He'd be the second ruckman, altenating between the bench, the backline and the ruck. The fact that defenders clock up the largest portion of time on the ground out of any position suggests that it is not impossibly taxing to spend time in the backline as a ruckman.

Defenders don't usually have to spend 25% of the game covering the entire ground (and jumping as high as possible every few minutes) on top of their work in defence, though. A ruckman spending time as a defender would be a very heavy workload. That's probably why no clubs have a player who plays this role despite it sounding like a good idea in theory.

Defenders don't usually have to spend 25% of the game covering the entire ground (and jumping as high as possible every few minutes) on top of their work in defence, though. A ruckman spending time as a defender would be a very heavy workload. That's probably why no clubs have a player who plays this role despite it sounding like a good idea in theory.

It really is purely theoretical as to how tired a player would get performing the role I'm suggesting, but one of the reasons it isn't tried is that most ruckman simply have no idea how to be a defender. Stef Martin does, and we've seen during mid-2011 how giving him a lot of responsibility has led to his best ever patch of football. Also, I would imagine he'd be spending more like 10% of the game in the ruck. Perhaps Jamar isn't up to rucking 90% of the game anymore, but in his break-out year in 2010, that's about how much of the work he was doing.

Edited April 14, 201213 yr by Chook

Can you get away with 3 Ruckmen/Forward types in modern day AFL football especially with the 3/1 sub rule?

At some stage do you have to bite the bullet and only have 2 Ruck/Forwards?

Are you not just massively impacting your mid-field running rotations ability - so in reality your mid-field runners will fatigue quicker - because we are one rotation down.

Look I accept North were unlucky to lose but you have to wonder - if it wont work with Petrie, Goldstein & MacIntosh - where will it work?

Just a thought.

Don't play the requisite number of talls to help out the mids.

Does this make the Mids Stronger, Or, Weaker???

Having Jamar or Martin resting forward is a waste of time when neither can kick straight. I'm not confident when either one of them mark the ball even 15 m from goal.

Don't play the requisite number of talls to help out the mids.

Does this make the Mids Stronger, Or, Weaker???

I'm sorry I dont understand what you are asking.

Having Jamar or Martin resting forward is a waste of time when neither can kick straight. I'm not confident when either one of them mark the ball even 15 m from goal.

I agree - think it should be a surprise/mis-match tactic not as part of our standard set-up. Its just not working.

When your only playing two of the there you are talking about as a ruck, yes you can. Unless of course two of the three dont perform.

When your only playing two of the there you are talking about as a ruck, yes you can.

Yeah but is that not the problem - Clark can play well as a forward yet our mid-field gets smashed. Jamar can compete and beat his man - yet our mid-field runners run out of gas.

I suggest we need to choose 1 ruckman who is backed by a ruck forward. ie Jamar 70% ruck time Clark 30% ruck time - then we need more mids to rotate.

Since Clark has been the only effective forward option Im not sure that would work. We might improve delivery but at a cost of not having an effective competitors in the forward 50 30% of the time.

The biggest issue with Martin resting as a defender is under pressure from good sides he becomes Warnock or Bartram like. It might be a stop gap option but it isn't sustainable so I don't see the point.

Simply I think we need a first string ruckman (Jamar, Gawn, ?Spencer), ideally a second ruck who can play forward (? Martin, ?Sellar, ? Fitzpatrick) and then at least 1 other tall forward (Clark). We are lucky that when they are in the team and playing well we could probably get away with just one key forward in Clark and use mobile (that's important) medium forwards like Jurrah and Howe.

At the moment I think Sellar offers more than Martin. He is more predictable in the air for marking or bring the ball to ground and leads better as a forward than Martin. He's not much chop as ruck but neither is Martin. At this stage Martin has battled into the season and the best option for him is to go back to Casey and play 50/50 forward and ruck so he gets his confidence up. Once he finds his touch again he'll come back and potentially be a bonus for the team.

Stef is like Miller - occasionally you get sucked into believing he has taken the next step and then he has another bad patch. I hope Im wrong and I think he did better work in the ruck than as a forward, although he can be a reliable kick off a set shot.

Frees up Frawley to do what? Frawley does fine at being an attacking option and a checking defender at the same time. I don't think he'd "attack more" if he had a lesser opponent.

If Sellar makes a better forward than Martin, then Sellar should be the ruckman/forward (assuming he's competent in the ruck), and Martin should be out of the side.

Sellar played as a ruck/forward.

I didn't see anyone mentioning how Martin was just a basketballer and not a footballer through his purple patch last year when Jamar was out. I know he's not playing well at the moment, but how short are our memories? He's not without hope of redemption like you and others imply.

If Jamar is injured i wouldn't mind Martin rucking all day, like last year, but give him an opponent in the back or forward line and he's of little value. Martin has been terrible and I can't see why you would persist with him if they are the only options.

Martin lacks mongrel and big men need a bit of that, unless they are exceptional talents like Kruezer.

Im sorry guys but at this stage i would drop Jamar and keep Martin as the number 1 ruck for the next 3 years. Then Gawn will take the job. Jamar is well down on form and i know martin is too like half our team but age is everything going forward right now and jamar is getting to slow for AFL and cant see him getting back to 2010 but i can see Martin playing as the number 1 ruck like lastyear really well Martin has more upside then Jamar in my eyes IMO.

Jamar would be great trade bait for the right team.

Edited April 15, 201213 yr by BIG JIM

Im sorry guys but at this stage i would drop Jamar and keep Martin as the number 1 ruck for the next 3 years. Then Gawn will take the job. Jamar is well down on form and i know martin is too like half our team but age is everything going forward right now and jamar is getting to slow for AFL and cant see him getting back to 2010 but i can see Martin playing as the number 1 ruck like lastyear really well Martin has more upside then Jamar in my eyes IMO.

Jamar would be great trade bait for the right team.

That's the Bailey route and its a massive mistake. Jamar isn't in great touch but their were times when he was right on top of Maric on the weekend and he took a few nice marks around the ground. Whenever we put Martin in the ruck we lost our ascendancy. A struggling Jamar is way above a battling Martin who has never looked like a true AFL ruck.

That's the Bailey route and its a massive mistake. Jamar isn't in great touch but their were times when he was right on top of Maric on the weekend and he took a few nice marks around the ground. Whenever we put Martin in the ruck we lost our ascendancy. A struggling Jamar is way above a battling Martin who has never looked like a true AFL ruck.

I have got to say thats not true in my eyes Martin was more then good lastyear when Jamar was out and we need some good picks come the end of this year and Jamar would bring a good player in for the right trade. GWS would love Jamar could be a good trade there. Jamar will not be there when we are going for the 13th cup. That will be Martin or Gawn so lets trade Jamar for a good running mid.

We should probably drop Martin, leave Jamar for almost all of the rucking (He's shown to have done that well in the past). And use Sellar/Clark as relief (as they have both played important roles in the ruck at their old clubs)

I was pleasantly surprised with Sellar on Saturday - didn't do a lot but provided contests up forward and rucked OK.

Martin, of whom I am a great fan, is starting to look like a man without a role. Unless IMO he can find a spot down back he will become a back-up jack of all trades and master of none, which would be a waste. Maybe Garland could be moved up to a wing leaving Stef a KPP spot down back - he is athletic enough and reads the play well, and did well there in his first years I think when Garland was injured. Garlo is struggling against the bigger forwards.

I'm going to bump this thread - I'm convinced we cant play Clark, Jamar, Martin & Sellar all in the same side - its killing us.

Sorry Dr, I totally disagree, and I harp on similar discussion each and every year.

Premiership sides generally have 2 rucks and 2 key forwards. Let's look at Geelong, the have West and Stephenson as rucks, and Hawkins and Pods as forwards. Collingwood generally play Jolly and anotehr ruck (was Woods the other night), and they have Dawes and Cloke forward. Hawthorn in 2008 had Campbell and Renouf in the ruck, Buddy and Roughy in the forward line.

It is why I also say to my Carlton supporting mates that they will struggle to win a flag this year. They have Kreuzer and Hampson in the ruck, but onbly have Waite up forward. They need to get Warnock in to that team, and perhaps have Kruezer or Hampson playing that 2md KPF role. Andrew Walker isn't it, and I strongly believe they won't win a flag until this issue is rectified.

The issue in your posts is more about the quality of the players you mentioned. I firmly believe that Rivers and Sellar should be competing for the same spot, especially now that Tommy Mc is holding his own in the firsts. I have absolutely no concern with our backline, and still beleive it's one of the better ones in the league (they get plenty of practice!). Our "big 4" will be Jamar (or perhaps Gawn) and Martin in ruck, Clark and Watts forward, then we will be getting close to push for a flag. At the moment, Watts isn't ready to demand that 2nd tall option, but it's coming. Hopefully by the time that arrives, we will have a mdifeld that can win its own footy and our inside 50 count increases dramatically.

Agreed. Martin also is not a forward and should be put in the backline and given instructions not to be too daring when he gets the ball.

Given that we are averaging 18 blokes each week that aren't performing well, I don't think Martin in the forward line is the first issue we need to address. Let's get the ball down there on a regular basis first, then we'll see.

Jamar will not be there when we are going for the 13th cup. That will be Martin or Gawn so lets trade Jamar for a good running mid.

It's this sort of mentality that has resulted in the MFC having no experienced players to show OUR younger players the way. I don't want to be overly critical, but why trade Jamar to GWS and let him help their young list whilst we create yet another void of experience at the club... It's a mercencary approach, and we lost way too many senior players when Bailey came through, many of these were possibly warranted, but others not so... we can't do it again when the cupboard is so bare.

Premiership sides generally have 2 rucks and 2 key forwards. Let's look at Geelong, the have West and Stephenson as rucks, and Hawkins and Pods as forwards. Collingwood generally play Jolly and anotehr ruck (was Woods the other night), and they have Dawes and Cloke forward. Hawthorn in 2008 had Campbell and Renouf in the ruck, Buddy and Roughy in the forward line.

Not sure I buy the 'framework'. Yes there's a number of instances where you can pick out a foursome (Lloyd, Lucas, Alessio, Barnes) (Lynch, Brown, Keating, McDonald??)...

It's an argument that can neither be won or lost - i.e. Almost every half-decent team has two bigger forwards, and two rucks...how about Brogan, Giles, Folau, Cameron (GWS "Big Four" Week 3)?

We need to play the best side, persisting with Sellar/Martin seems to me a dead-end. They play an identical role, and Sellar, while he tries hard is about half as coordinated and half as capable as Martin is

Not sure I buy the 'framework'. Yes there's a number of instances where you can pick out a foursome (Lloyd, Lucas, Alessio, Barnes) (Lynch, Brown, Keating, McDonald??)...

It's an argument that can neither be won or lost - i.e. Almost every half-decent team has two bigger forwards, and two rucks...how about Brogan, Giles, Folau, Cameron (GWS "Big Four" Week 3)?

We need to play the best side, persisting with Sellar/Martin seems to me a dead-end. They play an identical role, and Sellar, while he tries hard is about half as coordinated and half as capable as Martin is

Having 4 players to play those roles doesn't assure success, but I think without them, you're well behind the 8-ball.

As I stated in my post, for the big 4 to work at any club, you need to have a good midfield. Hopefully by the time Watts is playing consistently as our bigger forward, we will have a midfield to match it.

It is a big balancing act, we need better midfielders in our team, but if we have them and not the big 4, history shows that you struggle winning flags.

I'm sorry I dont understand what you are asking.

I'm talking about, do you make the mids stronger & work harder, by taking out a Tall, so another medium sized player can be used to provide more run & pressure, or does this hinder the Mids from learning to work harder & get fitter themselves?

Stef is like Miller - occasionally you get sucked into believing he has taken the next step and then he has another bad patch. I hope Im wrong and I think he did better work in the ruck than as a forward, although he can be a reliable kick off a set shot.

I think you could point that finger @ 3/4trs of the side at the moment.

Martin like all the players in the side, including the Captains, is struggling for confidence.

Watching games at the ground is the only way to get a handle on height match ups. In the Brisbane game we were obviously too short in one of the match ups at all times. Rivers just gets crucified by taking a player thats too big for him. Garland is starting to have the same problem. Either Martin or Sellar have to be trained to be a backman or permanent forward if they are to both have a future role. I would prefer Martin down back as he has a bit of speed to link up down the ground. I think that Neeld is still experimenting with all the talls and probably costing us games in the meantime. Gawn is hopefully going to be our main ruckman in time (fingers crossed) and Spencer is still in the mix. Its just going to take time to sort out who's going to make i and who isn't.

Watching games at the ground is the only way to get a handle on height match ups. In the Brisbane game we were obviously too short in one of the match ups at all times. Rivers just gets crucified by taking a player thats too big for him. Garland is starting to have the same problem. Either Martin or Sellar have to be trained to be a backman or permanent forward if they are to both have a future role. I would prefer Martin down back as he has a bit of speed to link up down the ground. I think that Neeld is still experimenting with all the talls and probably costing us games in the meantime. Gawn is hopefully going to be our main ruckman in time (fingers crossed) and Spencer is still in the mix. Its just going to take time to sort out who's going to make i and who isn't.

There is part of our problem we are plugging gaps with in betweeners.

Rivers is an in betweener, that just spreads the pressure elsewhere.

Others don't work hard enough, or do the tough stuff, Davey Sylvia, Beamer, Jurrah, Morton, Bennell... we have to stop excepting these things happening.