the 1sts as humanly possible if his current form holds, and he doesn't step up.

I think that applies all over the ground - pick the best players and not be too governed by a template. We hear often: can't play A & B in the same side...or X,Y & Z. If they are better than the alternative play them (within reason).

_________________
░L░I░N░K░I░N░B░I░O ░

Don't bite. Just acknowledge what's happening, and how we would counter them the next time we meet them, which may be Finals. That's what is missing from discussion.

I'm just pointing out what WBs are actually doing. Shows that sometimes things work, sometimes they don't.

Stating things as absolutes, suggesting things are Impossible, or Never will happen, or have Never happened when they have , are not discussions.

I said in my last post above, we will see what happens when TDK comes back. I didn't say this or this will or wont happen.

Form is a fickle thing. Fitness is dependent on ones base , how long they have been off their feet, and when they last played a competitive game. There's just too many variables to consider. and dismiss I didn't expect TDK's purple patch to continue for the rest of 2024, I didn't expect TDK to dominate the big bully rucks, and I don't expect TDK to return from injury and produce the same form he showed against Geelong. That he may need some support and may play less time in the ruck than we have been use to this year.

I look at why did Young take the place of Harry, instead of Martin, Fantasia, or Boyd? They are better footballers than Young. There's always a reason, and an exception to the rule and surprise selections do happen in Finals, and at the end of the day, we try and match fire with fire or come up with a different way to win.

Spewing we don't have an option for the next 4 games.

We will see what unfolds. We either discuss the possibilities or we don't. Remember TC and forums of this kind are all about how we, the poster sees things: 'the coulda woulda shoulda'. Its interesting how 3 KPDs and 2 rucks is working for WBs when it wasn't early in the season and the opposite worked for them when they won the flag in 2016 with 2 KPFs 2 KPDs and 2 rucks. Form counts. Boyd played his best game ever in the GF. It worked. Could easily have back fired. We will never know. But we know it worked on that day.

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue

young was picked to chop pittonet out. can't have kennedy in centre bounces.

bulldogs have the best collection of talls in the league. hagle and darcy are going to something else. lobb is so impressive at the back. he's out of contract too. there's no way the dogs let him go, and there's no way we can afford him... but it's nice to dream.