Round #2 Match Committee

[Sockeye Salmon]

Re: Round #2 Match Committee

What about using either Minson or Hudson as the sub, I guess in theory letting them run themselves into the ground for a half at perhaps 90% gametime then being able to bring on a fresh ruck without having to use them in the 21.

I was about to post this.

We are all talking about two ruckmen whoneed to play 50% game time each - in the ruck. Well there's a position where you share game time, it's called a sub.

[LostDoggy]

Re: Round #2 Match Committee

I was about to post this.

We are all talking about two ruckmen whoneed to play 50% game time each - in the ruck. Well there's a position where you share game time, it's called a sub.

Yeah, this.

[LostDoggy]

Re: Round #2 Match Committee

For this week, out Jones, Woods, Stack and Djerrkura
Ins Lake, Minson, Addison and Veszpremi

Back six
Morris, Markovic, Lake
Hill, Williams, Murphy

Ease Lake into the side and play Markovic on the most dangerous tall, just let Lake read and setup play, so more a Hargrave role.

I thought Hill was pretty good last week in defence.

Forward Six
Higgins, Hall, Viszpremi
Picken, Grant, Sherman

This is a better mix of talls, quicks and tackling pressure.

Interesting

[LostDoggy]

Re: Round #2 Match Committee

Giansiracusa Marcovic Morris

Griffen Williams Hill

Murphy Cross Ward

Higgins Hall Boyd

Veszpremi Grant Hahn

Hudson Cooney Picken

Minson Addison Moles Sherman

Gia can kick better than Cross or Boyd
Lake game fitness at Willy
Murphy marking option out on the wing
Cross stays behind the ball
Hall up the ground with Boyd/Addison locking ball
in the forward line. Benefiting Barry who's good at
ground level & at assists.
Grant & Hahn hovering, and Veszpremi deep.
Picken lockdown.
Moles has a good record with forward assists,
and I've tried to add some maturity to gameday.
Sherman or Liberatore as sub.
Hahn if Hargrave is on LTI list, that is.
Looking forward to Reid coming into this side.
Jones, Roughead, Cordy and a few others are still
developing , I reckon.

I've utilised ideas from posters on this board - any
bad ideas are my own - just some playful thoughts
after the debacle last weekend.

Bold-Dogg, I like this. Ya put a bit of thought into it, unlike the MC.
Like to see someone apartfrom me is looking fwd to Reid coming back

[Bulldog Joe]

Re: Round #2 Match Committee

I was about to post this.

We are all talking about two ruckmen whoneed to play 50% game time each - in the ruck. Well there's a position where you share game time, it's called a sub.

I can't see how this is an option.

The subbed player is out of the game, but the ruckman needs some rest through the game.

If we used the ruckman as sub we would still have the same problem with the relief ruck when the ruck rested.

We need the 2 in the 21.

[Mantis]

Re: Round #2 Match Committee

We are all talking about two ruckmen whoneed to play 50% game time each - in the ruck. Well there's a position where you share game time, it's called a sub.

Do these 2 rucks play a half straight or do they have rest periods?

Who rucks while they rest?

[Go_Dogs]

Re: Round #2 Match Committee

Do these 2 rucks play a half straight or do they have rest periods?

Who rucks while they rest?

Also, what happens if a midfielder gets injured in the first 5 minutes? Obviously this would apply if the 2 rucks were in the 21 also, but having a fresh running player as the sub has certain advantages.

Still, interesting idea.

Did Sydney play a 2nd ruck as their sub on the weekend? Didn't catch much of the game so no idea how it went...

[LostDoggy]

Re: Round #2 Match Committee

Giansiracusa Marcovic Morris

Griffen Williams Hill

Murphy Cross Ward

Higgins Hall Boyd

Veszpremi Grant Hahn

Hudson Cooney Picken

Minson Addison Moles Sherman

Gia can kick better than Cross or Boyd
Lake game fitness at Willy
Murphy marking option out on the wing
Cross stays behind the ball
Hall up the ground with Boyd/Addison locking ball
in the forward line. Benefiting Barry who's good at
ground level & at assists.
Grant & Hahn hovering, and Veszpremi deep.
Picken lockdown.
Moles has a good record with forward assists,
and I've tried to add some maturity to gameday.
Sherman or Liberatore as sub.
Hahn if Hargrave is on LTI list, that is.
Looking forward to Reid coming into this side.
Jones, Roughead, Cordy and a few others are still
developing , I reckon.

I've utilised ideas from posters on this board - any
bad ideas are my own - just some playful thoughts
after the debacle last weekend.

Barry at CHF? I think he's too old for that. Too much ground to cover to be effective. Prefer Murphy there despite the fact that I think it would shorten his career.

Hahn? Mmm. Showed some form and might be worth a go but I suspect the game has passed him by plus we need to develop one of our recruits instead.

The back half just won't have played together much. Might be a problem.

Griffen to half back is fine except he does a lot of other work around the ground and would be needed as an onballer at stages.

I'd have Wallis in but we need to be careful with youngsters who will be up and down in form and cannot be relied upon to carry this side.

[Mofra]

Re: Round #2 Match Committee

Yes, he is no Tippett or Hille etc, and would be a bit of a liability once the ball hits the deck. But considering what we got out of Jones (who I'm certainly not writing off on the basis of one poor game when the side was playing terribly) would replacing him with Minson end up costing us overall?

Very much it would cost us. Jones made position to the right areas, giving guys in the defensive half a target to kick to. Minson simply would not have made that sort of position, nor would his defensive efforts be in the same stratosphere as Jones who never stops chasing.

The sub rule has really hurt us if Roughy doesn't get back to form soon - he actually can lead & mark in the F50.
Hall, Roughy & Jones can play tall, Grant is quick and plays as a crumber on occasion anyway. All four can play in the forwardline, I'm less confidant Minson can contribute there.

[SlimPickens]

Re: Round #2 Match Committee

Also, what happens if a midfielder gets injured in the first 5 minutes? Obviously this would apply if the 2 rucks were in the 21 also, but having a fresh running player as the sub has certain advantages.

Still, interesting idea.

Did Sydney play a 2nd ruck as their sub on the weekend? Didn't catch much of the game so no idea how it went...

I thought Sydney using a second ruck as a sub really cost them, they clearly ran out of legs in a game they should have won. Bringing on Seaby late cost them, purely hypothetical but if a midfielder had of come on they would have won.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Re: Round #2 Match Committee

Do these 2 rucks play a half straight or do they have rest periods?

Who rucks while they rest?

I'd ruck them right through, they only have to do it for a half. It not as if they have to save any petrol tickets for the second half. I'd start Minson rather than Hudson and let Hudson have a crack when their rucks are starting to feel the pinch a bit.

Worst case they would take 3 min breaks each quarter. There might not even be centre contest during that time (of course there might be as well).

[Sockeye Salmon]

Re: Round #2 Match Committee

I thought Sydney using a second ruck as a sub really cost them, they clearly ran out of legs in a game they should have won. Bringing on Seaby late cost them, purely hypothetical but if a midfielder had of come on they would have won.

Seaby was their 3rd ruck though, that was dumb. They already had Mumford and White (and Goodes if they really had to).

Longmire said they used Seaby as the sub because they knew Mumford was carrying an injury and they didn't think he would last the game. Seaby was there to back up White if Mumford broke down.

[SlimPickens]

Re: Round #2 Match Committee

Seaby was their 3rd ruck though, that was dumb. They already had Mumford and White (and Goodes if they really had to).

Longmire said they used Seaby as the sub because they knew Mumford was carrying an injury and they didn't think he would last the game. Seaby was there to back up White if Mumford broke down.

Yep what didn't make sense is why the subbed off Reid, not Mumford. Anyway back to the topic at hand.

[Topdog]

Re: Round #2 Match Committee

It's ok as a tactic but if a midfielder gets injured we would be screwed.

[LostDoggy]

Re: Round #2 Match Committee

Horses for courses but I think Huddo's should not be the automatic first ruck choice, certainly against Essendon a combination of Will and Roughy would have been far better.

My reasoning:

Will and Roughy are far more mobile than Huddo, it would have given us options on Hille and Ryder.

In my opinion Will in 2008 and 2009 was right up with Hudson as a ruckman, in a different mold. When we are struggling to get the ball away Will is the only man that can punch it into the forward fifty, theres your plan B! Will can bash and crash in ruck contests too weakening, hurting, slowing down guys like Ryder. Will is getting a lot of criticism for last year, he was horrifyingly sick. Will gets criticism for a lack of ability as a forward, I thought he did ok seeing as he is a specialist ruckman!

The biggest argument for Huddo is that he plays as an extra inside mid. Is that really something we need right now? How about someone that can run with or man up on a damaging Hille or Ryder? At least try to make them accountable, Huddo cant keep up with them.

I certainly would be throwing Will and Roughy to the wolves for these next two games. What benefit do we get from playing Huddo? Its like sending Ponting to Bangladesh... what better chance to give a young guy a go rather than boost a near retired players average?