Might we see more of Brad Miller in the ruck next season?

[Keyser Söze 0]

Its just occurred to me that currently we have 5 ruckmen on the senior list, 2 of which are kids.

Gawn has a bit of weight on him but will be recovering from a knee injury and playing Beaker in the ruck at his size would just be cruel.

Which only really leaves Jamar, Johnson and Martin who has played the majority of his AFL footy in other areas.

If one of them goes down with, say, a bad hammy... that's 4 weeks under a bit of pressure. Rookie elevations can be made for long-term injuries only.

If I could put money on which player would be elevated from the rookie list mid-season, it would be on Spencer or Meesen... unfortunately for young Jordie Mac.

... anyway, we could end up seeing Brad Miller in the ruck as we did briefly against Richmond in round 19.

[big tuna 0]

Beaker is absolute gold... "you got a team of monkeys working around the clock on this?"

The only scenario where I could see Miller being required to go into the ruck is if Jamar (or PJ if Jamar not available) was selected as the sole ruckman got injured and Martin was either also injured or too vital in the backline or forward line to be moved. This scenario could occur but it is unlikely that Martin would be kicking a bag up front or required in the backline as our 3rd/4th best tall to shut somebody down. However, he is a much better option than risking LJ or Watts who have height & agility but would get crushed in the contest and no doubt injured themselves.

[Matt Demon 1,502]

Going on this I spose you want James Frawley up forward with Matty Warnock? Brad Miller was playing In the ruck so we had every chance to loose the game. He's not a ruckmans [censored]!

[John Dee 445]

It is my belief that we can elevate two rookies without the need for a long term injury; one for each veteran that we have on the main list.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Its just occurred to me that currently we have 5 ruckmen on the senior list, 2 of which are kids.

Gawn has a bit of weight on him but will be recovering from a knee injury and playing Beaker in the ruck at his size would just be cruel.

Which only really leaves Jamar, Johnson and Martin who has played the majority of his AFL footy in other areas.

If one of them goes down with, say, a bad hammy... that's 4 weeks under a bit of pressure. Rookie elevations can be made for long-term injuries only.

If I could put money on which player would be elevated from the rookie list mid-season, it would be on Spencer or Meesen... unfortunately for young Jordie Mac.

... anyway, we could end up seeing Brad Miller in the ruck as we did briefly against Richmond in round 19.

We only elevated Spencer when Jamar went down and neither Martin nor Meesen were plausible ruck options at the time.

It will take more than one LT injury to a ruckman to force an elevation off the rookie list.

Your post is confusing. Firstly you say elevations can only be for LT injury then suggest we could have a mid year elevation. Which is it? If the injury is a LT injury to a ruck then Jordie may not get a guernsey.

I doubt Meesen will be elevated unless there are extreme circumstances (multiple LT injuries and surprisingly strong VFL form). The way I see it, Meesen is sixth in line of our ruck stocks behind Jamar, PJ, Martin, Spencer, GAWN. As we move to the 2nd half of 2010 and all big men are fit, I could easily see Meesen moving to the VFL 2nds to provide "experience" for GAWN. Jamr and Martin at AFL level, PJ and Spencer at VFL 1sts and Meesen and GAWN VFL 2nds.

Brad Miller has as much chance of featuring in the ruck as Jordan McMahon has in kicking the winning goal in the 2010 GF.

[MikeyJ 60]

Rhino, as of 2009, all clubs were allowed to elevate a rookie to the senior list after round 11, irrespective of long term injuries to other players. KS isn't quite right in saying that they can only be elevated because of LT injuries.

To my thinking, Spencer and McKenzie would be the favourites for that spot, with McKenzie nosing in front. Of course, a serious injury to either Jamar or Johnson would improve Spencer's chances somewhat.

I'm unsure of the rules regarding elevated rookies and the veterans' list, though. KS might be on the money with his suggestion that we can elevate one rookie for each veteran outside the senior list but I'm not sure.

Edited December 15, 2009 by MikeyJ

[Keyser Söze 0]

My thoughts were a bit muddled at that time of night and the Miller thing was just a throwaway line...

Essentially, I think we'll be a bit thin in the ruck for the first half of the season with only 2 real ruckmen and a part-timer.

Once we reach the midpoint of the season we are able to elevate a rookie and my money right now would be on spencer.

If we have a minor injury or 2 we could struggle.

[H_T 3,049]

It is my belief that we can elevate two rookies without the need for a long term injury; one for each veteran that we have on the main list.

I was thinking this too. Can we do this ?

[Keyser Söze 0]

I was thinking this too. Can we do this ?

No. Not to my knowledge.

I know that the 2 veteran listed players take the place of 2 spots on the rookie list.

Its not related to elevations tot he senior list though.

[John Dee 445]

No. Not to my knowledge.

I know that the 2 veteran listed players take the place of 2 spots on the rookie list.

Its not related to elevations tot he senior list though.

I still think that we can elevate two rookies because of the two veterans. I have tried to find out, but, as always, the AFL is not forthcoming with any real information. The best I could find was some sort of explanation on the afl site that was clearly out of date; so I am none the wiser.

[Keyser Söze 0]

I still think that we can elevate two rookies because of the two veterans. I have tried to find out, but, as always, the AFL is not forthcoming with any real information. The best I could find was some sort of explanation on the afl site that was clearly out of date; so I am none the wiser.

Unless there has been another rule change I'm fairly certain you are wrong.

[1858 285]

The amount of players eligible for senior football is 40.

If you have 2 players on your veterans list then not only do you have 2 less standard rookies but none of them can be "nominated" to play senior football. 1 on the veterans list means 1 extra player on the standard rookie list as well as 1 nominated rookie. None on the veterans list means 2 extra players on the standard rookie list as well as 2 nominated rookies. My understanding is that "nominated" rookies are not elevated to the senior list, they are simply nominated as eligible for senior footy in order to preserve the 40 player pool in the event that a team has 1 or less players on their veterans list.

As others have said, we can also nominate a rookie mid year to play senior football regardless of veterans, injuries or other - essentially another player on top of the pool of 40 if I have this correctly.

rpfc - please confirm.

[Still Waiting 94]

Fitzy, Gawn, Jamar, Johnson, Martin, Meesen, Watts, Spencer, are all over 196 cm and average 201 cm.

We would not want to play all these guys together / nor could we, as it stands.

We then have another 12 players who are 190 --195cm at the club.

Miller will do well to get a regular game let alone have to do much in the way of ruckwork.

The club has many options in the area of ruckmen where key position players are also often called upon to contest a ball up or two.

There is a danger of us having "talls-overkill" if we get a few of our smaller mobile midfielders injured together. We must maintain swift ball movement generated at ball ups by talls to defenders or midfielders then on to forwards in a programmed and orderly manner.

The squad has good balance for the 1st time in ages and needs game time in bucketloads to fulfill the clubs potential.

We certainly aint short of tall timber!

[Keyser Söze 0]

Fitzy, Gawn, Jamar, Johnson, Martin, Meesen, Watts, Spencer, are all over 196 cm and average 201 cm.

We would not want to play all these guys together / nor could we, as it stands.

We then have another 12 players who are 190 --195cm at the club.

Maybe in the distant future we are well stocked, but Meesen and Spencer are on the rookie list, Watts and Fitzpatrick are severely underdeveloped physically, Gawn is recovering from an ACL.

Leaving only Jamar, Johnson and Martin.

But 3 should be enough for half a season.

Just don't expect Jordie McKenzie to get elevated mid-season unless there is an LTI.

[Still Waiting 94]

These guys are at the club "NOW" and will be given time at Casey and perhaps in the Seniors if injury or form warrants it.

How many 200 cm players do you think a club should have? 12, 15, 20??? We have 20 or 21 already over 190cm.

What you are inferring is that the club is ready to be a premiership threat but won't get there because of a lack of suitable ruckmen only.

Most people on this forum have already agreed that we are building a young side for FUTURE success.

Oh, and by the way it doesn't take 8-10 years for all young players to develop. Some come through in 2 or 3 years.

We will be strong in 2-4 years time but until then, the club has set in place a plan for future success.

And finally, why do you think there is a rookie list?

The club has a very good understanding of what the rookie list can do for the senior team.

Ask Dean and see what he has to say about the total balance of the squad.

Ask Jimmy, or Connolly or any of the management. I did.

[Keyser Söze 0]

These guys are at the club "NOW" and will be given time at Casey and perhaps in the Seniors if injury or form warrants it.

How many 200 cm players do you think a club should have? 12, 15, 20??? We have 20 or 21 already over 190cm.

What you are inferring is that the club is ready to be a premiership threat but won't get there because of a lack of suitable ruckmen only.

Most people on this forum have already agreed that we are building a young side for FUTURE success.

Oh, and by the way it doesn't take 8-10 years for all young players to develop. Some come through in 2 or 3 years.

We will be strong in 2-4 years time but until then, the club has set in place a plan for future success.

And finally, why do you think there is a rookie list?

The club has a very good understanding of what the rookie list can do for the senior team.

Ask Dean and see what he has to say about the total balance of the squad.

Ask Jimmy, or Connolly or any of the management. I did.

Who are you arguing with?

Most of your points are either not relevant or have already been answered.

[LITTLE STINGA 1]

Maybe in the distant future we are well stocked, but Meesen and Spencer are on the rookie list, Watts and Fitzpatrick are severely underdeveloped physically, Gawn is recovering from an ACL.

Leaving only Jamar, Johnson and Martin.

But 3 should be enough for half a season.

Just don't expect Jordie McKenzie to get elevated mid-season unless there is an LTI.

With Gawn out for half the season I think as long as Spencer has a good pre season he will be elevated immediately. It will be interesting to see Martin and Spencer competing for the second ruck spot when the pre season starts. Johnson had his chance and stuffed it up, he should be made to earn his spot and the respect that he lost after his disappointing 2009.

Edited December 16, 2009 by LITTLE STINGA

[beelzebub 23,383]

just thoughts:

Jamar is obviously first cab off the rank and in so needs an game day -offsider. PJ and Martin have both some experrince in this..and more importantly ARE on the senior list. As far as season oh-ten goes all others become somewhat speculative.

Im not sure if the pecking order is necessarily as simple as suggested. I would think if fit..and with some similar improvement as shown before injury then Meesen might edge out or at least give reason for consideration alongside Spencer...no lay down misere there. Gawn will need a good year in the magoos and 2 preseasons ( this and the next 0 before really looking to press for selection. This I might think occur more in 0h-leven with the likely hood of PJ being a casulaty of the next pruning season.

Im not sure that the FD has pidgeon holed Fitzsy as a ruck.. ...but its an option...but not tomorrow..or for a while.

Miller as a ruck...umm....ummm....welll.......ummm.. probably not !! not unless he does a Bradbury !!

[Still Waiting 94]

Keyser Soze, what I'm doing is having an opinion. Who is arguing?? Why don't you read and try to comprehend simple English? You have a mildly arrogant opinion in your response by saying "not relevant". Let me tell you bud, anything to do with the MFC on here IS relevant. Its called a forum and we can all have an opinion but some choose to pot others in stead of just writing opinions. Have you got anything to say about the club that hasn't been posted yet or do you want to have another go at me? Come in spinner! :lol:

[Sir Why You Little 37,212]

Its just occurred to me that currently we have 5 ruckmen on the senior list, 2 of which are kids.

Gawn has a bit of weight on him but will be recovering from a knee injury and playing Beaker in the ruck at his size would just be cruel.

I am a Huge fan of Beaker from the old Muppett Show!!!

Who are you referring to when you say Beaker?? Great Nick name :lol:

[H_T 3,049]

Keyser Soze, what I'm doing is having an opinion. Who is arguing?? Why don't you read and try to comprehend simple English? You have a mildly arrogant opinion in your response by saying "not relevant". Let me tell you bud, anything to do with the MFC on here IS relevant. Its called a forum and we can all have an opinion but some choose to pot others in stead of just writing opinions. Have you got anything to say about the club that hasn't been posted yet or do you want to have another go at me? Come in spinner! :lol:

In all fairness Still Waiting, KS had a fair question - "Who are you arguing with ?"

Your previous post does read as though it is intended for someone...perhaps you can fill us in who it is intended for ?

Whilst I think it is for KS, but I'm not entirely sure, I agree with the non -relevance of your post on KS' part.

I haven't read anywhere where KS inferred that "the club is ready to be a premiership threat".....so that isn't relevant.

[Guest apple]

Who are you arguing with?

Most of your points are either not relevant or have already been answered.

YOUR threads irellavant, use your brains, miller in the ruck, you need to get some sleep>

[e25 5]

YOUR threads irellavant, use your brains, miller in the ruck, you need to get some sleep>

Yuo need a bloody holiday you insolent pest.

ON THE TOPIC OF RUCKS:

Yeah, we might be a bit short if we are extremely unlucky, but even then it will only be temporary.

A longterm injury would let us elevate Spencer and a short term injury would be... well... short term.

We'd survive and the window would be short as this situation will only ocurr in the first half of the season.

Unless of course we upgrade J-Mac at the halfway. Then we'll still be stuck with 3 semi-capable ruckmen

[e25 5]

I am a Huge fan of Beaker from the old Muppett Show!!!

Who are you referring to when you say Beaker?? Great Nick name :lol:

I think Beaker is the moniker a few have given to Jack Fitzpatrick.

Check out the nicknames thread, there's a doosy of a .gif on there