That's quite interesting.

I never knew the nature of Campbell's knee injury.

An infection after an arthroscope. Unlucky.

I have extremely limited medical knowledge, but I'd imagine that would bode well for the state of his knee.

Better than multiple reco's or a problematic LARS graft.

He may be more than the assistant coach I hoped for.

An interesting article from Campbell's home territory:

SALES PITCH MAKES CAMPBELL A DEMON

His Family are all DEMON's supporters...I like it.

He may be more than the assistant coach I hoped for.

I felt that way after reading that article too. Seems that besides some cobwebs to be blown out, there will be nothing stopping him from reaching his best form - career best if the stars really line up, given his age.

This news just seems to get better and better really.

Edit: Seems to be completely at odds with what's coming out of the Hawthorn camp (quotes from Pelchin et al) re: Campbell's knee. Still, even if the MFCSS's worst nightmare happens and his knee is a complete bust, I'm still very happy that we've given it a shot.

Who do you think will relieve Jamar in the ruck, in that case?

I agree, that is a problem, since our only 2 genuine options are pretty dump, in Martin and Newton.

There results in two options for next season that I can see:

1. Jamar once again will play many games as the only ruckman (95% game time in the ruck), and relieved for 2 minutes here or there by Dunn or Sylvia.

2. It also means there is a distinct possibility that Martin and Newton will get games next year out of necessity.

HOWEVER, this is far from ideale, and we really do need a better back-up option moving from from 2012 (hence why we went after Hale).

BUT, the good news is that we have been planning! We drafted Fitzpatrick last year and McDonald this year. Both these players are versatile talls, who will have the adaptability to play forward (or even defence), and relieve in the ruck. Hopefully one of these guys will be ready to step up in 2012.

Whatever happens, I am pretty certain that the new substitute rule has spelled the death of the 2nd genuine ruckman. There is no way you can justify having Jamar and Spenser in the starting team, both genuine ruckman, because it leaves you with only 2 running interchange players. The only way you could get Jamar and Spenser in the same team is if Jamar started playing 50%+ time in the forward line, which imo would be absolutely silly. The guy has just played his first All Australian season, which he did playing as a pure ruckman, and the very next season shift his position and role entirely. God I hope not.

cant be any worse then Meesen and it sound like he is doing better in the coaching side of things to !

bet he plays more games then meesen and that's in his first year.

so glad we got him looking forward to see how he goes compared to all those other names they said we would pick up like Hansen.

That's assuming he gets the free upgraded rookie spot at the start of the season. The order at the moment is Jamar, Spencer, (upgrade Campbell if both are injured), then... Gawn, Fitz.

What about Martin- he carried the rucks early in 2009 and also at the start of 2010 and doesn't even get a gurnsey with you.

I agree, that is a problem, since our only 2 genuine options are pretty dump, in Martin and Newton.

There results in two options for next season that I can see:

1. Jamar once again will play many games as the only ruckman (95% game time in the ruck), and relieved for 2 minutes here or there by Dunn or Sylvia.

2. It also means there is a distinct possibility that Martin and Newton will get games next year out of necessity.

HOWEVER, this is far from ideale, and we really do need a better back-up option moving from from 2012 (hence why we went after Hale).

BUT, the good news is that we have been planning! We drafted Fitzpatrick last year and McDonald this year. Both these players are versatile talls, who will have the adaptability to play forward (or even defence), and relieve in the ruck. Hopefully one of these guys will be ready to step up in 2012.

Whatever happens, I am pretty certain that the new substitute rule has spelled the death of the 2nd genuine ruckman. There is no way you can justify having Jamar and Spenser in the starting team, both genuine ruckman, because it leaves you with only 2 running interchange players. The only way you could get Jamar and Spenser in the same team is if Jamar started playing 50%+ time in the forward line, which imo would be absolutely silly. The guy has just played his first All Australian season, which he did playing as a pure ruckman, and the very next season shift his position and role entirely. God I hope not.

Well option 1 is potentially suicidal

Option 2 is on a wish and a prayer

You've convinced me Campbell (if his fitness/knee holds) is a good chance to change with Jamar (maybe 60/40) with rests mainly on the field (pref FWD for mine) with minimal bench time (say 90/10)

My 4c worth

Edited December 9, 201014 yr by daisycutter

I agree.

We only need someone to play at FF, contest in the air and bring the ball to ground.

Something that PJ and Newton have both somehow struggled with in recent times.

Interesting that last year we drafted 1 pure ruckman (Gawn) and 1 versatile tall (Fitzpatrick) and this year we drafted 1 pure ruckman (Campbell) and 1 versatile tall (McDonald).

The combination of 1 pure ruckman and 1 versatile tall is where the trend is headed. We've stocked up on 4 rucks in the past 2 years, so we've planned for the future and we should be right from 2012 onwards.

We do, however, have problems with the back up ruck position for 2011. That's the only reason we went for Hale. Hale being a pretty pathetic player (i'm thankful we didn't get him), he only filled a very short term need in the side.

I'm having trouble understanding what makes people think Campbell can play forward pocket/2nd ruck role forward any better than the options we already have on the list? He hasn't shown any form as a forward in his career at AFL level.

I'll say it again... 25 goals from 116 games, the majority of which were played as his sides premier ruckman (the "he played back" argument doesn't cut it for mine). To put that into perspective, PJ kicked 20 goals from 68 games, Newton 30 goals from 25 games.

He's a good 'pure' ruckman type, peanuts as a forward though...

Tbh i would have preferred Hale (eew i feel dirty), as at least we know he can play as a marking forward at least adequately (or at least his goal average suggests so).

As far as a low risk insurance policy for Jamar i'm wrapped with the pick. Just don't see how both he and Jamar will play in the same side, ever.

Here's hoping Martin can recapture some of that form and potential he showed earlier in his career and really step up next year as the 2nd ruck/forward option, or even (more likely) as a defender who can chop Jamar out in the ruck.

Edited December 9, 201014 yr by Doggo

I'm having trouble understanding what makes people think Campbell can play forward pocket/2nd ruck role forward any better than the options we already have on the list? He hasn't shown any form as a forward in his career at AFL level.

I'll say it again... 25 goals from 116 games, the majority of which were played as his sides premier ruckman (the "he played back" argument doesn't cut it for mine). To put that into perspective, PJ kicked 20 goals from 68 games, Newton 30 goals from 25 games.

He's a good 'pure' ruckman type, peanuts as a forward though...

Tbh i would have preferred Hale (eew i feel dirty), as at least we know he can play as a marking forward at least adequately (or at least his goal average suggests so).

As far as a low risk insurance policy for Jamar i'm wrapped with the pick. Just don't see how both he and Jamar will play in the same side, ever.

Here's hoping Martin can recapture some of that form and potential he showed earlier in his career and really step up next year as the 2nd ruck/forward option, or even (more likely) as a defender who can chop Jamar out in the ruck.

• Having Campbell/Jamar deep in the fwd line (90% of time) is going to keep one opposition gorilla occupied and away from key fwds
  
• Provide more physicality and protection for young developing fwds
  
• Bring ball to ground for crumbers more often
  
• Potentially provide 2 goals per game collectively
  
• Allow Jamar to spend less time on ball avoiding over-exposure and burn-out
  
• Have a genuine relieving ruckman making midfield more effective
  

All this assumes Campbell is injury free and up to AFL fitness levels

Of course I could just be dreaming and getting carried away

People should remember that the new substitute role has undoubtably spelled the death of the second ruckman,

You can't have 2 big lumbering ruckman, when one sits a lot on the bench, leaving only 2 players to rotate. Until they get rid of the rule, it will be one genuine ruckman + one mobile tall (Leigh Brown style).

I will be shocked to see Jamar ever picked alongside Gawn, Campbell or Spenser next year.

I dont think as a rule will see a ruck resting on the bench but rather in a position on field.

We will see more inventive solutions with Ruck/Forwards or Ruck/Backs.

For example why wouldn't you play 2 big men, one who can fill a forward position and another who can fill a back position each being given responsiblity for either end of the ground to spread the load. No need to bench them.

I can see some really interesting tactics developing here that will cause grief to other sides especially if the ruck men are changing in different positions.

Edited December 9, 201014 yr by Robbie57

Interesting that last year we drafted 1 pure ruckman (Gawn) and 1 versatile tall (Fitzpatrick) and this year we drafted 1 pure ruckman (Campbell) and 1 versatile tall (McDonald).

The combination of 1 pure ruckman and 1 versatile tall is where the trend is headed. We've stocked up on 4 rucks in the past 2 years, so we've planned for the future and we should be right from 2012 onwards.

We do, however, have problems with the back up ruck position for 2011. That's the only reason we went for Hale. Hale being a pretty pathetic player (i'm thankful we didn't get him), he only filled a very short term need in the side.

You are dreaming!

2012?

Rucks recruited as teens will take 5 years on average or not come on at all.

They are long term decisions.

And by long term - I don't mean three years...

I dont think as a rule will see a ruck resting on the bench but rather in a position on field.

We will see more inventive solutions with Ruck/Forwards or Ruck/Backs.

For example why wouldn't you play 2 big men, one who can fill a forward position and another who can fill a back position each being given responsiblity for either end of the ground to spread the load. No need to bench them.

I can see some really interesting tactics developing here that will cause grief to other sides especially if the ruck men are changing in different positions.

I'm really interested to see how the game will evolve with this ruck dilemma.

Remember, our opposition also has the problem of trying to "hide" their second ruckman somewhere.

I see no problem using a bloke like Dunn if the opposition is using someone of the same ilk to oppose him in the ruck, but I don't believe this will happen.

Our options for the second ruck are now pretty varied..

We have used Sylvia and Dunn in the past and I note that Newton has been pushed towards that position in the latter part of last year. I don't like Newton as a player but he has been more effective in a second ruck role than a forward.

Add in Martin who is still learning the game, and who can play in defence and is not the write-off that some seem to think then I think we have an incredibly flexible line-up. All this without considering at Gawn, Fitzpatrick, Spencer and Campbell.

It seems to be the hallmark of DB that he demands players must be adaptable.

Versatility is something Bailey seems to have aimed for in rebuilding the list.