Macca

I reckon there would be a few who would baulk at it if asked (rucking) ... and they probably do get asked. Was it Frost that seemed a bit circumspect about it and mumbled something about the physical demands? I watch the rucking fairly closely these days because I'm fascinated as to where the game is heading with regards to clearances, clean clearances and the set plays that can result from those scenarios. It won't be long before the players will need to memorise a 'play-book' like they need to in the NFL. I wouldn't be surprised if it's already happening (at least to a small degree) We're at the infancy stages of the professionalism of the sport. Taps to advantage will become more valuable much like a tip-off in basketball often allows the recipient of the tip-off to get a chance at a basket.

It's a good point you make about 'unwilling' ... it's not the easiest task on the footy field and the role of the ruckman is probably more physically demanding than it's ever been (what with the more running involved and the increase in stoppages) It's just a pity that the sport and the way it's played now demands that playing a 2nd ruckman is a bit of luxury and stops a team from playing a 13th or 14th midfielder. But do we really need that many midfielders? And just 1 ruckman?

Here's a One-Series-Wonder from the past called 'Nowhere Man' (IMDb link) All the episodes from this one and only series (released in 1995) have been uploaded onto youtube so if you like your drama/mysteries with a real twist, you may like this. The show is very much in the mode of 'The Prisoner' You can watch 'Nowhere Man' here

Pazuzu ... yep. A frightening sight back in the day. That forward line I posted up is dependent on some other player taking the main rucking duties. Reading between the lines I'm not sure that we'll play King next week but with Spencer being out for 6 weeks or so, Mitch may get a run sooner rather than later. Playing makeshift back-up ruckmen for 2 months just doesn't make a lot of sense - that's why I'd rather see us bite the bullet straight off. Get a game under his belt and run from there. I know he's raw but any player has to play their first game at some stage. And Essendon is a team where the 'fit' might work better than against other teams. I wouldn't like to see him debut against the Crows or North ... that really would be a baptism of fire. Again, it's just a suggestion.

The fixture doesn't generally represent a problem for either team though ... a 5 day break for the Pies & Dons against other teams only happens when the fixture falls on a Tuesday. And we've helped alleviate that problem by playing the night before and thus being likely opponents for the following Sunday ... as it is this year where we play Essendon next Sunday. Collingwood have drawn the short straw by playing Geelong (the Cats will be coming off a 7 day break) However, the AFL could have fixtured the Pies against the Tigers next Sunday (or next Monday night so the MCG can be utilised for both games)

Oh yeah ... I'm more than confident that the fixture will stay - it's the fixturing around the date which needs to be nailed down. And if we can turn that other fixture into an annual event with that other fixture also being a top money-spinner, it's a win-win. I can't see why it can't be Essendon predominately too. We don't need it to be Collingwood as we've already got that home fixture secured. PJ has probably got some open dialogue happening with the Dons.

Historically the Pies & Dons have led off the round when they're drawn to play on a Wednesday ANZAC fixture Pennant. So that means that both teams have played on the prior Saturday (2012 & 2007) or the Friday (2001) We'd end up playing on a 5 day break against a team with at least a 7 day break (if the game was on a Sunday) ... A Monday night game can work better though (if we could swing it)

Next year (2018) ANZAC eve falls on a Tuesday so we'd then only have a 5 day break for a Sunday fixture played in the next round ... that's tricky because the Pies & Dons may not be available to play (when the Pies & Dons play on a Wednesday ANZAC fixture, both teams usually play on the prior Saturday) In 2019 our game would fall on a Wednesday so both the Demons & Tigers would almost certainly play other opponents on the prior Saturday (as the Pies & Dons do) In 2020 we have a leap year so our game against the Tigers would be played on a Friday (again, stand alone) Maybe a solution for 2018 would be for us to play on the following Monday night ... we could do another deal with another club (with the AFL's blessing) and end up with possible back-to back blockbusters. The Blues, Hawks or Cats might be accommodating. As it stands, we're possibly going to be playing against Essendon the round after or perhaps in the round prior to our ANZAC fixture so we should be endeavouring to make that game into a permanent fixture (with alternate H & A status) A default blockbuster per se. We need as many of these big money spinners as possible ... that's a big cheque for the Tigers last night (and it's our turn next season)

The other issue that needs to be addressed is our forward line ... our opponents are flooding back but we're giving them the time to flood back. We need to be far more direct with our inside 50 forays but that line of thinking needs to be backed up with the right personnel and structure. HF Kent Hogan Watts F Garlett Petracca Pedersen The above forward line needs to have an element of rotation & adaptability for roles & match-ups. Watts & Hogan can spend some time in the midfield (not rucking) whilst Petracca can play as a high-half forward on occasions (if fit) as well as playing out of the goal square. Watts can play a similar role. Pedersen can also (at times) play out of the goal square and he could also be used as a decoy ... apart from being the 2nd ruck. Bugg could play in Kent's position but the AFL is not the VFL. Meanwhile, we'd have a kid in the ruck trying his absolute best. It's not ideal but it might just have to do.

Pedersen has gone from being the chief whipping-boy to the saviour yet his actual output is still negligible. Goodwin will pick him now but previously, he's not done that. He is not a ruckman in the sense that he's below average at the art of rucking. The stats and our eyes bear that out. Here's how I see things playing out if we use Pedersen & Watts in tandem in the ruck ... Leuenberger gets 60 tap-outs with at least 20 of those taps to advantage Pedersen & Watts get about 20 taps between them with very few to advantage The Bombers win the clearances especially so in the 2nd half They win the game. So King is coming off an ACL - big deal. Gawn did 2 of those as a youngster. Mitch is back playing footy in a position that is very physical ... and he got 26 tap-outs on the weekend. I'd admit that he's not be the ideal choice but what alternatives do we have? (see above) And if someone wants to paint a better picture, go right ahead.

We need Watts elsewhere ... as a high half forward, deep forward and with spells around the midfield (without rucking) as a utility of sorts. I don't disagree that he's giving his all and is handy (at times) in the ruck - that's not the issue. Let's face it, Nankervis had a field day last night (56 tap-outs) ... and Leuenberger is better than Nankervis. But we're now in make-do mode so Jack will almost certainly be required to ruck for at least some parts of the games. That's not ideal though as we need him down forward working with Hogan. It's risky playing Mitch King or even Keilty but if either player were to compete well and not get smashed in the numbers, we could then use Pedersen as the back up which then frees up Jack. Playing Pedersen & Watts in tandem in the ruck would be a concession in my eyes. I just can't see it working. If we're going to pull the trigger on Mitch King or perhaps Keilty, we may as well do it now. The Bombers aren't a great side but if we hand them first use of the ball at bounce-downs & stoppages, they'll beat us. We can attempt to rove to their ruckman (Leuenberger) but that theory is a lot easier said than done. All other selection matters pale into insignificance.

The trouble is that a number of opposition ruckmen are big units who are experienced at ruckwork .... and even though they often nullify each other, if you put a lightweight up against them for long periods, the opposition will often find a way to gain an advantage (or a significant advantage) And I mean lightweight in the sense of a part time ruckman not having any real rucking skills. It's a game of keepings-off these days so first use of the ball often means having possession of the ball until such time that that team gets a shot at goal. Gawn was getting up to 25 taps to advantage and we were getting better and better at utilising those taps to advantage - now that advantage has been taken away from us.

We're not far from each other here AF ... I agree on the contested game angle and both myself & rjay were advocating Watts to the ruck in a part time capacity a couple/few years ago. But he can be involved in there (periodically) without having to ruck. The future answer could be that the MC bite the bullet and play both Gawn & Spencer in the same side (when they're both fit) We really need to recruit a forward/ruckman for the future though - that's the ultimate solution.

We can still use Watts in the middle periodically without him having to ruck. Dean Bailey used Watts on the ball for 3 or 4 games in the first half of 2011 - to good effect too. Not sure many noticed though as the want for Watts to be next big thing as a key forward was where the attention lay. I like the idea of using Watts as a utility/forward/follower but if he has to ruck, the bare minimum is my preference. But with our 2 main ruckmen going down with injury, we're going to have to be quite creative in that area (rucking)

Went 3/8 myself so you win again (is that every time?) And yeah, with a bit of luck your Leaf's could have won that series ... all 4 losses were close and 3 of the losses went to O/T. I'll do the next lot of tips later on but the Pens/Caps series should be a beauty. Nashville could be tough to beat too - very impressive over the Blackhawks.

And the other teams have wised up to our improved play and clearance work and are flooding our forward line ... we often contribute to the problem by not being direct enough. Hogan really needs to be playing at CHF but then we're left a bit short at deep forward ... this is why I don't want Watts out of the forward line too often. We know he works well with Hogan but he's been otherwise used in the ruck (for one reason or another) Hogan straightens us up when he plays deep forward but he straightens us up even more so when out at CHF. We'd have been hoping for more output from Weideman

Whichever way we look at it, it's a risk ... however, what is best for the team and the teams chances of winning takes precedence. That old saying that no one individual is bigger than the team sometimes means that an individual who may not necessarily be ready comes into the side to play a vital role. I'm not big on stop-gaps - those things rarely work. And all things on the field are connected - we're not getting the best value out of Watts. He'd need to ruck even more than what he's doing now if Pedersen was the other ruckman. And we'd lose in the ruck anyway. Lose/lose Our forward line needs more of Watts - not less. He works well with Hogan too. Nothing can be done now but the restrictive nature of the lists during the season needs to be addressed by the AFL. Clubs should be able to bring in a few players to cover themselves if a high amount of injuries occur.

If we were finishing better with more poise, the issues that you have highlighted would be of a lesser nature. Goodwin's sample size is far too small rjay - Goodwin is getting the team to tick a number of boxes. Under Neeld & Bailey, those boxes were never really ticked (effort, energy, application, attack on the ball & endeavour) I'm convinced that if Gawn hadn't have gone down, we'd be 5 & 0 and we'd be hailing Goodwin as a super-coach.

If anything, that's what you're known for ... belittling other posters on a constant basis. Take a good look in the mirror and grow up

Well, if we go with Pedersen & Watts in the ruck and it fails miserably, what then? We'll be 2 & 4 and staring down the barrel. I also highly doubt that Goodwin will be happy to go in with a Pedersen & Watts combo. He'll know that it's high risk.

I'm only interested in beating Essendon ... lose to the Bombers and our season could be shot. I'm also quite convinced that many here don't rate ruck work or taps to advantage. All this talk of not needing a proper ruckman is utter nonsense. We've just found out the hard way with 3 consecutive losses largely brought about by not having a decent ruckman in operation (Sandilands slaughtered Spencer in the ruck last week) How much proof needs to be offered? Pedersen & Watts sharing the ruck duties won't work. Talk of throwing T-Mac, Frost or suchlike into the ruck won't work either - we'd be robbing Peter to pay Paul regardless.

Tonight's loss was hard to cop but without a ruckman for most of the match, it was always going to be tough. We actually did quite well in the 3rd quarter (all things considered) but we were completely spent going into the last quarter. Nankervis got 60 tap-outs and had a an absolute field day. They killed us in the clearances late in the game. Goodwin's plan is to blow teams out of the water but we lack a bit of composure, finishing skills & poise. Add those vital areas in and we would have been out of reach going into the last quarter. I'm not too concerned looking ahead - when it all comes together we'll be a very good side. We're on the right track with regards to our effort, energy, attitude, attack on the ball and our endeavour. There's a lot to like despite the frustrating losses.

Check out Pedersen's stats when he rucks and have a good look at his rucking style - it is substandard. I've got Cam in the side next week though - to replace Smith and to do the back-up ruck duties. Most newcomers are 'not ready' ... the only way to find out if a player can play is to play them.

How are you so sure? Pedersen & Watts will get slaughtered and if you believe that we're good enough to rove to Essendon's 50 - 60+ taps, you're dreaming. Has Pedersen become a top-liner all of a sudden? I've never seen the bloke play 1 top game (ever) and he's as bad in the ruck as what Watts is. We go in with a Pedersen/Watts combo and we'll get smashed in the ruck and in the clearances. And we'll lose the game.

Mitch King might be about to find out what league footy is all about sooner than he might have thought ... he might do better than people think too. Once thrown the lead role, the understudy ruckman often excels. Unlike Pedersen & Watts, King's stock-in-trade is rucking and he's probably been doing it for a lot of his footy life. King got 26 tap-outs on the weekend and even though he's probably not really ready, the alternative is that we'll get absolutely mauled again with a combo of Pedersen & Watts. Neither Cam nor Jack know how to ruck properly and both are at best, back-ups. Pedersen could then come in to replace Smith and Cam can also handle the back-up ruck duties. This will free up Watts to play in the role that is best suited to the team (high half-forward, sometimes deep and with a few spurts in the midfield) Just a suggestion