Talking Carlton Index Lochie O'Brien Kerryn Harrington Lochie O'Brien Kerryn Harrington CFC Home CFC Membership CFC Shop CFC Fixture Blueseum
It is currently Wed Dec 03, 2025 3:16 pm

All times are UTC + 10 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 274 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Ruck debate
PostPosted: Sun Sep 28, 2025 4:17 pm 
Offline
Wayne Johnston
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 7:40 pm
Posts: 8085
Blue Vain wrote:
It will be a good debate ongoing,
No one is right or wrong. We all have different preferences and ideas. No doubt the coaching groups would be the same. I've no doubt many wrestle with the same thoughts every week.
Why we cant appreciate a great game of footy without having to gain personal validation or recognition out of it? A game we had NOTHING to do with.

I loved the game and moreso the result. I'm just looking forward to trade week now and hopefully some list acquisitions. (including some ruckmen) :grin:

Exactly BV . No ones right and no ones wrong . Slice it and dice it anyway you want . I ask the same question as DG BV , any goss ?

_________________
All my dangerous friends


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ruck debate
PostPosted: Sun Sep 28, 2025 5:56 pm 
Offline
Wayne Johnston

Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 4:04 pm
Posts: 8532
Location: Bendigo
bondiblue wrote:
Crusader wrote:
bondiblue wrote:
2025 AFL Premiers won with 2 rucks: Fort and McInerney

Lions 64 HO's vs Cats 46 HO's.

Those of you who were adamant the 2 rucks were dead, and a relic of the past have not only been proven wrong on a weekly basis since the debate started prior to the Crows game a couple years ago, yesterday's Premiers reminded everyone that the 2 rucks is not dead, not a thing of the past, has arole to play in the modern game, and led to success in the game that matters most; The Grand Final.

A reminder that we are all just punters on the side and not the gurus of the game, some think they are. The game evolves. Some things coma and go and come around again. There's horsed for courses, and there's the old mismatch that can go your way if delivery is good but can easily go against you if delivery is bad.

Who would have thought a player like Fort, who most fans had behind Pittonet as a ruckman, had 45 HO's vs Blicavs 28 HO's.

Well played Lions. :clap:

I was hoping you’d bring this one up :lol:

I thought there was a couple of things that held back the automatic tick for this game fitting into the two-ruck win category:

1. Blicavs had 28 hitouts while trying to tag Andrews at CHF.
2. Geelong had 0 rucks after half time & didn’t win a clearance until the game was over. Stanley was hopeless though.

I suspect it’s a win for the two-rucks, but it’s one where the other mob lost it just as much as the two-ruck won it.

Hats off to Darcy Fort though. That was the game of his career.


Its a discussion point, not a troll.

I like this debate and how it evolves, and will continue to evolve.

I agree with BV's take on the use of the "2 rucks" and use of the talls.

I watched the game and moves with a lot of interest. Loved it.

Also, to consider was the HO's to advantage. I think it was 8 each.

For some people the ruck role is an over valued role and believe the likes of Grigg made a mockery of the position.

Ask Cats what they did about the ruck situation before they paid a kings ranson for Owens. Ask them what they think now.

I watch teams we will be competing with carefully. Call it a SWOT analysis.

There's more to it than simply my 2 rucks vs your 1 ruck.

The players at the feet of the ruck men play such a huge role to the result.

Lets hope our boy Skull keeps improving. We have to at least nullify the oppositions ruck dtrength to give our boys on the floor an even chanve.

I’m in the two ruck camp, as long as they’re competitive. Versatility is the key.

Ruck forwards, just my opinion, usually aren’t good enough at either role.

I’ll have the old-school follower, or the bloke that drops behind play for intercepts.

_________________
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter" - Winston Churchill.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ruck debate
PostPosted: Fri Nov 21, 2025 4:14 pm 
Offline
Harry Vallence

Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 7:59 pm
Posts: 1324
SurreyBlue wrote:
Can’t play two rucks if either of them can't play forward. Pitto and TdK unfortunately.

Saints made a $1.7m pa bet that you are wrong about TDK. or they are overpaying the most expensive backup ruckman ever. (while the importance of a rucks can’t be overstated, still feels like they are overpaying TDK and are think hes going to develop even more)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ruck debate
PostPosted: Fri Nov 21, 2025 4:16 pm 
Offline
Harry Vallence

Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 7:59 pm
Posts: 1324
i wonder if the MC ever come to blows at the selection table? or even get into the two v one ruck debate, LOL?

i expect the discussions are much more nuanced than the ones in this thread which tend towards abstraction and defensiveness.

IMHO we should be keeping a close watch o the next few years draft for an agile and jumping ruck to develop as our main ruck in coming years. Reidy is of unknown quality until he goes against the best. but i can’t help feeling out ruck stocks (and our KP) are not premiership quality yet. H and Weiters obviously are and we have some young gun KP draftees. but the lack of depth for 2026 and 2027 concerns me. especially the in ruck.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ruck debate
PostPosted: Fri Nov 21, 2025 5:16 pm 
Offline
Stephen Silvagni

Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 11:03 am
Posts: 26147
Location: Bondi Beach
Our options in the ruck have been turned on their head with TDK Curnow and Silvagni gone.

OKeefe goes well in the ruck, but he’s just back up for a few years: he’s 21.plus he’s one of our only two KPFs.
I’d love a more mobile ruckman than Pittonet, and Reidy hopefully dethrones him.

But I’d like another KPF given Harry and skull are our only 2 listed KPFs…and a developing jumping ruckman up speak of Diesel. TDK type must be found young and developed.

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ruck debate
PostPosted: Sun Nov 23, 2025 11:27 am 
Offline
Stephen Silvagni

Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 11:03 am
Posts: 26147
Location: Bondi Beach
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtQ9vebGz44

From 2.00 - 2.30 mins.

Ross Lyon and StKilda's explaining strategy moving forward is to replicate the current Premiers, Lions, and the threepeat Premiers, Hawthorn, and play 2 rucks, with TDK and Marshall.

There's been hints TDK will be the Fwd-KP. Guessing Max King is their No 1 KPF, with Cooper Sharman the No 2 KPF, allowing dangerous tall HF's Mitch Owens 191 and Membrey sharing the other KPF

With 5 now allowed to operate from the interchange bench moving forward, looks like 2 rucks (one a Fwd-KPF) and 2 KPFs will become the preference, IF, the list allows for that to happen.

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ruck debate
PostPosted: Sun Nov 23, 2025 11:30 am 
Offline
Stephen Silvagni

Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 11:03 am
Posts: 26147
Location: Bondi Beach
I don't classify Kemp or McGovern KPFs, hence O'Keefe will be expected to carry that load, with McKay, and, ruck?

Based on OKeefe's injury history, we have to manage the loads on his hammies, and, I don't expect him to play injury free all year. We are limited for choice, to play 2 rucks and 2 KPFs, unless Reidy forces his way into the team, and we retain Pittonet as No 1 ruck.

I doubt we will play Pitto, Rediy and O'Keefe in the same team this year, but anything can happen with 5 on the interchange. Pitto isnt a Fwd Ruck and would have to spend time resting on the bench whilst Reidy plays ruck, and, I guess Reidy could play 3rd tall at FP, whilst OKeefe and McKay resume KPF duties to mix things up. Not for a whole game, but to stretch defences at times.

Only way around this shortage of developed KPFs (apart from McKay) is to change our modus operandi in the way bring we the ball into forward line, by lowering our eyes looking for moving targets Kemp/Gov, Hayward and Moir, instead of statues (Curnow), or smalls in best position such as Williams, Ainsworth, and even Evans when he gets to play as the 3rd small (assuming Williams is considered a small forward at 186cm; more of a hybrid small, like Hayward).

I have a feeling we will be OK having only McKay and O'Keefe as our KPFs, and a quicker, more skillful set further up the ground.

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ruck debate
PostPosted: Sun Nov 23, 2025 12:22 pm 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:00 pm
Posts: 24725
Location: Kaloyasena
bondiblue wrote:

Only way around this shortage of developed KPFs (apart from McKay) is to change our modus operandi in the way bring we the ball into forward line, by lowering our eyes looking for moving targets Kemp/Gov, Hayward and Moir, instead of statues (Curnow), or smalls in best position such as Williams, Ainsworth, and even Evans when he gets to play as the 3rd small (assuming Williams is considered a small forward at 186cm; more of a hybrid small, like Hayward).

I have a feeling we will be OK having only McKay and O'Keefe as our KPFs, and a quicker, more skillful set further up the ground.



If you recall during our golden 1978-1982 period we had one key position forward at 188cm (Mark Maclure) surrounded by a bevy of fleet footed mosquitoes- it worked pretty well.

:lol:

_________________
"Hence you will not say that Greeks fight like heroes but that heroes fight like Greeks"?

Winston Churchill


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ruck debate
PostPosted: Sun Nov 23, 2025 12:46 pm 
Offline
Harry Vallence
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 3:39 pm
Posts: 1733
Location: Darwin
bondiblue wrote:
Our options in the ruck have been turned on their head with TDK Curnow and Silvagni gone.

OKeefe goes well in the ruck, but he’s just back up for a few years: he’s 21.plus he’s one of our only two KPFs.
I’d love a more mobile ruckman than Pittonet, and Reidy hopefully dethrones him.

But I’d like another KPF given Harry and skull are our only 2 listed KPFs…and a developing jumping ruckman up speak of Diesel. TDK type must be found young and developed.


A young bloke from NT who is at boarding school in Adelaide goes OK. Taj Murray is around 200cm was captain of NT u16 basketball team and has the good elusive skills of a top basketballer, This year played for NT u18, Glenelg and Allies as well as school footy. Travelled all over Aust to play four games in just over a week this year. Is a ruckman forward who some say is a forward ruckman. Kicked 4 goals in one allies game and was BOG. The commentators called one of his goals Eddy Betts like. Running towards the boundary in forward pocket he beat 3 opponents to the ground ball, picked it up eluded opposition and slotted a dribble goal from middle of traffic on the boundary line.

I watched the game on Fox and have to admit I am somewhat biased as Taj is the son of a lady who works for my wife. Taj has one drawback - he supports St Kilda, but I am sure he could be cured of that!

Would be a good cheap pick up who could develop into a very good player.

_________________
“Before you criticise someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when you criticise them, you're a mile a way and you have their shoes."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ruck debate
PostPosted: Sun Nov 23, 2025 6:20 pm 
Offline
Wayne Johnston

Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 4:04 pm
Posts: 8532
Location: Bendigo
NTBlue wrote:
bondiblue wrote:
Our options in the ruck have been turned on their head with TDK Curnow and Silvagni gone.

OKeefe goes well in the ruck, but he’s just back up for a few years: he’s 21.plus he’s one of our only two KPFs.
I’d love a more mobile ruckman than Pittonet, and Reidy hopefully dethrones him.

But I’d like another KPF given Harry and skull are our only 2 listed KPFs…and a developing jumping ruckman up speak of Diesel. TDK type must be found young and developed.


A young bloke from NT who is at boarding school in Adelaide goes OK. Taj Murray is around 200cm was captain of NT u16 basketball team and has the good elusive skills of a top basketballer, This year played for NT u18, Glenelg and Allies as well as school footy. Travelled all over Aust to play four games in just over a week this year. Is a ruckman forward who some say is a forward ruckman. Kicked 4 goals in one allies game and was BOG. The commentators called one of his goals Eddy Betts like. Running towards the boundary in forward pocket he beat 3 opponents to the ground ball, picked it up eluded opposition and slotted a dribble goal from middle of traffic on the boundary line.

I watched the game on Fox and have to admit I am somewhat biased as Taj is the son of a lady who works for my wife. Taj has one drawback - he supports St Kilda, but I am sure he could be cured of that!

Would be a good cheap pick up who could develop into a very good player.

Is he the one they’re calling the Slim Reaper?

_________________
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter" - Winston Churchill.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ruck debate
PostPosted: Mon Nov 24, 2025 9:43 am 
Offline
Stephen Silvagni

Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 11:03 am
Posts: 26147
Location: Bondi Beach
NTBlue wrote:
bondiblue wrote:
Our options in the ruck have been turned on their head with TDK Curnow and Silvagni gone.

OKeefe goes well in the ruck, but he’s just back up for a few years: he’s 21.plus he’s one of our only two KPFs.
I’d love a more mobile ruckman than Pittonet, and Reidy hopefully dethrones him.

But I’d like another KPF given Harry and skull are our only 2 listed KPFs…and a developing jumping ruckman up speak of Diesel. TDK type must be found young and developed.


A young bloke from NT who is at boarding school in Adelaide goes OK. Taj Murray is around 200cm was captain of NT u16 basketball team and has the good elusive skills of a top basketballer, This year played for NT u18, Glenelg and Allies as well as school footy. Travelled all over Aust to play four games in just over a week this year. Is a ruckman forward who some say is a forward ruckman. Kicked 4 goals in one allies game and was BOG. The commentators called one of his goals Eddy Betts like. Running towards the boundary in forward pocket he beat 3 opponents to the ground ball, picked it up eluded opposition and slotted a dribble goal from middle of traffic on the boundary line.

I watched the game on Fox and have to admit I am somewhat biased as Taj is the son of a lady who works for my wife. Taj has one drawback - he supports St Kilda, but I am sure he could be cured of that!

Would be a good cheap pick up who could develop into a very good player.


I'm really keen on Taj, as I am of Flynn Reilly. Both developing rucks. I see Taj as a Forward-Ruck and Riley as a potential No 1 Ruck.

I was hoping we would balance the list this Trade period. We had way too many mediocre small forwards on it. I didn't think White moved the needle enough and wouldn't be retained, but hoped Evans would be. I was hoping Port would take Motlop (I had Durdin way ahead of Motlop), and we pay out Fogarty's 2026 contract, who was imo a liability (hit and miss; Inconsistent). Williams, Durdin and Evans was enough. With the additon of Ainsworth I felt we filled Durdins spot, but the addition of the exciting skilled 174cm Byrne, we really dont need Motlop or Fogarty. Two spots we could really do with this Trade/Draft/SSP period.

Once TDK was leaving, I thought Pittonet can be the stop gap but not long term solution, and was desperate for us to find a bonafide mature ruckman to replace TDK, and a developing ruck we could take our time with, given O'Keefe was the Forward-Ruck who was developing well ahead of expectation. Glad we got Reidy, and I can't judge him till I see him play in the preseason. The fact Riley is a train on player, its up to him to take Pitto and Reidy's spot. I know he's only 21yo, but what I saw of him in the 2025 preseason against Pitto and TDK impressed me.

The exodus of Curnow meant McKay would be our sole mature KPF, and wont be available to give No 1 ruck a chop out as had been the case at times in 2025, and the emancipation of Silvagni meant we could not expect him to help plug a hole in the ruck. The Curnow exodus also meant we lost a KPF we need to replace.

Bottom line is we have only one spot left for an SSP, and probably another with an early call for KOF to be on LTI list. A bonafide KPD who is better than Lewis Young and ready to take on CHB is what we are desperate for. No good having medium size defenders Hayes Gov or Kemp playing 200cm CHF. No good throwing Dean into the fire. I am not convinced Philips or Paea are the best 2 available in the country, but likely to take one spot.

If we had 2 more spots we could take on a developing ruck, a developing KPF and a bonafide CHB, and put a hold on HOKs LTI listing and wait to see what our needs are mid season.

Sadly, we continue to carry 2 small forwards who are excess to our needs, and have needs to fill elsewhere. Given our priority elsewhere, I doubt we will sign up another ruck man this year.

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ruck debate
PostPosted: Mon Nov 24, 2025 10:09 am 
Offline
Stephen Silvagni

Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 11:03 am
Posts: 26147
Location: Bondi Beach
AGRO wrote:
bondiblue wrote:

Only way around this shortage of developed KPFs (apart from McKay) is to change our modus operandi in the way bring we the ball into forward line, by lowering our eyes looking for moving targets Kemp/Gov, Hayward and Moir, instead of statues (Curnow), or smalls in best position such as Williams, Ainsworth, and even Evans when he gets to play as the 3rd small (assuming Williams is considered a small forward at 186cm; more of a hybrid small, like Hayward).

I have a feeling we will be OK having only McKay and O'Keefe as our KPFs, and a quicker, more skillful set further up the ground.



If you recall during our golden 1978-1982 period we had one key position forward at 188cm (Mark Maclure) surrounded by a bevy of fleet footed mosquitoes- it worked pretty well.

:lol:


I certainly recall that period...35 years ago.

I don't agree it was one 188cm CHF surrounded by 5 of the fabled Mosquito fleet. We actually did have more talls than just Maclure in the forwardline. In 1979 it was Peter Brown 184cm was FF and Fitzpatrick 192cm was FP/ruck, with Percy No 1 ruck. In 1981 it was David McKay FP 191cm and FF was Peter McConville 185cm...and Buzza at HF, he was around 185 too.

The Mosquito fleet, after Keogh retired included Johnston Buckley Marcou Sheldon Ashman. Great midfielders who loved playing forward and as dangerous in the forward line as our talls. It was like having 3 or 4 Eddie Betts in the forward line. Dangerous as hell. We have no match for the Mozzie fleet of the Golden era, even when we played Williams, Motlop, Evans, Fogarty and White in the same forwardline. In 2026 we will have Williams (albeit 186cm), Ainsworth and probably Smith ahead of Evans playing. Still no match for the proven and original "Mosquito fleet".

I also recall only 8 years prior to that gold period we enjoyed another golden period where our No 1 ruck dominated the state and national competitions, despite being was shorter than 3 votes, Carlton, Christopher Judd, our Brownlow medallist and ruck rover. His name was John Nichols.

I think those days of short 188cm CHF and ruckmen have past us.

Oppositions have 200cm defenders and 208cm rucks to contend with. I dont think Nichols or Maclure would have a chance against players with that sort of height advantage. Have to play fire with fire.

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ruck debate
PostPosted: Mon Nov 24, 2025 11:19 am 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:00 pm
Posts: 24725
Location: Kaloyasena
bondiblue wrote:
AGRO wrote:
bondiblue wrote:

Only way around this shortage of developed KPFs (apart from McKay) is to change our modus operandi in the way bring we the ball into forward line, by lowering our eyes looking for moving targets Kemp/Gov, Hayward and Moir, instead of statues (Curnow), or smalls in best position such as Williams, Ainsworth, and even Evans when he gets to play as the 3rd small (assuming Williams is considered a small forward at 186cm; more of a hybrid small, like Hayward).

I have a feeling we will be OK having only McKay and O'Keefe as our KPFs, and a quicker, more skillful set further up the ground.



If you recall during our golden 1978-1982 period we had one key position forward at 188cm (Mark Maclure) surrounded by a bevy of fleet footed mosquitoes- it worked pretty well.

:lol:


I certainly recall that period...35 years ago.

I don't agree it was one 188cm CHF surrounded by 5 of the fabled Mosquito fleet. We actually did have more talls than just Maclure in the forwardline. In 1979 it was Peter Brown 184cm was FF and Fitzpatrick 192cm was FP/ruck, with Percy No 1 ruck. In 1981 it was David McKay FP 191cm and FF was Peter McConville 185cm...and Buzza at HF, he was around 185 too.

The Mosquito fleet, after Keogh retired included Johnston Buckley Marcou Sheldon Ashman. Great midfielders who loved playing forward and as dangerous in the forward line as our talls. It was like having 3 or 4 Eddie Betts in the forward line. Dangerous as hell. We have no match for the Mozzie fleet of the Golden era, even when we played Williams, Motlop, Evans, Fogarty and White in the same forwardline. In 2026 we will have Williams (albeit 186cm), Ainsworth and probably Smith ahead of Evans playing. Still no match for the proven and original "Mosquito fleet".

I also recall only 8 years prior to that gold period we enjoyed another golden period where our No 1 ruck dominated the state and national competitions, despite being was shorter than 3 votes, Carlton, Christopher Judd, our Brownlow medallist and ruck rover. His name was John Nichols.

I think those days of short 188cm CHF and ruckmen have past us.

Oppositions have 200cm defenders and 208cm rucks to contend with. I dont think Nichols or Maclure would have a chance against players with that sort of height advantage. Have to play fire with fire.


During John Nicholls pomp we had 193cm Robert Walls at Centre Half Forward.

:wink:

_________________
"Hence you will not say that Greeks fight like heroes but that heroes fight like Greeks"?

Winston Churchill


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Ruck debate
PostPosted: Thu Nov 27, 2025 12:33 pm 
Offline
Rod Ashman
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:44 am
Posts: 2435
Location: East Melbourne
I don't believe the extra person on the interchange bench should necessarily be a second ruckman. Clubs have played with 23 players for the past few years except the 23rd player was the sub. On almost every occasion that 23rd player was a runner or utility player. We played TDK sub once, but from memory that didn't turn out too well.

Sent from my SM-S931B using Tapatalk

_________________
Jagga


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 274 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14

All times are UTC + 10 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 83 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group