Sweet Jesus: Should Jordan Sweet be our first ruck?

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Surely it's on the mids to:

1/ defend their opponents better when they're in possession.
2/ use the ball better when we have possession.

Agree with this, but we shouldn't underplay the disadvantage of playing reactive football.

The truth is we can never be proactive with English as the ruck. Even if he wins the tap, it's rarely emphatic / allows us to exit from the front of the contest.

I maintain English is a good player but a poor ruck. 'Best ruck in the league' is laughable.

[Rocco Jones]

Danjul, do you believe the around the ground work English does against fellow ruckmen will be basically replicated to equal value if he is up against mids or playing forward?

[The Bulldogs Bite]

I know this thread is a piss take, which I'm not sure achieves much besides belittling other opinions, but for mine a real question is would we be a better side with Sweet/English than English/Lobb?

The criticisms that Sweet doesn't mark/offers little around the ground are valid, but Lobb is no better in that regard. Lobb is the better forward out of these two, but would we get more from English in that second ruck role than we do Lobb? Would the net benefit of Sweet/English make us better?

[Danjul]

Look I don't agree with this summation, but if it is true shouldn't we be changing up our midfielders rather than the ruckman?

To me it seemed that when Port won the centre clearance they ran the ball out which led to some clean F50 entries, whereas when we won the clearance we hack kicked it forward to a contest.

Surely it's on the mids to:

1/ defend their opponents better when they're in possession.
2/ use the ball better when we have possession.

The fist step should be make the simplest change. Look at what happens. Then make the next adjustment.

We are not losing because of the midfielders.

As I said a few weeks ago, Naughton was consistent when Sweet played. 27 goals in 9 games. In 9 games this year he has scored only 1 in each. Lobb?s presence has not helped. So if we find something that works there could be a broader upside, including me not having to look at train loads of depressed supporters after games.

[Rocco Jones]

I know this thread is a piss take, which I'm not sure achieves much besides belittling other opinions, but for mine a real question is would we be a better side with Sweet/English than English/Lobb?

The criticisms that Sweet doesn't mark/offers little around the ground are valid, but Lobb is no better in that regard. Lobb is the better forward out of these two, but would we get more from English in that second ruck role than we do Lobb? Would the net benefit of Sweet/English make us better?

I am joking in part but at collectively how much Sweet is dominating the MC discussion. No pro or anti Sweet, just that he is literally taking up 80%+ of the posting there. It's comical (not attacking anyone, I legit find it funny, otherwise I would be frustrated).

[Rocco Jones]

Agree with this, but we shouldn't underplay the disadvantage of playing reactive football.

The truth is we can never be proactive with English as the ruck. Even if he wins the tap, it's rarely emphatic / allows us to exit from the front of the contest.

I maintain English is a good player but a poor ruck. 'Best ruck in the league' is laughable.

You mention belittling others, I would probably avoid calling the opposing opinion 'laughable'. I know not your intention.

English has the 5th most hit outs to advantage this season + looks the best around the ground ruck in the league. I get you like Sweet, but finding the opinion that he is the best ruck 'laughable' is a bit much IMO. FWIW I don't think he is the best ruck in the AFL.

[Rocco Jones]

The fist step should be make the simplest change. Look at what happens. Then make the next adjustment.

We are not losing because of the midfielders.

As I said a few weeks ago, Naughton was consistent when Sweet played. 27 goals in 9 games. In 9 games this year he has scored only 1 in each. Lobb?s presence has not helped. So if we find something that works there could be a broader upside, including me not having to look at train loads of depressed supporters after games.

Why not?

[The Bulldogs Bite]

You mention belittling others, I would probably avoid calling the opposing opinion 'laughable'. I know not your intention.

It had been stated in the media a few times lately which is what I had in mind when writing that line.

English has the 5th most hit outs to advantage this season + looks the best around the ground ruck in the league. I get you like Sweet, but finding the opinion that he is the best ruck 'laughable' is a bit much IMO. FWIW I don't think he is the best ruck in the AFL.

Stats shmats. Do you really believe he's the 5th best tap ruck in the league? When I think of the best rucks who could hurt teams with where they put the ball, it's the likes of Gawn, Naitanui and Witts. Others have shown capabilities (Jackson - we know too well, Grundy - but not his main weapon, Big O).

No disputing his around the ground ability (English), but when that's curbed (v Port) he's offering nothing. Most other rucks (even much less talented ones like Nank) can still influence the game as a ruck without doing a whole lot around the ground. Tim can't.

Also - not sure I've ever been a vocal 'Sweet promoter' but I don't buy into the piss take of this thread either.

[Danjul]

Danjul, do you believe the around the ground work English does against fellow ruckmen will be basically replicated to equal value if he is up against mids or playing forward?

To my way of thinking we need a revolutionary approach to fix the current state of affairs.

I would restrict Sweet to moving between CHF and CHB and then going to ruck contests from there.

English can follow the ball more closely. He has excellent footy smarts and reads the play better than most. And he has a big tank.

This would put significant pressure on the opposition. He would take some ruck contests but I would be trying to conserve his energy to maximise his game time.

The expected benefits of playing both like this would be

more direct moves by the midfielders, leading to
faster clean entries and better kicking positions for the forwards,
less chance of direct entries against our backmen.

I would be hoping for higher scores for and lower against.

How long should the trial last? Couple of hours.

Can I guarantee its success? No.

So why suggest it? Because I saw it work a number of times in 2021/2022 with the same players.

[Danjul]

Why not?

Look at their possessions and clearances. Only problem is that they are heading in the wrong direction when they get the ball.

[Rocco Jones]

Look at their possessions and clearances. Only problem is that they are heading in the wrong direction when they get the ball.

So possessions and clearances = meaning
5th highest hitouts to advantage= not meaning?

I am trying to get bearings of which stats are meaningful and which ones are 'stats shmats' (The Bulldogs Bite).

[Rocco Jones]

FWIW, whilst I don't agree with it, I would be fine with seeing Sweet having a go as first ruck. I am not 100% against it.

[GVGjr]

I'm happy for a somewhat contentious topic be isolated to one thread giving those who find the topic repetitive a chance to ignore it.

As always be civil to each other, debate the topic with some logic and most importantly play the ball not the man

[The bulldog tragician]

One of the things this thread shows and something Danjul has argued is that selection integrity is lacking. Or at best obscure.

We can question why a low possession bash and crash ruckman (that?s Sweet) can be ?carried? in the side yet regularly we see low possession guys selected to ?fill a role? eg Bruce late 22 (he?s taking pressure off Naughton!), Hannan ( he?s a defensive forward!), Lobb (he gives English a rest!), James O?Donnell (not even sure what the pretext is there).

I don?t necessarily agree with the conclusions reached in correlating Sweet?s presence with our wins but if we are only arguing against his selection by saying he gives us little around the ground, well, that?s hard to validate given what we see most weeks.

Sadly the argument might be moot if Lobb was delivering. But he?s not and is becoming at risk of becoming a member of the Graveyard of Tall Forwards in which we?ve often specialised. In fact you have to wonder if he is Exhibit A in demonstrating that it?s not our forwards, it?s delivery to our forwards that?s the problem.

[Danjul]

So possessions and clearances = meaning
5th highest hitouts to advantage= not meaning?

I am trying to get bearings of which stats are meaningful and which ones are 'stats shmats' (The Bulldogs Bite).

Two main reasons for the loss to Port:

i. (Forwards poor kicking) and not getting the ball to Naughton properly.
ii. Port got 4 goals from centre clearances and we got 0.

Most likely component of the game influencing both? Centre bounce. How many are there in a game? 25 approx.

Change 4, 2 for us and 2 against them. We win.

And that is with Richards and JJ out.