| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ronrat
Joined: 22 May 2006
Location: Thailand
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
Dave, explain premaritally to us all
_________________
Annoying opposition supporters since 1967. |
|
|
|
 |
Cuthbert Collingwood 
Once was on fire, now all at sea
Joined: 08 Dec 2005
Location: The BBC (Brunswick Bowling Club)
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Dave we need more Grundy threads!
_________________
McRae for Governor-General! |
|
|
|
|
Albert Parker
Joined: 13 Dec 2012
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Look at Essendon, with Ryder and Bellchambers out on the weekend, they rucked Carlisle rather than elevate Thurlow.
Got smashed by Warnock in the ruck hit outs but Essendon smashed Carlton in clearances etc.
Not a big deal if we have to give White more ruck time over the course of the season in order to manage Grundy, ideally with Reid back in the team.
_________________
One team, one dream - the Pies and this year's premiership |
|
|
|
|
melliot
Joined: 07 Apr 2006
Location: Bendigo
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| jackcass wrote: | | melliot wrote: | I think it's game/opposition specific.
The problem is that we're too slow with Witts & Grundy in the side. Especially when one plays deep forward. The ball bounces out like a trampoline.
Agree that Grundy needs help. He was spent in the 3rd. Maybe we need to play Lynch. Then we can have Lynch, White & Keefe providing a cumulative greater chop out of say 30%-40%. |
This arguement just mystifies me. How can Witts and Grundy be any slower than Simpson and McIntosh? |
Never said it was slower than them. But Imo it's better team balance it you have one true ruck and another that can play more like a forward or other positions. If Witts or Grundy could play forward adequately, I think those two can play and maintain balance. But both are poor when forward at AFL level. They don't do enough in the air when forward. That will come in time I think. But we will be seriously exposed until they do. They are just a rebound opportunity until they do enough in the air to substitute what they can't do on the deck.
I'd suggest both Cats rucks are better when forward. Although not great. |
|
|
|
|
melliot
Joined: 07 Apr 2006
Location: Bendigo
|
| Post subject: | |
|
PS I don't think the Cats ruck set up is one to aspire to.
Hawks' McCoy and Hale works well cos Hale is a good forward and solid in the ruck.
Essendon's Ryder and Bellchambers. Cos Ryder can play forward and back.
IMO your 2nd ruck must play another role well. Because otherwise they are useless for 60%-70% of the game. |
|
|
|
|
AN_Inkling
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| melliot wrote: | | jackcass wrote: | | melliot wrote: | I think it's game/opposition specific.
The problem is that we're too slow with Witts & Grundy in the side. Especially when one plays deep forward. The ball bounces out like a trampoline.
Agree that Grundy needs help. He was spent in the 3rd. Maybe we need to play Lynch. Then we can have Lynch, White & Keefe providing a cumulative greater chop out of say 30%-40%. |
This arguement just mystifies me. How can Witts and Grundy be any slower than Simpson and McIntosh? |
Never said it was slower than them. But Imo it's better team balance it you have one true ruck and another that can play more like a forward or other positions. If Witts or Grundy could play forward adequately, I think those two can play and maintain balance. But both are poor when forward at AFL level. They don't do enough in the air when forward. That will come in time I think. But we will be seriously exposed until they do. They are just a rebound opportunity until they do enough in the air to substitute what they can't do on the deck.
I'd suggest both Cats rucks are better when forward. Although not great. |
The Cats ruck setup is definitely not one to follow. Certainly not with McIntosh and Simpson.
That said: I've no problem with playing Witts and Grundy together, despite usually being strongly against playing two rucks (always hated it whenever we played Jolly and Wood together). The main reason is that we are not contending this year. It's a development year and both these players need to play, and Grundy at 19, definitely needs help. The other reason is that despite both being genuine first rucks they can both play around the ground. Maybe not to a great standard at AFL level just yet but that will come over the next 2-3 years. Refusing to play them now will just lengthen that process.
_________________
Well done boys! |
|
|
|
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
