Goining in with one ruckman?

[GVGjr]

I know this gets a lot of vibrant discussion but whats everyone's take on going into the game against the Swans with just one ruckman? Did it work?

I'm prepared to be flexible with this but in general terms I think we need the extra big guy.

It also seemed perplexing to hear that we had Roughead up in Sydney only to send him back to play at Williamstown. I can't quite work out if he was up there as a genuine emergency or as genuine selection option that we decided not to go with. Once it was decided not to use him getting him back to Willy was a good move.

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

Re: Goining in with one ruckman?

I really thought this would've been a perfect opportunity for Roughead, and was genuinely surprised we did not play him.

With Tommy rucking, we seemed to have made the call to have Boyd/Cross go up as third man regularly, and this did not work at all and often resulted in Sydney getting first use of the ball out of a stoppage.

I would've preferred to see how Roughead responded from last week and give him a go against Pyke this week, given his form had been quite promising for the last month.

[Hotdog60]

Re: Goining in with one ruckman?

I think we needed the extra ruck, although Tommy did his best we lost it in the middle when Huddo wasn't there. Also with the relieving ruck the mids seem to go for the 3rd man up alot and is usual ineffective and most times their opposition gets the ball.

[always right]

Re: Goining in with one ruckman?

The decision was an umitigated disaster and Eade should put his hand up and take responsibility for the cock-up. The whole night made me angry but watching Kirk lead our quickest defenders to the ball was only topped by seeing a second rate Canadian ruckman make Hudson look like a novice. This team finds new ways to test my allegiance.

[LostDoggy]

Re: Goining in with one ruckman?

Yep Ive called for going with one ruckman providing Everitt plays Tommy doesnt have the motor to be the only backup ruckman, so it was a complete waste and we found out nothing. This whole team revolves around Cooney being in the middle we just dont have the replacement.

[always right]

Re: Goining in with one ruckman?

Watching Roughead play for Willi today just reinforced what a dumb decision it was. He is a spedcial talent and should be persevered with.

Our defence has ben our strong point all season. Why mess with it by trying to make a ruckman out of your CHB this close to the finals?

[LostDoggy]

Re: Goining in with one ruckman?

excuses

[LostDoggy]

Re: Goining in with one ruckman?

Watching Roughead play for Willi today just reinforced what a dumb decision it was. He is a spedcial talent and should be persevered with.

Our defence has ben our strong point all season. Why mess with it by trying to make a ruckman out of your CHB this close to the finals?

Yep great point I was thinking the same I guess your name says it all.

[Bornadog]

Re: Goining in with one ruckman?

Well a few people on the forum have been calling for one ruckman but it didn't work, our structure was stuffed and we got killed.

Both Minson and Roughead played well today with Minson BOG and Roughead not far behind, although he played Jones roll up forward for the majority of the game.

[LostDoggy]

Re: Goining in with one ruckman?

I'm sure if we had Roughie or Minson in the team, we still wouldn't have won

[Remi Moses]

Re: Goining in with one ruckman?

Watching Roughead play for Willi today just reinforced what a dumb decision it was. He is a spedcial talent and should be persevered with.

Our defence has ben our strong point all season. Why mess with it by trying to make a ruckman out of your CHB this close to the finals?

I agree why upset the chemistry of the back 6 by rucking Williams! Please don't go into a final with one ruck!!

[ReLoad]

Re: Goining in with one ruckman?

Ok, well a couple of things.

1. Yes it failed
2. At least they tried it, given our performance last week, that had to try something different, they made a mistake, as it didnt work, but they will not do it again. Mistake made, now learn from it.
3. It will mean a reduced post count here on the forums :P

[LostDoggy]

Re: Goining in with one ruckman?

It was mystifying trying it without everitt in the side. Personally, I would have played will again against Sydney with him as first choice for this years finals.

[GVGjr]

Re: Goining in with one ruckman?

Watching Roughead play for Willi today just reinforced what a dumb decision it was. He is a spedcial talent and should be persevered with.

Our defence has ben our strong point all season. Why mess with it by trying to make a ruckman out of your CHB this close to the finals?

Roughead has the ability to play as a forward pocket plus obviously do his share in the ruck so that does provide us with the flexibility to add the extra tall.

I mentioned in another thread that I'm not against Williams doing a bit of ruck work when the need arises but planning for him to be the sole support just doesn't seem right.

[always right]

Re: Goining in with one ruckman?

I'm sure if we had Roughie or Minson in the team, we still wouldn't have won

No-one suggested it was the key reason for us losing, just one factor.....and one that made absolutely no sense. The MC carry some of the blame for the performance.