Forward-Ruck and team balance

[old55 23,848]

I've been a big proponent of our need to recruit a forward-ruck.  Someone who can play mostly forward, go into the ruck and give Max a rest and possibly ruck well enough allow Max to go forward as a marking threat.  That means they'd be playing at least 60% game time forward so they'd need to be good there.

When I've thought about it further with our current personnel and team balance I don't think we could fit a forward-ruck together with Hogan, Weidemann and Watts forward.  We'd be too top heavy across the 22.  These players play 85%+ game time, so they'll all be on the field together a significant amount.  Bench rotation spots are best used for mids, half-backs and half-forwards.

I think we need to persist with Watts in the ruck and we should expect Weidemann to start to ruck also as his body matures.

[Fat Tony 5,322]

I am a fan of Watts playing the role. He is reasonable in the centre bounces and we can use a third man up around the ground where he gets out bodied. Watts also has good second efforts once the ball hits the deck and he is also far too mobile for his opponent around the ground.

This is not to say we should not nab a Jenkins, Lobb or Wright if they come cheaply and we should still look to continue to develop such a player. (Hopefully King.)

As you say, we cannot go with Hogan, Weideman, and Watts plus another tall.

[deanox 10,059]

I agree RE forward/ruck. In an ideal world one of your three tall forwards can ruck. Id still look to develop one in case Gawn gets injured or Hogan leaves. 

On a slightly different note, if actually like to see the AFL ban the third man up.  No rule change is necessary: if a third man goes up when the other two ruckmen are engaged in a physical contest for position, then a free kick should be paid for shepparding in the ruck, which is already illegal. Too often do we see one ruck only attempt to negate the other, allowing a free run from a third player and an easy HO to advantage. 

 

 

 

[Deevolution 103]

One option could be throwing Jesse back in certain games ( Think Neita in his early years) & Bring in another tall fwd/ ruck when needed for team balance, apart from that happy to see Jack pinch hitting.

[Ricky P 757]

1 hour ago, Fifty-5 said:

I've been a big proponent of our need to recruit a forward-ruck.  Someone who can play mostly forward, go into the ruck and give Max a rest and possibly ruck well enough allow Max to go forward as a marking threat.  That means they'd be playing at least 60% game time forward so they'd need to be good there.

When I've thought about it further with our current personnel and team balance I don't think we could fit a forward-ruck together with Hogan, Weidemann and Watts forward.  We'd be too top heavy across the 22.  These players play 85%+ game time, so they'll all be on the field together a significant amount.  Bench rotation spots are best used for mids, half-backs and half-forwards.

I think we need to persist with Watts in the ruck and we should expect Weidemann to start to ruck also as his body matures.

I agree with this. I haven't agreed with the push for recruiting a forward ruck. With Max as dominant as he is, anyone we recruit is barely going to get a look in, in the ruck. I don't mind Watts in the ruck, I reckon he goes pretty well and is pretty damaging as a midfielder once the ball hits the deck. Roos said he was concerned about the toll it may have on Watts' body but Watts doesn't get injured much and he's a fairly big bloke these days.  

People have probably answered this before, but does Hulett do any ruck work?

[hemingway 7,633]

I can understand the logic for team balance, but I don't favour Watts being used in the ruck, very much robbing Peter to pay Paul. He has a bigger frame these days but he is not huge. Like Roos, I just worry about the physical toll on his body and the heightened risk of injury. His mobility and pace, together with his marking skills leading up the ground and kicking accuracy make him our major weapon up forward. I would hate to see this sacrificed. However, it does not answer the question as to the best bet back-up for Max.  I really think that either we play Spencer or we clear him. He has been around a long time a la Jamar, and he is wasting away playing for Casey every week. Yes, I know that raises questions of team balance but some game time early in the season is warranted. 

[ManDee 7,352]

I know Vickery has few friends here, but at his best he has what we need.

[Wrecker45 3,378]

Max Gawn is arguably our most important player and certainly the player we can least avoid to lose through injury. Yet somehow I am always worried about Watts getting injured in the ruck.

 

[poita 3,929]

How is Pedersen not the player we want for this role, at least in the short term? He can ruck, he can play forward or back, and he has a big body that can take a fair amount of punishment. Next in line should be Spencer if he can develop his forward play to the point where he can make a contribution each week, even if he is not necessarily kicking a heap of goals.

Watts is too valuable to play ruck, and doesn't have the body strength to ruck around the ground against bigger opponents. I really don't see Weideman as an option long term either, for much the same reasons.

There is no doubt that Gawn needs support, but I don't see that we need to over complicate things.

[rjay 25,360]

58 minutes ago, ManDee said:

I know Vickery has few friends here, but at his best he has what we need.

Lazy, non competitive and can't ruck...not so sure about this 'Man'.

[Maldonboy38 6,420]

Zac Clarke? 

[KingDingAling 3,758]

1 hour ago, ManDee said:

I know Vickery has few friends here, but at his best he has what we need.

Vickery only fills the need on paper. On game day though he doesn't provide a target up forward, and is a very ordinary ruck man.

 

[Bluey's Dad 3,419]

1 hour ago, poita said:

How is Pedersen not the player we want for this role, at least in the short term? He can ruck, he can play forward or back, and he has a big body that can take a fair amount of punishment. Next in line should be Spencer if he can develop his forward play to the point where he can make a contribution each week, even if he is not necessarily kicking a heap of goals.

Watts is too valuable to play ruck, and doesn't have the body strength to ruck around the ground against bigger opponents. I really don't see Weideman as an option long term either, for much the same reasons.

There is no doubt that Gawn needs support, but I don't see that we need to over complicate things.

I assume because they don't want to play Wiedeman and Pedo in the same team, and since Weed can't ruck yet, Watts is it.

[old55 23,848]

To revisit my OP - I'm not sure how Pedersen/Vickery/Clarke, Hogan, Weideman and Watts all play in the same forward line?

I'm all for retaining Pedersen as back up to Hogan, Weideman and Watts.  Spencer as back-up to Gawn.  But a new ruck-forward can't fit in the 22 IMO.

[monoccular 17,701]

Ricky P asked a question that I have also asked in the past - can / does / could Hulett become a forward ruck?  Certainly looks monstrous.

As a MFC fan I am naturally a pessimist: Max had a dream year but were he to miss even a few games Watts, Weideman, Hogan could not be expected to carry the load.

That leaves Spencer, if he doesn't ask for a trade, or Pedersen assuming he stays on the list.

 I reckon if Spencer stays he should be given a lot more forward time at Casey to see if he could work on the forward role: otherwise maybe groom Hulett. Maybe these two experiments / developments should actually be concurrent. 

[Wilson7 2,689]

2 hours ago, Maldonboy38 said:

Zac Clarke? 

He would have to be a backup only, can't play forward at all. Can't see him playing in the same team as Gawn, not much difference between Clarke & Spencer except Spencer can take a mark