The two Ruck option is not just a matter of replacing a tall for a more mobile mid/forward/defender. It's a little more complicated than that. There are a number of other variables that come into play. There is a flow on effect for multiple other positions. The roles played by TDK, Harry, even Kennedy change to some extent. Of course that can have an impact on performance Initially that can be unsettling to a side. If it's to be persisted with it's something that would take time to fine tune. The alternative is to scrap it completely and consign one ruck to a season of VFL
Given all that. And also given the understanding that a ruck on the bench reduced mid-field rotations, which was further complicated by injuries.
Pittonet played 50% of the game. TDK played 75% Was there a difference in our effectiveness or style of play in the lengthy times when one ruck was off the ground? For much of the game we did play only one ruck.
Binns is a funny one. In the VFL games I've watched... He racks up possessions, but he does so in a manner that is often barely noticeable. I'm often surprised when I look up the stats and seen he's had the ball so often. Do those possessions equate to influence and impact on games?
Part of that could be the nature of the commentary of VFL matches where players aren't always identified, and cameras don't pan in or follow the play to the same extent that they do with multi camera angles in AFL games.
It puts more on the shoulders of others as a result, and the benefit we get from it is not worth it. Pitto had 6 clearances, only beaten by Walsh (8 ) and Cripps (7). He even kicked a goal. Put Cerra back in the side and he'd get the same amount of clearances (if not more), more possessions and is more likely to kick a goal most weeks as well. So what benefit did we get from Pitto? A few extra hitouts to advantage....most likely leading to clearances.....which could've been equalled by having another pure midfielder in the team. So what were the disadvantages....more gametime required by others, less run and pressure around the ball.....which is our strength.
I guess my issue with this, as it has always been with this debate is.... What are you replacing the ruckman with? It's not going to be someone of the standard of Cerra. It's going to be a fringe AFL player from the VFL who is not necessarily going to give you the same output as Pittonet produced in half a game yesterday. Now Cincotta would probably have been a better option once Cerra was out, maybe even give Binns a chance...but who else? (we'll pop over to the VFL now to have a look) Most likely that extra player would have had minimal impact.
(I'm not sure why Pittonet only played half a game on the ground- managed, slight injury...watch this space. He could have rested either forward or back.)
I can see all the benefits of one ruck. But I can also see the benefit in a long season in alternating them on some occasions and on others sharing the load and developing an understanding and combination.
No VFL/AFL team has ever gone through the season undefeated. Someday one will. It may even be a Carlton side. That team will be a great team. We’re not yet a great team, we’re not even our best team… not by a long shot, with quite a number of our players out, or injured during the game. Our forward line was missing Fogarty, Motlop, Martin, Cunningham all of who are in the mix for our best side. Our defence was missing Marchbank, then Saad and McGovern Cerra goes out of the midfield, and we’re a bit depleted.
The first loss of the season always stings. It stings even more when it’s a team we thought we would account for easily.
But Adelaide did a number on us last year and did their homework well. We were out coached on the day. There were elements of the Fremantle approach in some passages yesterday as we struggled to move the ball out of defence. So naturally there is a bit of disappointment, even anger and we’re looking for reasons. Had we snuck over the line that would have largely disappeared. We’d be looking for heroes, not villains.
But we weren’t awful…except some of our finishing. The effort seemed to be there. So many moments…Owies had two that could have changed the game Had Owies not tripped over his own feet (or the Adelaide players feet) near the end it may have been a different story. Had the goal Owies kicked been counted (An umpire should never say "I believe it was touched". They either saw the touch or they didn’t. So the soft call when it’s inconclusive must always be a goal)…different story
Just on the two- ruck situation. It’s not as cut and dried as some believe. The replacement of a ruck/tall with a small mid-field running player has to be viewed in terms of plusses and minuses. The gain of the running player must be seem in terms of the cost of what you lose by omitting the tall/ruck. There may be an advantage…but the gap may not be as huge as we may think. Pittonet gave us a bit especially early on…but yes, it may have cost us later in the game. Playing two wasn’t the issue, as much as playing a ruck to replace Cerra was. With Saad and McGovern going down a lot of our drive disappeared as rotations were affected. Williams also seemed to be struggling at stages and may have had to stay on because of the injuries. In that situation a second ruck may have cost us and Cincotta would have been handy when Saad was injured. But looking at the bigger picture…This was Pittonet’s first game of the year. and he wasn’t too bad considering. More than anything he needs a bit of game time. (He only got half a game yesterday) Does that affect TDK’s performance. You can look at it that way, based on this game, but making judgements based on one game is fraught with danger. You would have to believe that there is a bit of a plan regarding the ruck situation going forward, and managing that will be a bit tricky. The more Tom and Marc play together the better the understanding they’ll develop. Whether they’ll be given that opportunity is up to the coaches.
It's a funny game. I don't think we're playing too badly. Our intensity and effort seems to be there. I just think Adelaide are playing 100% better than anything they've shown this year.
We'll get a couple of days of 'noise' and then another controversy will take over.
It's a pretty great feeling to be back in a position of strength, where these things make the supporters of other sides (those not even involved in the contest) lose their sh*t
I stll find it a bit 'bizarre' that a side that was pretty disciplined for 99% of the game lost that discipline in the last minute. I don't mind 'bizarre'
It will be interesting to see if other sides adopt some of the smothering/stifling tactics against us that Freo employed today. It will be interesting to see if other sides are capable of it.
They worked harder and wanted it more...but in the end they lost. I suspect they will be seething. Should be a tough game next time we play them.
The umpiring evened itself out in the end so we shouldn't dwell too much on that.
