TWOMEY: How the AFL could reduce the glaring gulf in ruck stocks

The AFL should consider a third rookie list category to give clubs an opportunity to nurture young ruckmen, writes Callum Twomey

https://resources.afl.com.au/photo-r...952&height=592

LAST week, two AFL ruckmen went down with serious injuries. Last year, only three ruckmen were drafted.

When Rowan Marshall at St Kilda was ruled out for the start of the season with a foot injury, the Saints quickly signed Paul Hunter, who had been training with the club for the pre-season supplemental selection period spot.

When Braydon Preuss suffered his serious shoulder injury, the Giants looked inward – back at veteran Shane Mumford and towards the yet-to-debut Matthew Flynn to take on the No.1 mantle.

The gulf between the need for big men at the top level and how many are actually coming through the system has never been as glaring.

It is why, although the League is in an era where it has been forced to cut lists, resources and staff in the fallout from COVID-19, it should consider adding another way to bring ruckmen into the game.

The trend of clubs avoiding drafting ruckmen has been in plain sight since Brodie Grundy slipped to Collingwood's pick No.18 in 2012. Tim English, four years later, got through to the reigning premiers, the Western Bulldogs, with pick No.19.

Instead, clubs have used the annual trade and free agency period to restock their ruck department with ready-to-go big men. In 2019, eight ruckmen changed clubs.

Last year, Preuss, Stef Martin, Tom Hickey and Shaun McKernan swapped clubs, with Shannon Neale (Geelong), Samson Ryan (Richmond) and Henry Smith (Brisbane) the only pure ruckmen entering the system via the NAB AFL Draft – Adelaide's top choice Riley Thilthorpe is considered more of a forward.

https://resources.afl.com.au/photo-r...064&height=600

The AFL already has two categories of rookies: 'A' (players selected in the standard rookie draft) and 'B' (players who are from non-traditional recruiting backgrounds, such as international players, Next Generation Academy prospects and other sports).

But it should look at adding a third category to give clubs an opportunity outside the salary cap to nurture and grow young ruckmen to ensure their development continues.

The time and patience required for ruckmen to prosper means that some clubs would prefer to pick off mature-aged options in the exchange period, but opening up a rookie program where they can learn their craft to the side if they have been overlooked in the national draft would ensure there is a big-man breeding ground.

Some application would have to be applied – prospects must be 195cm or taller, for instance, and a cap of only one per club – but with the category B rookie list already being used to house ruck prospects from previous sports, including the success story of premiership Tiger Ivan Soldo, a dedicated ruck list offers even greater flexibility for clubs.

And with uncertainty surrounding the players' next collective bargaining agreement from the end of this season, establishing a ruck rookie list should be part of the discussions.

LINK

I can't see valid reasons why clubs need extra spots or incentives to draft ruckman or KPP.
We have 3 ruckman on our list, one an AFL veteran, one and emerging talent and a player who will need another season to accurately assess where he is at in his development and I think we might have missed an opportunity to carry one more as well.
We could also look at bringing in an extra KP player or two at Footscray

If clubs want to take chances on just holding 2 or 3 spots on their list open for rucks then they roll the dice on injuries not derailing their season.

Also once you start cramming multiple rucks into your VFL side are you actually improving their development or hindering it?

Bring back 3rd man up, problem solved.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by soupaman

Also once you start cramming multiple rucks into your VFL side are you actually improving their development or hindering it?

---

The best players will surface as opposed to just having to rely on what you have. I think competition among the bigger boys is a good thing in fact right across the playing list

The real challenge is of course that most coches can't find room for 2 ruck man in their best 22 set-up and now prefer the KP players filling on for 5 minutes a quarter.

I actually like the idea, as long as the ruckman is a rookie. We know the young guys take longer to develop and alot of clubs, or most clubs, won't take the risk. These guys are then lost to basketball.

How many 'LISTS' do clubs need? How many drafts and trade periods do clubs need?

I'm sure Twomey is being fed this by one or two of his recruiter mates...if the clubs want ruckman, here's an idea. Pick them. They are there. The challenge is that they don't want to play professional athletes to be professional athletes. They want another way to cheaply get control of a player 'in case' he turns into something...despite the changes to the footy budget, there is still money for clubs to have multiple recruiting/list management staff...so manage your list and recruit players. If the Giants don't have adequate cover for Preuss, well, that simply means that as a club they have made other positions a priority...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mjp

How many 'LISTS' do clubs need? How many drafts and trade periods do clubs need?

I'm sure Twomey is being fed this by one or two of his recruiter mates...if the clubs want ruckman, here's an idea. Pick them. They are there. The challenge is that they don't want to play professional athletes to be professional athletes. They want another way to cheaply get control of a player 'in case' he turns into something...despite the changes to the footy budget, there is still money for clubs to have multiple recruiting/list management staff...so manage your list and recruit players. If the Giants don't have adequate cover for Preuss, well, that simply means that as a club they have made other positions a priority...

---

Agreed, clubs run their own risk with reducing their ruck numbers. Having more spots isn't the answer. If clubs don't want to make a 4 year investment in a KPP or ruckman then start drafting them at 21 or at a more mature age

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GVGjr

I can't see valid reasons why clubs need extra spots or incentives to draft ruckman or KPP.
We have 3 ruckman on our list, one an AFL veteran, one and emerging talent and a player who will need another season to accurately assess where he is at in his development and I think we might have missed an opportunity to carry one more as well.
We could also look at bringing in an extra KP player or two at Footscray

If clubs want to take chances on just holding 2 or 3 spots on their list open for rucks then they roll the dice on injuries not derailing their season.

---

Because why otherwise bother putting the effort in to draft and develop them when there might not even be a spot for them and you can just pick someone up ready made?

Seems the point of the article is no one wants to be the club doing the developing of ruckmen unless they're a special talent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hujsh

Because why otherwise bother putting the effort in to draft and develop them when there might not even be a spot for them and you can just pick someone up ready made?

Seems the point of the article is no one wants to be the club doing the developing of ruckmen unless they're a special talent.

---

You identify the talent and make the investment in developing them. If that takes a season or two longer then that's the price to pay

Id be looking at way of incentivising the state league teams to develop players not the AFL teams.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GVGjr

You identify the talent and make the investment in developing them. If that takes a season or two longer then that's the price to pay

Id be looking at way of incentivising the state league teams to develop players not the AFL teams.

---

Or you don't and just pick one up from somewhere else. It seems a number of clubs prefer this strategy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hujsh

Or you don't and just pick one up from somewhere else. It seems a number of clubs prefer this strategy.

---

Yep, nothing wrong with looking at Jordon Sweet type players who were a bit more mature.

I think we had the capacity on our list to add a longer term KP player or ruck man

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hujsh

Or you don't and just pick one up from somewhere else. It seems a number of clubs prefer this strategy.

---

That is the issue that Twomey says should be addressed, and I think it is a valid reason.

It's almost like you need an academy system just for ruckman. So clubs can nurture young players and have some guarantee that they can join the club when they are ready and if by a curtain time the club doesn't select then they can explore other options.