Ruck Training

[samoht]

OK ... my final post - this time I mean it - on my pet topic.
Let's assume that the midfielders have no influence and look at the raw hitout numbers of the so called "dominant" ruckmen.

RE: the so called dominant ruckmen, let's see what advantage their extra hitouts translate to:

2015 Stats:
North Melb/Goldstein 5.7 more hitouts (than AFL ave) .... translates to 0.4 more total team clearances and 0.3 LESS stoppages than the AFl ave
WCoast/ Natanui 9 more hitouts than AFL ave ... translates to 1.2 more total team clearances and 0.7 more stoppages than the AFL ave
Freo/Sandi 16.3 more htouts than AFL ave .. translates to 3.1 more total team clearances and 2.7 more stoppages than the AFL ave
GWS/ Mumford 2.8 less hitouts than the AFL ave .... translates to 1.2 less total team clearances and 0.6 more stoppages than AFL ave
Adelaide/ Jacobs 0.7 more hitouts translates to 2 more total team clearances and 0.4 more stoppages than the AFL ave

So the raw hitout numbers and extra hitouts are not translating to extra clearances... and I can't see their dominance - only an inefficiency, if anything.
Shows up the fact that the hitouts of some of these "dominant" ruckmen aren't finding their intended target - and a lot must be going to the opposition?

That's why I think the real difference may be in the possessions these ruckmen win around the ground - the saving marks they take, etc.. what they do around the ground is at least as important, I think.

[To the top]

I stand by my prior contribution that possessions are not the be all and end all (only a function of fantasy!) and that contribution also includes honoring the game plan and being an option (used or unused).

There is, therefore, a far wider consideration than "possessions".

An example from a successful period for St Kilda in terms of "options" contributing to game plan was Riewoldt and Koschitzke.

Or, as another example, Everitt and Vidovic, whose injuries cost us in 1997 (Vidovic allowed Everitt to become a damaging forward option).

In regards any who obviously "exist" to exclusively "contribute" to this site as they do, can I attempt to assist you in widening your horizons in life by suggesting that you educate yourself in regards:-

1) Recalcitrant

and

2) Change hands at 99


In regards the contribution of a ruckman dominating at bounces and boundary throw ins, a guy by the name of Bill Wedding was a dominant knock ruckman (including All-Australian selections at - then - Carnivals) who gave his team mates confidence in regards where the ball was going to be at any bounce or boundary throw in (the likes of Bunton and Oatey being the beneficiaries).

Did not contribute a hell of a lot around the ground (marks, kicks, handballs) "Big" Bill, but won (I think) 4 Club Best and Fairest's against fair competition and was a regular State player such was his dominance of ball ups and boundary throw ins.

Would he survive with that particular skill set in today's game?

As always, a good question unable to be answered.

But I would suggest that he may not because the competition is a Sandilands who can position to influence other than at bounces and boundary throw ins.

But, as the game changes so do player capabilities including by practice, practice and practice so in a changed world practice, practice and practice would have delivered what?

Players such as Longer and Hickey practice, practice and practice - and you would hope to the ultimate conclusion - or, at least, close to it in terms of contribution to team and team success.

If you can not get any better by practice, practice and practice, you are at the end of the road - or, at least, close to it!

[BigMart]

Still don't understand that raw aggregate numbers are not what is analysed by anyone who understands footy.

Otherwise the best and fairests, brownlows, norm smiths, highest paid players... Etc
Would be those who just get the most possessions...

Important touches
Quality touches
Contested marks
Quality hit outs
Effective tackles
Clearances

Let me actually tell you now, (the same thing any AFL mid would)

It's easier to win first possession if you control the ruck. It's easier to get on the fly if you know what quadrant the ball will be directed to... If you don't believe that...
You've never played a game in anger, definitely haven't been in a midfield!

[Bluthy]

It's easier to win first possession if you control the ruck. It's easier to get on the fly if you know what quadrant the ball will be directed to... If you don't believe that...
You've never played a game in anger, definitely haven't been in a midfield!

Agree - and that really pays off in prelims and grannies where you have blue ribbon big-bodied talented midfielders at every single contest on each side who just need the slightest advantage to get it out and going their way. It comes down to centimetres at clearances in the big games. Rucks stocks rises exponentially each week of the finals. Its why coaches have almost infinite patience with the big men. They know their value in September.

[BackFromUSA]

Perhaps I am biased in this subject being the old dinosaur that played in the ruck at Amo level but being predictable to the midfield at ruck contests is essential. A ruckman not only needs to tell team mates where to be for an attack on the ball if an effective rap is won BUT where to defend if a tap is lost. I often gave away 2 to 3 inches in height to the opposing ruckmen but also some reach which I had to make up either through leap or body positioning (restricting their leap) and in many cases I could force my opponent into hitting to one side or the other where I had set up our numbers. Rucking is not just about a leap and a tap! It is about getting the ball into zones where you have got your numbers and if you do win the tap into a zone where you have two receivers taking the inside positioning of their opponents so that they can protect and work with each other. I often see our centre clearance set ups as being overly defensive - and when Holmes started winning taps - we were unable to adapt.

[BackFromUSA]

p.s. I shall keep repeating ... Rhys Stanley is a ruckman. Best we have had since Spider. Happy with Hugh Goddard. Sad to see Rhys go. Cats will benefit if he can avoid injury.

[BigMart]

Rhys is strong and athletic...

Has physical attributes that may well see him become a quality ruckman, if he stays on the park.

[ripplug66]

It's easier to win first possession if you control the ruck. It's easier to get on the fly if you know what quadrant the ball will be directed to... If you don't believe that...
You've never played a game in anger, definitely haven't been in a midfield!

Agree - and that really pays off in prelims and grannies where you have blue ribbon big-bodied talented midfielders at every single contest on each side who just need the slightest advantage to get it out and going their way. It comes down to centimetres at clearances in the big games. Rucks stocks rises exponentially each week of the finals. Its why coaches have almost infinite patience with the big men. They know their value in September.

Why if rucks are so important in finals, do the losing or poorer ruckmen win the last 4 GF's. I would even argue that was of the reasons we got back into the first GF in 2010 was because our main ruckman went down and Kosi and Blake went into the ruck. Both are hardly class ruckmen but can get the ball around the ground.

[Bluthy]

It's easier to win first possession if you control the ruck. It's easier to get on the fly if you know what quadrant the ball will be directed to... If you don't believe that...
You've never played a game in anger, definitely haven't been in a midfield!

Agree - and that really pays off in prelims and grannies where you have blue ribbon big-bodied talented midfielders at every single contest on each side who just need the slightest advantage to get it out and going their way. It comes down to centimetres at clearances in the big games. Rucks stocks rises exponentially each week of the finals. Its why coaches have almost infinite patience with the big men. They know their value in September.

Why if rucks are so important in finals, do the losing or poorer ruckmen win the last 4 GF's. I would even argue that was of the reasons we got back into the first GF in 2010 was because our main ruckman went down and Kosi and Blake went into the ruck. Both are hardly class ruckmen but can get the ball around the ground.

Not at all. All the premiers have had two strong ruckmen. They will all differ a bit in particular strengths - tap outs, forward, around the ground, marking, athleticism - but they can both do genuine rucking that means the midfielders are never truly on the back foot.

[ripplug66]

It's easier to win first possession if you control the ruck. It's easier to get on the fly if you know what quadrant the ball will be directed to... If you don't believe that...
You've never played a game in anger, definitely haven't been in a midfield!

Agree - and that really pays off in prelims and grannies where you have blue ribbon big-bodied talented midfielders at every single contest on each side who just need the slightest advantage to get it out and going their way. It comes down to centimetres at clearances in the big games. Rucks stocks rises exponentially each week of the finals. Its why coaches have almost infinite patience with the big men. They know their value in September.

Why if rucks are so important in finals, do the losing or poorer ruckmen win the last 4 GF's. I would even argue that was of the reasons we got back into the first GF in 2010 was because our main ruckman went down and Kosi and Blake went into the ruck. Both are hardly class ruckmen but can get the ball around the ground.

Not at all. All the premiers have had two strong ruckmen. They will all differ a bit in particular strengths - tap outs, forward, around the ground, marking, athleticism - but they can both do genuine rucking that means the midfielders are never truly on the back foot.

Sydney didn't for a start and the Hawks last year even subbed Hale because he really struggled. Most of the sides had one reasonable ruckman and a player who mainly played forward. The losing sides had the better ruckmen unless you rate Ben and Hale better than Sandilands and Nat. Mathematics says if you choose to play 2 talls its more important the second tall is good enough on his own to play as a KPP. They will spend about 70% of their time there and only around 20% as a ruckman. If he is no good for 70% you are going to struggle.

[Bluthy]

Sydney had Mumford and Pyke. Mummy had dodgy hammy so shows another benefit of having two guys who can do specialist ruck - you need that cover as s*** happens. Hale and McEvoy were a great combo against Nic Nat and Sandilands. You need the two rucks man. History shows it. You can't argue with history.

[ripplug66]

Sydney had Mumford and Pyke. Mummy had dodgy hammy so shows another benefit of having two guys who can do specialist ruck - you need that cover as s*** happens. Hale and McEvoy were a great combo against Nic Nat and Sandilands. You need the two rucks man. History shows it. You can't argue with history.

Just a couple of simple questions Bluthy. If Hickey plays 70% of a game as a forward is he a forward? Was Fev a forward when he played on Gehrig or a backman? And if Hickey isn't very good as a forward does he continue to play so we have someone in the ruck for about 20% of the game?

[samuraisaint]

p.s. I shall keep repeating ... Rhys Stanley is a ruckman. Best we have had since Spider. Happy with Hugh Goddard. Sad to see Rhys go. Cats will benefit if he can avoid injury.

Can't agree with this. King and Gardi were both far better than Stanley based on what we have seen - can't use a game against a Fremantle with it's best 13 out, or a preseason night game as evidence of being our best ruckman in the past 15 years, during which time we were a top 2 side. For mine, the greatest asset that Rhys has is his athletic ability, but this is negated by his inability to withstand injuries. Case in point, his 2015 season at Geelong. I hope he is succesful, good luck to him.

Longer and Hickey need to be playing and developing in the firsts while our side is going through the rebuild. Hickey will get more chances this year due to Carlisle's suspension. I believe that AR's decision to not play one of Hickey or Longer against the Cats probably cost us the win, and certainly contributed to the uncompetitiveness of the team in the final two matches, but I think he was trying to make a point, a la Lyon with Dal and Milney.

[BackFromUSA]

I think this year that it would be great if they played longer and hickey 50% in ruck each.

Rather than play 50% forward - limit their time to longer 10% forward and Hickey 20% forward.

So Hickey on the ground 70% game as he can play forward and Longer on for just 60% of the time.

Then a third mobile tall forward - Ideally McCartin - gets at least 60% game time week in week out. Even up to 80% game time if we need to rest Bruce and Riewoldt for periods ... The 2 Ruckman and 1 tall forward should only use up 3 to 4 rotations a quarter leaving the rest to midfielders - who this year will rotate as much forward as they do through the interchange as defensive and small forwards.

[BackFromUSA]

p.s. I shall keep repeating ... Rhys Stanley is a ruckman. Best we have had since Spider. Happy with Hugh Goddard. Sad to see Rhys go. Cats will benefit if he can avoid injury.

Can't agree with this. King and Gardi were both far better than Stanley based on what we have seen - can't use a game against a Fremantle with it's best 13 out, or a preseason night game as evidence of being our best ruckman in the past 15 years, during which time we were a top 2 side. For mine, the greatest asset that Rhys has is his athletic ability, but this is negated by his inability to withstand injuries. Case in point, his 2015 season at Geelong. I hope he is succesful, good luck to him.

Longer and Hickey need to be playing and developing in the firsts while our side is going through the rebuild. Hickey will get more chances this year due to Carlisle's suspension. I believe that AR's decision to not play one of Hickey or Longer against the Cats probably cost us the win, and certainly contributed to the uncompetitiveness of the team in the final two matches, but I think he was trying to make a point, a la Lyon with Dal and Milney.

I stand by my opinion.

Gardiner and King were solid and only played a few great games too. Both also had a fair share of injuries in their time with us.

Rhys rarely played ruck with us but when he did our clearance rate improved because he was getting clean hands or forcing the other Ruckman one way. He struggled from some leap timing issues at times because he was denied valuable time as a Ruckman. He also struggled with body positioning at boundary throw ins but in his last year that improved dramatically.

Watch him at Geelong. Will thrive. They want to give him the first ruck position.

The foot injury he coped was pure bad luck. Will recover hopefully as they can take a while. Ask Sam Gilbert.

[samoht]

I've stopped posting - this is the stats speaking for themselves!

The 2003 AFL season is interesting - we had Kosi and Maguire winning the bulk of the hitouts, with Knobel only playing a few games for the season (and only winning 80 hitouts) - Riewoldt also chimed in with 60 hitouts - so it's not surprising that only 2 teams Collingwood and the Bulldogs ended up with less hitouts that season.

Despite this, we still ended up with 4th most stoppages and 4th most team clearances in 2003!

That's with Kosi and Maguire as our main ruckmen!! ... and winning 5.5 less hitouts than the AFL team average and finishing 3rd from the bottom as far as hitouts go !! - we still ended up with the 4th most stoppages and 4th most clearances.
I rest my case!

That's why I'll maintain until I'm blue in the face that ruckmen need to win their fair share of possessions and take important marks around the ground and kick a few goals - to make a real difference. It's not about hitouts - as they don't translate well or correlate well into clearances.

[Mr Magic]

Who is our Ruck Coach this year?

[Bluthy]

Sydney had Mumford and Pyke. Mummy had dodgy hammy so shows another benefit of having two guys who can do specialist ruck - you need that cover as s*** happens. Hale and McEvoy were a great combo against Nic Nat and Sandilands. You need the two rucks man. History shows it. You can't argue with history.

Just a couple of simple questions Bluthy. If Hickey plays 70% of a game as a forward is he a forward? Was Fev a forward when he played on Gehrig or a backman? And if Hickey isn't very good as a forward does he continue to play so we have someone in the ruck for about 20% of the game?

Been here, done that, brought the t-shirt. Go back and read my posts. I've been very clear what I mean by "two rucks" I'm not doing this waltz with you again - its boring and repetitive and you keep stepping on my toes. I think they'll keep trying the Hickey as fwd experiment on and off this year working towards the "two ruck' thing that all the Premiers have. That may not be the case in the future, past patterns do change as the game evolves. Dawson just said he thinks hulking forwards are on their way out as this season there will be even more running and you can't afford to have a forward who can't cover huge amounts of ground.

[ripplug66]

Sydney had Mumford and Pyke. Mummy had dodgy hammy so shows another benefit of having two guys who can do specialist ruck - you need that cover as s*** happens. Hale and McEvoy were a great combo against Nic Nat and Sandilands. You need the two rucks man. History shows it. You can't argue with history.

Just a couple of simple questions Bluthy. If Hickey plays 70% of a game as a forward is he a forward? Was Fev a forward when he played on Gehrig or a backman? And if Hickey isn't very good as a forward does he continue to play so we have someone in the ruck for about 20% of the game?

Been here, done that, brought the t-shirt. Go back and read my posts. I've been very clear what I mean by "two rucks" I'm not doing this waltz with you again - its boring and repetitive and you keep stepping on my toes. I think they'll keep trying the Hickey as fwd experiment on and off this year working towards the "two ruck' thing that all the Premiers have. That may not be the case in the future, past patterns do change as the game evolves. Dawson just said he thinks hulking forwards are on their way out as this season there will be even more running and you can't afford to have a forward who can't cover huge amounts of ground.

Its not clear at all what you call 2 rucks. For a start in the GF last year Hale hardly rucked and was taken off because his form at the position he was picked, CHF, wasn't good enough. My questions are completely relevant because I gave a percentage of time Hickey would play at CHF and in the ruck. By the way I reckon blind freddy would know Hickey was dropped twice last year because of his forward play and not his ruck work which means the club regarded him as a forward. How many minutes do you have to play in the one position to be regarded as playing there on that day? 70% which is what he was doing makes him a forward. Anyone can see that.

And can you explain how this 2 ruck thing works is as you say they don't really play much on the bench? My guess is how would be now. Hickey is a forward who very occasionally rucks and Longer is a ruckman who rests when not rucking so in other words its one ruckman and someone to give him a chop out. Same as last season when they both played. Whist I disagree with how BFUSA wants the ruck set up at least what he is saying is 2 rucks. What you are suggesting is one ruck with help from a forward who IMO isn't a forward at all. As for Hickey getting more chances because of Carlisle suspension well Samurasaint I don't get that at all. They aren't going even close for the same position. Goddard will get more chances though.

[BigMart]

So would we have done better in 2003 with a better ruckman... Or worse ... Or the same??

You and plugger are arguing a different POV completely

You are saying you can still perform well without a quality ruckman, and are using examples of teams that do...
Of course you can, a team is played with 18 players and an effective my midfield has six players. A ruckman is one of six... But they are important!

Yes you can get away without one, but you need to make it up in other areas... But can be exposed if the opposition have one.

If you have no great feat key forwards you can still perform well, if you have great key forwards you can perform well too...

The argument in any of those examples would be, would hawthorn (or whoever) be better off with a quality ruckman. Answer is obviously yes, and any midfielder would attest to this...

Again, any argument that suggests a quality ruckman isn't a huge advantage for mids, has never been at a stoppage, and probably doesn't understand what happens there. And quoting raw numbers is absolutely a waste of time, because how do you compare those same mids operating with first use? and suggesting because Hawthorn don't have an elite ruckman it is unimportant is also ridiculous... They have 12 other elite players to cover that weakness... Imagine if they did have

We apparently had the greatest forward I history and won nothing, does that mean he was unimportant??

Finally
Remember, raw stats tell half a story... The relevance of those stats is more important

[ripplug66]

So would we have done better in 2003 with a better ruckman... Or worse ... Or the same??

You and plugger are arguing a different POV completely

You are saying you can still perform well without a quality ruckman, and are using examples of teams that do...
Of course you can, a team is played with 18 players and an effective my midfield has six players. A ruckman is one of six... But they are important!

Yes you can get away without one, but you need to make it up in other areas... But can be exposed if the opposition have one.

If you have no great feat key forwards you can still perform well, if you have great key forwards you can perform well too...

The argument in any of those examples would be, would hawthorn (or whoever) be better off with a quality ruckman. Answer is obviously yes, and any midfielder would attest to this...

Again, any argument that suggests a quality ruckman isn't a huge advantage for mids, has never been at a stoppage, and probably doesn't understand what happens there. And quoting raw numbers is absolutely a waste of time, because how do you compare those same mids operating with first use? and suggesting because Hawthorn don't have an elite ruckman it is unimportant is also ridiculous... They have 12 other elite players to cover that weakness... Imagine if they did have

We apparently had the greatest forward I history and won nothing, does that mean he was unimportant??

Finally
Remember, raw stats tell half a story... The relevance of those stats is more important

I don't know about Sobraz but I certainly would think we would have gone better with a better ruckman. What I am arguing as I think Sobraz is, is what is a ruckman. Hitting the ball a lot to me doesn't make you a good ruckman. Taking marks especially contested plus useful possessions around the ground helps you become a very good ruckman. Cox was excellent at that as is Goldstein now. Even Sandilands averages about 13 possessions a game and 4 marks plus because of his size brilliant tap work but not many if any tap as well as him so that is a rarity. And again you telling us what we don't understand weakens your argument. You wouldn't have a clue what either of us know. And because of SC hawthorn probably cant have elite ruckman. Its give and take and the Hawks are choosing to have a ordinary ruckman because I would suggest they think other positions are more important.

The question is about Longer. Is hardly taking a mark and not getting many possessions overtaken by his taps. I say no. You obviously think yes.

[BackFromUSA]

I rate Longer's physical presence but his tap work and around the ground work (marks and possession rate) is below par.

Hickey is better around the ground, equally below par in tap work, but lacks physical presence.

I want them to split duties. These Ruckman need to break even and protect the space behind them and force the ball into our defensively set up clearance team.

Holmes has the most potential in terms of building a clearance team set up for his tap work. To be selected he needs to be given a role that he can focus on rather than run around without real purpose or direction.

Too early to tell with light weight Lewis. Needs 5-10kg more to even compete.

[BigMart]

Do you rate what AR thinks plugger, or Ross Lyon. They clearly want an effective ruckman who can compete at stoppage.

Ross bases his game around stoppage.

We traded McEvoy and he takes marks around the ground. We preferred Longer because he not only gives some first use, but competes harder to blunt the effectiveness of the opposition ruckman.

I suggest go to a VFL game, go to a Qtr time huddle, listen to the midfield group and listen to what the main emphasis is on... Stoppage Set Up. Which is dictated by who is winning the ruck... Mids set up accordingly.
Not about taps, it's about areas.

[BigMart]

Pierce is heavier/stronger ATM than Hickey. And is better already at stoppage.

Holmes is best at centre bounce
Holmes is the most agile and best athlete
Longer is best at around the ground stoppage
Hickey is best around the ground
Holmes and Longer have the best pressure skills
Hickey has the best hands in traffic
Longer is the most physical
Hickey and Pierce have some ability to play forward

None are elite in any of those categories. Perhaps Holmes the closest at Centre bounce.

[ripplug66]

Do you rate what AR thinks plugger, or Ross Lyon. They clearly want an effective ruckman who can compete at stoppage.

Ross bases his game around stoppage.

We traded McEvoy and he takes marks around the ground. We preferred Longer because he not only gives some first use, but competes harder to blunt the effectiveness of the opposition ruckman.

I suggest go to a VFL game, go to a Qtr time huddle, listen to the midfield group and listen to what the main emphasis is on... Stoppage Set Up. Which is dictated by who is winning the ruck... Mids set up accordingly.
Not about taps, it's about areas.

Again I would like to thank you for what you think I see and don't see. And the day you decide what the coaches say and you depend on it is the day I spew up.