Mark Jamar

[jayceebee31 671]

Spencer will be a No1 Ruck within 3 Years,,,IF he continues the attitude & hard work. Gawn, hopefully will be his understudy. I saw in Jamar, & I see in Spencer, as long as he keeps on keeping on, a lot of potential, just as Connells does.

Jamar 26yrs 9mths, - 1st Ruck - 2010/11/12/13

Spencer 20yrs 7mths - 1st Ruck - 2013/14/15/16

Gawn, 18yrs 4mths, hopefully 1st Ruck - 2016/17/18...

http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/tp-melbourne-demons?year=2010&sby=15

Big Call- however I think GAWN maybe Full forward for a while as well.

[jayceebee31 671]

Some people are really over rating Spencer. He is Horrible. He will not be our No.1 ruck ever! Will struggle to be on a AFL list next year

Get real -- how many ruckman shows more potential as does Spencer at his age. I'd love him to go head to head with Nic Nac and I'd put my hard earnt on Spencer.

[Rogue 585]

Dappa Dan, your central point seems to be that Jamar is more likely to get injured playing as sole ruck. Do you have any evidence to support this contention?

As for 'On the Couch' and us losing with two rucks, I have two quick points.

One, someone's mentioned Martin and the Brisbane win and North loss, so the theory seems to immediately have less weight.

Two, if we had a decent second ruck at the moment we could reasonably decide whether that was helpful for our game plan. However, our second rucks have given us nothing, so I wouldn't be making any sweeping generalisations.

[Rod Grinter Riot Squad 5,636]

How are we supposed to take your thread seriously with this? On what planet is losing Sylvia from the forward line/regular midfielder position HELPING the side when he's good for only a handful of hit-outs?

See above, and by all means feel free to ask any more questions that have been answered half a dozen times on this thread already.

Next.

And had you answered before or did you just have a heap of generalisations and say nothing?

The Sylvia point was highlighting how far off the standard the other two are. A simple point I would have thought. Obviously not simple enough for you.

[dee-luded 2,958]

Big Call- however I think GAWN maybe Full forward for a while as well.

IMO he'll need to be able to play that post as well,,, but lets hope he has to fight Fitzpatrick for it though.

[Rod Grinter Riot Squad 5,636]

First we have:

"That's exactly what you can do. It's proven that you're more likely to suffer soft tissue AND impact injuries while fatigued."

Where has it been proven, or are you making things up to help your argument?

I disagree. The evidence is in the injuries we're seeing these days. Perhaps not to ruckmen so much (it's not getting to the point that we need to bring in another rule like the centre circle). But certainly to AFL players generally. Recovery IS footy these days. IMO you're kidding yourself if you think injuries aren't a key factor in a club's fortunes these days. In fact it's getting to the stage (with the evenness of the comp) that the medicos are affecting the entire season the most out of everyone. Almost as much affect as the recruiters... and even they are looking at injury history in a big way.

Evidence? Where? or are you making this up to help your argument?

BTW why are the AFL considering limiting interchanges to slow the game down due to worries over soft tissue injuries?

[jnrmac 19,175]

Play Jamar on his own. Great. Sensational. To what end? Even if we DO make the finals we'll only scrape in by the skin of our teeth, like the Dons last year. Why are we running him into the ground? You lot can't SERIOUSLY think the club is going to give the stamp of approval to a one-ruckman gameplan for season 2011 and beyond as our Plan-A

How good would it be to have a great ruck DUO? Playing him on his own doesn't get us there. It's just an unnecessary strain o

Wasn't that Daniher's plan? A lone ruckman. That's why Jolly left and why we got rid of SImmonds.....and why Jamar took so long to develop!!!

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

And that is why you fail.

Where do you get off using the word "fail?" I've failed at nothing.

I don't see how anyone can think that 20 mins is useful for an up and coming ruckman.

Who said 20 minutes? Personally I'd prefer to see them get the gig for 40% game time while Jamar goes forward.

To play two-thirds of one quarter and expect to get better?!

What is the point of that?

It's called development. You have to start these ruckmen somewhere. Years ago, Jamar was eased into things this way, and that seems to have worked. They're not getting to know the team any better, or understanding AFL footy any better playing in the VFL.

BTW, our gameplan requires more run than other sides.

We need run.

Yeah, yeah. Our gameplan needs run, heard that before. You know what our gameplan needs more than run? A dominant ruckman who doesn't break down.

Not mediocre ruckwork for 5 centre bounces, and 20 minutes of following.

And this is why YOU fail. You can't come to terms with the fact that we're in a development year still.

Dappa Dan, your central point seems to be that Jamar is more likely to get injured playing as sole ruck. Do you have any evidence to support this contention?

Actually, my central point amongst all of this is that we're in a development year. I have worried since the first few rounds that no-one else is coming up as a ruckman. The fear of injury thing is just the straw that broke the camels back on this issue for me. The OP I provided certainly didn't suggest much of this though, so back to your point...

I would say that the evidence is all around us. Riewoldt overworks, pings (or tears) a hammy. There was a spate of midfielders early this year too, Kerr was the last from memory. Short of getting medical reports, I'm not sure how much more you want to see. I do remember reading an article in the last 12 months about the over-working of fatigued players in the AFL these days, and how it correlates to both impact and soft tissue injuries, but I'll be buggered if I could find it.

Besides. Who says I need "evidence?" It's common sense! Overwork a footballer and you may end up with Crawford... ie, a player who works hard and only seems to gather momentum. Overwork other players and you end up with a Sylvia situation. It's not ironclad that he's going to get hurt... it's a RISK. One I'd be willing to take if we were some chance at a top-4 spot... but we're not.

- Jamar's not had a glittering history with his robustness... So right away that concerns me.

- Jeff White used to play as a sole ruckman, but he played an outside midfielder role. Nowhere near the crash and bash Jamar has to deal with. And even he had help in every year, except maybe in his B&F year from memory.

- The fact there's no decent backup doubles the threat IMO. Lose Jamar and what do we have?

- Jamar is more use to Spencer in the side, helping him, educating him and supporting him than he is barking suggestions from the sideline on his crutches.

- I've never seen anyone give a post-match interview sitting down. I've never seen Jamar this tired, and it's only round 9.

It's simple, IMO. It's a risk. It could work out great. He could play 90% of the ruck for us and end the year in one piece. Which would be lovely. But why risk it? For a couple of extra wins? For a shot at an AA gurnsey? No. Not when development can take place, and not when he's showing genuine signs of some deep-set fatigue, playing the hard hitting body on body game he does.

Two, if we had a decent second ruck at the moment we could reasonably decide whether that was helpful for our game plan. However, our second rucks have given us nothing, so I wouldn't be making any sweeping generalisations.

No-one's saying we bring in a second ruckman because it'll help us win. I'm saying it'll benefit Spencer in 2011 and beyond. I want to see a ruckman the club is SERIOUS about developing into a 22-round-a-year player playing with the midfielders he's going to be feeding it to. He needs those first 50 games, some of them rough ones, to learn his craft. I'd rather he take them now, when we're not a premiership threat, than in 2011, when we might just be.

And had you answered before or did you just have a heap of generalisations and say nothing?

I've made my point five times. I can't be help accountable for the brick wall I'm talking to. Anyway, it's an internet forum and we're talking opinions here. There's plenty of evidence in the real world that suggests what I'm talking about here. We're not in a court of law and I'm not a doctor. I don't need to be. I'm not answering to anyone important here.

The Sylvia point was highlighting how far off the standard the other two are. A simple point I would have thought. Obviously not simple enough for you.

Plenty simple. I'm having a serious discussion though. If you want to take pissweak passive aggressive shots at posters, have fun at bigfooty.

First we have:

"That's exactly what you can do. It's proven that you're more likely to suffer soft tissue AND impact injuries while fatigued."

Where has it been proven, or are you making things up to help your argument?

See above. Or take the simple answer. It's common sense.

Evidence? Where? or are you making this up to help your argument?

Like I said. I'm not going to quote stats to support a statement like "overworking a player leads to injury." That's like asking for evidence that eating a lot of food will cause you to take a big dump. Or drinking too much will make you throw up.

What is it with internet forums? You make a simple to understand, run of the mill statement, and suddenly all the Phds on here feel the need for it to have evidence submitted in triplicate?

BTW why are the AFL considering limiting interchanges to slow the game down due to worries over soft tissue injuries?

Ummm. Yes. The game is getting too quick, and players are dropping. Not in plague-like numbers, but enough for it to affect the game. Hence the idea that Jamar is at SOME risk.

The same, as you say, could be said for the midfielders. ie, if we don't have that extra rotation then THEY will suffer more from exhaustion. I don't buy that though. Having ONE extra ruckman to go with the one you already have will be more beneficial that having one extra midfielder to go with the 6 or 7 that would already be rotating through the guts, along with any small forwards that can pinch-hit.

Also, if we start suffering because we have one less midfielder, then the fix is not to rob Peter to pay Paul. You have to select mature players who can run the game out with the rotations they already have... IMO, we're not starved in that area. Not at this stage. If we do get to a stage where they're struggling? Then fine. For a week or two, if the matchups work out that way, Jamar could ruck alone. Just not all year FFS.

Wasn't that Daniher's plan? A lone ruckman. That's why Jolly left and why we got rid of SImmonds.....and why Jamar took so long to develop!!!

I would say that Simmonds and Jolly miiiiiight have had more currency than any of our backups though.

[e25 5]

A spate of injuries to midfielders?

Talking about Roo's hammy, Kerr's and then Gibson's.

Have you noticed how since then there have been ZERO recurrences of this particular injury?

That's because they were overhyped coincidences.

There is no "evidence", save for the evidence that refutes your argument.

[e25 5]

Some people are really over rating Spencer. He is Horrible. He will not be our No.1 ruck ever! Will struggle to be on a AFL list next year

you know, it looks like you went back 3 years, found a common post about Jamar, then changed the name to Spencer.

Get my drift..?

[Rogue 585]

Dappa Dan, I seem to have a couple of problems with your argument.

First, you state that we should be playing a second ruck 'because it's a development year', and you seem to be making the argument that we should thus get games into rucks.

However, if we play a second ruckman, who will that ruck be taking a spot from? It's likely to be someone else we'd also like to get games into (ie. Jetta).

The other point is that playing a few minutes a quarter in the ruck isn't, IMO, particularly good for development. In fact, my contention is that a guy like Spencer is going to learn more playing number one ruck for Casey than he is benchwarming for us and only playing say 20% game time in the ruck.

I think the idea that Spencer is going to learn more from Jamar by playing with him is odd, given that your own conception of the ruck duo is that it would allow Jamar to rest. That means that Jamar is going to be getting a leg massage on the boundary while Spencer is on the field, doesn't it? Even if Jamar was also on the ground, how is he going to help Spencer? This seems a bit odd to me.

Second, you state that Jamar is likely to get injured because of over-work.

Implicit in this seems to be the idea that if we don't play a second ruckman, Jamar rucks 100% of the time. That's clearly not true. Either a second ruckman takes some of the ruck (probably more than we/Jamar would like just because we have a second ruck and feel the need to utilise him as a ruck) or that 20% or so of ruck time will be taken by a pinch-hit ruckman (ie. Newton, Dunn, etc).

Furthermore, as your own figured show, it's not 'overwork' in a game time sense that leads to injuries - you've mentioned midfielders, and they are rotated heavily these days.

I contend that unless we're playing Jamar when he's not fit enough to play, he's at no greater risk of injury by rucking alone than he would be otherwise (if we ignore common sense understandings that playing more does increase risk - ie. if you play 88% of the game you are exposing yourself to double the chance of an injury just by being out there etc).

As an aside, I think the idea that you do need a ruck 'duo' made up of two bona fide ruckman is something that can be challenged. I don't think it's necessarily the case that one decent pinch-hit plus one number one ruck is the way to go, but a reasonable case can be mounted for this approach.

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

if we play a second ruckman, who will that ruck be taking a spot from? It's likely to be someone else we'd also like to get games into (ie. Jetta).

True. But then there's 22 spots in the team. IMO 2 ruckmen have to be blooded. One is a confirmed ruckmen, the other is yet to be found. This is simply a difference of opinion. In mine, if we're to be taken seriously, 1 ruckman won't cut it for long. So for you, you say Jetta misses out on a game. For me, I say Spencer misses out on experience. It's the same both ways.

The other point is that playing a few minutes a quarter in the ruck isn't, IMO, particularly good for development.

I'm not talking about playing a PJ-like 5 minutes a quarter. I want to see Spencer given starting duties, then playing 40% in the guts. Jamar can go forward for what portion of time he can, while the other KP forwards take a breather. If it doesn't work at first, so be it. Better to have him warm to the role now. Also, I'd like to see Spencer given a good honest run in a secondary role, which is something he'll need to do.

In fact, my contention is that a guy like Spencer is going to learn more playing number one ruck for Casey than he is benchwarming for us and only playing say 20% game time in the ruck.

Good point, though I think Jamar and Spencer in the same side is important, and I'll explain below.

I think the idea that Spencer is going to learn more from Jamar by playing with him is odd, given that your own conception of the ruck duo is that it would allow Jamar to rest. That means that Jamar is going to be getting a leg massage on the boundary while Spencer is on the field, doesn't it? Even if Jamar was also on the ground, how is he going to help Spencer? This seems a bit odd to me.

While he's getting said leg massage, he'll be watching Spencer. Jamar can offer a LOT of support and education/experience/know how/tricks, and is by all accounts a sensational team-man. There'd be no better ruck coach at the club, I reckon, than Mark. He can really get in Spencer's ear on the bench, at half time, in the huddles. Spencer is SO green, the learning curve with Mark there to pull his game apart would be a lot steeper with a team-mate helping out. Kind of like when White was on the decline, he would spend a lo of time chatting with his young-uns.

You're right that they can't contend the ball ups together. But being in the same team as Mark, as opposed to playing at Casey miles away, I'm CERTAIN will give him more knowledge. Your point is well made though... However I would contend that playing SOME time in the AFL would teach him more than WHOLE games at Casey, where the ruck opposition can be variable...

Implicit in this seems to be the idea that if we don't play a second ruckman, Jamar rucks 100% of the time. That's clearly not true.

When there's no career ruckman, he plays close to 90% I reckon. At least 80% anyway (I never mentioned the 100% figure... only that he's the only winning ruckman, and so gets rushed on the ground at times when he could be rested further/play forward). Whatever the percentage it's enough to leave him staggering by the end of the game. And furthermore he's not given much of a chance up forward to show his wares. Unbelievable that he got to the contest, let alone took the almost mark on the weekend. Also after the point went through, Trengove is sprinting up the ground to get to block the next Port attack. Jamar is only strolling. I'd have liked to see our big ruckman get to CHB to contest a mark, or head to the last line. Hard to run the full length when you're THAT stuffed.

Furthermore, as your own figured show, it's not 'overwork' in a game time sense that leads to injuries - you've mentioned midfielders, and they are rotated heavily these days.

Of course not. It's overwork/fatigue over the space of a season. Wear and tear on joints. Slow burn sorts of damage... But then in the immediate sense if he's tired, he's more likely to stumble, cause collision his body isn't in position for, and could collect a sensitive area. That's always been my understanding of the "impact" part of fatigue-related injuries. When you're THAT buggered, you often zig when you were supposed to zag.

I contend that unless we're playing Jamar when he's not fit enough to play, he's at no greater risk of injury by rucking alone than he would be otherwise

And that's a fair enough contention. Plenty of logic in there. But then there's plenty of logic in mine. Neither is proven fact... and neither has been proven wrong. I take the position that... given an honest chance at a flag... test him. Play him the most out of everyone. At least you don't die wondering what would have happened had you NOT played PJ in a losing final.

But in a year when everyone seems to have forgotten that we're still developing? What if he does do a big injury? Call me paranoid if you want. I call it a simple case of risk management.

As an aside, I think the idea that you do need a ruck 'duo' made up of two bona fide ruckman is something that can be challenged. I don't think it's necessarily the case that one decent pinch-hit plus one number one ruck is the way to go, but a reasonable case can be mounted for this approach.

Yeah. Again this is an area we're going to find polarises 'land posters, just as it does us. Those that want to see us win games with all that extra leg speed will advocate Jamar on his own, because we get premiership points. Those on the other side are the "what if" crowd, like me...

What if Jamar twists his ankle on the day and is less effective/can't jump/benched for the last 3 quarters? No backup on the day = we lose all our effectiveness in the ruck, as Dunn/Miller/Davey would be doing the ruckwork.

What if Jamar goes down for the season (not from exhaustion necessarily, just bad luck)? We have PJ + a bunch of ruckmen who have negligible experience. They'd probably play PJ...

This approach we're going with is great when it works. But in the football year, bad stuff will happen. What then? I think having a backup in every position (ie depth) is massively important to the longevity and, in the end, ladder position of a side going into a season. The Hawks are a really good football side with ZERO ruckmen at the moment. Look what's happening there?

Good discussion here Rogue. And for what it's worth I don't know that either of us are wrong or right. Certainly I think you're being fair when you claim the ruck duo set up is one that can be challenged. Likewise it's true that under adversity (injury) the duo setup will limit the damage you suffer. Safe option vs risky... Glad I'm not the footy department.

[rpfc 27,590]

I frequently miss your point, DD, behind the wall of text.

Pithyness is a virtue.

I would love to develop a second ruckman. But we do not have one that demands an AFL game, let alone 40% of AFL game time.

We are in a development year. You don't need to tell me that, I knew that when most on here thought it was Bailey's 'D-Year'.

But there are limitations to even a year like this and bringing in a ruck who hasn't got the form, and who would be playing so little time doesn't cut it with me.

There's development, and then there is development for developments sake.

BTW, Jetta needs games as well, and he is earning his.

[MadAsHell 4,088]

I still reckon the answer is Martin to play at CHB and relieve Jamar in the ruck when he needs a spell, this of course would mean not playing Rivers which I think is the best thing for the team structure.

With already having Warnock, Frawley and Garland in defence, and Morton and Bruce who can go back there when Martin is needed in the ruck, this would be the best way for Melbourne to afford Jamar some relief without taking to much away from their running as the change is only Martin in for Rivers.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, Gawn is our long term prospect for the no 1 ruck and Fitzpatrick will be our long term no 2 ruckman who will mainly play forward but with the ability to go back also if needed.

[e25 5]

Just on Jamar: has any player gone from most-maligned to virtually most-loved, like he has?

I can only of Richo, but no Melbourne players.

What he has been doing this season and even late last season have been herculean efforts.

If I had the opportunity to carry him around on my shoulders, I would.

[rusty_kingswood 0]

Mark Jamar would eat nails for breakfast and ask for seconds. He does not get tired. In Russia, ruckman rests you. I wouldn't worry.

Hahahaha...nice.

[Rod Grinter Riot Squad 5,636]

Besides. Who says I need "evidence?" It's common sense! Overwork a footballer and you may end up with Crawford... ie, a player who works hard and only seems to gather momentum. Overwork other players and you end up with a Sylvia situation. It's not ironclad that he's going to get hurt... it's a RISK. One I'd be willing to take if we were some chance at a top-4 spot... but we're not.

I've made my point five times. I can't be help accountable for the brick wall I'm talking to. Anyway, it's an internet forum and we're talking opinions here. There's plenty of evidence in the real world that suggests what I'm talking about here. We're not in a court of law and I'm not a doctor. I don't need to be. I'm not answering to anyone important here.

Plenty simple. I'm having a serious discussion though. If you want to take pissweak passive aggressive shots at posters, have fun at bigfooty.

See above. Or take the simple answer. It's common sense.

Like I said. I'm not going to quote stats to support a statement like "overworking a player leads to injury." That's like asking for evidence that eating a lot of food will cause you to take a big dump. Or drinking too much will make you throw up.

What is it with internet forums? You make a simple to understand, run of the mill statement, and suddenly all the Phds on here feel the need for it to have evidence submitted in triplicate?

Ummm. Yes. The game is getting too quick, and players are dropping. Not in plague-like numbers, but enough for it to affect the game. Hence the idea that Jamar is at SOME risk.

The same, as you say, could be said for the midfielders. ie, if we don't have that extra rotation then THEY will suffer more from exhaustion. I don't buy that though. Having ONE extra ruckman to go with the one you already have will be more beneficial that having one extra midfielder to go with the 6 or 7 that would already be rotating through the guts, along with any small forwards that can pinch-hit.

Answered the question 5 times? No, you hadn't said who you'd play when I posed the question.

There's a case to be made for using an undersized back up for a few minutes a quarter rather than wasting a spot on the list for someone who will contribute nothing. The point was made and you dismiss it with scorn. Then you have the nerve to whinge about "pissweak passive aggressive shots". What an amazing hypocrit!

No need for evidence to be submitted in triplicate, but if one is to quote the evidence, then supply it.

Unless of course you are making it up to support your argument, which obviously you are.

[Inner Demon 1]

Just a thought to temper the whole "We must prioritise development of a #2 ruckman" drive. This concept seems to assume that our 82 game #1 ruckman, Mark Jamar, has suddenly become fully developed.

We're talking about a guy who was in and out of the team as recently as 2008, managed 6 quality games in 2009 in an injury-ruined year and is just 9 games into what is effectively his breakout season. He has tonnes of development still to do as a ruckman. He is going very, very nicely, but he needs to keep that up for another couple of full seasons to really establish himself and get Sandilands/Cox type consistency in his game. Don't worry about rushing to develop our #2 ruckman, let's get our #1 ruckman there.

[Rogue 585]

While he's getting said leg massage, he'll be watching Spencer. Jamar can offer a LOT of support and education/experience/know how/tricks, and is by all accounts a sensational team-man. There'd be no better ruck coach at the club, I reckon, than Mark. He can really get in Spencer's ear on the bench, at half time, in the huddles. Spencer is SO green, the learning curve with Mark there to pull his game apart would be a lot steeper with a team-mate helping out. Kind of like when White was on the decline, he would spend a lo of time chatting with his young-uns.

You're right that they can't contend the ball ups together. But being in the same team as Mark, as opposed to playing at Casey miles away, I'm CERTAIN will give him more knowledge. Your point is well made though...

Come on. If an argument for having Spencer in the team is that Jamar can pay attention to what Spencer is doing while the Russian's having a breather and then give him tips this Club - and the match committee - is in all sorts of trouble.

However I would contend that playing SOME time in the AFL would teach him more than WHOLE games at Casey, where the ruck opposition can be variable...

When Spencer is smashing it at VFL level you'll have a point, but by all reports he's not.

It seems like Spencer has plenty to learn about rucking and footy, and I think getting plenty of game time at Casey - despite not having the brilliant observations that would come while Jamar was having a rest - is a good place to do that for now. I'm sure it'll be an easier place to develop a second string to his bow, which he'll need if he's not going to overtake Jamar for a numero uno ruck role.

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

Sorry. Missed this thread over the weekend. I'll make this my last post here as it's getting ridiculous, and the point has been made, and missed over and over. Any further issues, feel free to PM.

Pithyness is a virtue.

Apologies. I'll work on it.

There's development, and then there is development for developments sake.

And THIS is where we differ. I'm ALL FOR development for developments sake. In fact, that statement describes the approach by the ENTIRE CLUB to seasons 2008 and 2009! I am looking SOLELY at 2011 and beyond. I don't care one bit about wins this year. Not one bit. And my MAJOR stress with this side (behind forwards) is a backup ruckman. I think it's the one vulnerability we have that has the potential to wreak havoc should the worst happen to Jamar. Form or no form, we MUST find a backup. And in my opinion (not yours, and that's fine) it comes in doing what they've done for the last 3 years. Play the kids even when they're not winning their position. The learning curve is huge.

BTW, Jetta needs games as well, and he is earning his.

That's a matter of opinion. But again, the point is moot. He's not a ruckman. I don't think Neville would ever look at one of the ruckman and say "that bastard, he took my spot." No-one said dropping him would be an easy decision. Actually, I never mentioned Jetta. You did. Your point is made though.

Answered the question 5 times? No, you hadn't said who you'd play when I posed the question.

Oh Jesus. I did mate. Have a closer look. My answer was Spencer. Failing that Martin. That's six.

There's a case to be made for using an undersized back up for a few minutes a quarter rather than wasting a spot on the list for someone who will contribute nothing. The point was made and you dismiss it with scorn. Then you have the nerve to whinge about "pissweak passive aggressive shots". What an amazing hypocrit!

You've lost me there. I approach the questions head on. Nothing pissweak or passive about it. And yes, there's a case, sure. I don't happen to agree... But I'm not picking apart your "case."

No need for evidence to be submitted in triplicate, but if one is to quote the evidence, then supply it.

Again. I've been through this, and now the simple act of answering your question, with said evidence, is met with scorn by other posters for the length of my posts. If you can't understand SIMPLE things like - Injuries have occurred this year because of overwork, and that no "evidence" should be needed when it comes to common sense... then I can't help you.

Unless of course you are making it up to support your argument, which obviously you are.

Obviously? Obviously?! I'd ask for evidence, but again, it's like banging my head against a brick wall with you. I would suggest you show me where I've made ANYTHING up. But that's going round in circles yet again, with you. So I'm done.

Come on. If an argument for having Spencer in the team is that Jamar can pay attention to what Spencer is doing while the Russian's having a breather and then give him tips this Club - and the match committee - is in all sorts of trouble.

Mate, that's not the only argument I made. You were asking how he stood to learn. I said he'll learn plenty by playing in the same side as Jamar, being able to discuss opponents on the day in the huddle, bonding. It's not the whole picture, but it's something. Certainly something to consider. It has worked for Watts and Miller (I know, I know, different positions... can play in tandem), and it worked for White's last few years when Jamar and PJ were his understudies. Whenever I've played in team sports in divisions, I learned more from team-mates than club-mates in the 3rds, 2nds, or 1sts above me.

It seems like Spencer has plenty to learn about rucking and footy, and I think getting plenty of game time at Casey - despite not having the brilliant observations that would come while Jamar was having a rest - is a good place to do that for now. I'm sure it'll be an easier place to develop a second string to his bow, which he'll need if he's not going to overtake Jamar for a numero uno ruck role.

Each to their own. Like I said, personally I would like to see him learn those strings in the AFL. I have concerns over the gulf between the two leagues. And unlike everyone else, I'm not concerned with our form, or as desperate for wins this year. I just hope he's not in the VFL for the WHOLE season, then is needed in 2011, without having had much more of a run this year. That's all. The steps he and Martin (or the other boys, if they ever show form post injury) take are my ONLY focus here. Disagree all you like... the idea of him working into form in the AFL is NOT ridiculous. It's worked for the other 21 on the list for the last 2 years. They were shocking.

[Rod Grinter Riot Squad 5,636]

Oh Jesus. I did mate. Have a closer look. My answer was Spencer. Failing that Martin. That's six.

Obviously? Obviously?! I'd ask for evidence, but again, it's like banging my head against a brick wall with you. I would suggest you show me where I've made ANYTHING up. But that's going round in circles yet again, with you. So I'm done.

My God you are either completely full of it or ....

I asked where had you said who your back up option would be before I posed the question.

Why don't you try look at the thread a bit closer and tell me that. You hadn't and are full of it.

The 'proof' and 'evidence' are also examples of this.

[GOLF 13]

And from this weekend, reports are that Spencer is injured.

We have 5 ruckmen on our list: Jamar, PJ, Meesen, Spencer and Gawn. Forget FitzPatrick, he's a forward. Three of these are out injured: Gawn (indefinite), Meesen (indefinite), Spencer (unknown). This is, I think, what is called "a parlous state", particularly when you take PJ's recent form into account.

We have a backline. We have a midfield that only needs more games to be great (bows towards Gsberts). We have a possible forward line in a year or two around Watts, Jurrah, FitzPatrick and maybe Morton. But we are on our base a**e bones for ruckmen. One serious injury to Jamar and we may well be putting our flag in peril.

[Keyser Söze 0]

And from this weekend, reports are that Spencer is injured.

We have 5 ruckmen on our list: Jamar, PJ, Meesen, Spencer and Gawn. Forget FitzPatrick, he's a forward. Three of these are out injured: Gawn (indefinite), Meesen (indefinite), Spencer (unknown). This is, I think, what is called "a parlous state", particularly when you take PJ's recent form into account.

We have a backline. We have a midfield that only needs more games to be great (bows towards Gsberts). We have a possible forward line in a year or two around Watts, Jurrah, FitzPatrick and maybe Morton. But we are on our base a**e bones for ruckmen. One serious injury to Jamar and we may well be putting our flag in peril.

You forgot Stefan Martin.

And if you're thinking of claiming he is not a ruckman you are dead wrong.

He's as much a ruckman as any of the 3 you mention as being injured.

[Rogue 585]

That's a matter of opinion. But again, the point is moot. He's not a ruckman. I don't think Neville would ever look at one of the ruckman and say "that bastard, he took my spot." No-one said dropping him would be an easy decision. Actually, I never mentioned Jetta. You did. Your point is made though.

Jetta might not think it, but that's the scenario we face [whether it's Jetta or someone else] in choosing a pinch-hit over a bona fide ruckman.

You either pick a second ruck or someone else gets their chance. At the moment there are other guys who we'd like to get games into, and are in better form, than Spencer, PJ and co.

And unlike everyone else, I'm not concerned with our form, or as desperate for wins this year.

Creating a strawman doesn't help your argument I think it's pretty clear that there are plenty of posters who are not desperate for wins!

Each to their own. Like I said, personally I would like to see him learn those strings in the AFL. I have concerns over the gulf between the two leagues.

Fair enough.