We are struggling with tall forwards and a second ruck. The obvious contenders are Miller, Martin and Johnson. Each could fill both positions. Miller is the third ruck option of these three. Johnson and Martin can both adequately fill the 2nd ruck and both can play forward even if it is well below what we dream of. Both do no worse than Miller on the forward line so I would chose one of them and rotate them through the ruck, the bench and forward line and especially in Martin's case down back when needed. Johnson has done OK down back in the past. Personally I think Martin is the best as he is more likely to have a future. Miller would surprise and disappoint most if he lasts this year. Johnson probably needs to be around for depth. Don't forget he carried the ruck in the first half of last year and did a servicable job. Martin has to stay as there is still to much up side to let someonther club grab him and develop him further.

We are struggling with tall forwards and a second ruck. The obvious contenders are Miller, Martin and Johnson. Each could fill both positions. Miller is the third ruck option of these three. Johnson and Martin can both adequately fill the 2nd ruck and both can play forward even if it is well below what we dream of. Both do no worse than Miller on the forward line so I would chose one of them and rotate them through the ruck, the bench and forward line and especially in Martin's case down back when needed. Johnson has done OK down back in the past. Personally I think Martin is the best as he is more likely to have a future. Miller would surprise and disappoint most if he lasts this year. Johnson probably needs to be around for depth. Don't forget he carried the ruck in the first half of last year and did a servicable job. Martin has to stay as there is still to much up side to let someonther club grab him and develop him further.

I still don't understand why martin isn't being played in defence. i've always thought he did really really well down in defence. I'd take him over Garland any day of the week.

I'm a great sympathiser with your opinion on Martin down back and believe we've lost games because we lacked his height down back. I'm not as negative about Garland but why he hasn't been tried forward beats me.

I still don't understand why martin isn't being played in defence. i've always thought he did really really well down in defence. I'd take him over Garland any day of the week.

Because we don't want a one dimensional Melbourne team that will never win a flag. Martin is a size as a defender where there won't allways be a matchup for him, so, he needs to learn to play as a forward mainly & pinch hit in the ruck, like Charman did. the fact that he can go back as well is a massive bonus, & possibly could be a match winning player.

We are struggling with tall forwards and a second ruck. The obvious contenders are Miller, Martin and Johnson. Each could fill both positions. Miller is the third ruck option of these three. Johnson and Martin can both adequately fill the 2nd ruck and both can play forward even if it is well below what we dream of. Both do no worse than Miller on the forward line so I would chose one of them and rotate them through the ruck, the bench and forward line and especially in Martin's case down back when needed. Johnson has done OK down back in the past. Personally I think Martin is the best as he is more likely to have a future. Miller would surprise and disappoint most if he lasts this year. Johnson probably needs to be around for depth. Don't forget he carried the ruck in the first half of last year and did a servicable job. Martin has to stay as there is still to much up side to let someonther club grab him and develop him further.

To say that Martin or Johnson do as much in the forward line as Miller is naive. Miller has been disappointing but his work ethic outstrips every other forward and easily covers a kid new to the game (Martin) and someone who wishes he was a foot smaller than he is (Johnson).

Johnson as depth is laughable considering what a second ruck, especially to a dominant Jamar, does during a match. This is why we don't play a second ruck - because there isn't a ruck in the top 30 players at the club and considering that most Hives albums go for longer than the time spent on the field by Jamar's understudy.

Edited June 10, 201015 yr by rpfc

Personally I think Martin's the man for the job at the moment. He should play at CHB for the majority of the match and play in the ruck when Jamar needs a spell. Having Martin play at CHB would require Rivers to go back to Casey but if it's for the good of the teams structure then so be it.

PJ wont be there beyond this year, next year if Jamar was to miss through injury then the FD would use the opportunity the throw Spencer in as our no 1 ruck.

As far as the future goes though Fitzpatrck will be the man to play at FF and then go into the ruck to relieve Jamar, Spencer or Gawn or whoever our no 1 ruck is at the time.

I still don't understand why martin isn't being played in defence. i've always thought he did really really well down in defence. I'd take him over Garland any day of the week.

No wonder the MFC Footy department play Garland. Garland takes a broader range of forwards than Martin can possibly do. I think you've rated Martin under your Newton theory.

To say that Martin or Johnson do as much in the forward line as Miller is naive. Miller has been disappointing but his work ethic outstrips every other forward and easily covers a kid new to the game (Martin) and someone who wishes he was a foot smaller than he is (Johnson).

Johnson as depth is laughable considering what a second ruck, especially to a dominant Jamar, does during a match. This is why we don't play a second ruck - because there isn't a ruck in the top 30 players at the club

All too true