Mickstar wrote:
bondiblue wrote:
GreatEx wrote:
Yeah, well said BV. I expect a bit of over-criticism on TC in the name of reasoned debate, but I found it surprising how many times I've read or heard something in the mainstream media pointing out that we've been getting beaten in the clearances as though it's a major cause for concern, and not asking why that may be. If we can switch between turnover and stoppage mode, and be elite at both, there's no stopping us. It'd be great if we could flip the switch with an identical 23. It's a shame that Pitto doesn't have the tools to be in such a 23, but maybe someone else will be. It's exciting to see where this goes, and great that we're banking enough wins early that we can afford the occasional tactical misstep along the way.
Can we win a GF without Pitto? The answer is yes.
Can we win a GF if TDK is subbed out injured without Pittonet? I think we can...might...should.
Who knows.
I love the versatility of the squad. I love the never say die attitude. I love the way they're playing for each other.
There's 20 more rounds to go. Fk we've only just started. There will be 2 rucks, there wont.
I don't think Pitto makes that much difference to our speed TBH. Its not like TDK is making us a faster side than Pitto.
But I tell you what, I reckon the sum of Pitto and TDK imo would be better because TDK would increase our productivity and marking power in the forward line more than our current situation.
IMO, we need one more threat done there in the forwardline, for now; till Vossy works out the small forwards mix, of 4, and that's with Motlop out.
They opposition know its Charlie and Harry and a bunch of midgets. Kennedy isn't it for me. Kemp mightn't be. Martin is, sorta. I don't think we need 4 midgets. So TDK mixing it with Pitto is for me the go every now and then: against gorillas, and against teams with 2 rucks....and in a Prelim or GF.
There's more to this season than what we've seen thus far.
I know I don't want to be playing against Fremantle in a GF without Pitto, but I'll leave that to Vossy and co in 29 weeks time.
Go Blues.
Harry has gone in for a few centre bounces . Makes me nervous . What do you think Bondi ?
Thanks for the question Mickstar.
The whole argument keeps doing the rounds in my head, and know the argument for the affirmative, but I can't help but come to the conclusion its a case of Russian Roulette playing TDK as No 1 ruck with Harry as the chop out.
The Harry in the ruck debate is a weird debate for me.
I can understand the argument of some posters in favour of Harry in the ruck, but I think there is too much exaggeration in the move's benefits to take serious and be dogmatic. Firstly, look at Pittos stats as first ruck last year, and he's not as crap as some suggest. He's a decent No 1 ruck who gives his contested bulls in the midfield more ball than TDK. Its where the engine room is and where the play starts. We've lost that with TDK. His tap work needs work and he's feeding the opposition mids moreso than ours.
My bottom line is the ruck position provides more opportunity for injury that KPF.
KPF is the hardest position on the ground to play. We have 2 of the best KPFs in the AFL and have longed to play them in tandem. Why would you rob your forward line that weapon just to give a chop out to a position where injury is more likely to happen to your biggest asset?
One day Harry or Charlie will kick a goal in the ruck when Harry is rucking, but thus, after 4 games, they haven't.
Maybe its nice to see Harry having a trot around the ground playing ruck like Daniher does. But he does that anyway without having to be one of the 2 bulls going at each other in the ruck.
The argument for Harry rucking is that its only 5 minutes here and there. Its still the friggin ruck. You can't be half pregnant. OH&S does'nt accept the argument that the environment was "only a liitle bit dangerous" after someone has died. Its negligent.
Bottom line is Harry is a much better KPD than Daniher and there lies the reason to send Daniher into the ruck.
I can bring up a lot of negatives of TDK as the first ruck, but don't want to belittle one of our own developing players. After all, if posters want to see his shortfalls, the eye test on his opponents and reference to the important stats will tell you all you need to know about his shortfalls.
I know TDK is growing in confidence and stature, and getting better at the ruck craft, but he will not be Gawn's size or have Gawn's (or other bigger rucks') power for another couple years. His break out year is not this year, just like it wasn't for the last 2 years posters who scoff at 2 rucks have hoped for. TDK's time will come.
And the argument we are quicker and take more marks around the ground with TDK as No 1 ruck is fanciful. Really? How is that so?
So if we avoid Pitto in best 23, we take out TDK as the 3rd Forward marking position to give us more speed and mobility in the ruck. Yeah? Have a look at the kms and additional speed in that move. And we replace TDK with Kennedy as the 3rd marking tall...I think TDK is quicker than Kennedy. Kennedy doesn't give us an extra runner as some claim, and neither of the 4 midgets are not a 3rd marking option in the forward line when SOS ad Martin are not playing...and Martin can't give TDK a chop out in the ruck like Kennedy can't....so we rob Harry, one of our twin towers in the forward line to give TDK a chop out.
I'm not saying no ruck time for TDK. I'm saying share the ruck duties with Pitto to wear down opponents for TDK to jump over them later in quarters, till TDK is strong enough to be the Colossus Gawn is, and leave Harry as our forward line weapon.
I like the idea of keeping rucks fresh, full of bounce and showing strength throughout a game. A tiring ruck is not a good ruck, especially when he's still developing his body and craft.
Did I mention our contested possessions have gone south since TDK has been our first ruck? ie we've lost a strength of ours ince TDK has been No 1 ruck whilst POitto is out injured or returning to the field through the VFL?
Oh yeah, but we've increased our number of goals from turnover. Does anyone really believe the increase in goals from turnover can be attributed to TDK and Harry in the ruck? Please don't.
Furthermore, the net gain we've had from an increase in goals from turnover and a decrease of goals from contest is how many? We need both. Robbing Peter to play Paul is not adding another layer. Both avenues for goal are possible from our maturing team.
Pitto in the ruck, whilst TDK is developing gives us more than the naysayers suggest. If Pitto isn't fit, don't play him; and we haven't. But if Pitto is fit as he showed last week in the VFL, then he should be our No 1 ruck.
This year, for me, should not be a development year for TDK in the ruck, by playing him as first ruck.
This year we should be playing our best team and improving on the platform we created last year to end up top 4 and win a Flag. Development for TDK happens with or without Pitto because TDK is not the finished product this year. In fact, if you have a good look at TDK in the ruck, he has cost us goals from dropped marks in the defensive half ... just look at the replay.
Have you considered that maybe he's fatigued from playing 80% ToG as the No 1 ruck may have something to do with that? Maybe he isn't fully developed to play full time No 1 ruck without being fatigued. And Pitto is chastised because he isnt taking enough marks in defense, TDK hasn't fixed that as some want to believe.
Leave Harry as the roaming CHF and let him continue to build synergy with the other half of the twin towers, Charlie. I don't mind Harry rucking in the forwardline, or him choosing to go into the ruck to mix things up, but he should not be our go to ruckman when TDK is totally exhausted 25 minutes into the quarter, when he probably should have been given the chop out 15 minutes into the quarter, by another ruckman, because he needs a chop out for more than 20% game time imo..
Harry is our most dangerous forward. All 203cms of him. Remember Charlie, also a Coleman medallist, is 194cm (you can see from that the advantage Harry has over KPD opponents), will also need to have times to get out of the goal square to drag his opponent out and get a kick further up the ground .... knowing a fresh Harry is in the goal square as a marking target.
Finally, imagine in a cut throat final, ie Elimination, Prelim or Grand Final, and we go in with TDK as our sole ruck. The opposition ruck might be anyone of Gawn, Grundy, English, Marshall, Darcy, Witts, Nankervis, Preuss, Cox, who monster TDK. Now if you were coach in this cut throat final would you ask your ruck to do everything in your power to take out/ injure the only ruck Carlton has, the skinny TDK? Absolutely, because there's no tomorrow, and without TDK in the ruck, Harry would have to go in the ruck, and that leaves Charlie to be double and triple teamed, and when Harry is tired its Kennedy, who will be detroyed by those monsters, or Cripps, who is our contested bull, and has enough of a workload as it is.
Now if you were opposition coach in a cut throat final and Harry was in the ruck, would you ask your ruckman to injure/ take out Harry? Absolutely. Harry would cower away from that sort of aggression and lose all confidence, let alone a limb.
Its a matter of balance, and insurance, no matter what you think about insurance, because insurance plays a huge role in the selection of a team. Why do you think Voss wants players to be able to play multiple roles? Well, the ruck is not a position you can just throw anyone in. Grigg days are gone ever since the Tigers midfield group lost their dominance over the competition.
I bet anyone, if Pitto and TDK are fit and firing, and we are playing in a cut throat Final, Vossy and the MC wouldn't dare play TDK as the sole ruckman in the squad of 23, and I bet Vossy would prefer to have Harry and Charlie as his marking KPFs rather than running around as battering rams in the ruck, because we need to kick goals, and whether you like it or not, we haven't got too many avenues to goal (except when we play NM or Weagles).
Get fair dinkum and Play rucks in ruck and KPFs as KPFs.
There you go Mickstar. That's what I think about Harry in the ruck. It should not be a permanent thing, not even for 5 minutes each quarter.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
