| TalkingCarlton http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/ |
|
| Ruck debate http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=38137 |
Page 1 of 12 |
| Author: | bender [ Sun Jul 21, 2024 6:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Ruck debate |
Can we keep the debate around 1 ruck vs 2 rucks to this thread, rather than every other thread? |
|
| Author: | jake_h03 [ Sun Jul 21, 2024 6:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Ruck debate |
Bondi, get in here Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro |
|
| Author: | Braithy [ Sun Jul 21, 2024 7:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruck debate |
there is no debate. we're 10-1 with one ruck. we can't be compared to other teams with 2 rucks, bcos we're the only team in the comp with two top 5 key forwards ... adding a resting tdk to that, messes up our turnover and giving up rebound scores. |
|
| Author: | Braithy [ Sun Jul 21, 2024 7:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruck debate |
so either we find another ruck like Lobbe who can play CHB ... or we run with one ruck and Harry chopping them out |
|
| Author: | Lowey_47 [ Sun Jul 21, 2024 8:06 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Ruck debate |
I don't get this argument. In today's game you dont go with your traditional ruck set up. Other posters have said silvagni is a big loss and imn thinking that's correct. Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk |
|
| Author: | Heavs [ Sun Jul 21, 2024 8:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruck debate |
@#$%&! I miss jsos |
|
| Author: | Hornet [ Sun Jul 21, 2024 8:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruck debate |
The "ruck debate" isn't a knock on Pitto the player, not from me... I don't mind him I just don't like the balance of the team when we do play two rucks and two big forwards He makes a slow midfield, slower... especially when the ball hits the ground... TDK makes an extra mid It results in a resting ruckman making our forward structure, slower and too predictable.. two big forwards and a ruck will do that to any team. I like how Harry pinch hitting in the ruck changes our forward structure for a while and forces the opposition defenders to adjust. We miss Jack... just my opinion |
|
| Author: | GreatEx [ Sun Jul 21, 2024 8:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruck debate |
That's it, Hornet. There's maybe one or two posters on here, tops, who doesn't think Pitto is a good ruckman. It's all about team balance and agility. Yet somehow the debate always descends into a catfight over one man. Just like at high school, right guys? Guys? |
|
| Author: | Crusader [ Sun Jul 21, 2024 11:03 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruck debate |
Hornet wrote: TDK makes an extra mid Until he's given a role that’s mostly extra mid and forward. They’re both premium ruckmen, when opposed to other ruckmen. |
|
| Author: | Crusader [ Mon Jul 22, 2024 12:28 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruck debate |
The contingency for one ruck going to pot should be to just concede the contest. Shark the hitouts, and/or goad the bloke into taking it clean & bring him down. Leave Harry forward & make it up in the first & second possession. It’s not that Harry’s no good in the ruck, it’s just that if we take him out of the forward set up, we’ll have two parts of our game that don’t work. |
|
| Author: | Braithy [ Mon Jul 22, 2024 7:37 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruck debate |
Crusader wrote: The contingency for one ruck going to pot should be to just concede the contest. Shark the hitouts, and/or goad the bloke into taking it clean & bring him down. Leave Harry forward & make it up in the first & second possession. It’s not that Harry’s no good in the ruck, it’s just that if we take him out of the forward set up, we’ll have two parts of our game that don’t work. i don't agree with that at all. when harry is further up the field it gives us a different look. add martin or williams forward yday to owies and motlop, and we're difficult to contain. adds an extra wrinkle and makes other teams have to adjust, especially if they're a tall backline. with owies and motlop back with the fog, i think our forward line will be buzzing. |
|
| Author: | kingkerna [ Mon Jul 22, 2024 11:57 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruck debate |
If TDK is an extra mid he is a mid that is very sloppy with his disposal. If we are going with one ruck he edges out Pitto - but it is a slim margin. We'd be brave not to play both against a team like Freo |
|
| Author: | CK95 [ Mon Jul 22, 2024 1:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruck debate |
bender wrote: Can we keep the debate around 1 ruck vs 2 rucks to this thread, rather than every other thread? Depends if we want to go with 1 thread or 2. |
|
| Author: | Sydney Blue [ Mon Jul 22, 2024 1:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruck debate |
The problem I as I see it - It is ok to run with 1 ruck if you have the 3rd banana up forward who can take a grab. When we use Harry as 2nd ruck and TDK or Pitto go to the bench it leaves Charlie 1 out in the forward 50 and he gets defended to easily . When we go with two rucks neither TDK or Pitto are viable options as that forward 50 target or they are not very good at drifting back a kick behind play to cut out the ball coming into back Half. TDK is up with the best with his follow up after the ruck contest and is good at taking the ball from boundary throw ins and sending it forward. Pitto tap work is good and his abilty to block and create space for the midfield is also very good. When you look at the Dogs their forward structure is Naughton, Ugle and Darcey - When English has a rest and Darcey rucks they still have two forward fifty targets. Same applies to Swans - they have Macdonald Armarty and Maclean and throw in Heywood - so when Grundy comes off they still have options in attack . These two sides still manage to defend the ball coming out of their front half and create repeat entries so either our smalls are not getting to work when we have 3 tall forwards - Or our talls are giving up once the initial marking contest is lost. We are going to get found out with only one genuine ruck - but with out JSOS I am not sure what the solution is |
|
| Author: | dannyboy [ Mon Jul 22, 2024 1:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruck debate |
1 ruck it is then - Pitto best of luck! |
|
| Author: | grrofunger [ Mon Jul 22, 2024 1:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruck debate |
Debate over TDK out for the rest of the home and away season |
|
| Author: | jezzarules [ Mon Jul 22, 2024 1:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruck debate |
Hudson O'Keefe has entered the chat |
|
| Author: | GreatEx [ Mon Jul 22, 2024 1:55 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruck debate |
@Syd: Yes, I think that's a fair analysis. It's the deficiencies in Pitto, TDK, CC and H's respective games - and the midfielders, and the small forwards - that makes the 2R+2KPF system sub-optimal for us, it's not that the approach is fundamentally impossible. Based on what you're saying, Syd, it shows that Jack Martin getting fit and firing will make a huge difference too. I happened to be watching highlights of R22-24 and finals last year, and I had forgotten just how pivotal he was to our success (lest we forget how he nailed the Charlie defensive intercept role to clinch the EF win v. Swans). |
|
| Author: | missnaut [ Mon Jul 22, 2024 1:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruck debate |
@#$%&! we're really going to miss JSOS. |
|
| Author: | Mickstar [ Mon Jul 22, 2024 1:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruck debate |
jezzarules wrote: Hudson O'Keefe has entered the chat And Lewis Young . |
|
| Page 1 of 12 | All times are UTC + 10 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|