https://www.sen.com.au/news/2023/08/29/each-afl-clubs-highest-individual-goal-percentages-of-2023/
It's good for Curnow, and good for the fans, but personally, I don't like seeing one bloke kick 30% of our goals. And it's 3x as much as the next guy. The Brisbane and Collingwood profiles are more sustainable IMO.
https://www.sen.com.au/news/2023/08/29/each-afl-clubs-highest-individual-goal-percentages-of-2023/
It's good for Curnow, and good for the fans, but personally, I don't like seeing one bloke kick 30% of our goals. And it's 3x as much as the next guy. The Brisbane and Collingwood profiles are more sustainable IMO.
This is when some of my % stats would be handy. He kicks 28% of the goals in games he plays in......which was all of them this year.
Same can't be said of any of the others....as they all missed large chunks of time through injury.
As an example...
Curnow played in 23 games.
Harry - played in 19 - but kicked 12.2% of the goals he played in
Owies - 16 - 14.8%
Motlop - 18 - 11.4%
Silvagni - 16 - 7.2%
So for every goal Charlie kicks, we get around 1 each out of Harry, Owies and Motlop....keeping in mind each of them got subbed out during games as well through injury.
That list is a list of how fit your goal kickers have been for the year.
Also we have the back to back coleman medalist.
Harry won it a few years back with Charlie in the side.
Had Charlie kicked better without converting everything he probably still should have about 40 odd.
https://www.sen.com.au/news/2023/08/29/each-afl-clubs-highest-individual-goal-percentages-of-2023/
It's good for Curnow, and good for the fans, but personally, I don't like seeing one bloke kick 30% of our goals. And it's 3x as much as the next guy. The Brisbane and Collingwood profiles are more sustainable IMO.
Hmmm,
@PaulP isn't that stat just a historical statement about what it takes to lead the goal kicking, on average has it been any different for any other Coleman medallist?
Historically, teams at the top of the ladder kick between 200 and 300 goals a season. Coleman medallists typically kick about 70 goals a season or more, it's nearly always between 25% and 33% of a teams goal score!
Some Coleman winners come out of lowly teams, forming an even greater percentage.
I concur with
@kruddler, the most important stat for us is not Charlie's 33% it's the 6 or 7 other "regular" goal scorers.
What's become even more important for us than the goal scoring, is the way Harry, Charlie and others work up the ground to get the chain of disposals moving, it's really the key difference between us 3 months ago and now and we've missed a bit of that having Harry and Owies out at times over recent weeks.
Hmmm, @PaulP isn't that stat just a historical statement about what it takes to lead the goal kicking, on average has it been any different for any other Coleman medallist?
Historically, teams at the top of the ladder kick between 200 and 300 goals a season. Coleman medallists typically kick about 70 goals a season or more, it's nearly always between 25% and 33% of a teams goal score!
Some Coleman winners come out of lowly teams, forming an even greater percentage.
I concur with @kruddler, the most important stat for us is not Charlie's 33% it's the 6 or 7 other "regular" goal scorers.
What's become even more important for us than the goal scoring, is the way Harry, Charlie and others work up the ground to get the chain of disposals moving, it's really the key difference between us 3 months ago and now and we've missed a bit of that having Harry and Owies out at times over recent weeks.
Spot on, Spotted One.
Charles is a 'generation' player. He's unpredictable and uniquely talented. Can't be pidgeonholed. And when something special is called for in dire situations, he finds something. Look at the strife we were in against GCS, Charles showed leadership and really stepped up with some clever and sublime efforts to get us back into the contest... lifting his team mates in the process.
If we're to go deep into the finals, we'll need H to fire as well.
Our small forwards are going great and they work so well with Charles and each other (Owies, Motlop, Fog & Martin - each brings something different as well).
Seems to me that our forwards (and wingers/mids) don't give a flog who kicks the goals, just as long as we all help each other and play to our strengths.
Spot on, Spotted One.
Charles is a 'generation' player. He's unpredictable and uniquely talented. Can't be pidgeonholed. And when something special is called for in dire situations, he finds something. Look at the strife we were in against GCS, Charles showed leadership and really stepped up with some clever and sublime efforts to get us back into the contest... lifting his team mates in the process.
If we're to go deep into the finals, we'll need H to fire as well.
Our small forwards are going great and they work so well with Charles and each other (Owies, Motlop, Fog & Martin - each brings something different as well).
Seems to me that our forwards (and wingers/mids) don't give a flog who kicks the goals, just as long as we all help each other and play to our strengths.
Further to what you've stated here.
Agree, we will most likely require Harry to fire to do some damage.
Harry is the best key forward option we've had since Fevola...and by some margin. Strong mark. Good on the lead. Tall and relatively agile. Game changer.
....and Harry is just the robin to Charlies Batman.
Put the 2 together and its ridiculous how good they are and how much we take them for granted.
If those 2 fire, we can beat anyone......and i doubt anyone can stop them.
Charlie has been good at spotting up the long F50 target over the last month or so, with Owies and Motlop getting deep inside F50 on the turnover.
But I do not expect that trick will work more than once in a final, teams will be too switched on and ready for it to happen.
So the key next week will be that even though I expect Charlie or Harry to still get the possessions up the field, they should now be looking for players in space around or juts inside the F50 arc, because I bet the defenders push back hard leaving an opportunity for HFF to double back onto the footy. The players who are going to be most likely in that zone to do the damage will be the likes of Martin, Cottrell, Cerra and Acres.
As others have suggested, the percentages used in that analysis reflect games played as much as a focus on particular forwards at the expense of others.
Charlie kicked 78 goals from 23 games whereas our other major goalkickers were:
Harry - 27 goals from 19 games;
Owies - 25 from 16;
Motlop - 22 from 18;
Silvagni - 14 from 16;
Martin - 13 from 11; and
Small Durds - 11 from 11.
I'm not going to do a Lods style comparison of our scoring but it's interesting to see how our ability to score has improved:
2023 - 275 goals, 206 behinds :-*
2022 - 268 goals, 208 behinds
2021 - 250 goals, 201 behinds
2020* - 146 goals, 114 behinds
2019 - 231 goals, 183 behinds.
Of course, AFL rule changes and coaching tactics generally have an impact as does our players and gamestyle.
Bearing in mind differences in the number of games played (and changing roles), the most significant changes in our goalkickers from last season are:
Cripps 20 > 6
McKay 45 > 27
Motlop 12 < 22
Fisher 18 > 4
Owies 14 < 25
Everyone else was more or less the same, but 27 players out of 37 scored at least one goal this season compared to 22 out of 34 last season.
:-* Incorrect number of behinds in original post and it seems that the figures I used don't include rushed behinds
2023 - 275 goals, 272 behinds
2022 - 268 goals, 208 behinds
2021 - 250 goals, 201 behinds
You know, this is as simple as it gets when it comes to scoring and ratios.
We've had way more scoring shots than last year, converted less of them consistently.
That being said, weve had 2 heavy wins vs the Eagles, which contributed to 19 of Charlie's goals in 2 matches.
Harry's conversion ratio is way down on his average. His scoring totals normally convert 60% of his shots into goals at worst, and this season he is at about 50% and thats not including out of bounds on the full.
Instantly that explains a lot of our reliance on charlie away.
Ultimately, whatever will work works, and the rest is just details.
2023 - 275 goals, 272 behinds
2022 - 268 goals, 208 behinds
2021 - 250 goals, 201 behinds
You know, this is as simple as it gets when it comes to scoring and ratios.
We've had way more scoring shots than last year, converted less of them consistently.
That being said, weve had 2 heavy wins vs the Eagles, which contributed to 19 of Charlie's goals in 2 matches.
Harry's conversion ratio is way down on his average. His scoring totals normally convert 60% of his shots into goals at worst, and this season he is at about 50% and thats not including out of bounds on the full.
Instantly that explains a lot of our reliance on charlie away.
Ultimately, whatever will work works, and the rest is just details.
2023 - 23 games
2022 - 22 games
2021 - 22 games (with a sacked coach)
2023 - 23 games
2022 - 22 games
2021 - 22 games (with a sacked coach)
An extra game doesn't explain 71 more scoring shots.
An extra game doesn't explain 71 more scoring shots.
Never said it did.
But to be pedantic, its not scoring shots. Its behinds.
That includes rushed behinds, but wouldn't include shots that missed everything.
Ultimately, its team gets better = more scoring shots.
It also doesn't explain the difference in ratio where we are almost goals behind parity.
In previous years we scored more efficiently.
The point I'm making is that there is a lot of scope for improvement.
https://www.sen.com.au/news/2023/08/29/each-afl-clubs-highest-individual-goal-percentages-of-2023/
It's good for Curnow, and good for the fans, but personally, I don't like seeing one bloke kick 30% of our goals. And it's 3x as much as the next guy. The Brisbane and Collingwood profiles are more sustainable IMO.
One can bogged down with silly stats. We've been pumping sides so been doing something right.
I'm guessing the like of Jason Dunstall kicked a fair percentage of Hawthorn's goals in the golden era. If you get the ball into the F50 efficiently then you can get your key forward one out. If not, we have plenty of others kicking goals in the last 10 weeks. Mids and smaller forwards have had a picnic during that period. If Charlie didn't kick them, someone else was. If any side has the best key forward in the competition, then they'll kick that percentage of goals or more. Also remember, we have had basically 2 seasons, the first 13 weeks and the last 10 weeks where we dominated the competition. So you need 2 sets of stats for starters.
It also doesn't explain the difference in ratio where we are almost goals behind parity.
In previous years we scored more efficiently.
The point I'm making is that there is a lot of scope for improvement.
I've got something that explains the difference. Human error.
https://afltables.com/afl/teams/carlton/season.html
2023 - 275.272.1922
2022 - 268.249.1857
2021 - 250.246.1746
2023 - 275 goals, 272 behinds
2022 - 268 goals, 208 behinds
2021 - 250 goals, 201 behinds
You know, this is as simple as it gets when it comes to scoring and ratios.
We've had way more scoring shots than last year, converted less of them consistently.
That being said, weve had 2 heavy wins vs the Eagles, which contributed to 19 of Charlie's goals in 2 matches.
Harry's conversion ratio is way down on his average. His scoring totals normally convert 60% of his shots into goals at worst, and this season he is at about 50% and thats not including out of bounds on the full.
Instantly that explains a lot of our reliance on charlie away.
Ultimately, whatever will work works, and the rest is just details.
Let's not get too wound up with stats. We've really had only a 10 week season. Forget the previous 13 weeks where we were barely interested. That 13 weeks we relied on Charlie as no-one else could kick a goal. We spent about 4 weeks at one stage kicking no more than 6 goals a game as a team. Tell about the last 10 weeks when we were committed and on fire.
Further to the above....
2023 - 275.206 - https://afltables.com/afl/stats/2023s.html
2022 - 268.208 - https://afltables.com/afl/stats/2022s.html
2021 - 250.201 - https://afltables.com/afl/stats/2021s.html
Not sure where you get your stats from, but AFLTABLES should be where you start.
Maths says Thry is right - 275.272=1,922 points for the season as per the ladder
This is 106 more points than last season but we played one more game
Pity we didn't score a couple more points last season.
Who cares - it doesn't matter what we score as long it is more than the opposition and isn't Ross Lyon brand footy.
Not sure where you get your stats from, but AFLTABLES should be where you start.
I've seen this "error" before in AFL reporting, it's the incorrect / correct use different types of averages.
For example if you look at some sites they will report we "average" 9 behinds per game, 9 x 23 = 207 behinds, yet we've scored 272 behinds. If readers start filtering kicked versus rushed and the like, it starts to make sense but the websites reporting the stats do not make that clear. So the subtotals are 207 kicked behinds + 65 rushed = 272.
Averages reported for goals are always correct for the obvious reason you can only kick a goal.
It's difficult / labour intensive to retrospectively look at the figures because historically many stat sites haven't differentiated kicked versus rushed. If we wanted to be really accurate we'd also have to find touched off the boot and hit the post as separate categories.
Finally, compared to the past the game has changed so much, all the banana kicks with check-side, leg and off-breaks, how do you compare that to history and claim one is better than the other? In the past some blokes could kick a drop kick or torp from outside 60m+ on a regular basis, now they do not exist. A drop punt or torp goal from deep in the pocket was almost non-existent, now the deep pocket set shot with the banana is almost preferred!
Further to the above....
2023 - 275.206 - https://afltables.com/afl/stats/2023s.html
2022 - 268.208 - https://afltables.com/afl/stats/2022s.html
2021 - 250.201 - https://afltables.com/afl/stats/2021s.html
Not sure where you get your stats from, but AFLTABLES should be where you start.
I went to the AFL ladder
Further to the above....
2023 - 275.206 - https://afltables.com/afl/stats/2023s.html
2022 - 268.208 - https://afltables.com/afl/stats/2022s.html
2021 - 250.201 - https://afltables.com/afl/stats/2021s.html
Not sure where you get your stats from, but AFLTABLES should be where you start.
I've got something that explains the difference. Human error.
https://afltables.com/afl/teams/carlton/season.html
2023 - 275.272.1922
2022 - 268.249.1857
2021 - 250.246.1746
I generally use AFL tables as a rule for historic purposes.
Thing is though, your stats contradict each other somewhat.
I've got something that explains the difference. Human error.
https://afltables.com/afl/teams/carlton/season.html
2023 - 275.272.1922
2022 - 268.249.1857
2021 - 250.246.1746
I used the figures from a different page - https://afltables.com/afl/stats/2023s.html - and they're wrong. I suspect those tables don't count rushed behinds ::)
And I copied one number incorrectly :-[
Readers can see why you need to be very careful using stats, it's all in the definition and you cannot assume anything, you can't even assume the terms used mean the same thing to you and whoever compiled the stats.
Lot's of variables in discussing goalkicking accuracy.
.
You can kick 30 goals-30 behinds....and they will tell you it's bad kicking :D
And it was on that day Rnd 2 1969 against Hawthorn
Because only one of those behinds was 'rushed' according to the tables ;D
(one dodgy, unskilled player in particular kicked 6-12) ;)
On the other hand we kicked 9-20 against GWS in Rnd 3 this year and 8 out of the 20 behinds were rushed.
Then there's the shots that miss everything ::)
I generally use AFL tables as a rule for historic purposes.
Thing is though, your stats contradict each other somewhat.
I didnt think i needed to spell it out, but apparantly i do.
First list was total goals and total behinds per year.
Second list was total goals and behinds kicked by us......that is, excluding rushed behinds. So can see how many rushed behinds there are.
There is no contradiction. Just misunderstanding.
I just had a quick look at our 2022 and 2023 goalkickers:
2022 - Key forwards 126, Small/medium forwards 72, Midfielders 61, Rucks 4, Defenders 5
2023 - Key forwards 124, Small/medium forwards 101, Midfielders 63, Rucks 9, Defenders 9
The figures are a bit rubbery as players change roles and I've treated Silvagni as a key forward rather than a ruck, but the increased efficiency of our small and medium forwards was significant in 2023. Crippa's output dropped from 20 to 9 but his midfield teammates more than picked up the slack.
Our gameplan and personnel are very different to Collingwood's and that is reflected in their 2023 goal kicking breakdown:
Key forwards 88, Small/medium forwards 109, Midfielders 101, Rucks 32, Defenders 4
However, it would be great if we could get more of a contribution from our rucks and midfielders.
I just had a quick look at our 2022 and 2023 goalkickers:
2022 - Key forwards 126, Small/medium forwards 72, Midfielders 61, Rucks 4, Defenders 5
2023 - Key forwards 124, Small/medium forwards 101, Midfielders 63, Rucks 9, Defenders 9
The figures are a bit rubbery as players change roles and I've treated Silvagni as a key forward rather than a ruck, but the increased efficiency of our small and medium forwards was significant in 2023. Crippa's output dropped from 20 to 9 but his midfield teammates more than picked up the slack.
Our gameplan and personnel are very different to Collingwood's and that is reflected in their 2023 goal kicking breakdown:
Key forwards 88, Small/medium forwards 109, Midfielders 101, Rucks 32, Defenders 4
However, it would be great if we could get more of a contribution from our rucks and midfielders.
Interesting, thanks for that DJ
Interesting, thanks for that DJ
What those figures do show is that our forwards - tall, medium and small - are the least of our worries.
I dont think we have too many worries.
The challenge for us isn't about ability anymore, it's about consistency and continuity. If we can get a decent run with injuries this season, we'll give the flag a red hot shake.
I dont think we have too many worries.
The challenge for us isn't about ability anymore, it's about consistency and continuity. If we can get a decent run with injuries this season, we'll give the flag a red hot shake.
Yes, that’s true Thry.
A greater contribution from our mids and rucks would make life easier for our forwards though.
Adding Schultz or Papley to our list wouldn’t address a deficiency.
I think the main reason we don't get enough goals from our midfield is that they have to play higher up the ground than most of the other top teams - and the reason for this is we don't have enough run out of the backline.
We just don't have the run and carry to make springboard attacks from the back half, so almost all of our scoring comes from midfielders delivering to forwards.
If we can get Boyd, WIlliams, Saad, Cincotta to set up plays from defensive 50 with run and bounce, the ball may well end up in the hands of Walsh/Cripps/Kennedy etc on the run from 40-50 metres out, instead of them kicking it from 70 metres out to contested situations.
The other top sides do this so well (think of Crisp/Quaynor/Coleman/Whitfield etc), and it's part of our game that I think we need to add.
I dont think we have too many worries.
The challenge for us isn't about ability anymore, it's about consistency and continuity. If we can get a decent run with injuries this season, we'll give the flag a red hot shake.
Agreed, fans see a short term issue due to injury or form and what backups of backups of backups, but it is not realistic with the TPP and list caps to have quality AFL backups for every position. If you have too many in the backup ready to go category your list will crash after 4 or 5 years because they all peak and wane together, or you have to find ways to bring in ready made types like the Handbaggers, but even they are now struggling.
Just like you have a distribution of types, you have to have a distribution of ages as well.
I get the fan frustration, but to sustain long term success you have to accept some risk such that chance will play a role in your fate.
Yes, that’s true Thry.
A greater contribution from our mids and rucks would make life easier for our forwards though.
I've got an idea how to get more out of our rucks.....play Jack as one! ;)
I've got an idea how to get more out of our rucks.....play Jack as one! ;)
Play Jack as a ruckman and his form as a tall forward drops off dramatically … and that has repercussions for Harry and Charlie.
Pitto generally stays behind the ball when we’re attacking and that must be his instructions. It would be nice if he clunked a mark inside 50 from time to time.
I really don’t think we need to change our goal kicking options all that much - if you’re scoring plenty of goals from centre clearances you can’t expect to score many from rebounds - but some additional contributors wouldn’t go astray.
Points scored in 2023(average)
First 13 games: 72.3
Last 13 games: 91.7
Removed the huge Eagles games from both averages and its
65.7
87.7
Play Jack as a ruckman and his form as a tall forward drops off dramatically … and that has repercussions for Harry and Charlie.
Pitto generally stays behind the ball when we’re attacking and that must be his instructions. It would be nice if he clunked a mark inside 50 from time to time.
I really don’t think we need to change our goal kicking options all that much - if you’re scoring plenty of goals from centre clearances you can’t expect to score many from rebounds - but some additional contributors wouldn’t go astray.
The day Jack kicked 4 and was BOG and got 3 brownlow votes, he was yep, playing as a backup ruck.
People perceptions override the reality.
Jack
Games as ruck/backup ruck - 6
Goals while playing backup ruck -7
1.16 goals/game as a ruck/forwardGames with 2 rucks in the team (or 1 ruck and Young as backup) - 10*
Goals with 2 rucks in the team (or 1 ruck and Young as backup) - 8*
*Game vs Adelaide - SOJ was KPF, pitto got injured early in 1st quarter, Young/SOS played backup
0.8 goals/game as a pure forwardIf we take out games against West Coast and North as they were just terrible and inflated averages.
1.2 goals/game as a ruck/forward0.5 goals/game as a pure forwardSo you may want to rethink your statement. ;)
Do we really need yet another thread morphing into a Jack-the-ruck discussion ?
Do we really need yet another thread morphing into a Jack-the-ruck discussion ?
If the shoe fits, and people are posting mistruths, then yes.
If the shoe fits, and people are posting mistruths, then yes.
Then we best make sure people know that best game from SoJ was against Port at Marvel, with Port was in the middle of it's ruck crisis and had to ruck an underdone / premature return from injury Lycett (Dixon had gone out) with only Finlayson as a backup.
TDK playing on the fastest surface in the AFL was jumping all over Lycett early, Lycett aggravated his injury in a heavy contest early and then spent the rest of the game trying to belt the cover off our blokes but he couldn't catch them.
McKay also got injured early, but because Port had also brought Jonas back in prematurely and Lycett was broken they were short of talls at both ends of the ground.
A good game from SoJ, but hardly a test!
Then we best make sure people know that best game from SoJ was against Port at Marvel, with Port was in the middle of it's ruck crisis and had to ruck an underdone / premature return from injury Lycett (Dixon had gone out) with only Finlayson as a backup.
TDK playing on the fastest surface in the AFL was jumping all over Lycett early, Lycett aggravated his injury in a heavy contest early and then spent the rest of the game trying to belt the cover off our blokes but he couldn't catch them.
McKay also got injured early, but because Port had also brought Jonas back in prematurely and Lycett was broken they were short of talls at both ends of the ground.
A good game from SoJ, but hardly a test!
...and remind people that Port had won, what 13 in a row up to that point as well?
Perhaps you would prefer it if i brought up the game against Freo where Jack, Harry and Young had to go up against the man-mountain Darcy from Freo who got 58 hitouts, (and athletic freak Jackson) yet we won by 50+ point as jack had 19 touches. Which was the most by any ruck for us all year, only matched once by TDK against easybeats WCE.
Take away the bias mate.
Lets play your game for $h!ts and giggles
Take away his best game for the year, and the figures still show he averages more goals/game as a backup ruck than a forward.
Whichever way you want to slice it, he is NOT worse off performance wise playing in the ruck. In reality, its actually the opposite.
Which surprise, surprise, is what i've been saying all year.
I don't want to reignite the debate again, just pointing out what DJC was factually wrong.
The day Jack kicked 4 and was BOG and got 3 brownlow votes, he was yep, playing as a backup ruck.
People perceptions override the reality.
Jack
Games as ruck/backup ruck - 6
Goals while playing backup ruck -7
1.16 goals/game as a ruck/forward
Games with 2 rucks in the team (or 1 ruck and Young as backup) - 10*
Goals with 2 rucks in the team (or 1 ruck and Young as backup) - 8*
*Game vs Adelaide - SOJ was KPF, pitto got injured early in 1st quarter, Young/SOS played backup
0.8 goals/game as a pure forward
If we take out games against West Coast and North as they were just terrible and inflated averages.
1.2 goals/game as a ruck/forward
0.5 goals/game as a pure forward
So you may want to rethink your statement. ;)
Jack had three good games when he played as a back-up ruckman and five playing as a tall forward with no or occasional ruck duties.
When Jack plays as the third tall forward, he relieves Harry and Charlie, demands a decent tall defender, regularly finds space and can take contested marks. De Koning has a slightly different skill set but plays a similar role as third tall forward. When Jack is used as a back up ruckman, his forward craft suffers and Charlie and Harry have to work a lot harder.
Jack played as second ruck in seven games (Pitto was subbed off early in Rd 2). He kicked five goals in those seven games and we won three and drew one. In the nine games Jack wasn't second ruck, he kicked nine goals and we won five (including the game where he was subbed off). We lined up without Jack in the ruck in 17 games and won 12 of them. Pitto and the King rucked together in 12 games for nine wins.
Our forward line functions better (a) when Pitto and De Koning share the ruck duties and (b) when Silvagni and/or De Koning play as the third tall.
Jack had three good games when he played as a back-up ruckman and five playing as a tall forward with no or occasional ruck duties.
When Jack plays as the third tall forward, he relieves Harry and Charlie, demands a decent tall defender, regularly finds space and can take contested marks. De Koning has a slightly different skill set but plays a similar role as third tall forward. When Jack is used as a back up ruckman, his forward craft suffers and Charlie and Harry have to work a lot harder.
Jack played as second ruck in seven games (Pitto was subbed off early in Rd 2). He kicked five goals in those seven games and we won three and drew one. In the nine games Jack wasn't second ruck, he kicked nine goals and we won five (including the game where he was subbed off). We lined up without Jack in the ruck in 17 games and won 12 of them. Pitto and the King rucked together in 12 games for nine wins.
Our forward line functions better (a) when Pitto and De Koning share the ruck duties and (b) when Silvagni and/or De Koning play as the third tall.
Thats all fascinating, but it has nothing to do with the original statement.
Jack is NOT hurt by playing as a backup ruck. He excels at it.
If you wanna talk about how well others go, then thats talking about team balance....and thats a whole other kettle of fish, which i've already argued to death.
If the club listens to SoJ fanboys it's going to love SoJ into oblivion, the obsession with him rucking seems to make them appear oblivious to his plight.
No matter how heavy the begging, our club in the absence of injuries is never going with him ahead of Pitto or TDK, and we already have McKay, Cripps, Charlie, McGovern taking inside 50m stoppages, with Cripps particularly impressive inside 50m in finals even while injured.
Add to that next year we'll probably still have several of Mirkov, Young, Lemmey or O'Keefe to pick from, with TDK another pre-season under his belt and obviously on the rise despite the bitterness of his naysayers.
Even so if SoJ actually gets a future opportunity to ruck and manages to prove the bulk of us wrong then we'll be happy for him.
In the meantime I suggest his boosters stop talking down his team-mates and actually back the squad even when SoJ isn't in it! ;)
SoJ as a 1st choice AFL ruck option!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jL2DH-nKBeA