Changes Rnd 4

[older saint]

Collingwood were just too good IMO, but great for this young team to get a smack in the face as to what the level required is.

Plenty poor performances, so no baby with bathwater, that said Need to consider the opposition.

Richmond go with 1 ruck and likely will swap Saldo for Nank,

Out: Ryder
In : Battle ( to back up ruck if needed or could use Marsh )

Under pressure:

Long - while much talk about his drive the last 2 weeks teams have targeted his player as his defensive side isn't good enough. Will keep his spot but needs to be a 2 way player.
Hind - His role means he needs to be an impact player, deserves another chance but needs to grab it
Lonie - small forward a tough gig and perhaps Butler has shown him up a little by playing so well but again more impact at contests.

Like I said plenty of poor players this week because opposition pressure up another level . Richmond on the rebound after the media starting to question their motivation - doesn't get any bigger test than this.

[The_Dud]

I agree, Ryder out. The two ruck strategy just isn't as suited to the shorter game, neither him or Marshall are having enough impact.

I'd like to see Parker back at some stage, I think when he's up and going he provides something different to the team.

[Joffa Burns]

What I'd like to see.

Out: Ryder in Battle
Out: Hind in Sinclair
Out: Marsh in Parker

In comes some hardness at the contest in Battle & Parker.
Speed in Parker & Sinclair and some skills and decent kicking.
Perhaps Webster has also earned a recall?

Roma rucks with chop out from Howard/ Carslile/ King at either end of the ground.
Battle forward or back as required.
Wouldn't mid seeing Howard play not as deep back, when he gets it and goes he moves well and is very athletic.

I don't think Ryder will be dropped but would rather he is.

[bigcarl]

Stick with the two ruckmen.

We need some height in the forward line other than King (a fourth-gamer) and Membrey (not big enough to be a KPP).

Collingwood’s a good side and taught us a lesson in pressure. We should be 2-1 rather than 1-2.

Stick to our guns. It will click eventually.

Tigers are on the rebound and will have Dusty back, so you’d expect them to show something. On the other hand, the belting they received by Hawthorn will have hit their confidence and may make them vulnerable.

For additions, I’d be looking at Roberton and Battle (and Geary, of course if fit). even if it makes us slightly slower. We were way to easy to score against.

[samoht]

Battle is a better player than Ryder and almost the same size.
Youth and future over past reputation - it shouldn't even be a discussion.
If 1 ruckman is good enough for the reigning premiers, it's good enough for us.

No more experiments.

It'd be different if we consistently won the clearances by a fair margin with our ruck duo - but we were a whopping 11 clearances down vs the Pies.

[bigcarl]

Battle is a better player than Ryder and almost the same size.
Youth and future over past reputation - it shouldn't even be a discussion.
If 1 ruckman is good enough for the reigning premiers, it's good enough for us.

No more experiments.

It'd be different if we consistently won the clearances by a fair margin with our ruck duo - but we were a whopping 11 clearances down vs the Pies.

Can Battle jump?

[CURLY]

Battle has to come in and play CHF can't have Billings matching up on players like Howe. No wonder our ball movement was slow.

[samoht]

Can Battle jump?

He’s not an elephant.
Anyway, he won’t have to, if we’re going in with 1 ruckman.

[bigcarl]

Can Battle jump?

He’s not an elephant.
Anyway, he won’t have to, if we’re going in with 1 ruckman.

If we’re going in with one ruckman - and Ratts has admitted it’s a possibility - we need a pinch hitter who can at least break even in the ruck.

Battle would add something in the forward line, it’s true, but we don’t want a Bruce situation. Where you cede the advantage to the opposition every time Marshall has a breather.

[samoht]

If we’re going in with one ruckman - and Ratts has admitted it’s a possibility - we need a pinch-hitter.

Have we tried Marsh? Marsh, King, Carlisle and Battle would work ... it’d only be for a handful of ruck contests,anyway - between all these pinch-hitters.
Anyone would be better than Bruce.
Marshall to contest in the ruck 90-95% of the time.

We can have Marsh-all (for almost all) and Marsh-some as the duo.

[Selhurst Saint]

I am surprised that no one has mentioned Coffield as a potential out.

His decision making and speed of execution were very poor on the weekend and cost us several goals.

It might just be Webster/Geary for Coffield this week.

[nostalgicsaint]

I am surprised that no one has mentioned Coffield as a potential out.

His decision making and speed of execution were very poor on the weekend and cost us several goals.

It might just be Webster/Geary for Coffield this week.

Close to worst on, the moment/pressure got to him which is fine as he is young. How the coaches want to handle that will probably depend on what they think is best for his individual development weighed against our desire to win. Some players respond to being dropped, others to being backed in.

Personally I'd give him a spell as the back-line is where we have the most depth.

My changes

Out: Marsh or Ryder, Coffield
In: Webster, Dunstan

What I think will happen
Out: Ryder, Hind
In: Battle, Geary

[samoht]

Anyway, I don't think the pinch hitter role is such a big deal, if Marshall rucks 90% plus of the time.
Grundy rucks 95% of the time for Collingwood.

I mean, Jason Blake was our main ruckman at one stage - at 189cm, and we benefited from his around-the-ground work - and it hasn't come to this, now.

Out: Marsh, Ryder
In: Battle, Dunstan

[bigcarl]

Anyway, I don't think the pinch hitter role is such a big deal, if Marshall rucks 90% plus of the time.
Grundy rucks 95% of the time for Collingwood.

I mean, Jason Blake was our main ruckman at one stage - at 189cm, and we benefited from his around-the-ground work - and it hasn't come to this, now.

Out: Marsh, Ryder
In: Battle, Dunstan

Ten per cent is a big deal. Footy is very much a game of momentum and it starts in the middle. Can’t afford to allow any advantage to the opposition, even for a few minutes.


As for Blake, he was a very competitive, versatile and underrated player. Had a good leap on him and would run rings around many of our current squad.

[samoht]

Ten per cent is a big deal. Footy is very much a game of momentum and it starts in the middle. Can’t afford to allow any advantage to the opposition, even for a few minutes.


As for Blake, he was a very competitive, versatile and underrated player. Had a good leap on him and would run rings around many of our current squad.

Grundy rucks 95% of the time - Richmond is the reigning premier and only go with 1 ruckman - they wish they had Marshall.
We won 37 more hitouts vs the Bulldogs - it only resulted in 3 more clearances - there's only a very small correlation between hitouts and clearances, if there even is one - I'd rather win more possessions around the ground - and we'll do that by playing Marshall 95% of the time, as our single ruckman.
We could then include an extra ground-level player - which is what Collingwood effectively had against us.
So Collingwood didn't only win 11 more clearances against us - you need to add another 20 plus possessions to that from their extra ground-level player. We concede a lot by doubling up in the ruck - and let's not forget that Roma is also down on his usual possessions around the ground.

[nostalgicsaint]

Ten per cent is a big deal. Footy is very much a game of momentum and it starts in the middle. Can’t afford to allow any advantage to the opposition, even for a few minutes.


As for Blake, he was a very competitive, versatile and underrated player. Had a good leap on him and would run rings around many of our current squad.

Grundy rucks 95% of the time - Richmond is the reigning premier and only go with 1 ruckman - they wish they had Marshall.
We won 37 more hitouts vs the Bulldogs - it only resulted in 3 more clearances - there's only a very small correlation between hitouts and clearances, if there even is one - I'd rather win more possessions around the ground - and we'll do that by playing Marshall 95% of the time, as our single ruckman.
We could then include an extra ground-level player - which is what Collingwood effectively had against us.
So Collingwood didn't only win 11 more clearances against us - you need to add another 20 plus possessions to that from their extra ground-level player. We concede a lot by doubling up in the ruck - and let's not forget that Roma is also down on his usual possessions around the ground.

Watch a game where you get smashed in the ruck and you'll understand why it's important.

Yes it is less obvious when both sides are fielding genuine ruckman but look no further than Ryder vs Bruce to see how much influence it can have when you get a mismatch in the ruck.

Most players who have played in the guts rave about how much easier their life is with a good ruck.

[samoht]

Watch a game where you get smashed in the ruck and you'll understand why it's important.

I did watch a game recently, and you just did .. we smashed the Bulldogs 49 hitouts to 12 ... we quadrupled their hitouts - yet we only had 3 more clearances - 32 to 29.
So 34 out of those extra 37 hitouts amounted to zilch - what else can we conclude?

Ryder can jump (and he needs to at 197cm) - but, it's not a high-jump contest.

I'm convinced that going in with 1 good ruckman - Marshall - who can take marks and can rack up possessions around the ground - not just win hitouts which much more often than not don't translate into clearances, is the way to go.
This way - by not doubling up in the ruck - you can also play another ground level player and gain another 20 plus possessions. Even if we don't see the rationale of this, Collingwood and Richmond certainly do.
Marshall is not quite as effective as he was by sharing the duties - we need to see all the negatives - and there are plenty - that come with doubling up in the ruck.

Anyway, enough said --- I'm getting tired of hearing myself ... I'll give it a rest, now.

[Nick_BlueNRG]

The experiment with Ryder needs to stop now!!!! Anyone that can't see that Marshall's effectiveness has evaporated is stupid. AS I HAVE SAID ALL ALONG, RYDER SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN RECRUITED. HE IS PAST IT AND IS JUST HAVING A GOOD TIME WITH HIS COUSIN AND RECEIVING HIS PENSION PAYMENTS. Gallagher should be immediately sacked as far as I'm concerned. His philosophy of topping up while still in the bottom half of the ladder will/has put us back 5 years and we are in a for a world of pain. This year will be the ninth year missing from finals. This will stretch to at least 14 years thanks to Gaggs. I just hope that the 2 benefactors clear our debt because if they don't we will be in a lot of trouble. End of this year will see our debt reach $20Mil and with continued performances like the other day it won't take long before we are shut down.

[Beno88]

Marsh, Hind, Ross out.

Battle, Geary, Dunstan in.

[shanegrambeau]

Watch a game where you get smashed in the ruck and you'll understand why it's important.

I did watch a game recently, and you just did .. we smashed the Bulldogs 49 hitouts to 12 ... we quadrupled their hitouts - yet we only had 3 more clearances - 32 to 29.
So 34 out of those extra 37 hitouts amounted to zilch - what else can we conclude?

Ryder can jump (and he needs to at 197cm) - but, it's not a high-jump contest.

I'm convinced that going in with 1 good ruckman - Marshall - who can take marks and can rack up possessions around the ground - not just win hitouts which much more often than not don't translate into clearances, is the way to go.
This way - by not doubling up in the ruck - you can also play another ground level player and gain another 20 plus possessions. Even if we don't see the rationale of this, Collingwood and Richmond certainly do.
Marshall is not quite as effective as he was by sharing the duties - we need to see all the negatives - and there are plenty - that come with doubling up in the ruck.

Anyway, enough said --- I'm getting tired of hearing myself ... I'll give it a rest, now.

Clearances from lost hit outs are a misleading stat IMO. How many of them are good clearances? The time the player has to execute disposal from an unexpected collect should be far less.

Ryders tap work was praised, surely it is useful. I didn't like it when GT used that rationale for Kosi to ruck and I don't like us saying Battle is a substitute for Ryder...but Ryder could be dropped for other factors of course.

Marsh out.
Battle in.
Coffield out.
Geary in.

Dusty killed us last year. 36 disposals.

[spert]

Grundy won the ruck duels, but my worry was when the ball hit the ground and was there for the taking- our players were a metre off their man and waiting, not attacking, almost like Ratts told them to play a step away from the contest. The tackle count was terrible as we we not playing close enough to tackle!

After thinking a bit more about it..
Out: Hind, Paddy, King
In: Kent, Battle, Parker

[samoht]

Clearances from lost hit outs are a misleading stat IMO. How many of them are good clearances?

Well, there was one “ beautiful”double-handed hitout by Ryder to a Bulldog player who was well in the clear, which resulted in a Doggie goal. The Bulldog player took full advantage of it.
You’re obviously not referring to that one.

[freely]

Collingwood were just too good IMO, but great for this young team to get a smack in the face as to what the level required is.

Plenty poor performances, so no baby with bathwater, that said Need to consider the opposition.

Richmond go with 1 ruck and likely will swap Saldo for Nank,

Out: Ryder
In : Battle ( to back up ruck if needed or could use Marsh )

Under pressure:

Long - while much talk about his drive the last 2 weeks teams have targeted his player as his defensive side isn't good enough. Will keep his spot but needs to be a 2 way player.
Hind - His role means he needs to be an impact player, deserves another chance but needs to grab it
Lonie - small forward a tough gig and perhaps Butler has shown him up a little by playing so well but again more impact at contests.

Like I said plenty of poor players this week because opposition pressure up another level . Richmond on the rebound after the media starting to question their motivation - doesn't get any bigger test than this.

Yeah, except it's the older players who need the smack in the face IMHO.

[Yorkeys]

The conundrum - few changes so there is continuity vs reaction to a v. bad game. I think there was a coach's rule of thumb that more than three changes and team work takes a serious hit. Well Hind probably won't be around long term like some lower draft picks, Paddy has missed marks in the forward line that would have cemented his place, & most others can be given a forget the run mark which is generous to plenty. Geary if fit and Battle in I suspect, but possibly Webster for Coffield. Hanneberry will be given a stern talking to and Ross a confidence building interview.

[The Fireman]

Care factor has dropped considerably , has shown everyone how incapable the side can be.

Honestly didnt see that coming, I knew the skunks were good and tipped them for the Corana cup..but wow...we stank.

Back to fishing for me.. spare the heart ache.

Signed Mr Glass half empty...(for good reason)