Do you really want the best one on one defender in the comp chasing his opponent down to the other end of the ground.
Seriously??
Hogan pushed up the ground trying to create a mismatch because he didn't want to be deep with Weiters down there.
The moment Weiters went off he hardly moved from 30 metres from goal.
And sorry as good as Weiters is he is not going to match a leading jumping forward on one leg.

There were parts of the 2nd quarter where we had Weiters Gov TDk being treated on the bench and 6 or 7 minutes when Cripps didn't come on.
Cripps was also late coming back onto the ground after half time he didn't run out with the rest of the team.

Clearances must have been about 20 to 4 in 1st quarter and we ended up losing the clearances.

Briggs slowly got on top of TDK and it was all over red rover

Sent from my SM-F926B using Tapatalk

_________________
If you allow the Government to change the Laws in an emergency
They will create an Emergency to change the Laws

We won the clearances. More quality research.

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.

I’ m no too fussed about the two ruck situation unless our ruckman whoever it is goes down early
Tap outs are the most overrated stat in the game
45 hit outs to 22
Yet we won clearances 46 to 43
Centre clearance dead even
Two things stood out like dogs balls
Weitering is our most important player
We have no back up
Taylor was out but Buckley was outstanding
Kemp tried but what out of his depth
He is a young player
This is where McGovern should step up but clearly Voss doesn’t think he is up to it despite his experience

Owies being the sub
Now unless he was sore he should be one of the first picked because he has layed more tackles in our forward 50 than anyone not to mention being our third leading goal kicker

Forward 50 tackles were 26 to 4
Enough said
Williams after quarter time was crap
Neither he or McGovern don’t work hard enough

39 to 26 after quarter time - flogged them

_________________
If you allow the Government to change the Laws in an emergency
They will create an Emergency to change the Laws

coaching was poor on the weekend. kemp on hogan, and when the whips were cracking, williams go back into a defensive roll, where he did nothing, and then when we went forward, we had no one at ground level.

cottrell never should have been picked, and we needed to retain owies instead. cottrell was invisible. he's a great glue guy, and very underrated, but that's only when he's playing his best and in form. and missing 8 weeks or whatever it was, there was no way he was ever going to be in form.

Hogan was the difference, marked everything that came his way. Just had one of those games where it all went right for him.
At one point Weitering was about to come in from the side to spoil and Newman inadvertently blocked his run. Mark, goal.

_________________
"One of my favorite philosophical tenets is that people will agree with you only if they already agree with you. You do not change people's minds." - Frank Zappa

You said we lost the clearances. Totally untrue. We won them 46-43.
When games are won based upon quarters or segments of games, your post may be relevant.

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.

Can't disagree with any of that.
But it's one loss and we're still second on the ladder. I'm sure any of us would have taken that if offered it at the start of the season.

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.

Who is actually coaching the side in game? Is it Hansen making moves and then Voss ok’ing them?

The lack of tactical change was alarming. You need to be able to pull levers in game to change the flow and we seem incapable. Saturday wasn’t the first time either.

Everyone has talked about taking a midfielder out for Cottrell, I’ll leave it alone.

You did make those comments and made others along the lines of, and I'm not quoting, in saying you preferred to go into the game with the 2 rucks, you didn't want another "war and Peace" discussion.

I'm 100% sure you were referring to me. That's OK. I'm not offended. I was a tad embarrassed to read. But I know you don't have to read what I post.

I didnt realise till the weekend that a lot of people read and post TC from their phones. I don't. Its too small. Reading "War and peace" on a mobile would be difficult for me, and annoying to others. But I'd do it, if I had to. I'm not offended, in fact, I take it as a compliment that some took an interest in my posts and it was a pain reading them. I speak to a lot of people who don't post on TC but are from the wider Carlton community. I get it. A lot of peple know of BB, BV, SB, Cazz, Mick...you'd be really surprised. A lot.

I'm glad you could see virtue in 2 rucks, and are open minded about "horses for courses approach", because the acceptance of the "horses for courses" seemd to happen right after I took a break from TC for a couple months and Pitto was selected a few days later ... I had a laugh reading the posts, but I was told it was going to happen. I'm not Nostradamus. Good on you. Some posters who were in the "Horses for Courses" then weren't, then were no they aren't, then they are, now they wont....their positions on 2 rucks or Pitto only, seem to be dependent on our weekly results, and the theres some posters who talk in absolutes: That Vossy would not go with 2 rucks based on the results in first few rounds, then Voss did, and since Pitto hasn't played the absoluteists think Vossy would never go that way again. Then the status quo changes as results come in, and we read the same again.

Out of respect to you missnaut, let me explain why I came back as a poster, and the" War and peace" from me. I think it is important for posters and readers of this site to know.

I read the following posts after the smashing of Nankervis, Richmond with Pitto in the ruck.







There was also posts along the same vein from Agro and Surrey.....

It saddened me to read.

After being a "visitor only" for 2 months I too noticed the site became a few one liners, no debate, and a decline in content. The site had been taken over by the loudest cynics in their use of vitriol towards Pitto and 2 rucks, and when Pitto showed his value, crickets. Any mention of Pitto or 2 rucks was treated with disdain. It didn't suit their argument. Those who could see the benefit of 2 rucks, or "horses for courses", not the fairweather posters who chopped and changed, didn't state their case, to put themselves in the line of ridicule from the opposition: the close minded.

There was no discussion anymore. The site became the site for one ruck. Even the "Horses for courses" position some had allowed their acceptance of it to dissipate as if it was never a thing for them. In fact, the site was filling up with false facts. That the 2 rucks never happened last year in our 9 in a row and in Finals. That no teams played the 2 rucks anymore, happily referring to teams with an injured first ruck but manipulating the facts to suggest that they chose one ruck over 2 See Freo, and the only empirical evidence that was constant, they used ad nauseum was the number of wins with 1 ruck vs 2 rucks as their crutch. Happy to dismiss the facts which may have influenced the result such as the personnel we had out injured, the form of the opposition, the form of the team and opposition rucks, Weather, Experimentation from the coach etc etc. Form is a fickle thing; something you can;t rely on because as the saying old goes "if you could bottle it, you would".

No one held these posters to account. Only Mickstar and Sydney Blue would write one line posts tthey prefer 2 rucks, only to have them shot down as if it was never going to happen, and then it did happen against the GWS and we won. That occurrence was conveniently avoided after that week as if it never happened, or conveniently dismissed as an anomaly.

So after 2 months of one sided argument, which collated would have been 2 " editions of "War and peace"!. Not only was I saddened, I had enough of this repeat it enough and people will believe it crap, and it was time for the opposing argument to catch up with my offering of "War and Peace".

For me, I wanted TC to be atheplace it was again. A place for discussion, debate amongst open minded intelligent posters who know a bit about footy and understand the footy gods. What do the footy gods say? Shit happens. We all know that. I made my peace with posters. They can take it or leave it, but my hope as a community, we are a great site to visit with facts we can learn from, Hypothesis which are possible and worthy of consideration, bound by respect and a balance of ideas and acceptance of possibility. That's how real life works.

I expect there will be no scepticism at all after yesterday's loss with TDK in the ruck, nor any consideration of the 'horses for courses position" some held 4-8 weeks ago, nor any discussion about the possibility TDK and its impact to the team's structure, by the naysayers and some will be dogmatic in their need to prove they are right and the opposing view is wrong.

Missnaut, have a look at this thread, it has already been a lot of lively fun. It feels like the old TC. Its alive and pumping with both sides of the argument. Lets hope it stays open minded.

I haven't read posts since my last post last night because missnaut, you were on my mind and I felt embarrassed by your comment initially, but felt the need to explain why I was so loud and proud arguing the virtues and possibility for 2 rucks or "Horses for Courses", or Pitto. Not to unleash on people but to bring some balance and hopefully get back to respectful posting.

I saw a few heat maps and a lot of posts since my last post last night. I have a busy day packing but I look forward to reading some posts from some of our most respected posters BV, SB,T79, CK,Cazz, GWS, HP, DB, LB, jake, braithy, daggs.... expecting fireworks, but hoping its respectful and intelligent. I expect mistakes to be made. Its how we respond and handle the mistakes I want to see.

I understand if the length of this post is frustrating to read. Sorry. Like Ive said before it comes from a good place because I really love all my Blue Brethren for sticking Phat over the last 2 decades, especially the TC family. I just want to have fun.

Good news for you, I'm off for holidays tonight and heading to Canberra then the South Coast for a paddle this week, followed by the snow the following week. I hope there's no long posts whilst I'm away, because I may have to read them on my mobile if my tablet runs out of battery, or my son doesn't bring his tablet with him to the snow. If I post they will be short. Yes!!! I hear

Lets get a huge win for Crippas 200th, with one ruck or two. Whatever Vossy decides. Anything is possible. Hopefully I may have a spare day to get to the game at the Dome.

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue

As long as we finish top 4 we never need go to NSW again...

Agree as well
Unless they fall in a massive hole Sydney will finish on top
Happy where we are at but 2 nd or 3 rd is nearly a must
Saturday’ s game will be interesting as the Dogs are either hit or miss.

Tolstoy wrote a sequel!

_________________
“When a clown moves into a palace, he doesn't become a king. The palace turns into a circus.”
Turkish Proverb

Maybe because our other results with 2 rucks were crap, unless you count the Melbourne game where we barely fell over the line completely out of puff.

Yes, mitigating factors with the injury list, but you could say the same about Saturday with Weiters hobbled.

Whatever the merits of 1 ruck vs. 2 rucks, you can't exactly scoff at people who watched us win 2 lose 4 to be jumping up and down going "I was wrong all along! This is the way!"

it's really confronting ... i'm studying law, and i thought that was heavy going, dense reading, soul destroying, toiling with words. but bondi is another level.

i need the audio book version.

In my day we dealt with posts that were multiple pages long on TBV! Young people these days just lack resilience….

and gee whizz bondi ... it's not so much about the two rucks that bogs us down. it's the 3 key forwards we run with when pittonet is in the ruck. that's not a forward line with any balance, pressure or turnover. all the other teams using two rucks are doing that, bcos they have only one key forward.

two things limit us here:

1) pittonet is the slowest player in the afl; he can't impact play around the ground with pressure, marks or tackling, and is too slow and with poor stamina for a modern ruck to run goalsquare to goalsquare like gawn, grundy, tdk does.

2) harry isn't physical enough to make an impact in the ruck while our solo ruck is chopped out. cripps thrives on first use which is why he loves pittonet bcos he wins the ball, but tap to advantage alone, will never win a final or let alone a GF,

the modern game cannot have 3 big key marking forwards who offer nothing else once they've dropped the mark and the ball hits the deck. forward-lines need speed, mobility, defensive pressure and to lock the ball in the front half otherwise it pings back the other way for a score.

last season we were bottom 3 for allowing scores from our own F50 bcos we didn't have ground level pressure. the 2 wins - 4 losses this year with two rucks makes for a sobering read:

18th ranked allowing score from stoppage
16th rank allowing score from our own F50
17th ranked points allowed
15th ranked defensive pressure
14th ranked tackles per game
16th ranked points differential in 4th qtr.


that profile doesn't even make the finals, it's a top 4 draft pick, is what it is. so please for the love of god drop the 2 ruck obsession, and concentrate on team balance from having 4 big men - H, Charlie, TDK and pittonet who cannot provide defensive pressure and turnover, and make more work for the runners in the team to cover - hence the horrid 4th qtr scoring fade outs.

why do you think last year our record without Harry was 9-0? Not bcos of one or two rucks, but bcos we had 1 key forward and tdk resting up front when pittonet was in the ruck. its why jack silvagni was so important to our structure and balance. if harry could summon just half of Jack's want and application around the ground in the ruck, we'd be set.

eh? Harry played 21 games in 2023.

edit: and yes, we were 5-0 without him.

yeah, sorry. i think we were 9-0 without pittonet and 5-0 without harry.

but we did have jack. who imo, has been a huge loss to our balance. jack can exist on any line and chop out a solo ruck, and do a job while harry and charlie can camp in the forwardline with pressure players at their feet.

https://afltables.com/afl/stats/teams/c ... 3_gbg.html

https://afltables.com/afl/stats/players ... tonet.html

W4 D1 L3 without Pitto. You're in big trouble when bondi sees this, mister!

It's a shame that first link doesn't show match results, would be a much easier one-stop-shop for these kind of debates. I did a look at the individual players and identified at least 5 wins with TDK+MP+CC+HM, including one final, but it was tiresome work. Overall it was hard to deduce any trends.