Hampson has proved that he at least can halve a contest. That gives our mids half a chance or better given they'll beat most players for contested footy.

We should've been rotating our rucks on Hille and running him into the ground. Instead he did that to us.

If you give up the ruck like we did yesterday to a top line ruckman, your mids don't stand a chance.

_________________
end of message

Hampson has been disappointing when in the sniors but i reckon he needs to be persisted with because he has a huge upside

Quickest player at the club
Tallest player at the club
by playing him 50% time he doesnt get burnt out



Jacobs has improved heaps this year

He has lost weight and is more mobile
He also is potentially a good tap ruckman something we havent hadsince Dirty Harry

As BB said why play Cloke in the ruck when he aint a ruck

Promote Jacobs back hampson and together they can start bulding a relationship

As I said we can also play Kreuzer up forward more.

Not quite convinced that our lose yesterday was soley the result of our inability to win the contested ruck.

I understand the importance in winning the clearances, but I felt there was more to our loss than just the ruck influence.

Those of you at the game, may of taken note that many times when Essendon* won the center clearance they did not run the ball through the midfield, they simple kicked long and wide to the flanks. Their forwards positioned themselves around 15 mteres inside the 50mt arch and ran out to receive mostly uncontested ball. !!

When they failed to hit a target, which was surprisingly high, we simply failed to move the ball through the middle and in to our forward 50.

Note inside 50"s by third qtr were 1 different in essendons favour, but supprisingly Essendon* had 10 further scoring shots!!!

I dont look at individual players and their contribution, rather look at structure and stategy. We failed to place implied pressure by not hurting Essendon* once their poor clearance failed to hit the mark. A side with more confidence in using the corridoor would have made Essendon* think twice and rely on their midfielders to move the ball, most likely outcome errors, which would have forced them to play a more accurate and conservative game!!

Is it a case that due to minimal forward options in fev, that running the ball through the corridoor with confidence will coincide when other options become available.

This may become apparent when our backline recovers, with players returning into the fold, ie andrew walker, bannister etc. hopefully releasing waite and others to become other forward options.

keep the faith
go blues

Great post badbuzz!!

I agree that the lack of ability to overcome (or contest better against) Hille in the ruck was the sole reason for the job; I believe that's where they got the jump on us because maybe we didn't have the right personnel (Bentick?) in there to compete against the flow.

I'm sure that the inclusion of Walker alone would make a huge difference to the balance of our side's structure. I also think Bower would add to that too.

If their inclusion enables us to create more dangerous options moving forward (and I believe it would), it would certainly help our cause.

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue

That’s your match committee for you again, they drop a tall like Hampson and replace him with a short player like Browne, we needed another tall on the bench in my opinion to rotate with Cloke and Kreuzer to give them some breathing space, plus with Judd getting injured dint help either, I cant understand why Judd kept playing after near being concussed just for the sake of one match we risked him getting a serious injury.

Ciccio wrote



True



Good point. We were going to rest Kreuzer for the Port game because he was perceived to be tired. We all know what he did in that game.

Leuenberger was rested that weekend. Furthermore, the conspiracy theory suggests that Lions don't want to us to have Leuey on our radar, so they hid him. Leuey is a mad Carlton supporter, and it was reported that he wanted to come to Carlton but understood why we went with Murphy at No 1 pick, but he was keen to come to Carlton after he had served his mandatory 2 year contract as a rookie. He is not in contract!!



The argument put forward is not about winning or losing against the scum or finals, it's about developing our ruck combinations, seeing what we have and what we don't have (in talent and potential) to make the right decisions at the end of the year. Jacobs is out of contract come year's end. How will we know if Jacobs, Hampson and Kreuzer can work together and create a great ruck - forward conbination.

We all know that they have potential. We all know Kreuzer and Hampson are the future, but will we be able to afford the luxury (and threat) of a more mature Kreuzer to play more time forward than anticipated when drafted? Can Jacobs and Hampson work in tandem? Many questions we need to find out. There's only one way to do that.

I'd rather have Hampson playing 50% of a senior game and learning the AFL at a senior level than have him spend 90% game time in the Ants playing in an inferior competition and on inferior grounds.

Good post Ciccio. As you point out we have options, and I guess with options, it's optional if we go with them. We just have to make sure we have good reason for the choices we make. For me, Cloke is not our ruck future, and if you asked any of Kreuzer, Hampson or Jacobs if the seniors is too hard for them and could get some relief by playing in the Ants, I know what they would say. It's a waste of valuable learning time.

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue

The Duke wrote



Whoever has done it, they've broken him.

He was known to have acclimatised to the game better than Setanta, even at a younger age. He's bridged the gap earlier perhaps because footy was in him at an earleir age than Setanta.

He definetely had the height, athleticism and, importantly in the new game, raw pace to play the game at a high level. At his height and athleticism he has the x factor

After a very good second half last year, and finally when we were desperate for him in the ruck, he broke down (ironically like his brother did with a similar promotion). We needed him then.

One is playing, and the one that should be (and they both should be) playing in the seniors is written off as damaged goods; or so it seems.

We've failed Aisake, not the other way around. We must take ownership for his condition (both for the mental readiness to play AFL and his skill level).

Under Dempsey, Daniher and Mitchell he was flourishing. We lost Dempsey; that's the problem!

What has happened?

Breathe some life in the kid FFS; don't let him just dilly delly. Throw him in the deep end!!

Prepare him over several weeks in the Ants for a role in the seniors, whether ruck (jumping into the player type) and rotate him through the HF line, or play him on an attacking wing (he'd have to be tagged) or even in the flamin' BP.

This kid has AFL assetts, and under the current regime he's floundering. It makes me angry. Anger starting from the choices they have made this year:

They select Hampson at pick 19 and Kreuzer at pick 1 for our future ruck combo. They pick rookie Jacobs who had been dominating the ruck in the SAFL as an 18 yo, to back them up as insurance. As it turns out, all 3 have shown ability to play senior footy, only 2 have been listed. So finally after 10 years we've done something about our ruck decision; Cloke and Ackland are not the future.

They have the opportunity to promote Jacobs with an LTI selection anytime they want, and what do they do?

They continue with last years 195 and 196cm big men to ruck against the genuine ruck giants. Anyone who played school footy knows that the tallest guy is always going to be a ruckman. They pick last years short ruckmen Cloke and Ackland when Kreuzer and Hampson were injured, and returned to their old ways we thought we'd moved on from.

Something is not right with the ruck and bigman coaching at Carlton. Same story goes with Hartlett. I hope they are able to develop Austin as a CHB, because he isn't going to be our FB. Jamison fell from the sky (Crosisca's wildcard)

Jacobs should be playing as part of the future and he should be developed. He should be on the field as part of our future. He and Aisake will learn how to play with our current crop of kids for the remainder of the year, or they will fail badly between next week and the end of the year, and go back to playing Cloke or Ackland if they have to.

I have a hunch or I'm living in hope, that Carlton have got a big named ready ruckman as part of our future at the end of the season as relief for Kreuzer and Hampson whilst they develop, hence why the negligence of Aisake and Jacobs.

God help me if they don't snag one beauty of a ruckman at the end of the year. As insurance (or trade value) they have no excuse but to play them. Life isn't full of definetes. And Jacobs and Aisake aren't definetely write offs.

Play them FFS

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue

I know he'll learn from that, Spud Frawley told me so

_________________
"I had to eat"

for what its worth we are in an interesting period of development and hence there are drivers pushing against playing Hampson

the best way to develop is to play to win and put our best team out there. lets not kid our selves if Ratten does not deliver he will be gone in next yr so he is has to deliver so he will play to win

... that said lets understand we are not good enough for finals yet so we should be using this year to continue the development of the younger folk and the reward for us is an early draft pick again - after that Gold Coast and West Sydney will take the cream of the crop and by 2009 my expectations are we should be legitimately pushing for 9-6 position

and hence the conundrum. I hope we are out of finals contention by rd 18 so we will revert to playing the kids again in the last 4 rounds and give them an opportunity to develop

_________________
The glass is neither half full nor half empty. Rather the glass is twice as big than required.

I find it hard to believe that we are playing to win by playing what most other top sides would consider #3 and #4 ruckman.

We had an opportunity to get Hammer up against Simmonds, and Cloke/Kreuz to fight Pattison. We could've won that battle which would go a long way to winning the war. Instead we're going in with an inferior (as hard as that is to believe) ruck combo.

_________________
end of message

The coaches and people that count probably feel Hampson will develope more in the 2's at the moment than having his confidence crushed in the ones. He was pretty bad against collingwood and didnt show much before then.

He is going to be a star but right now i reckon he needs full games. I imagine Ratten let him know after the collingwood game that he was going to give him full games in the 2's for a few weeks and then give him a good run in the ones to see the season out.

It may not be the way many here would do it but everyone has different ideas. Non wrong - Non right.

I get the feeling Asaike has already let CFC know his future plans. Thats why when his name comes up in interviews with Ratts and Swann a tone of disappointment and a bit of lip biting seems evident in their voices.

Just play Hampson
Promote Jacobs

If last nights game doesnt convince you that we must play a RUCKMAN in theruck then.......................................................

Be it Kreuzer, Hampson or Jacobs, they'll be boys playing against men for probably the next 2-3 years or so.

There's a big decision to be made as to how the club tackles our current ruck deficiency, while still developing for the future. Cloke surely can't shoulder the burden until such time as these lads are ready, so an established, big-bodied ruckman simply must be found somewhere, somehow...

Just goes to show how shit our recruiting was and how much we [REDACTED] ourselves in the period prior to our downfall...

_________________
The problem will be made. for the solution to be sold, to your face before your eyes, tolerance is now the new danger

I agree with this & your initial post. We need to give Hampson & Jacobs more game time & exposure to these MEN & bigger bodies they are up against each week.
Best way for these kids to condition there bodies to these contests is to GET IN THERE & DO IT.

Just to add some weight to the development argument, as a club it has been some time since we were able to develop ruckman in the seconds whilst having a strong bodied ruckman in the seniors. Cast your minds back to the days of madden, allan and porter. Since then we have struggled.

Also a point to consider collingwood are in the same predicament, they have a young woods (light weight) and bryan (cloke size), yet they are capable of at least nullifying the opponents dominace, alla sydney with jolly and everit. Not to mention frazier bopping up as either a forward or ruck.

Keep the faith, we musn't think that the MC has no forward plan regarding our ruck division. We really only been developing our younglist over the past 8 months. By all accounts jacobs has steadily improved, whilst hampson is learning the finer points of a game he is relatively new at.

Go Blues.

how tall is jacobs

_________________
"You don’t get much more Navy Blue than Stephen Kernahan" - Marc Murphy

I think many are forgetting that Pagan tried to have this 'experienced' big bodied ruckman playing...i'd like to add while we develop our youngsters...but i cant remember having a decent young ruckman on the list under him.

We had
Ricky Mott
Dylan Mclaren
Cain Ackland

Only problem was that they are all very average footballers at best!

_________________
Loooook OUT!

It's been a common theme all year; we've been smashed in the hitouts (last on average hitouts) yet are competitive in the clearances.

We won the clearances and first possessions last night, 36 to 28 and 38 to 30 respectively so our midfielders are doing an excellent job based on the lack of hitouts. Having the best clearance player in the competition helps. Another 2 years of development for Kreuzer and Hampson and we should be winning the clearances week in week out.

Agree totally with Keogh's post.

Jacobs and Aisake need to be given a go before years end so a decison can be made on their futures.

Would like to see a Warnock and a mature ruckman (value of King showed last night) added to list.