Hickey or Longer?

[Con Gorozidis]

I think the club just wants to keep Billy motivated and interested.

[Bluthy]

Cheer up champ, sometimes you just say things and look like a dick... happens to me regularly.

Let's hug it out.

Sure

[Bluthy]

I think the club just wants to keep Billy motivated and interested.

Tony has said its a lot more than that - the rule change is more in Billys wheelhouse according to vid review. I think people need to get ready to see Billy strutting his stuff on the main stage. We don't necessarily need another midfielder out there with less than elite delivery - we've already got lots of those. Perhaps the powers that be feel we need a big guy that people can get around and make them walk taller and hurt the oppo. Some mongrel and grunt.

[kosifantutti]

PS: and yes Hickey's handball is a real weapon. He has very god vision and has the knack of being able to teammates in the clear.

....

Oh and Hickey has God vision now? Seriously. So he's better than Dangerfield and Mitchell. ACtually start watching the games - Hicks is great for a big guy but no where near the level of the elite mids disposal - he rarely does penetrating disposals that open things up. Now THAT was a dumb comment.

It's clearly not what he said.

And Hickey's handball in close is very good. Not very good for a big man, just very good.

[saintsRrising]

Richo post game did not speak like a coach furious about his ruckman breaking team rule's. Indeed it seemed to me he was somewhat pleased with Hickey's game.

From what Tony and other ITK's have said Richo is very hard nosed about players having to follow team rules. If Hickey broke them then he will not be playing against the Swans.

Personally I very much doubt that the way Hickey played was not as the coach would have wanted. Indeed I would instead imagine that he would have been marked as exceeding expectations.

Maybe the coaches had in mind that Longer could be playing in a more bash and crash style. If so then Hickey's game against the Swans, on top of his form of 2016 that ruckman can be more than that, or at least some can be.

Big Ben was moved on because he was was limited as an overall ruck package. He was not the ruckman that Longer potentially is, but was better around the ground. Whereas Hickey is better around the ground that Ben, and is also better with his ruckwork.

Longer's training form may well have been superb, but when the big dance came Hickey played like he wants to remain our No 1 Ruck. Training and playing are quite different. And yes the H&A will be different again.

If Hickey keeps playing like he did against the Swans then he will be hard to displace.

Personally I reckon what we need are more players to exceed expectations. The more the better. It is up to Longer to improve. Indeed it is up to all of our players to improve.

[shrodes]

Richo post game did not speak like a coach furious about his ruckman breaking team rule's. Indeed it seemed to me he was somewhat pleased with Hickey's game.

His words were almost literally "couldn't have done much more to stake his claim for round 1"

[Bluthy]

Richo post game did not speak like a coach furious about his ruckman breaking team rule's. Indeed it seemed to me he was somewhat pleased with Hickey's game.

From what Tony and other ITK's have said Richo is very hard nosed about players having to follow team rules. If Hickey broke them then he will not be playing against the Swans.

Personally I very much doubt that the way Hickey played was not as the coach would have wanted. Indeed I would instead imagine that he would have been marked as exceeding expectations.

Maybe the coaches had in mind that Longer could be playing in a more bash and crash style. If so then Hickey's game against the Swans, on top of his form of 2016 that ruckman can be more than that, or at least some can be.

Big Ben was moved on because he was was limited as an overall ruck package. He was not the ruckman that Longer potentially is, but was better around the ground. Whereas Hickey is better around the ground that Ben, and is also better with his ruckwork.

Longer's training form may well have been superb, but when the big dance came Hickey played like he wants to remain our No 1 Ruck. Training and playing are quite different. And yes the H&A will be different again.

If Hickey keeps playing like he did against the Swans then he will be hard to displace.

Personally I reckon what we need are more players to exceed expectations. The more the better. It is up to Longer to improve. Indeed it is up to all of our players to improve.

Its not about breaking team rules. Its more an over-view of the best type of ruck to win you a grannie. Keating for Brisbane would chug his way though the season pretty unremarkably and then in finals go WHACk and smack in and smack the ball and bash into the other ruck and bash into the oppo mids who were watching their backs with this ankle crushing, rib-bruising giant.

Some of those less physical rucks don't hold up in the brutal, physical battle of finals where it is much more congested, much more body on body. And with no third man up - that dogs used that well with Bontempelli - physicality in rucks could even be more important. So maybe the club is trying to be more visionary than just looking at winning the Melbourne game and playing a longer (excuse the pun) game. End result - two AFL seasoned rucks and a ruck who can hold up in brutal finals footy. But just keep ignoring the argument and keep talking about irrelevant "team rules" if that makes you happy.

[Bluthy]

Richo post game did not speak like a coach furious about his ruckman breaking team rule's. Indeed it seemed to me he was somewhat pleased with Hickey's game.

His words were almost literally "couldn't have done much more to stake his claim for round 1"

Doesn't mean he's a lock to be the main ruck - although I think he does match up well on Gawn and hence will play the season opener. What happens if we lose to Melbourne with Hickey rucking - would people re-evaluate his importance? Possessions aren't everything if the team dynamic isn't working.

[dragit]

Richo post game did not speak like a coach furious about his ruckman breaking team rule's. Indeed it seemed to me he was somewhat pleased with Hickey's game.

His words were almost literally "couldn't have done much more to stake his claim for round 1"

Doesn't mean he's a lock to be the main ruck - although I think he does match up well on Gawn and hence will play the season opener. What happens if we lose to Melbourne with Hickey rucking - would people re-evaluate his importance? Possessions aren't everything if the team dynamic isn't working.

I think Hickey has enough runs on the board to not be dropped after one game unless he was absolutely shocking.

[Bluthy]

Richo post game did not speak like a coach furious about his ruckman breaking team rule's. Indeed it seemed to me he was somewhat pleased with Hickey's game.

His words were almost literally "couldn't have done much more to stake his claim for round 1"

Doesn't mean he's a lock to be the main ruck - although I think he does match up well on Gawn and hence will play the season opener. What happens if we lose to Melbourne with Hickey rucking - would people re-evaluate his importance? Possessions aren't everything if the team dynamic isn't working.

I think Hickey has enough runs on the board to not be dropped after one game unless he was absolutely shocking.

Did I miss where we won a flag last year after Hickey crushed it in the finals driving the team to ultimate success hence validating him totally and giving him lots of credit in the bank? I thought we finished lower than half the teams in the competition and struggled in clearances. Seems you're easily satisfied particularly after losses. Hope our team selectors aren't. Dempster has the runs on the board, doesn't mean he should be selected if they don't think it is the best team dynamic and balance.

[dragit]

So much drama as always bluth… it has nothing to do with what I am satisfied with, is your memory going?

The guy finished 8th in our B&F in what was widely considered a breakout season.

Richo's thoughts

“Tom had a very positive year. He was one of our most improved players. He went from a player who had struggled for any continuity with his program previously because of injury to having a really solid pre-season which meant he was able to get a lot of work into his body, improve his running, improve his vertical leap and improve his strength. He ended up having a really strong year because of it. There’s not too many ruckmen that he got beaten by.

“As his year unfolded he grew as a player, not only was he really competitive for us with his primary role, he was then able to play as an onballer after his ruckwork; his follow up work was impressive, his handball work became really positive. As the year kept going he got better and better in the air from a marking perspective. It was a very positive year.”

You can go and on using hypotheticals about him not being good for team dynamic and balance, but all the evidence we have so far is completely to the contrary…

So in the end you are just being contrary, for the sake of it.

[Bluthy]

No I'm not just being contrary (he said being contrary) at all - I'm too old to try and be some edgy dude.

You will find Richo said similar compliments about Templeton. This is what supporters do all the time - get way ahead of themselves and starting saying a player is a gun after one good season and won't listen to any other possibilities or look at possible flaws or just admit that they are still a work in progress.

To be a gun you've got to put multiple strong seasons together and show you can hold up in big games when things really matter. The huge danger now for our club is we get ahead of ourselves, get too cocky and stop asking the hard questions. I love that the club has done huge video review to get a handle on how the rule change impacts the ruck. I love that they are questioning what is involved in the ruck and that we want strong cover - that's visionary stuff. Half the board here want to trade Longer out and then what happens if Hickey gets injured or starts struggling. Could cost us a flag.

This is a complex game with so many variables that are beyond numbers like possessions or b&f finishes. Chemistry, team dynamics and physical superiority matter huge in this game Look at Mav - he's averaging 16 disposals last year. You can quite rightly ask if that is enough. But then Richo will love his leadership, his often brutal physicality to intimidate the oppo backs and midfielders sometimes hurting them. You can, and should, apply the same questions to the ruck.

Complacency and self-satisfaction is the seductive devil of footy clubs on the rise and I'm glad we aren't falling into that trap. We finished below the majority of other teams in the comp. We gotta lot of work to do to get better and have huge mountains in front of us like GWS, Sydeny, GC and Melbourne who are loaded up on high draft picks. WE can't just do things well, we gotta do nearly everything brilliantly and innovatingly (word?) to get to the top.

I know a lot of people are scared of questioning where we are at - much more enjoyable to punch the air screaming "we got the bestest ruck - he get the ball and do stuff wid it yeahhhhh! Give us our flag now" But I'm glad the club isn't taking the easy road.

[dragit]

This is what supporters do all the time - get way ahead of themselves

"we got the bestest ruck - he get the ball and do stuff wid it yeahhhhh! Give us our flag now"

Must feel great to know so much more than most supporters…

I can't remember anyone writing anything remotely like what you are suggesting above… so you are just coming across like an arrogant douche.

Hickey just had a very good year and is clearly our best ruckmen right now, not the best ruckmen in the comp… though he did play very well against AA Gawn twice last year.

You should keep going on about complexities such as chemistry, dynamics and balance that most supporters can't fathom, cause you're not scared of the big questions like the rest.

[saintsRrising]

Did I miss where we won a flag last year after Hickey crushed it in the finals driving the team to ultimate success hence validating him totally and giving him lots of credit in the bank?

Yes you must have missed it after celebrating too hard and long after Longer's 2015 Brownlow. Oh wait, that did not happen either did it.


Seriously why the need to constantly exaggerate or belittle players?

Your whole argument about Longer is what he MIGHT do. Right here and now he has not done it. Right here and now Hickey is rated by most as the better performed and more inform ruckman.

Hopefully Longer can improve his game enough to displace him.

[Con Gorozidis]

I think the club just wants to keep Billy motivated and interested.

Tony has said its a lot more than that - the rule change is more in Billys wheelhouse according to vid review. I think people need to get ready to see Billy strutting his stuff on the main stage. We don't necessarily need another midfielder out there with less than elite delivery - we've already got lots of those. Perhaps the powers that be feel we need a big guy that people can get around and make them walk taller and hurt the oppo. Some mongrel and grunt.

Good in theory. Still needs to actually do it in a real game before we can make any pronouncements.

[Enrico_Misso]

After that it can't be Hickey

[longtimesaint]

After that it can't be Hickey

I think Gawn would have beaten Billy as well

[Liam_G]

There was a moment from Hickey during the last quarter that left me fuming.

Hickey was clearly already out of gas at this stage. But there he is, using more energy than I'd seen all day, pulling some players off a little melee on the half-forward flank. A melee he wasn't even involved in to begin with. All this while the ball was ready for a throw-in on the back flank. Throw-in ensues with Hickey still messing around on the forward flank, so poor Seb Ross has to ruck against Gawn. The result, of course, was a simple Gawn clearance, inside 50, goal Demons. Just like that.

I think it riled me up more than it should have because I've been championing Hickey as out #1 over Longer and his performance today was such a backward step for him.

[White Winmar]

The third man up rule really hurt us today. It was as though Gawn didn't have an opponent and we had no alternatives.

[BigMart]

Hickey, no match for Gawn

7cm and 15kg

Like Tom Hickey rucking against Nick Coughlin

What I didn't like was his lack of output around the ground to make up for the hiding he was copping in the centre square

[The OtherThommo]

After that it can't be Hickey

I think Gawn would have beaten Billy as well

Maybe, but he would have felt it.

The worst part of Hickey's performance was Melbourne felt able to give Gawn rests, and when they did, Watts bested Hickey. They kicked 7 straight to 1.6 in the 2nd 1/4, and Watts opposed Hickey for a fair slice of that.

I reckon they chose Hickey with the anticipation that Gawn might dominate the close in stuff, but Hickey would contribute by using his athleticism to get off Gawn and hurt them the other way (he did so last year).

Not today, Hickey was a liability.

And, I did say post selection, we shoulda played Longer. When Paddy pulled out, playing 2 big blokes made more sense than introducing Lonie.

[SaintWodonga]

I like to give people a chance, however Hickey was so bad, I would insist Longer play against WCE.

[saintbob]

Hickey by a street, even after last night