Sweet Jesus: Should Jordan Sweet be our first ruck?

[jeemak]

Re: Sweet Jesus: Should Jordan Sweet be our first ruck?

Are we arguing that Sweet, who doesn't often win hit outs, will turn around our fortunes in the centre?

Is that what we're arguing?

We're saying that putting a ruck that doesn't win hit outs and can't do much around the ground will help us win games because it will free up a player to play an around the ground role or play forward even though him playing for us is contingent upon playing as a ruck.

This is progress!

Wouldn't it be easier to hit targets, kick straight, and not not let the ball get behind the contest if you're planning on going third man up as a tall defender?

All the ruck changes in the world won't make a jot of difference if we can't get the above back on track. And yes I hear the four goals from clearances stuff get rolled out, but that's on the players in the centre and not just the ruck.

[hujsh]

Re: Sweet Jesus: Should Jordan Sweet be our first ruck?

Are we arguing that Sweet, who doesn't often win hit outs, will turn around our fortunes in the centre?

Is that what we're arguing?

We're saying that putting a ruck that doesn't win hit outs and can't do much around the ground will help us win games because it will free up a player to play an around the ground role or play forward even though him playing for us is contingent upon playing as a ruck.

This is progress!

Wouldn't it be easier to hit targets, kick straight, and not not let the ball get behind the contest if you're planning on going third man up as a tall defender?

All the ruck changes in the world won't make a jot of difference if we can't get the above back on track. And yes I hear the four goals from clearances stuff get rolled out, but that's on the players in the centre and not just the ruck.

Keep this up and you'll be fleeing to the Carlton Boards. You'll have to make up lies about Comrade Sweet just to get by (I wonder if anyone will know who this lady is?)

[Danjul]

Re: Sweet Jesus: Should Jordan Sweet be our first ruck?

Are we arguing that Sweet, who doesn't often win hit outs, will turn around our fortunes in the centre?

Is that what we're arguing?

We're saying that putting a ruck that doesn't win hit outs and can't do much around the ground will help us win games because it will free up a player to play an around the ground role or playing forward even though him playing for us is contingent upon playing as a ruck.

This is progress!

Wouldn't it be easier to hit targets, kick straight, and not not let the ball get behind the contest if you're planning on going third man up as a tall defender?

Port got 6 goals within 2 minutes of a centre bounce. That includes retrieving the ball from the crowd. 4 of them were direct:
22, 70, 72, and 85 seconds. The other 2 are not classed as directly from the ruck although it was a major factor.

These incidents have a significant impact on the result. Preventing the direct exit is more important than chipping the ball forward and then turning it over.

Let?s quantify it. I suggest that preventing a centre clearance goal is worth at least as much as the 3 handballs followed by 2 poor kicks that we are seeing frequently. Oh I forgot, and the losses they have been causing.

[jeemak]

Re: Sweet Jesus: Should Jordan Sweet be our first ruck?

How is playing a ruck that doesn't win hit outs going to improve that though?

[Rocco Jones]

Re: Sweet Jesus: Should Jordan Sweet be our first ruck?

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.

I do hear you with issues re: selection and I really believe I rate Sweet more than most. I do not think Sweet in the ruck and English forward is crazy. Whilst I don't agree, I get it and we are underperforming.

You mentioned the clearances in reference to praising the midfielders. You also mention losing 4-0 is goals from clearances. I get how English might carry blame but feel if you are praising the mids for getting clearances, they are getting off easily for losing them.

Re: clearances I feel an issue is how clear the oppositions clearances. Perhaps I will TM 'Clear Clearances'. I think there's a strong argument in English losing hitouts badly when he loses them but there's also one in the midfielders lack of defensive nous/pressure and ability to nullify.

[bulldogtragic]

Re: Sweet Jesus: Should Jordan Sweet be our first ruck?

Just pick him for North and it’s all or nothing on the result.

[GVGjr]

Re: Sweet Jesus: Should Jordan Sweet be our first ruck?

Just pick him for North and it’s all or nothing on the result.

I'd consider the move against North because it would potentially lighten the load for English before the byes and hopefully that freshens him up for the balance of the season. It also allows Sweet to get a run just in case.

[hujsh]

Re: Sweet Jesus: Should Jordan Sweet be our first ruck?

I'd consider the move against North because it would potentially lighten the load for English before the byes and hopefully that freshens him up for the balance of the season. It also allows Sweet to get a run just in case.

I'd rather swap Naughton and Bruce and try that TBH but that's another thread.

Maybe we do both and send WOOF into overdrive

[Rocco Jones]

Re: Sweet Jesus: Should Jordan Sweet be our first ruck?

I'd rather swap Naughton and Bruce and try that TBH but that's another thread.

Maybe we do both and send WOOF into overdrive

I think if we bring in Sweet, we should move Naughton back.

- Sweet ruck
- English and/or Lobb offering relief, perhaps keeping the one going well forward up forward more
- Naughton, L Jones and Keath back
- Marra with Lobb and English forward
- If no one goes off injured and Sweet isn't going well/tired, sub him off and have a fresh English go at it in the ruck for final quarter

[Danjul]

Re: Sweet Jesus: Should Jordan Sweet be our first ruck?

I think if we bring in Sweet, we should move Naughton back.

- Sweet ruck
- English and/or Lobb offering relief, perhaps keeping the one going well forward up forward more
- Naughton, L Jones and Keath back
- Marra with Lobb and English forward
- If no one goes off injured and Sweet isn't going well/tired, sub him off and have a fresh English go at it in the ruck for final quarter

Dangerous thoughts.

[bulldogtragic]

Re: Sweet Jesus: Should Jordan Sweet be our first ruck?

I think if we bring in Sweet, we should move Naughton back.

- Sweet ruck
- English and/or Lobb offering relief, perhaps keeping the one going well forward up forward more
- Naughton, L Jones and Keath back
- Marra with Lobb and English forward
- If no one goes off injured and Sweet isn't going well/tired, sub him off and have a fresh English go at it in the ruck for final quarter

That’s interesting. Bevo would never do it. Sounds like Friday night was the night for flexibility (swapping Bruce & Aaron) and there was a refusal to embrace flexibility in the box. Just everyone else needs to be flexible.

[jeemak]

Re: Sweet Jesus: Should Jordan Sweet be our first ruck?

Tim English won't play for us if he doesn't play first ruck.

[Danjul]

Re: Sweet Jesus: Should Jordan Sweet be our first ruck?

Tim English won't play for us if he doesn't play first ruck.

What if he is 0.75th and Sweet is 0.25th?

I would be happy with that.

[JanLorMill]

Re: Sweet Jesus: Should Jordan Sweet be our first ruck?

How is playing a ruck that doesn't win hit outs going to improve that though?

Easy by stopping the opposition getting taps or easy clean clearances

[bulldogtragic]

Re: Sweet Jesus: Should Jordan Sweet be our first ruck?

Tim English won't play for us if he doesn't play first ruck.

Why’s that?