Ruck Training
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
Re: Ruck Training
So you've never played in the midfield and understand why not losing the ruck is important?
-
samoht
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5820
- Joined: Sun 14 Mar 2004 10:45am
- Location: https://www.amazon.com.au/Fugitive-Sold ... B00EO1GCNK
- Has thanked: 598 times
- Been thanked: 447 times
- Contact:
Re: Ruck Training
Don't get me wrong ...
At some stage I hope we end up playing 2 of our ruckmen every game, where they're both on the ground at the same time 80% of the game time (not alternating off the bench), as I think that would probably mean that apart from
1. their more than competitive ruckwork, and
2. bravely throwing their massive frames around to open pathways for our spoilt midfielders (compared to the bruise free opposition ruckman or ruckmen alternating off their bench) -
3. more importantly (for mine) they'd probably be winning close to 30 possessions between them per game and thus justifying being on the ground at the same time.
We've all watched games where ruckmen are so frustrated from the ineffectual nil-all-draw ruck contests, where half their hitouts have been cleared by the opposition players, that they just take the ball out of the ruck contest themselves, when they finally get half a chance to do so - and that's when finally something clean always seems to happen - their well-directed handball finds a team mate in the clear, something positive finally happens.
y
A ruckman can have 15 effective disposals but 30 hitouts where half have gone to the opposition, half to his own players (and at the end of the day only about 5 clearances separate all the AFL teams - it's neither here nor there) - those 15 effective disposals is where the ruckman has made most of the impact.
At some stage I hope we end up playing 2 of our ruckmen every game, where they're both on the ground at the same time 80% of the game time (not alternating off the bench), as I think that would probably mean that apart from
1. their more than competitive ruckwork, and
2. bravely throwing their massive frames around to open pathways for our spoilt midfielders (compared to the bruise free opposition ruckman or ruckmen alternating off their bench) -
3. more importantly (for mine) they'd probably be winning close to 30 possessions between them per game and thus justifying being on the ground at the same time.
We've all watched games where ruckmen are so frustrated from the ineffectual nil-all-draw ruck contests, where half their hitouts have been cleared by the opposition players, that they just take the ball out of the ruck contest themselves, when they finally get half a chance to do so - and that's when finally something clean always seems to happen - their well-directed handball finds a team mate in the clear, something positive finally happens.
y
A ruckman can have 15 effective disposals but 30 hitouts where half have gone to the opposition, half to his own players (and at the end of the day only about 5 clearances separate all the AFL teams - it's neither here nor there) - those 15 effective disposals is where the ruckman has made most of the impact.
Re: Ruck Training
Anyone can get 15 disposals... Have another mid, they'd get 30.
Why don't teams go down the route of an undersized that can easily get 25... Stefan Martin style/Blicvas style
Why have Sandi, Natinui, Mumford, Goldstein, Jacobs???
Trying to get the argument to suite ...
Why don't teams go down the route of an undersized that can easily get 25... Stefan Martin style/Blicvas style
Why have Sandi, Natinui, Mumford, Goldstein, Jacobs???
Trying to get the argument to suite ...
-
ROLS-LEE
- Club Player
- Posts: 1206
- Joined: Tue 25 Sep 2007 3:45am
- Has thanked: 32 times
- Been thanked: 40 times
Re: Ruck Training
Over the last 20 years. Name a grand finalist teamthat didn't have a strong ruck division as in 2 good ruckmen. It's only really hawks in 08 that go against the rule when they won.
-
ROLS-LEE
- Club Player
- Posts: 1206
- Joined: Tue 25 Sep 2007 3:45am
- Has thanked: 32 times
- Been thanked: 40 times
Re: Ruck Training
Because it's just not about the number of possessions. It's what the possessions are. A linking ruckmen that can take good solid contested marks, cover ground relatively quickly and handy at kicking goals are worth their weight in gold. But it's not just the ruckmen. You need the midfield to go with it.BigMart wrote:Anyone can get 15 disposals... Have another mid, they'd get 30.
Why don't teams go down the route of an undersized that can easily get 25... Stefan Martin style/Blicvas style
Why have Sandi, Natinui, Mumford, Goldstein, Jacobs???
Trying to get the argument to suite ...
Re: Ruck Training
ROLS-LEE wrote:Over the last 20 years. Name a grand finalist teamthat didn't have a strong ruck division as in 2 good ruckmen. It's only really hawks in 08 that go against the rule when they won.
Sydney 3 years ago and the Hawks last year who even took Hale off. Hawthorn would have won with no ruckmen or 4. Name a side in the last few years who has had 2 ruckmen and neither can really play forward. I thought you didn't rate Ben? Now he is a strong ruckman.
-
samoht
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5820
- Joined: Sun 14 Mar 2004 10:45am
- Location: https://www.amazon.com.au/Fugitive-Sold ... B00EO1GCNK
- Has thanked: 598 times
- Been thanked: 447 times
- Contact:
Re: Ruck Training
We've had this argument before.... Big Mart.
Of course you need to play a ruckman - and not a 170cm midget - to counter the opposing ruckman - otherwise Goldstein and Sandi etc.. would be able to direct a few more hitouts to their clearance players (also fewer errant ones would go to the opposition), under a lot less pressure. The midget would also be ironed out in the first ruck contest.
You do need a contest in the ruck.
Compared to us, Freo averaged about 19 more hitouts per game, but only ended up with around 6 more clearances. They were the highest clearance team, we were the lowest.
Maybe if we had Fyfe in our midfield and kept the same ruckmen we would have ended up with as many clearances as Freo did?
It's hard to attribute the extra clearances to the ruckman. But if one ruckman wins 6 more effective kicks around the ground and takes 3 more contested marks than the opposing ruckman - that's a clean-cut advantage, attributable to the ruckman.
Sandi is good around the ground - takes important marks etc - it's not only about his hitout numbers, of course.
But,in any case, out of 350 possessions in a game per side - it's hard to believe those extra 6 clearances are going to make a world of difference.
Of course you need to play a ruckman - and not a 170cm midget - to counter the opposing ruckman - otherwise Goldstein and Sandi etc.. would be able to direct a few more hitouts to their clearance players (also fewer errant ones would go to the opposition), under a lot less pressure. The midget would also be ironed out in the first ruck contest.
You do need a contest in the ruck.
Compared to us, Freo averaged about 19 more hitouts per game, but only ended up with around 6 more clearances. They were the highest clearance team, we were the lowest.
Maybe if we had Fyfe in our midfield and kept the same ruckmen we would have ended up with as many clearances as Freo did?
It's hard to attribute the extra clearances to the ruckman. But if one ruckman wins 6 more effective kicks around the ground and takes 3 more contested marks than the opposing ruckman - that's a clean-cut advantage, attributable to the ruckman.
Sandi is good around the ground - takes important marks etc - it's not only about his hitout numbers, of course.
But,in any case, out of 350 possessions in a game per side - it's hard to believe those extra 6 clearances are going to make a world of difference.
Re: Ruck Training
Spot on Rols. And the reason is that contested possession in grand finals is absolutely vital. Any advantage you can get in that department is huge. Coaches don't want any let up in rucking and they can use the other big man as a forward threat to stretch the oppo backline when the intensity of a grand final wilts the players. It wouldn't be impossible to use a piece meal ruckmen like Bruce to win a grand final but I'll believe it when I see it. The gold plate standard is two guys who can genuinely ruck and have the big body, height and know-how to do it.ROLS-LEE wrote:Over the last 20 years. Name a grand finalist teamthat didn't have a strong ruck division as in 2 good ruckmen. It's only really hawks in 08 that go against the rule when they won.
The crowd around the footy now, and especially in grannies, means that any advantage you can get from the ruck is more important, not less, the way many thought the big rucks would become dinosaurs. And by pumping in years of sports science and training science its amazing how well they can get these big guys to cover the ground and become a half decent forward player. It takes while though.
Re: Ruck Training
It's about quality of clearance or quality of hit out
Aggregate numbers are not useful
Does the clearance lead to another possession or is it a clearing kick to a contest or the opposition. Does it lead to a score or an i50?
Is the hit out to advantage, does it lead to a clearance?
Ruckmen (like any player) can have certain attributes
Physical
Leap, Strength, agility, endurance, power
Skill
Kicking, marking, hands of the ground, tap work, positioning in contests, positioning around the ground, ball winning ability.
You'll never find a ruckman who can be elite in most of those categories, and coaches will look to get a ruckman that best compliments their team and game plan.
Sandi suits Freo because he combines with their big mids especially Fyfe... Similar with Adelaide and Jacobs with Danger
Goldie suits Norths offensive running game due to his elite running he can go 90% solo and allow an extra mid and he finds the ball
Hawthorn have a strong workman like stoppage midfield (Lewis, Sheils and one of Hodge and Mitch) and their game plan dominance is centred not around stoppages, but general play strategy ... They zone and use the ball off HB well, their wingman are their most important mids and they have a varied and potent far line which are efficient.
They don't rely on a couple of quality mids who need supply.
Which attributes are our ruckmen elite?
Aggregate numbers are not useful
Does the clearance lead to another possession or is it a clearing kick to a contest or the opposition. Does it lead to a score or an i50?
Is the hit out to advantage, does it lead to a clearance?
Ruckmen (like any player) can have certain attributes
Physical
Leap, Strength, agility, endurance, power
Skill
Kicking, marking, hands of the ground, tap work, positioning in contests, positioning around the ground, ball winning ability.
You'll never find a ruckman who can be elite in most of those categories, and coaches will look to get a ruckman that best compliments their team and game plan.
Sandi suits Freo because he combines with their big mids especially Fyfe... Similar with Adelaide and Jacobs with Danger
Goldie suits Norths offensive running game due to his elite running he can go 90% solo and allow an extra mid and he finds the ball
Hawthorn have a strong workman like stoppage midfield (Lewis, Sheils and one of Hodge and Mitch) and their game plan dominance is centred not around stoppages, but general play strategy ... They zone and use the ball off HB well, their wingman are their most important mids and they have a varied and potent far line which are efficient.
They don't rely on a couple of quality mids who need supply.
Which attributes are our ruckmen elite?
-
samoht
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5820
- Joined: Sun 14 Mar 2004 10:45am
- Location: https://www.amazon.com.au/Fugitive-Sold ... B00EO1GCNK
- Has thanked: 598 times
- Been thanked: 447 times
- Contact:
Re: Ruck Training
Quality of clearance = whatever the clearance player makes of it. Comes down to the quality of the clearance player.
If there was any quality in the hitouts, would Sandi and Freo be achieving only 6 more clearances from their 19 extra hitouts (compared to our ruckmen)?
This despite having Fyfe in the engine room.
re: our ruckmen
Longer is physical, etc.. but he needs to win more possessions around the ground and start marking the ball. Hickey needs to be more durable - he has the potential to be a very good ruckman, who could impact around the ground. We've only seen some glimpses from him.
Holmes leaps like Natanui ... but a leap doesn't amount to anything. A ruckman needs to win around the ground possessions (15 plus as a target/game - including a few contested marks).
Maybe Pierce could leapfrog everyone - he has very strong legs - just needs to build an upper body. He's very smart around the ground. I was really impressed with one of his games against Melbourne's VFL side.
If there was any quality in the hitouts, would Sandi and Freo be achieving only 6 more clearances from their 19 extra hitouts (compared to our ruckmen)?
This despite having Fyfe in the engine room.
re: our ruckmen
Longer is physical, etc.. but he needs to win more possessions around the ground and start marking the ball. Hickey needs to be more durable - he has the potential to be a very good ruckman, who could impact around the ground. We've only seen some glimpses from him.
Holmes leaps like Natanui ... but a leap doesn't amount to anything. A ruckman needs to win around the ground possessions (15 plus as a target/game - including a few contested marks).
Maybe Pierce could leapfrog everyone - he has very strong legs - just needs to build an upper body. He's very smart around the ground. I was really impressed with one of his games against Melbourne's VFL side.
Last edited by samoht on Wed 20 Jan 2016 10:42am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Ruck Training
Incorrect
If you clear the ball out of a stoppage (formerly known as a pack) under pressure due to having to contest the clearance ... The quality diminishes
If the ball is put down your throat or your hit on the fly in space (AFL you need less than a metre) you have time to execute from a stoppage.
It's what is trained for hours upon hours.
General play is hard to control. Coaches like control.
It's why they want tackle numbers high... To create stoppages
Stoppages can then be structured and set ups behind and forward of the ball can occur.
If you have an advantage at the stoppage, your team benefits. It's called first use.
What is done with that is then the mids responsibility.
This year
Jacobs and Natinui dominated games and it had zero to do with around the ground possessions.
Stevan Martin also dominated games and it was all about possessions
Mumford dominated games... All about his strength at stoppage
If you clear the ball out of a stoppage (formerly known as a pack) under pressure due to having to contest the clearance ... The quality diminishes
If the ball is put down your throat or your hit on the fly in space (AFL you need less than a metre) you have time to execute from a stoppage.
It's what is trained for hours upon hours.
General play is hard to control. Coaches like control.
It's why they want tackle numbers high... To create stoppages
Stoppages can then be structured and set ups behind and forward of the ball can occur.
If you have an advantage at the stoppage, your team benefits. It's called first use.
What is done with that is then the mids responsibility.
This year
Jacobs and Natinui dominated games and it had zero to do with around the ground possessions.
Stevan Martin also dominated games and it was all about possessions
Mumford dominated games... All about his strength at stoppage
-
samoht
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5820
- Joined: Sun 14 Mar 2004 10:45am
- Location: https://www.amazon.com.au/Fugitive-Sold ... B00EO1GCNK
- Has thanked: 598 times
- Been thanked: 447 times
- Contact:
Re: Ruck Training
Of course, it goes without saying that under pressure the quality of a clearance diminishes - but all things being equal you'd much rather have it cleared by a stoppage player who can use the ball effectively.
There's too many variables - we can go around in circles all day.
Where there's no variables and where you can see a ruckman clearly impacting (or failing to impact) is in effective possessions around the ground,taking important marks etc...
That's an area we need our ruckmen to improve in. If Hickey can get over his injuries - he could be that ruckman?
He'll never become the physical player that Mumford is.
Mumford also averaged 12 possessions per game by the way in 2015, which isn't too shabby. Longer averaged 6 possessions per game in 2015.
GWS averaged 2 more clearances which includes 2 more stoppages than us --- the quality of the clearance again depends on the clearance player and how much pressure they were under.
But 2 more possessions won this way - through clearance - in an ocean of 350 possessions per game - is neither here nor there.
Given this, in which area do we need our ruckmen to improve in - I suggest it's in their around the ground possessions - averaging 6 around the ground possessions and 1 mark per game is not good enough. I'm not sure if they will improve in this area - but that's where we need to improve or maybe need to trade for to improve in?
There's too many variables - we can go around in circles all day.
Where there's no variables and where you can see a ruckman clearly impacting (or failing to impact) is in effective possessions around the ground,taking important marks etc...
That's an area we need our ruckmen to improve in. If Hickey can get over his injuries - he could be that ruckman?
He'll never become the physical player that Mumford is.
Mumford also averaged 12 possessions per game by the way in 2015, which isn't too shabby. Longer averaged 6 possessions per game in 2015.
GWS averaged 2 more clearances which includes 2 more stoppages than us --- the quality of the clearance again depends on the clearance player and how much pressure they were under.
But 2 more possessions won this way - through clearance - in an ocean of 350 possessions per game - is neither here nor there.
Given this, in which area do we need our ruckmen to improve in - I suggest it's in their around the ground possessions - averaging 6 around the ground possessions and 1 mark per game is not good enough. I'm not sure if they will improve in this area - but that's where we need to improve or maybe need to trade for to improve in?
Re: Ruck Training
Have you ever noticed that there are two boards held up in qtr breaks
One is the team, the other is a grid
Us and them
Example
Stoppage clearance +1
Tackle +5
Tackle i50 (very important)
Contested Ball +8
Other indicators may be 'run to receive' or uncontested marks or i50 conversion.. Efficiency
They never look at total possession... Meaningless stat.
Could be countless cheap possessions across HB or rubbish efficiency possessions that are actually detrimental?
If you win stoppage... You are a long way being able to win the game. Because it's easier to coach defence and defence creates stoppage, allowing a predictable structure. So you can get the game on your terms.... IF you can win stoppage.
One is the team, the other is a grid
Us and them
Example
Stoppage clearance +1
Tackle +5
Tackle i50 (very important)
Contested Ball +8
Other indicators may be 'run to receive' or uncontested marks or i50 conversion.. Efficiency
They never look at total possession... Meaningless stat.
Could be countless cheap possessions across HB or rubbish efficiency possessions that are actually detrimental?
If you win stoppage... You are a long way being able to win the game. Because it's easier to coach defence and defence creates stoppage, allowing a predictable structure. So you can get the game on your terms.... IF you can win stoppage.
-
samoht
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5820
- Joined: Sun 14 Mar 2004 10:45am
- Location: https://www.amazon.com.au/Fugitive-Sold ... B00EO1GCNK
- Has thanked: 598 times
- Been thanked: 447 times
- Contact:
Re: Ruck Training
Sure, and if you look at the stats, we were a couple of stoppages behind the average (24.5 cf 26.5) over the 2015 season - and about 5 stoppages behind the best team, Freo.
So we can improve - but it's no big deal.
And who do we attribute the extra stoppage wins to - solely the ruckman/Sandilands ??? ... and not at all to Fyfe and co?
Whereas if your ruckman wins 20 effective possessions around the ground and takes 6 saving marks vs 6 possessions and 1 mark by the opposing ruckman --- it's a clear win by your ruckman, which is attributable to him. That's a big advantage your way.
But, again, if those 2 or 5 extra stoppage wins make that much difference in winning and losing a game (and let's remember that only half those stoppages would be forward of centre - so let's call it 1 or 2 extra stoppage wins forward of centre), and if it's all the "dominant" ruckman's doing, then we should concentrate on recruiting/poaching a Sandilands instead of a Fyfe - who has little to do with winning the clearance or the quality of the clearance.
1-2 extra stoppages won forward of centre - on average - big deal (over an ocean of about 175 possessions won forward of centre and 350 possessions over the whole ground on average )! Let's put it in perspective.
We need our ruckmen to win more possessions around the ground, we shouldn't be arguing about that.
So we can improve - but it's no big deal.
And who do we attribute the extra stoppage wins to - solely the ruckman/Sandilands ??? ... and not at all to Fyfe and co?
Whereas if your ruckman wins 20 effective possessions around the ground and takes 6 saving marks vs 6 possessions and 1 mark by the opposing ruckman --- it's a clear win by your ruckman, which is attributable to him. That's a big advantage your way.
But, again, if those 2 or 5 extra stoppage wins make that much difference in winning and losing a game (and let's remember that only half those stoppages would be forward of centre - so let's call it 1 or 2 extra stoppage wins forward of centre), and if it's all the "dominant" ruckman's doing, then we should concentrate on recruiting/poaching a Sandilands instead of a Fyfe - who has little to do with winning the clearance or the quality of the clearance.
1-2 extra stoppages won forward of centre - on average - big deal (over an ocean of about 175 possessions won forward of centre and 350 possessions over the whole ground on average )! Let's put it in perspective.
We need our ruckmen to win more possessions around the ground, we shouldn't be arguing about that.
Re: Ruck Training
Do you reckon Sandilands or Natinuis dominance doesn't contribute to their team winning?
No different to having a dominant key forward or mid.
Thing is,
If you lack any of those it is detrimental to success... Problem with the ruck, unlike fwds, defs and mids there is only one on the ground and if that person is getting outplayed there are no other players that can take up the slack.
Like it or not
The ruckmen are critical to a functioning midfield as their performance dictates set up.
As I said, I've played hundreds of games in the midfield and my highest possession game was due to the fact we were able to get first use and a dominant ruckmen gave the ball to me on a platter. I got the 3 votes due to getting a truckload of the ball but the service made it fairly easy.
No different to having a dominant key forward or mid.
Thing is,
If you lack any of those it is detrimental to success... Problem with the ruck, unlike fwds, defs and mids there is only one on the ground and if that person is getting outplayed there are no other players that can take up the slack.
Like it or not
The ruckmen are critical to a functioning midfield as their performance dictates set up.
As I said, I've played hundreds of games in the midfield and my highest possession game was due to the fact we were able to get first use and a dominant ruckmen gave the ball to me on a platter. I got the 3 votes due to getting a truckload of the ball but the service made it fairly easy.
-
samoht
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5820
- Joined: Sun 14 Mar 2004 10:45am
- Location: https://www.amazon.com.au/Fugitive-Sold ... B00EO1GCNK
- Has thanked: 598 times
- Been thanked: 447 times
- Contact:
Re: Ruck Training
I'm not saying the ruckmen are not important as far as ruck contests go - and obviously you do need to be competitive.
But it's not like a scrum contest in a rugby league match, where the player feeding the ball into the scrum always ends up giving the advantage to his team - and his team wins the scrum contest 100% of the time and always ends up with the ball.
At the end of the day there's only a marginal difference - from 19 more hitouts Freo only ends up with 6 more clearances than us (they could hardly be called well-directed hitouts, could they? 19 more hitouts and ending up with only 6 more clearances! - that should tell us something).... 40 to 34 (per game average in 2015)- that's it in the nutshell - the best and worst clearance teams. Freo with a superstar in Fyfe - that has some say in the clearances.
Our ruckmen will never be as dominant as Sandilands and Mumford as far as raw hitout numbers are concerned - but they can keep being more efficient with their hitouts (we definitely are more efficient than Freo!!) and hopefully start matching Mumford and Sandilands by winning more possessions around the ground (a fit Hickey would do that).
Your anecdote:
What a 206 cm ruckman does at junior footy level and the type of dominance and mismatch you're talking about should not be confused with what happens at the elite level. At AFL level, Freo has a 211cm giant (Sandi) who may get the lion share of the hitouts - but he's misdirecting a lot of them (that's if we're attributing how many of his hitouts translate to clearances to him - i.e., taking the clearance players out of the equation) - due to the competitive pressure he's under.
But it's not like a scrum contest in a rugby league match, where the player feeding the ball into the scrum always ends up giving the advantage to his team - and his team wins the scrum contest 100% of the time and always ends up with the ball.
At the end of the day there's only a marginal difference - from 19 more hitouts Freo only ends up with 6 more clearances than us (they could hardly be called well-directed hitouts, could they? 19 more hitouts and ending up with only 6 more clearances! - that should tell us something).... 40 to 34 (per game average in 2015)- that's it in the nutshell - the best and worst clearance teams. Freo with a superstar in Fyfe - that has some say in the clearances.
Our ruckmen will never be as dominant as Sandilands and Mumford as far as raw hitout numbers are concerned - but they can keep being more efficient with their hitouts (we definitely are more efficient than Freo!!) and hopefully start matching Mumford and Sandilands by winning more possessions around the ground (a fit Hickey would do that).
Your anecdote:
What a 206 cm ruckman does at junior footy level and the type of dominance and mismatch you're talking about should not be confused with what happens at the elite level. At AFL level, Freo has a 211cm giant (Sandi) who may get the lion share of the hitouts - but he's misdirecting a lot of them (that's if we're attributing how many of his hitouts translate to clearances to him - i.e., taking the clearance players out of the equation) - due to the competitive pressure he's under.
Re: Ruck Training
Junior footy?? Last game I played in Junors was a Grand Final in 1989
I'm 42yo and the period I was referring to was in 2004-2007 when I was playing senior suburban footy.
Again, you talk about aggregat numbers... Not quality of clearance.
A person could serve at the same percentage of first serves in, in tennis... And lose 6-0 as the quality of his first serves not near as good
Quantitative vs qualitative.... What does 6 clearances mean... Dd they lead to retention of the ball... Did it lead to a score?
Aggregate numbers tell a portion of a story.
I'm 42yo and the period I was referring to was in 2004-2007 when I was playing senior suburban footy.
Again, you talk about aggregat numbers... Not quality of clearance.
A person could serve at the same percentage of first serves in, in tennis... And lose 6-0 as the quality of his first serves not near as good
Quantitative vs qualitative.... What does 6 clearances mean... Dd they lead to retention of the ball... Did it lead to a score?
Aggregate numbers tell a portion of a story.
Re: Ruck Training
BigMart wrote:Junior footy?? Last game I played in Junors was a Grand Final in 1989
I'm 42yo and the period I was referring to was in 2004-2007 when I was playing senior suburban footy.
Again, you talk about aggregat numbers... Not quality of clearance.
A person could serve at the same percentage of first serves in, in tennis... And lose 6-0 as the quality of his first serves not near as good
Quantitative vs qualitative.... What does 6 clearances mean... Dd they lead to retention of the ball... Did it lead to a score?
Aggregate numbers tell a portion of a story.
The only problem with your theory isn't it doesn't relate to ladder position. You say its about hits to advantage with ruckmen well Freo and WCE were one and two but Sydney were last and Hawthorn weren't up near the top. Clearances could be a number of reasons like better mids or better hit outs to advantage. The point is if the ruckmen hardly takes a contested mark or hardly gets the ball then we may as well have 7 footers who can jump. I saw Holmes play senior footy last year and he can jump and palm the ball as well as anyone but he is so far away from playing good senior footy it isn't funny. By the way I'm unsure suburban footy 10 years ago has anything much to do with AFL now. Ive seen how much my local club has changed their mid set ups in the last few years let alone an AFL club.
I think the GF showed last year how its about mids and the rucks are just bit players. Hale was very ordinary and subbed off. Ben is a nice player but was up against a supposed clearance king in Nat and look what happened. WCE were smashed. I would say the worst ruckmen have won the last 4 or 5 GF's.
Last edited by ripplug66 on Thu 21 Jan 2016 4:05pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
samoht
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5820
- Joined: Sun 14 Mar 2004 10:45am
- Location: https://www.amazon.com.au/Fugitive-Sold ... B00EO1GCNK
- Has thanked: 598 times
- Been thanked: 447 times
- Contact:
Re: Ruck Training
Well said, plug66.
I'm done posting on this topic - I should have wrapped it up a few post back, but I just wanted to acknowledge a good, sensible post.
Good point, re: Holmes. Of course it's reasonable to expect an AFL ruckman to win their fair share of possessions (and take a few important marks, etc.). It's not about hitouts only.
I'm done posting on this topic - I should have wrapped it up a few post back, but I just wanted to acknowledge a good, sensible post.
Good point, re: Holmes. Of course it's reasonable to expect an AFL ruckman to win their fair share of possessions (and take a few important marks, etc.). It's not about hitouts only.
-
To the top
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3266
- Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2007 4:05pm
- Been thanked: 390 times
Re: Ruck Training
The concentration on possessions amuses me.
It is a team game - and the object is to score more than your opposition.
To do this a game is played on a chess board, looking for advantage.
I tend to also look at player positioning (where R Clarke was under estimated) and the result of that positioning.
So, if we have Hickey drifting forward as an option and attracting a tall defender or creating a mismatch it may be that he is not used because who he attracts can lead to a one out contest elsewhere for a key forward instead of that forward being double teamed (and Hawthorn double team in defence).
So it is structure and contribution to structure - used or not.
And that brings us back to result.
Kosi served that purpose for Roo over many successful years - and Kosi was wrongly condemned for not kicking bags.
With McCartin, Bruce and Hickey (periodically) up forward there are options including causing chaos in opposition defences.
But, when we go inside 50, it is up to the delivering player to assess what the structure has delivered to him in terms of options as to who to use.
If it is a mismatch deep because of who Hickey has attracted, then Hickey may be used depending on what he has freed up elsewhere and the running patterns of the other key forwards (and their support who have the opportunity and defensive responsibilities).
Of course, it comes back to the mid-field (served by a ruck presence at stoppages and throw ins) and the defensive rebound to quickly hit the forward options created.
I see Hickey and Longer as a positive to structure and game plan.
It is a team game - and the object is to score more than your opposition.
To do this a game is played on a chess board, looking for advantage.
I tend to also look at player positioning (where R Clarke was under estimated) and the result of that positioning.
So, if we have Hickey drifting forward as an option and attracting a tall defender or creating a mismatch it may be that he is not used because who he attracts can lead to a one out contest elsewhere for a key forward instead of that forward being double teamed (and Hawthorn double team in defence).
So it is structure and contribution to structure - used or not.
And that brings us back to result.
Kosi served that purpose for Roo over many successful years - and Kosi was wrongly condemned for not kicking bags.
With McCartin, Bruce and Hickey (periodically) up forward there are options including causing chaos in opposition defences.
But, when we go inside 50, it is up to the delivering player to assess what the structure has delivered to him in terms of options as to who to use.
If it is a mismatch deep because of who Hickey has attracted, then Hickey may be used depending on what he has freed up elsewhere and the running patterns of the other key forwards (and their support who have the opportunity and defensive responsibilities).
Of course, it comes back to the mid-field (served by a ruck presence at stoppages and throw ins) and the defensive rebound to quickly hit the forward options created.
I see Hickey and Longer as a positive to structure and game plan.
Re: Ruck Training
To the top wrote:The concentration on possessions amuses me.
It is a team game - and the object is to score more than your opposition.
To do this a game is played on a chess board, looking for advantage.
I tend to also look at player positioning (where R Clarke was under estimated) and the result of that positioning.
So, if we have Hickey drifting forward as an option and attracting a tall defender or creating a mismatch it may be that he is not used because who he attracts can lead to a one out contest elsewhere for a key forward instead of that forward being double teamed (and Hawthorn double team in defence).
So it is structure and contribution to structure - used or not.
And that brings us back to result.
Kosi served that purpose for Roo over many successful years - and Kosi was wrongly condemned for not kicking bags.
With McCartin, Bruce and Hickey (periodically) up forward there are options including causing chaos in opposition defences.
But, when we go inside 50, it is up to the delivering player to assess what the structure has delivered to him in terms of options as to who to use.
If it is a mismatch deep because of who Hickey has attracted, then Hickey may be used depending on what he has freed up elsewhere and the running patterns of the other key forwards (and their support who have the opportunity and defensive responsibilities).
Of course, it comes back to the mid-field (served by a ruck presence at stoppages and throw ins) and the defensive rebound to quickly hit the forward options created.
I see Hickey and Longer as a positive to structure and game plan.
I have no idea if you are trying to say Hickey can be used like Kosi but ive come to that conclusion because you mentioned him. And tall players only cause kaos if they are good enough in that position otherwise the defender plays off them and helps the back who is on the most dangerous forward. Hickey or longer together will only be a positive if one of them can play as a forward and we all can gather Longer cant at all as of yet and Hickey can very occasionally but was dropped twice last year because he was usually not good enough in that position. Then there is the matter of Hickey, McCartin and Bruce playing together. I see a slow and little defensive forward line and if they aren't marking it then its out of there. I hope it works but I doubt it can and Rooy needs to fit in there as well. And then there is Membery. people seem so keen on Hickey playing forward that better forwards aren't playing just so he can ruck for about 25% of the game. My maths says that just doesn't add up.
Re: Ruck Training
Hawthorn had a few other decent players... For a start James Frawley, their FB was BOG
They dominated around the ground.... If they had a dominant ruckman they may have won by 100 points or more...
That's not the argument... Otherwise it could be said about any team or any game... A moron could see that.
Ie/
You could argue a dominant key forward is not relevant or a necessity because the best 2 (Kennedy and Buddy) didn't play at hawthorn. But buddy did both win and lose a premiership as the best key forward on the ground... Playing against and for hawthorn... You do realise there are 17 other players on the ground
Your argument is senseless... And irrelevant
Answer this question
Would Hawthorns midfield be more potent if Nic Natinui (who has tore them a new arse before) was in the ruck.... Hence would he assist the rest of the midfield group?
You're argument that first use is irrelevant means you know little and have a different POV to all AFL coaches.
However you can't have it all, and what they lose in the ruck wrt quality... They more than make up for with kpp quality, great hbs and wingers and potent small fwds.
They dominated around the ground.... If they had a dominant ruckman they may have won by 100 points or more...
That's not the argument... Otherwise it could be said about any team or any game... A moron could see that.
Ie/
You could argue a dominant key forward is not relevant or a necessity because the best 2 (Kennedy and Buddy) didn't play at hawthorn. But buddy did both win and lose a premiership as the best key forward on the ground... Playing against and for hawthorn... You do realise there are 17 other players on the ground
Your argument is senseless... And irrelevant
Answer this question
Would Hawthorns midfield be more potent if Nic Natinui (who has tore them a new arse before) was in the ruck.... Hence would he assist the rest of the midfield group?
You're argument that first use is irrelevant means you know little and have a different POV to all AFL coaches.
However you can't have it all, and what they lose in the ruck wrt quality... They more than make up for with kpp quality, great hbs and wingers and potent small fwds.
Re: Ruck Training
BigMart wrote:Hawthorn had a few other decent players... For a start James Frawley, their FB was BOG
They dominated around the ground.... If they had a dominant ruckman they may have won by 100 points or more...
That's not the argument... Otherwise it could be said about any team or any game... A moron could see that.
Ie/
You could argue a dominant key forward is not relevant or a necessity because the best 2 (Kennedy and Buddy) didn't play at hawthorn. But buddy did both win and lose a premiership as the best key forward on the ground... Playing against and for hawthorn... You do realise there are 17 other players on the ground
Your argument is senseless... And irrelevant
Answer this question
Would Hawthorns midfield be more potent if Nic Natinui (who has tore them a new arse before) was in the ruck.... Hence would he assist the rest of the midfield group?
You're argument that first use is irrelevant means you know little and have a different POV to all AFL coaches.
However you can't have it all, and what they lose in the ruck wrt quality... They more than make up for with kpp quality, great hbs and wingers and potent small fwds.
Playing the man. Well done. Funny that you mentioned last year and not the previous 3 and you also completely side stepped positions on the ladder equating to hits to advantage. No idea if Hawthorn would be better with Nat. I know they still would have won the flag though. And Frawley wasn't best IMO. Maybe looks different on TV. Maybe use more examples about you.