mcevoy

[bigcarl]

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/m ... 2fd8d.html

on Hickey:

''It's been fantastic to have someone else out on the track and being able to play with him and against him. Hopefully we can both play in the same team, but if the game doesn't go that way that means there's competition for the spot, which is healthy. Either way it's a positive.
''I'm not worried about someone coming in to take my spot. I'll earn it and get it or else someone else better has taken it. It's a matter where the best player plays. Hopefully we can work together because he's a great athlete. But it's not like I've been looking over my shoulder. I've embraced it.''

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/m ... z2MTqRjctT

[bigcarl]

There's room for both, imo. A dominant ruck duo in the making

[Munga]

I can see McEvoy resting in the forward line, should snag a few this year.

[bigcarl]

I can see McEvoy resting in the forward line, should snag a few this year.

Yes, that's most likely. But there's nothing that says either can't drop back to help out our undersized defence either.

[Scollop]

Class act. I reckon Macca is determined to keep his spot as No 1 ruckmen and he's looking super fit and gained some muscle too. Good signs that he's worked hard and wants to keep improving. Very positive for St Kilda FC. We have some fantastic emerging leaders and all credit to management, Saints board and Watters and his coaches with the focus on development of our players.

[Con Gorozidis]

In an ideal world you have 2 ruckman playing every week.

If form warrants it we can sqeeuze Mac Stanley and Hickey in the same 22 I reckon.

If anyone is going to be 'squeezed out' by Tom Hickeys arrival it is highly likely to be the Big Kos.

[saintspremiers]

Well as Stanley has already managed to get a significant injury already he's a bonus if when he plays, so it's a masterstoke getting Hickey. He looks like a best 22 type player.

[plugger66]

I can see McEvoy resting in the forward line, should snag a few this year.

Yes, that's most likely. But there's nothing that says either can't drop back to help out our undersized defence either.

I dont see how that works. One has to play forward when the other is rucking. Neither can play as a backman and if one is dropping back as a spare man then he is the wrong type of spare man. The sppare man has to be a Siposs type. Hickey looks like he could be a more natural forward then Ben so i would suggest Ben will ruck 60% of the game and Hickey, if he plays will do most of the rest as long as they can play forward. That is the big if.

[bigcarl]

I can see McEvoy resting in the forward line, should snag a few this year.

Yes, that's most likely. But there's nothing that says either can't drop back to help out our undersized defence either.

I dont see how that works. One has to play forward when the other is rucking. Neither can play as a backman and if one is dropping back as a spare man then he is the wrong type of spare man. The sppare man has to be a Siposs type. Hickey looks like he could be a more natural forward then Ben so i would suggest Ben will ruck 60% of the game and Hickey, if he plays will do most of the rest as long as they can play forward. That is the big if.

Plugger, there is no rule that says the ruckman must rest forward ... nor that the loose man in defence must be a running type.

Unless the AFL has introduced some more policy on the run ... which wouldn't surprise me since they have legislated on everything else.

So, just to clarify.

A ruckman may rest in which ever position he chooses, even loose in defence, especially if height is a significant issue in defence. This is allowed even if no other clubs do it. It is called innovation.

Would it work? Possibly. McEvoy reads the play better than just about anyone, plus he is more mobile than he looks.

[plugger66]

Yes, that's most likely. But there's nothing that says either can't drop back to help out our undersized defence either.

I dont see how that works. One has to play forward when the other is rucking. Neither can play as a backman and if one is dropping back as a spare man then he is the wrong type of spare man. The sppare man has to be a Siposs type. Hickey looks like he could be a more natural forward then Ben so i would suggest Ben will ruck 60% of the game and Hickey, if he plays will do most of the rest as long as they can play forward. That is the big if.

Plugger, there is no rule that says the ruckman must rest forward ... nor that the loose man in defence must be a running type.

Unless the AFL has introduced some more policy on the run ... which wouldn't surprise me since they have legislated on everything else.

So, just to clarify.

A ruckman may rest in which ever position he chooses, even loose in defence, especially if height is a significant issue in defence. This is allowed even if no other clubs do it. It is called innovation.

Would it work? Possibly. McEvoy reads the play better than just about anyone, plus he is more mobile than he looks.

There is no rule that says Saad cant ruck and Milera cant play FB but common sense and the way that the game is now played suggests true ruckmen cant play as a key back and shouldnt be the spare man. Ormond wouldnt even try it in D amatuers so I dont an AFL club will do it. Siposs spare man or Ben. You be the judge.

[bigcarl]

There is no rule that says Saad cant ruck and Milera cant play FB but common sense and the way that the game is now played suggests true ruckmen cant play as a key back and shouldnt be the spare man. Ormond wouldnt even try it in D amatuers so I dont an AFL club will do it. Siposs spare man or Ben. You be the judge.

It doesn't hurt to think outside the square occasionally Plugger. I know that is not your strong suit, though, so I cut you some slack.

A ruckman dropping across half back is not without precedent and in fact we saw Ben used in that role several times ... and to good effect ... last season.

So, in fact, it is a ploy we have used already. Think about it. When Ben was dropping back ... Loose in defense ... someone else was taking the hit outs. I expect this tactic to be used again ocassionally this season, especially as we still lack height in defence

[Dave McNamara]

Ormond wouldnt even try it in D amatuers...

D grade!?!

WT... that's not where I left them...

[plugger66]

There is no rule that says Saad cant ruck and Milera cant play FB but common sense and the way that the game is now played suggests true ruckmen cant play as a key back and shouldnt be the spare man. Ormond wouldnt even try it in D amatuers so I dont an AFL club will do it. Siposs spare man or Ben. You be the judge.

It doesn't hurt to think outside the square occasionally Plugger. I know that is not your strong suit, though, so I cut you some slack.

A ruckman dropping across half back is not without precedent and in fact we saw Ben used in that role several times ... and to good effect ... last season.

So, in fact, it is a ploy we have used already. Think about it. When Ben was dropping back ... Loose in defense ... someone else was taking the hit outs. I expect this tactic to be used again ocassionally this season, especially as we still lack height in defence

He drops back as a kick behind the play. many ruckmen do it but they still dont play as the spare man in the backline. When ben was dropping back the ball was going to the opposition forward line so he took the contests there. If the ball then moved forward so would he. he didnt hang around the backline as you are suggesting. No ruckman does it these days. Scott watters said either yesterday or late last week that one of our ruckman will play forward when not rucking so you can have some fantasy and call it thinking outside the square or I could just say it wont happen. BC you have thought outside the square since I stared on this site its just the club havent joined you yet.

[plugger66]

Ormond wouldnt even try it in D amatuers...

D grade!?!

WT... that's not where I left them...

It actually is. We went up the year after you left.

[bigcarl]

He drops back as a kick behind the play. many ruckmen do it but they still dont play as the spare man in the backline.

Call it It a kick behind play if you want. Fact is someone else was taking the hit outs and McEvoy was loose in defence.

So in fact the tactic that Ormonde amateurs wouldn't use has been employed successfully by our club. Good to see that the powers that be down there aren't as straightjacketed in their thinking as you

[Siposstar#2]

By d grade I think he means overall fourth division. Not d4
Premier a. Premier b. premier c. Then div 1. So division 1 equates to d grade. Which is still a decent standard of footy.

[plugger66]

He drops back as a kick behind the play. many ruckmen do it but they still dont play as the spare man in the backline.

Call it It a kick behind play if you want. Fact is someone else was taking the hit outs and McEvoy was loose in defence.

So in fact the tactic that Ormonde amateurs wouldn't use has been employed successfully by our club. Good to see that the powers that be down there aren't as straightjacketed in their thinking as you

He is a kick behind the play as a lot of ruckman are in any club including Ormond but when the play moves up to the wing so does ben. He isnt the spare man at all. It doesnt open up for another ruckman around the ground. If Hickey was playing in that instance he would be forward and would do the rucking there. The same it has been for a fair few years now. I still coming to terms with the big 3 in 2007. How did that go again BC?

[plugger66]

By d grade I think he means overall fourth division. Not d4
Premier a. Premier b. premier c. Then div 1. So division 1 equates to d grade. Which is still a decent standard of footy.

So true. It is now called division one so all those soft people who couldnt handle D1 feel better. The same reason they started calling G grade D3. And i can assure the standard of footy is just fair compared to C grade. Id say 10 goals worse at least. But its my clun and if they were in division 4 I would still follow them.

[paddy]

I think that Macca will continue to play his roving ruckman position....

He has a massive tank and will follow the ball around the ground so that he is at each ball up... seeing as though it will be going up more quickly at each stoppage...

he is actually really well suited for this rule change as he can run around all day and is very mobile for a big man...

Will be really interesting to see how it all pans out though...

[bigcarl]

I think that Macca will continue to play his roving ruckman position etc

He's a very good player, mobile and versatile around the ground and the next St Kilda captain IMO. He exudes leadership.

Hickey, if he's as good as he looks like he's going to be, will be a better pure tap ruckman.

So the question is, with the current three interchanges and a sub, how do you get both into the same team?

One can rest forward, true, but if you just plonk one at full forward ... as we have with Kosi in the past ... it may be at the expense of a genuine forward such as Wilkes or, down the track, Lee. I don't like it.

It's a good thing that Mac has shown he's versatile enough to go a kick behind play, or loose in defence, however you want to term it. He's a midfielder after all, albeit a tall one.

[plugger66]

I think that Macca will continue to play his roving ruckman position etc

He's a very good player, mobile and versatile around the ground and the next St Kilda captain IMO. He exudes leadership.

Hickey, if he's as good as he looks like he's going to be, will be a better pure tap ruckman.

So the question is, with the current three interchanges and a sub, how do you get both into the same team?

One can rest forward, true, but if you just plonk one at full forward ... as we have with Kosi in the past ... it may be at the expense of a genuine forward such as Wilkes or, down the track, Lee. I don't like it.

It's a good thing that Mac has shown he's versatile enough to go a kick behind play, or loose in defence, however you want to term it. He's a midfielder after all, albeit a tall one.

I think Scott will need a lot more convincing that he could play loose in defence afterall we shouldnt be tanking yet. Like the idea of a ruckman playing a kick behind the play when our backs are struggling. They are different roles though.

[bigcarl]

Like the idea of a ruckman playing a kick behind the play when our backs are struggling. They are different roles though.

If it allows us to play McEvoy, Hickey and two genuine key position forwards, I don't care what you call it.

Look, it's all about getting your best players out there. Sometimes you have to bend things a little bit to make it work. If they are good enough, you find a way to make it work. It's true Hickey is just young ... but the indications are that he may be very good.

I want two good ruckmen on the ground and two good key forwards.

[plugger66]

Like the idea of a ruckman playing a kick behind the play when our backs are struggling. They are different roles though.

If it allows us to play McEvoy, Hickey and two genuine key position forwards, I don't care what you call it.

Look, it's all about getting your best players out there. Sometimes you have to bend things a little bit to make it work. If they are good enough, you find a way to make it work. It's true Hickey is just young ... but the indications are that he may be very good.

I want two good ruckmen on the ground and two good key forwards.

Well that will not happen unless one of the ruckman plays as a key forward. And you dont have to think outside the square to know that.

[mad saint guy]

The only way I see Hickey in the 22 is if neither Kosi or Stanley are playing forward. With Stanley either injured or in defence and Maister in good touch this could well happen.

[bigcarl]

Well that will not happen unless one of the ruckman plays as a key forward.

We'll see.