Spencer's promotion from the rookie list is an indication that he's made more progress than the coaching staff at Melbourne had hoped for, despite the setback injury to Mark Jamar.

His inclusion in the team for Round 1 would see him leap frog 22 year old John Meesen for selection to ruck with Paul Johnson against the North Melbourne Football Club on Sunday.

BAILEY CONFRONTS RUCK DILEMMA

Spencer's promotion from the rookie list is an indication that he's made more progress than the coaching staff at Melbourne had hoped for, despite the setback injury to Mark Jamar.

His inclusion in the team for Round 1 would see him leap frog 22 year old John Meesen for selection to ruck with Paul Johnson against the North Melbourne Football Club on Sunday.

BAILEY CONFRONTS RUCK DILEMMA

I think it is more a recognition of the disappointment with Meesen when coupled with Jamar's injury.

I cannot recall a player that we have traded for that disappoints me more. Boy did the Crows see us coming. I am actually surprised that they didn't sell us Ayres Rock.

I think it is more a recognition of the disappointment with Meesen when coupled with Jamar's injury.

I cannot recall a player that we have traded for that disappoints me more. Boy did the Crows see us coming. I am actually surprised that they didn't sell us Ayres Rock.

what did we pay for him again ?

what did we pay for him again ?

Pick #37 IIRC.

Pick #37 IIRC.

thanks mate

Got the opportunity to watch Meesen and Spencer side by side today.

I must say that I was a little surprised at Spencers kicking ability, and overhead marking. Spencer seriously struggled with short kicking and on a number of occasions struggled to hit the man on the chest.

I know hes still developing as a ruckman, I just hope that there is ALWAYS a man running past, for the short handball option.

We've got huge ruck problems.

We need to hope that our injury curse of the past two years is over, at least when it comes to our rucks over the next 8 weeks.

We've got huge ruck problems.

We need to hope that our injury curse of the past two years is over, at least when it comes to our rucks over the next 8 weeks.

Unfortunately I can only agree.

Spencer really needs time to develop at VFL - and yet he may have to lead our ruck division. PJ is much better as a relief ruckman in between stints up forward and down back. The problem is exacerbated by the fact that we don't have a tall forward who can contest in the pockets. - allowing the main ruckman to sit back accross half forward. Stef is big enough to try in the ruck - but we are trying to develop him as our big-bodied defender. For several years now, people have whingeing that Jamar is not good enough - yet right now we are crying out for him.Let's hope PJ stays fit

I am afraid I find it extraordinary that we didn't try to boost our ruck stocks in either the draft or the rookie draft ( after missing on Warnock). The argument that you shouldn't have more than 4 ruckman on your list doesn't wash - particularly when one is not up to it ( Meeson) and another ( Johnson) is better as a utility tall. We lost our lead ruckman ( White) and a relief ruckman ( Holland) last year - and made no attempt to re-balance the list. I don't understand why we took three small rookies

People say that there were no talls in the draft worth trying. It's interesting that Richmond are thinking of naming a 205cm rookie in their team on Thursday night. I wonder if Roughead will make his debut this year?

Perhaps Meeson will surprise us all. We really need him. Go number 26 !!

For several years now, people have whingeing that Jamar is not good enough - yet right now we are crying out for him.

Jamar still is not good enough and his absence does not make him any better. We are crying out for a competent competitive ruckman. I am hoping Spencer develops into that.

I am afraid I find it extraordinary that we didn't try to boost our ruck stocks in either the draft or the rookie draft ( after missing on Warnock).

How will taking another young, raw and inexperienced player correct the problems we have right now?

The argument that you shouldn't have more than 4 ruckman on your list doesn't wash - particularly when one is not up to it ( Meeson) and another ( Johnson) is better as a utility tall. We lost our lead ruckman ( White) and a relief ruckman ( Holland) last year - and made no attempt to re-balance the list. I don't understand why we took three small rookies.

Thats not the argument that is being given. The problem with our rucks was when we did not take another ruckman (draft, trade or rookie) three or four years ago. The current administration has sought to address this last year by rookieing Spencer and recruiting Meesen for a 3rd round pick. Meesen will be gone at year end(paid out) and we will rookie/draft a ruckman than.

White was finished as a ruckman and Holland played KPF or KPB and was not used last year so he was not a ruckman.

Again, what good would rookieing another 18-19 beanpole do to fix our current problems? If all our ruckman are fit the rookie would struggle for game time at Casey 2nds.

People say that there were no talls in the draft worth trying. It's interesting that Richmond are thinking of naming a 205cm rookie in their team on Thursday night. I wonder if Roughead will make his debut this year?

Richmond have Simmonds (Good), Pattison (Ordinary), Graham (Awful), Vickery (talent but raw), Putt (very raw with uncertain future). Unless there are injuries then they have either have alot of useless goal posts in order to elevate Browne. Their position only makes us look better. We have Meesen. They have Pattison, Graham and Putt in that basket.

Richmond are pressing for the finals in Wallet's last year of his contracr. They have Simmonds. If he goes down injured then they have nothing. Its a case of desperation that they are doing what they are doing because Simmonds aside their rucks are worse than ours. And there actions does not address the current problem because ruckman take a long lead time to be established in AFL

Perhaps Meeson will surprise us all. We really need him. Go number 26 !!

Dont hold your breath!

There is muc h said and discussed about rucking. I wonder if it isnt quite as important to the game as it once was. The duel of giants has fast beenreplaced by the "moving" game. It is important to have competition at the rucking but im more intent that we get better faster, more mindful and skilled ball carriers that being outset winners at the tap.

Meesen ought to be better then Spencer as an immediate choice but he simply isnt and I cant recall anyone here seeing any hope or reason to suspect he will be. Quite happy for him to surprise us all, just shalnt hold my breath.

I think that the combo of Spencer and Johnson will be ok, if not outstandingly brilliant for the foreseeable.

You can win games without always winning the ruck, however you never win games without people capable of kicking goals

We've got huge ruck problems.

We are crying out for a competent competitive ruckman.

Thought I'd highlight these quotes. After all this issue needs addressing come season's end. Hopefully Spencer can blossom for the short to medium term.

No doubt the footy department tried to address it last draft/trade period. Ie. R.Warnock. Before he bowed to the Carlton Crew.

Expect to see Stefan Martin doing some back up ruck work as well. Didn't he start at Sandringham as a ruckman?

And of course they didn't hand him the #34 for nothing did they.

How will taking another young, raw and inexperienced player correct the problems we have right now?

It won't ...but it might help correct the problems we are still going to have in 3 years time .... ( which aren't going to easily solved through the compromised drafts of the next three years)

White was finished as a ruckman and Holland played KPF or KPB and was not used last year so he was not a ruckman.

The fact is that we needed their height and weight to get through last year - and we will need back up players of their height and weight to get through every year

Again, what good would rookieing another 18-19 beanpole do to fix our current problems? If all our ruckman are fit the rookie would struggle for game time at Casey 2nds.

Game time in Sandy 2nds was good enough for Spencer; a rookie of any quality would take Meeson's spot in Casey 1sts; you'd like to think we'd find another back up tall who could play in a KP

.....because ruckman take a long lead time to be established in AFL

Agree. When are we going to start?

Next time I'll have to figure out how the split quote feature works!!

It won't ...but it might help correct the problems we are still going to have in 3 years time .... ( which aren't going to easily solved through the compromised drafts of the next three years)

You were complaining about the state of our rucks now and I agree. But rookieing one 3 to 6 months does not address that issue nor does it create a good development point for the 2nd rookie ruckman.

Hopefully Spencer will mature in that time and we will take two others at the end of this season which will provide us with options.

The fact is that we needed their height and weight to get through last year - and we will need back up players of their height and weight to get through every year

Agree. The problem was 3 to 4 years ago in the making. 12 months ago we took Meesen as a speculative trade and Spencer as a speculative rookie.

Game time in Sandy 2nds was good enough for Spencer; a rookie of any quality would take Meeson's spot in Casey 1sts; you'd like to think we'd find another back up tall who could play in a KP

Not all rookies progress like Spencer. MFC have had Van Schaik who was tall and nothing else. We had another rookie ruckman who just got cut last year. If all rucks are fit then the 2nd rookie wont get a look in at Casey 1sts.

We needed to see what Meesen can deliver us this year. Unfortunately we have got him for 3 years. He has not made any headway thus far. To be fair most 18yo rookie ruckman can barely distinguish their left and right foot. Lets not over play their capabilities early on.

IMO I think Spencer is being pushed along too quickly. he could be very good for us but he is 19yo and still raw. However, as you have pointed out, he is already equal to /better than some of the options in front of us.

Agree. When are we going to start?

We have started last year to address this problem. I would suggest that depending on relative form, fitness and opportunities that Jamar may be in his last year and that they will consider paying Meesen out at season's end and focussing on getting a ruckman later in the draft and/or another rookie.

Meesen will be gone at year end(paid out) and we will rookie/draft a ruckman than.

We still haven't gotten to the bottom of this have we Rhino? I still believe his contact ends at the end of this year.

Bailey making enough noise about the fact that he's only 22 makes me think he'll get one more year or be dropped to Rookie status.

Jamar still is not good enough and his absence does not make him any better. We are crying out for a competent competitive ruckman. I am hoping Spencer develops into that.

Amen.

How will taking another young, raw and inexperienced player correct the problems we have right now?

He will have one year more to develop.

Thats not the argument that is being given. The problem with our rucks was when we did not take another ruckman (draft, trade or rookie) three or four years ago. The current administration has sought to address this last year by rookieing Spencer and recruiting Meesen for a 3rd round pick. Meesen will be gone at year end(paid out) and we will rookie/draft a ruckman than.

Amen again brother.

Again, what good would rookieing another 18-19 beanpole do to fix our current problems? If all our ruckman are fit the rookie would struggle for game time at Casey 2nds.

See earlier answer on year's development.

We still haven't gotten to the bottom of this have we Rhino? I still believe his contact ends at the end of this year.

Bailey making enough noise about the fact that he's only 22 makes me think he'll get one more year or be dropped to Rookie status.

I have.

My bet is still open for the benefit of the Club.

Otherwise you believe what you want to believe Fork.

Redleg, Doing that deals with 3 to 4 years down the track but with limited development opportunities in the first year. And you deny the possibility to explore an opportunity for a potential midfielder.

Redleg, Doing that deals with 3 to 4 years down the track but with limited development opportunities in the first year. And you deny the possibility to explore an opportunity for a potential midfielder.

Correct except for denying midfielder opportunities. Our ruck weakness is glaring. It takes time to develop them. Midfielders more often show their ability early. They can be turned over each year or two if they are not good enough. We have many midfielder types on our list but few rucks. Good rucks are far scarcer.

Correct except for denying midfielder opportunities. Our ruck weakness is glaring. It takes time to develop them. Midfielders more often show their ability early. They can be turned over each year or two if they are not good enough. We have many midfielder types on our list but few rucks. Good rucks are far scarcer.

So is our midfield and we need more of them. The weakness in our rucks is now and and the time for developing a ruckman differs and its not clear that the extra year will help that process significantly when they may be relegated to 2nd ruck in Casey. The failure to date of Meesen has complicated what is already a difficult to solve problem.

I wonder if an experienced ruckman "Harbours" any plans to return to the sporting capital city from where he once learned his trade...

The failure to date of Meesen has complicated what is already a difficult to solve problem.

Has it what?

He also has two years to run on his contract.

I am prepared to say a miracle is possible and that he may yet play good AFL footy. Then again I have seen him play several times and I will save my miracle for us winning our next flag.

Has it what?

He also has two years to run on his contract.

I am prepared to say a miracle is possible and that he may yet play good AFL footy. Then again I have seen him play several times and I will save my miracle for us winning our next flag.

Two years to run......agghh!!! As rhino has pointed out, if things do not improve with Meesen, the people in the positions to make decisions may consider at the end of this season to sort the rucking department out, despite one year left on the contract.

How will taking another young, raw and inexperienced player correct the problems we have right now?

List management isn't just about the 'now', and perhaps it was that very same argument that meant we did nothing to bolster our ruck stocks further at a time when the fruits of the labour would be reaped now.

The current administration has sought to address this last year by rookieing Spencer and recruiting Meesen for a 3rd round pick. Meesen will be gone at year end(paid out) and we will rookie/draft a ruckman than.

It's not enough.

With a ruck division of Jamar (we tried to trade him away), PJ (seemingly written off as 'first ruck' potential), Meesen (treading water) and Spencer (a rookie) it's still too thin.

But rookieing one 3 to 6 months does not address that issue nor does it create a good development point for the 2nd rookie ruckman.

While it may not have helped us right now, I disagree with your assertion.

If we take it that Meesen is no good, as you've said, that PJ isn't going to play the 'number one' ruck role, as Bailey has hinted, that leaves Jamar on the primary list (and no one else).

Plenty of teams have as many or more rucks than we do.

To be fair most 18yo rookie ruckman can barely distinguish their left and right foot. Lets not over play their capabilities early on.

...and yet you argue that we can't pick up a second rookie ruck because, with five ruck options across the primary and rookie list, the first-year rookie ruck may not be gauranteed a spot in the VFL 1sts?

Each to their own...