Hampson goes, Wood comes in to join Kreuzer & Warnock in our ruck division.
All three have different strengths & weaknesses and suit different situations. However, they are not all going to play at the same time so how is this 'new' ruck war going to play out ??
Well for starters Wood is on the rookie list and will only play if there is a long term injury to either Kreuzer or Warnock..
In the meantime Kreuzer and Warnock will both play in the same team... /thread. ;)
What's to say that there is a long-term injury to any of the other players and Wood gets upgraded in his absence ??
Then Kreuzer or Warnock would have to be in poor form for him to get a gig.. He is a back up for when our 1st two either get injured or lose form... But then we also might just go with Casboult, who can play forward..
We play Kreuzer as much as we normally do and come the end of the year, trade him for a decent key forward.
Keep Warnock and Wood and try and pick up another wood-type cheap ruck to cover the Kreuzer trade.
As for who plays and when, base it on nothing else other than form. Competition breeds improvement.
We play Kreuzer as much as we normally do and come the end of the year, trade him for a decent key forward.
This. If he doesn't come one or is plagued by injury once again. Although he did show his loyalty to the club in his last contract renewal. Kind of seems a little harsh.
Wood couldn't cement a spot at Brisbane or Collingwood, played a reasonable season in the VFL and kicked a goal in a NAB Cup game and he's challenging Kreuzer and Warnock for a spot in the 22? :o
Wood couldn't cement a spot at Brisbane or Collingwood, played a reasonable season in the VFL and kicked a goal in a NAB Cup game and he's challenging Kreuzer and Warnock for a spot in the 22? :o
Trade him away before he is completely written off by this club. He has had the fork in him for a while and is considered completely cooked. Do we need another Waite in the club for the next 5 years or so ? This is what most people are honestly thinking here. Not myself, but many here do. Start talking to GWS and GCS players and pinch one of their best forwards and offer Kreuzer up along with a second rounder. It will be one less hole to plug, and he can whip us back in return when he plays against us, to show us what we really lost. We will still have world beater Wood in the squad. ???
Wood is ex Collingwood and a Malthouse inspired choice......I think he will be given every chance to be promoted and play seniors.
He was probably the best ruck in the VFL last season and I would expect him to dominate mots games he plays in the VFL.....
Wood can take a mark and is a straight kick when he gets a chance but his ruck work is inferior to that of Warnock and Kruezer.....maybe Capuano can improve that and make him a more complete player.
Wood is ex Collingwood and a Malthouse inspired choice......I think he will be given every chance to be promoted and play seniors.
He was probably the best ruck in the VFL last season and I would expect him to dominate mots games he plays in the VFL.....
Wood can take a mark and is a straight kick when he gets a chance but his ruck work is inferior to that of Warnock and Kruezer.....maybe Capuano can improve that and make him a more complete player.
I agree with all but the bit in bold, I think that is a bit unfair on several other ruckmen when you consider who was playing lots of VFL last season. Blokes like Warnock, Hampson, Grundy, Hudson, Stephenson, Witts, Simpson all played about 1/2 a season or more in the VFL and are probably better rucks. But as a forward/ruck option Wood was certainly superior.
If you said the best non-afl listed ruckmen then I would agree.
"The Kreuzer Konumdrum"
There some people who believe we should trade Kreuzer, some who think he should play as a midfielder and others who reckon we should try him again at CHB.
His development & output is a major talking point now that Cotchin has turned into a bone-fide ball magnet and quality leader at the Tigers.
We needed to bring someone like Cam Wood into the club to assist in a back-up role but I'm concerned about Kreuzer and how much more he has to give onfield and around the ground. There is no doubting that he has the talent but he doesn't seem to have the aggressive character to go with it.
Could he end up being a genuine trade option at year's end or is that just silly thinking from those who are his biggest detractors ??
Ive accepted that he is unlikley to reach the potential most expected. IMO its clear we should have taken Cotchin, and also clear that its dangerous take a ruckman with early pick. The problem now, is the investment trap, its far harder to part with something/someone/ideal in which youve invested heavily in for smaller return, because doing so means you have to accept a loss. I think he'll end up going nowhere because he wont command high value. I reckon the club will stick with him, abd with the exception of a few good patches,he'll slowly wind down in effectiveness with each season.
Its to late IMO, we should have acted earlier
He'll be one of the better ruckman in the game soon enough. Whether he'll be a great ruckman... hard call. Injuries seem to have the better of him ATM.
Getting rid of Hammer makes him untradeable if he wasn't before IMO
I reckon all 3 will be given all the chances they need. By season's end, or perhaps sooner, we'll know who will stay and who will go.
Wood's ability to catch the aggot and kick straight is a big up side. Neither of the other two can do that and one of them at least must start doing that this year.
I reckon all 3 will be given all the chances they need. By season's end, or perhaps sooner, we'll know who will stay and who will go.
Wood's ability to catch the aggot and kick straight is a big up side. Neither of the other two can do that and one of them at least must start doing that this year.
Agree 100 percent.
I reckon all 3 will be given all the chances they need. By season's end, or perhaps sooner, we'll know who will stay and who will go.
Wood's ability to catch the aggot and kick straight is a big up side. Neither of the other two can do that and one of them at least must start doing that this year.
x2. Rightly or wrongly I think there will be heaps of pressure on Kreuzer this year to take it up a notch and I hope beyond hope he does. Wood will get enough games and if he can show enough in the ruck and mark the ball around the ground well then it will be interesting.
Wood was only taken because our current rucks are so fragile. I'm not expecting him to play outside of an injury to a ruck, it would be bizarre for him to play in any other circumstance IMO.
Wood was only taken because our current rucks are so fragile. I'm not expecting him to play outside of an injury to a ruck, it would be bizarre for him to play in any other circumstance IMO.
All the talk about Wood being a good mark and being a good kick of the footy might indicate he may have a role up forward at some point in time in this squad. I have my doubts he was selected for his ruck skills.
All the talk about Wood being a good mark and being a good kick of the footy might indicate he may have a role up forward at some point in time in this squad.
It's like a never ending nightmare :P :)) :))
I think Blueseum's profile of Cameron Wood sums up what 2014 holds for him:
In one of the biggest surprises of the 2013 AFL Rookie Draft, Carlton selected 27 year-old former Brisbane and Collingwood ruckman Cameron Wood in the second round, at number 28 overall. After being delisted by Collingwood in 2012, Wood had enjoyed a solid 2013 in the VFL with Williamstown, but few expected him to be given a third opportunity at elite level.
However, the departure of Shaun Hampson to Richmond a few weeks earlier had forced the Blues to re-assess their stock of big men, so Wood was picked up as insurance against long-term injury to Matthew Kreuzer, Robert Warnock and Levi Casboult. Although another ex-Collingwood ruckman – the vastly-experienced Premiership player Darren Jolly – was also available, Carlton’s recruiting team opted for the younger man, largely because he had already established a strong rapport with Blues coach Mick Malthouse during their five seasons together in black and white.
Way back in 2004, Wood had been working his way up through the ranks at West Adelaide when he was drafted for the first time. The Brisbane Lions called his name at number 18 in the National Draft, and Cameron packed his bags for the tropics. He played his first senior game early in 2005, but from then on his opportunities were limited and, despite gaining a Rising Star nomination in round 2, 2007, he had played only 16 matches in three seasons before he was traded to Collingwood later that same year.
Wood went on to play another 48 games for the Magpies between 2008 and 2012, although he was never able to shake the tag of back-up ruckman and his entire career in black and white was spent in the shadows of Josh Fraser, Darren Jolly, Leigh Brown and Chris Dawes. In October 2012, Collingwood delisted Wood, so he crossed to Williamstown in the VFL and enjoyed perhaps his most effective season as he helped lift the Seagulls into a Preliminary Final.
Upon his arrival at Princes Park, Cameron credited his previous good relationship with Malthouse and high performance manager David Buttifant as the key to his recruitment. He knows that the challenge facing him at Carlton is huge, but is also determined to give it his best shot. "I'm under no illusions that I've been recruited as insurance,” he said during an early interview. “But if I didn't think I could play the number one ruck role, I wouldn't waste people's time and be here for the sake of being here."
I'm with IOT on this one; it would be bizarre for Wood to play unless we lose one of Warnock and Kreuzer, and Casboult and Rowe aren't performing.
If Wood plays well in the VFL this year, which is likely based on his efforts there last year, he has every chance of playing seniors for us at some stage this year IMO. Both Kreuzer and Warnock have been criticised for their poor forward performances and if that continues then MM could well be tempted to try something different, especially if one or both of their ruck work also takes a dip.
Neither Sam nor Levi has yet set the world alight either as a forward or as a ruck so MM may well decide to turn to Cameron Wood. I think "insurance" is basically right, but at the same time I certainly wouldn't write off his chances of getting some senior game time.
I know he hasn't pulled on the navy blue yet but, if he goes alright against the Bulldogs and with the NBs, I'd like to see Luke Reynolds take the LTI elevation.
He'll be one of the better ruckman in the game soon enough. Whether he'll be a great ruckman... hard call. Injuries seem to have the better of him ATM.
Getting rid of Hammer makes him untradeable if he wasn't before IMO
This!!.....
.....and This!!!
Wood couldn't cement a spot at Brisbane or Collingwood, played a reasonable season in the VFL and kicked a goal in a NAB Cup game and he's challenging Kreuzer and Warnock for a spot in the 22? :o
A fit and firing Kreuzer will silence all his detractors!!
I know he hasn't pulled on the navy blue yet but, if he goes alright against the Bulldogs and with the NBs, I'd like to see Luke Reynolds take the LTI elevation.
Likewise DJ. I think I'm gonna like this Kid.
Think we will get an idea if and when a player is promoted to take Duigans spot....like others I like the look of Reynolds and what he could offer but if Mick promotes Wood then I would be watching my back if I was Warnock.
Ive accepted that he is unlikley to reach the potential most expected. IMO its clear we should have taken Cotchin, and also clear that its dangerous take a ruckman with early pick. The problem now, is the investment trap, its far harder to part with something/someone/ideal in which youve invested heavily in for smaller return, because doing so means you have to accept a loss. I think he'll end up going nowhere because he wont command high value. I reckon the club will stick with him, and with the exception of a few good patches,he'll slowly wind down in effectiveness with each season.
Its to late IMO, we should have acted earlier
Or kept Kennedy and traded picks 1 & 3 for Judd instead.
Ive accepted that he is unlikley to reach the potential most expected. IMO its clear we should have taken Cotchin, and also clear that its dangerous take a ruckman with early pick. The problem now, is the investment trap, its far harder to part with something/someone/ideal in which youve invested heavily in for smaller return, because doing so means you have to accept a loss. I think he'll end up going nowhere because he wont command high value. I reckon the club will stick with him, and with the exception of a few good patches,he'll slowly wind down in effectiveness with each season.
Its to late IMO, we should have acted earlier
Or kept Kennedy and traded picks 1 & 3 for Judd instead.
I hadn't even considered that option, but Gee hindsight is a wonderful thing and how great would it have been to go that option. To also consider that Kennedy was gutted and desperately wanted to stay a Blue at the time. Thanks for depressing me even further Laj :(
This is Kruezer's last chance this year IMO
If this bloke does not start taking games apart, get angry and hit hard I am more than happy to trade him at years end.
I was thinking the same thing myself with both of the last 2 posts. :(
I was thinking the same thing myself with both of the last 2 posts. :(
WTF? You abused me for suggesting such a thing 18 months ago.
I dont want to Crystal ball here, but we would be silly to make any guarantees on what we do with Kreuzer.
I.e. We may be better off him leaving as a free agent (under current compensation) than trading him around for relatively less.
As a former number 1 draft pick, worse players than him have achieved good compensation than his current trade worth, and giving him till the 7 year mark (by my reckoning end of next season, or the season following) might be worthwhile. Cameron Wood has never been anything special and I wouldnt be overly enthused with him taking Kreuzer's spot on the senior list at this stage.
I dont want to Crystal ball here, but we would be silly to make any guarantees on what we do with Kreuzer.
I.e. We may be better off him leaving as a free agent (under current compensation) than trading him around for relatively less.
As a former number 1 draft pick, worse players than him have achieved good compensation than his current trade worth, and giving him till the 7 year mark (by my reckoning end of next season, or the season following) might be worthwhile. Cameron Wood has never been anything special and I wouldnt be overly enthused with him taking Kreuzer's spot on the senior list at this stage.
I think they are planning on scraping compensation for free agency.
Personally i think its a good idea. Clubs are displaying no loyalty to players if it feels they will get a good pick in return.
I think they are planning on scraping compensation for free agency.
Personally i think its a good idea. Clubs are displaying no loyalty to players if it feels they will get a good pick in return.
I agree, at the moment there is not enough risk for clubs to warrant them to get deals done early.
Get rid of the safety net and let the market determine what happens, I think you will find younger players being signed on for longer and given more time to develop. It may be the end of situations like the Scully incident.
I just want Kreuzer to be the gun he (once) promised to be.......
I just want Kreuzer to be the gun he (once) promised to be.......
Me 2
If Cameron Wood was a batsman I reckon he would be padding up ready to come in....Warnock and Kruezer were held to a nil all draw with Lobbe and gave us nothing after 1/4 time...
If Cameron Wood was a batsman I reckon he would be padding up ready to come in....Warnock and Kruezer were held to a nil all draw with Lobbe and gave us nothing after 1/4 time...
Feck them both off as at minimum Wood can take a clincker up forward and convert. Piss the other 2 off before they cost us more losses.
If Cameron Wood was a batsman I reckon he would be padding up ready to come in....Warnock and Kruezer were held to a nil all draw with Lobbe and gave us nothing after 1/4 time...
Feck them both off as at minimum Wood can take a clincker up forward and convert. Piss the other 2 off before they cost us more losses.
Warnock too one mark on the lead and had the sit on a player in the goalsqurae area but couldnt mark it...I reckon Wood would have taken that mark.
Its just hopeless having a player that tall who cannot take marks...I'd rather Wood or Casboult...
If Cameron Wood was a batsman I reckon he would be padding up ready to come in....Warnock and Kruezer were held to a nil all draw with Lobbe and gave us nothing after 1/4 time...
Feck them both off as at minimum Wood can take a clincker up forward and convert. Piss the other 2 off before they cost us more losses.
Wood is worse in the ruck than both of them, unless he has improved 50% Wood is only marginally better than Casboult or Rowe as a ruckmen.
But it is true that Wood is twice the forward target that either Warnock or Kreuzer are, and Wood is not easily disposed of in contests like Casboult and Rowe.
Malthouse is repeating the same mistakes of Ratten. We have no forward so he has tried to turn one of the league best stoppage players in Matthew Kreuzer into a marking forward. I suspect this is because MM is hypnotised by Warnock's first hand on the ball. But on a night like tonight you see why that stat is worthless. Lobbe was able to stop Warnock's effectiveness, and he did so without getting his hands to the ball, there is the real problem. A bit of tenderising and Warnock's brain switches off so much that he becomes predictable to opponents and easily manipulated by opposition rucks. They control where he hits the ball just by the way they jump at him! Further to that, once he becomes timid he cannot clunk a mark and we saw him beaten twice in situations any other player his height and weight would have dealt with easily.
Kreuzer might not be a great tap ruckmen but given an extended run on the ball he is ten times the stoppage value of Robert Warnock.
Unfortunately now because of our draft / trade decisions we have lost all flexibility in the ruck department. We will be praying for a long term injury which is a pretty piss poor plan for a football season, that is if there was a plan to start with and not just a panic!
Too much slack between these 2. One can hit out, and the other can mark (when he isn't injured). So we end up with 2 players each with one half of value and another half of redundancy. What shiats me about Kruizer is that he cost us pick 1. At this moment I'd much rather play 206 and Wood, at least you've got a chance of winning hit outs, and the other providing a better chance of holding a mark and kicking a goal whilst providing relief in the ruck. can't keep going with this Kruiz experiment for ever FFS
Warnock showed tonight that he is a crab !! For a guy with such height, he cannot take a mark and he is not effective enough around the ground.
they are both crap - Kruezer and Warnock were both killed in the last quarter by No 23 from Port - a young ruckman
clean them both out at years end...
Only way Kruiz provides value, is if he ruck all day (with occasional relief from a forward) thereby allowing you to fill that second ruck spot with another player ie perhaps a runner or whatever (depending g on who your playing). But even leaving aside what we gave up to get him, if he's going to hold down a ruck spot on his own it stands to reason he's gotta first be fit to play. It's seems every year gets harder and harder for him to get out there in first place, let alone staying on field when he does. It's not working.
Only way Kruiz provides value, is if he ruck all day (with occasional relief from a forward) thereby allowing you to fill that second ruck spot with another player ie perhaps a runner or whatever (depending g on who your playing). But even leaving aside what we gave up to get him, if he's going to hold down a ruck spot on his own it stands to reason he's gotta first be fit to play. It's seems every year gets harder and harder for him to get out there in first place, let alone staying on field when he does. It's not working.
Kruezer is not a certainty any more..
cannot take a pack mark
cannot leap and tap ruck
good follower
kicking under pressure is average
Only way Kruiz provides value, is if he ruck all day (with occasional relief from a forward) thereby allowing you to fill that second ruck spot with another player ie perhaps a runner or whatever (depending g on who your playing). But even leaving aside what we gave up to get him, if he's going to hold down a ruck spot on his own it stands to reason he's gotta first be fit to play. It's seems every year gets harder and harder for him to get out there in first place, let alone staying on field when he does. It's not working.
Agreed, he must ruck or he is of diminished value. He has to get to the majority of stoppages to be of real value, but we don't have anyone to rotate him with any more. Perhaps MMs plan is to belt someone in the leg with a sledgehammer at training so he can get Wood into selection.
Definitely isn't working... I'd drop him after tonight's effort. We'd get more out of Casboult as the 2nd ruck.
Unfortunately he isn't going to be the player we thought he would be.
Definitely isn't working... I'd drop him after tonight's effort. We'd get more out of Casboult as the 2nd ruck.
Unfortunately he isn't going to be the player we thought he would be.
Warnock is the one who must go, opposition teams treat him with disregard around the ground. He is worse than a traffic cone because they would at least run around a traffic cone. They run through Robert Warnock and rover defeat him in marking contests.
Give Kreuzer six games in the twos to build some confidence boyh in his body and his ability. Then bring him back. Let Warnock do it in the interim as we got killed when Kreuzer rucked whilst Warnock was able to break even. The rest we hurt ourselves.
Only way Kruiz provides value, is if he ruck all day (with occasional relief from a forward) thereby allowing you to fill that second ruck spot with another player ie perhaps a runner or whatever (depending g on who your playing). But even leaving aside what we gave up to get him, if he's going to hold down a ruck spot on his own it stands to reason he's gotta first be fit to play. It's seems every year gets harder and harder for him to get out there in first place, let alone staying on field when he does. It's not working.
Agreed, he must ruck or he is of diminished value. He has to get to the majority of stoppages to be of real value, but we don't have anyone to rotate him with any more. Perhaps MMs plan is to belt someone in the leg with a sledgehammer at training so he can get Wood into selection.
At least Warnock gave us something in the ruck. We were better tonight when he was in there.
Just thought Kruezer really struggled and I'm not sure where he goes from here.
This is going to be a fun thread after the next game. LP, is warming up for it already :P
Think MK was a very sore boy today BTW.
Give Kreuzer six games in the twos to build some confidence boyh in his body and his ability. Then bring him back. Let Warnock do it in the interim as we got killed when Kreuzer rucked whilst Warnock was able to break even. The rest we hurt ourselves.
Have to agree with this despite my fondness for the K-man. A couple of years ago it was the opposite, when K-man was in the ruck we would dominate the clearances and his absence was clearly noticeable. Don't like to see him become a liability.
Give Kreuzer six games in the twos to build some confidence boyh in his body and his ability. Then bring him back. Let Warnock do it in the interim as we got killed when Kreuzer rucked whilst Warnock was able to break even. The rest we hurt ourselves.
Now that's sound logic... Totally agree.
At the moment there is simply to much redundancy, 2 selections to make up 1 position it's madness . This where we get found out at times, we have to much redundancy in several areas. Another tonight was in the midfield with McLean, if his touch isn't on he gets found out on the rebound. So you end up with a player that can do some grunt but gets you killed going the other way if his first touch is wanting. Ellard on the other hand was battering ram and live wire going the other way. But then who do you replace him with in the immediate term ? Cripps ?
Give Kreuzer six games in the twos to build some confidence boyh in his body and his ability. Then bring him back. Let Warnock do it in the interim as we got killed when Kreuzer rucked whilst Warnock was able to break even. The rest we hurt ourselves.
Warnock doesn't break even, if you call winning the taps while the opposition get the clearance breaking even I am not sure what to think of your logic. He tapped the ball directly to opponents more than our own players. Furthermore to break even you have to be at least 50/50 around the ground as well and Warnock would be lucky to get to 10/90 outside of the centre circle.
How long do you accept a 206cm x 105kg player getting out marked or beaten in the air by small defenders or forwards? This bloke should be taking 4 ~ 6 marks a game, at the moment he would be lucky to get that many a season!
HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa, I get it. Our club has played the greatest joke on us of all time!
Trade both for just one decent ruck man.
Warnock is outdated for the game IMO. We picked him up at a time where we really should have seen how the rucks roles in modern footy were changing. Rucks need to be more versatile and flexible around the ground than ever and Warnock can't provide that. Warnock is great in the ruck no doubt, but elsewhere he is a nightmare.
Kreuzer is a real worry, since his knee its been a slow steady decline. Really not sure about him any more.
to be fair.... a bit hinges on how docherty turns out.
If he is a gun... then we made a great move.
I still think Warnock is a great ruckman... but he found him self under more pressure than ever before.
he cost us the game again. but without him we may never have got that close... bit of a contradiction
In hindsight the fact that we picked up Wood would suggest that it would have been better to trade Warnock instead of Hammer for the simple fact that he is more mobile. Warnock will be slaughtered by Natinui!!
Kruezer will never be fit and Warnock while being a skilled tap ,ruckman cannot be played anywhere else and we cannot afford a player who is a one trick pony in the modern game.
You add his lack of marking prowess to his woeful kicking and his ruckwork is cancelled out.
Warnock won the hitouts but his opponents Hampson ,Griffiths and Vickery are a very ordinary combo.....
Wood probably isnt the answer as his ruckwork is only C grade but he does offer more around the ground......think we may have to recruit another readymade ruckman who can offer us some flexibility and marking power.
In hindsight the fact that we picked up Wood would suggest that it would have been better to trade Warnock instead of Hammer for the simple fact that he is more mobile. Warnock will be slaughtered by Natinui!!
except by the fact that warnock owns nic nat in the ruck
In hindsight the fact that we picked up Wood would suggest that it would have been better to trade Warnock instead of Hammer for the simple fact that he is more mobile. Warnock will be slaughtered by Natinui!!
except by the fact that warnock owns nic nat in the ruck
Warnock owns everyone in the ruck (excluding sandilands) but at best 50% goes to our advantage.
Considering everyone owns Warnock over the rest of the ground....what benefit does he give us? SFA.
Said before this game that i'd have Wood in ahead of both Kreuzer and Warnock. Nothing has changed after that effort.
In hindsight the fact that we picked up Wood would suggest that it would have been better to trade Warnock instead of Hammer for the simple fact that he is more mobile. Warnock will be slaughtered by Natinui!!
except by the fact that warnock owns nic nat in the ruck
Warnock owns everyone in the ruck (excluding sandilands) but at best 50% goes to our advantage.
Considering everyone owns Warnock over the rest of the ground....what benefit does he give us? SFA.
Said before this game that i'd have Wood in ahead of both Kreuzer and Warnock. Nothing has changed after that effort.
x2
In hindsight the fact that we picked up Wood would suggest that it would have been better to trade Warnock instead of Hammer for the simple fact that he is more mobile. Warnock will be slaughtered by Natinui!!
except by the fact that warnock owns nic nat in the ruck
The Weagles are going to fly past most clubs this year as they should have last year, and I don't expect that Nicnat will be losing much sleep over Robbie.
as each game is played both Kruezer and Warnock are heading to have their papers stamped....
At least Warnock owns something (as unbalanced as it is) . If managed properly he and Wood in tandom might at least give you some chance. Kruizer on the other hand !!!!!!!!!!
Warnock is a spud, added kicking to his apparent inability to mark.
Warnock is a spud, added kicking to his apparent inability to mark.
What about his amazing ability to tap it to opposition players ::)
In hindsight the fact that we picked up Wood would suggest that it would have been better to trade Warnock instead of Hammer for the simple fact that he is more mobile. Warnock will be slaughtered by Natinui!!
except by the fact that warnock owns nic nat in the ruck
Warnock owns everyone in the ruck (excluding sandilands) but at best 50% goes to our advantage.
Considering everyone owns Warnock over the rest of the ground....what benefit does he give us? SFA.
Said before this game that i'd have Wood in ahead of both Kreuzer and Warnock. Nothing has changed after that effort.
x2
x3
In hindsight the fact that we picked up Wood would suggest that it would have been better to trade Warnock instead of Hammer for the simple fact that he is more mobile. Warnock will be slaughtered by Natinui!!
except by the fact that warnock owns nic nat in the ruck
Warnock owns everyone in the ruck (excluding sandilands) but at best 50% goes to our advantage.
Considering everyone owns Warnock over the rest of the ground....what benefit does he give us? SFA.
Said before this game that i'd have Wood in ahead of both Kreuzer and Warnock. Nothing has changed after that effort.
x2
x3
x4
In hindsight the fact that we picked up Wood would suggest that it would have been better to trade Warnock instead of Hammer for the simple fact that he is more mobile. Warnock will be slaughtered by Natinui!!
except by the fact that warnock owns nic nat in the ruck
Warnock owns everyone in the ruck (excluding sandilands) but at best 50% goes to our advantage.
Considering everyone owns Warnock over the rest of the ground....what benefit does he give us? SFA.
Said before this game that i'd have Wood in ahead of both Kreuzer and Warnock. Nothing has changed after that effort.
x2
x3
x4
X5
Warnock owns everyone in the ruck (excluding sandilands) but at best 50% goes to our advantage.
Really? Not last night, and not by any measure of real success(see the comment below), if all you count is who got first hand to the ball maybe often but again not last night on that one either. I predicted a Nil All draw in the centre against Hampson and that is what was delivered. If a fit Kreuzer had played he would have smashed Hampson, this is the difference between Warnock and a real ruck.
except by the fact that warnock owns nic nat in the ruck
You are kidding yourself, getting first hand to the ball means nothing if your opponent is in control of where you tap it! Warnock is predictable and dumb, sure he gets a hand on the ball but the opposition control where it goes. The best work 206 did last night was on his knees acting as a road block!
We have some of the leagues best midfield out there and they are getting slaughtered by being dependent on a ruck who is not in control of his own game. I'd start by sacking our ruck coach!
So in hindsight, we should have fought harder to retain Sam Jacobs as we have seen over the journey, all 3 of the others that we kept in order for him to move on have been and will more than likely continue to be ordinary.
At least we got something in return for Hampson.
Hopefully we can engineer a win out of the others too.
So in hindsight, we should have fought harder to retain Sam Jacobs as we have seen over the journey, all 3 of the others that we kept in order for him to move on have been and will more than likely continue to be ordinary.
At least we got something in return for Hampson.
Hopefully we can engineer a win out of the others too.
Sauce wanted to go, we had no room to move in when he left.
If they all stay fit Hampson will be twice the player Warnock is within one or two seasons, and Kreuzer will leave them all far behind, but it's a big
"If."People get mesmerized by stats, but Warnock's stats are worthless. To have any real impact on a game the way he plays he has to get 50 or 60 hit outs with at least half of those going unimpeded to our players, and at AFL level that isn't going to happen. Add to that I think Warnock is 28 this year, he should already be at his peak not needing to improve!
So in hindsight, we should have fought harder to retain Sam Jacobs as we have seen over the journey, all 3 of the others that we kept in order for him to move on have been and will more than likely continue to be ordinary.
At least we got something in return for Hampson.
Hopefully we can engineer a win out of the others too.
What we should have done is Drafted Trent Cotchin, allowing allowing Jacobs to stay and Flourish and had ruckman from Jacbos/Hampson/Warnock.
What we should have done is Drafted Trent Cotchin, allowing allowing Jacobs to stay and Flourish and had ruckman from Jacbos/Hampson/Warnock.
I don't think Cotchin had a night to remember either, OK but just ordinary.
In summary, last night we watched two teams that are hurriedly going about their business of going nowhere!
So in hindsight, we should have fought harder to retain Sam Jacobs as we have seen over the journey, all 3 of the others that we kept in order for him to move on have been and will more than likely continue to be ordinary.
At least we got something in return for Hampson.
Hopefully we can engineer a win out of the others too.
What we should have done is Drafted Trent Cotchin, allowing allowing Jacobs to stay and Flourish and had ruckman from Jacbos/Hampson/Warnock.
Forget Cotchin.
What we should have done, is traded our number one pick for Judd instead of JK, and left the drafting alone for a year and right now we could play Hendo back without destroying our forward line.
In fairness to Kreuzer, he has struggled since the Knee injury and if he continues like this, I can see him pulling a Max Bailley.
Kreuzer has deficiencies that aren't linked to his knee injury though. Can't read the flight of the ball and clueless when it comes to body positioning in a marking contest. He's knocked off his line way too easily. For a bloke his size, he has zero presence.
FWIW I heard through a friend of his that he didn't want to play against Port but was forced to. The guy is the new glass man on the block.
Right now and for a vast majority of the last few years having Keuizer on the list has been like going into the season with one less player on your list. In a majority of the games he's played (with the exception of a handful of games) whenever he has played its been like going into a game with one less ruck-man or one less forward. At the very least he should be a regular contributor and according to what he cost us he should be pillar of the side. We can talk about potential to the cows come home, but that fact is right now we are one down. We'd be better off having a vacant spot to give a young player a go.
Right now even comparisons to Josh Fraser are inaccurate, JF could at least take a mark and kick straight. Im struggling to see value here.
Kreuzer has deficiencies that aren't linked to his knee injury though. Can't read the flight of the ball and clueless when it comes to body positioning in a marking contest. He's knocked off his line way too easily. For a bloke his size, he has zero presence.
If that is the case, please do not offer up Casboult as an alternative as Casboult is worse!
Right now even comparisons to Josh Fraser are inaccurate, JF could at least take a mark and kick straight. Im struggling to see value here.
This ^^^^. Been saying it for years and copped plenty for it as well.
HUN reporting that Kruezer could miss 6 to 8 weeks with his foot injury.
Guess that means we can elevate Wood from Rookie list?
Kreuzer has deficiencies that aren't linked to his knee injury though. Can't read the flight of the ball and clueless when it comes to body positioning in a marking contest. He's knocked off his line way too easily. For a bloke his size, he has zero presence.
If that is the case, please do not offer up Casboult as an alternative as Casboult is worse!
Casboult is a great mark and can occupy some space so players like Garlett get passage to the footy but he isnt offering much else...he is neither a qualified forward or ruckman and is even less flexible than Rowe who can at least attempt to play down back in a KP.
Casboult has too many quiet periods in games where he does nothing....I think Rowe is the better ruckman in terms of palming..
HUN reporting that Kruezer could miss 6 to 8 weeks with his foot injury.
Guess that means we can elevate Wood from Rookie list?
If true, I think Kruezer may be at end at Carlton..I suspect MM wont put up with a player being continually injured..
Casboult is a great mark and can occupy some space so players like Garlett get passage to the footy but he isnt offering much else...he is neither a qualified forward or ruckman and is even less flexible than Rowe who can at least attempt to play down back in a KP.
Casboult has too many quiet periods in games where he does nothing....I think Rowe is the better ruckman in terms of palming..
EB1 I want to qualify that statement, Casboult has great hands.
Is he a great mark, great marks are like Jack Riewoldt last night, they clunk them from all angles covering slips catches to jumping over packs and taking the front position. Casboult tends to get a lot of his marks in just two circumstances, long leads to the HBF or jumping over an already formed pack.
I have rarely seen Casboult take the front position or back into a pack and mark strongly, nor have I noted him float across a pack or pull in a one hander. PS. I have seen him do this at VFL level, but there is the problem, he needs to do it at the next level.
I too thought Rowe did OK at a couple of ball ups and boundary line throw ins, better than he has done previously. Good enough to suggest he should have got a bit more time on the ball last night.
We now all know that you should not waste Number one Draft pick on a ruckman.
Just hope our club now knows this. I think they are starting to think the same.
Shame for Kruezer. Ever since he did his knee he has not been the same player.
I say trade him at years end.
HUN reporting that Kruezer could miss 6 to 8 weeks with his foot injury.
Guess that means we can elevate Wood from Rookie list?
If true, I think Kruezer may be at end at Carlton..I suspect MM wont put up with a player being continually injured..
At the end of the day its a business. Kruezer may be a terrific bloke and hard worker but I am beginning to think the same thing. I thought less than 6 months ago he was untradable. I don't think this any more. Football is a brutal business. Its about wins and losses, its that simple. Whats Ross Lyon's famous saying, something like: better to hurt a few than to kill many???
HUN reporting that Kruezer could miss 6 to 8 weeks with his foot injury.
Guess that means we can elevate Wood from Rookie list?
If true, I think Kruezer may be at end at Carlton..I suspect MM wont put up with a player being continually injured..
Mossie...I think the club will support him but his long term future as a player in the game at any club might start being an issue.
You would have to think we will search for another ruckman next season to give us another option....Wood is good backup and handy around the ground but his ruckwork isnt any better than Rowe's IMO although you could argue he needs game time as the NO 1 ruckman to improve in that area given he has only played 50-60 games from memory.
So he knew he was injured, was forced to play and now has broken down. Smart move CFC.....if true.
At this particular time there appears to be a large crop of KPPs in this draft, not so many true ruckmen. However, it would not surprise me at all if we drafted a young ruckman and rookied another. A couple of years back we picked a beauty in Sam Jacobs as a rookie. We can do that again, or perhaps trade for a kid like Lycett who is going to struggle to get games with the Weagles if Natanui and Cox stay fit.
This crop is not as well endowed with mids, but there are some nice ones and a few kids with real electric pace. Young Touk Miller from Calder, for example.
So he knew he was injured, was forced to play and now has broken down. Smart move CFC.....if true.
Fair point Carrots...he was useless the previous week and clearly unfit...Mick has to wear that mistake and now we hear MK is out for 6-8weeks.
Thats poor medical management IMO and MK's career has to be under the microscope given he gets injured so often...
So he knew he was injured, was forced to play and now has broken down. Smart move CFC.....if true.
That doesn't sound like something our club would do! :o
At this particular time there appears to be a large crop of KPPs in this draft, not so many true ruckmen. However, it would not surprise me at all if we drafted a young ruckman and rookied another. A couple of years back we picked a beauty in Sam Jacobs as a rookie. We can do that again, or perhaps trade for a kid like Lycett who is going to struggle to get games with the Weagles if Natanui and Cox stay fit.
This crop is not as well endowed with mids, but there are some nice ones and a few kids with real electric pace. Young Touk Miller from Calder, for example.
Think Lycett would want back to SA and Port would welcome him ...agree we will draft a rookie ruck and I also think we will get a readymade from other club/s or one of the state leagues.......I wonder if Darren Jolly is fit? Mick might take him on for two years if he can get some KP's and get a finals worthy list together in a hurry.
Bad news if true about Kreuz. Even if he does fully recover there is a real chance now he will be traded out - looks like the club has not managed his injuries too well.
We certainly need to be looking for another ruck option for sure - wonder whether MM sees it as being a forward/ruck type to back up Warnock continuing as the #1 ruck. Should be an opportunity for Casboult to try and prove himself.
HUN reporting that Kruezer could miss 6 to 8 weeks with his foot injury.
Guess that means we can elevate Wood from Rookie list?
If true, I think Kruezer may be at end at Carlton..I suspect MM wont put up with a player being continually injured..
Mossie...I think the club will support him but his long term future as a player in the game at any club might start being an issue.
You would have to think we will search for another ruckman next season to give us another option....Wood is good backup and handy around the ground but his ruckwork isnt any better than Rowe's IMO although you could argue he needs game time as the NO 1 ruckman to improve in that area given he has only played 50-60 games from memory.
The only "support" the Club should make is to find him another Club or if not, employment outside football
We cannot "support" injured players on the playing list - we have Carrozzo that has not played for 12 months - with a 2 year extension
Kruezer has to stand literally and metaphysically on his own two feet.
Football is not a charity - its a ruthless on field business, why should it not be ruthless off field?
The only "support" the Club should make is to find him another Club or if not, employment outside football
We cannot "support" injured players on the playing list - we have Carrozzo that has not played for 12 months - with a 2 year extension
Kruezer has to stand literally and metaphysically on his own two feet.
Football is not a charity - its a ruthless on field business, why should it not be ruthless off field?
There are two issues to your ruthless business ethic.
A: Clubs must paint themselves as attractive destinations, especially given the increasing scope for Free Agency. Demonstrating good player welfare is tantamount to long term success, if that wasn't the case clubs would not be wasting money on multi-million dollar training and recovery facilities.
B: The AFLPA wields a mighty stick at the moment, player welfare is paramount and towers over the desires, wants and needs of the clubs. The AFL is a professional workplace not an amateur sporting body, so player welfare is an OH&S issue, and rightly so I think!
IMHO, clubs have no choice but to be good citizens in this regard.
To me it is the fit but under-performing players that the clubs need more freedom to deal with!
Before we state what Mick will and will not put up with, how long was Josh Fraser (a former number 1 draft pick) given at Collingwood, before they finally let him go?
By my reckoning he got about 10 years at Collingwood, and most of them under Malthouse. He too was injury prone.
They found support for him by the end.
When push comes to shove, its just another position that we are struggling in really.
Before we state what Mick will and will not put up with, how long was Josh Fraser (a former number 1 draft pick) given at Collingwood, before they finally let him go?
By my reckoning he got about 10 years at Collingwood, and most of them under Malthouse. He too was injury prone.
They found support for him by the end.
When push comes to shove, its just another position that we are struggling in really.
Fraser was a great marking target from the beginning, so much so they considered making him a permanent forward. Nobody on our list other than Waite comes close!
I am not sure why he is being discussed, you could compare Josh Fraser to Fraser Gehrig and get a closer match than comparing Josh Fraser to any of our rucks.
Before we state what Mick will and will not put up with, how long was Josh Fraser (a former number 1 draft pick) given at Collingwood, before they finally let him go?
By my reckoning he got about 10 years at Collingwood, and most of them under Malthouse. He too was injury prone.
They found support for him by the end.
When push comes to shove, its just another position that we are struggling in really.
Fraser was a great marking target from the beginning, so much so they considered making him a permanent forward. Nobody on our list other than Waite comes close!
I am not sure why he is being discussed, you could compare Josh Fraser to Fraser Gehrig and get a closer match than comparing Josh Fraser to any of our rucks.
Someone stated that mick wont put up with Kreuzer being injury prone. Follow the thread LP.
The only "support" the Club should make is to find him another Club or if not, employment outside football
We cannot "support" injured players on the playing list - we have Carrozzo that has not played for 12 months - with a 2 year extension
Kruezer has to stand literally and metaphysically on his own two feet.
Football is not a charity - its a ruthless on field business, why should it not be ruthless off field?
There are two issues to your ruthless business ethic.
A: Clubs must paint themselves as attractive destinations, especially given the increasing scope for Free Agency. Demonstrating good player welfare is tantamount to long term success, if that wasn't the case clubs would not be wasting money on multi-million dollar training and recovery facilities.
B: The AFLPA wields a mighty stick at the moment, player welfare is paramount and towers over the desires, wants and needs of the clubs. The AFL is a professional workplace not an amateur sporting body, so player welfare is an OH&S issue, and rightly so I think!
IMHO, clubs have no choice but to be good citizens in this regard.
To me it is the fit but under-performing players that the clubs need more freedom to deal with!
You are now raising another important issue - just how strong is the Carlton administration to stand up and control its own destiny?
What is the so called "mighty big stick" to which you are referring?
OH & S would suggest that if an employee has an existing physical condition then their employment duties change a minimum.
Before we state what Mick will and will not put up with, how long was Josh Fraser (a former number 1 draft pick) given at Collingwood, before they finally let him go?
By my reckoning he got about 10 years at Collingwood, and most of them under Malthouse. He too was injury prone.
They found support for him by the end.
When push comes to shove, its just another position that we are struggling in really.
Fraser was a great marking target from the beginning, so much so they considered making him a permanent forward. Nobody on our list other than Waite comes close!
I am not sure why he is being discussed, you could compare Josh Fraser to Fraser Gehrig and get a closer match than comparing Josh Fraser to any of our rucks.
Someone stated that mick wont put up with Kreuzer being injury prone. Follow the thread LP.
I see, but it still isn't apples for apples as Josh Fraser could sit in a pocket 80% fit and demand attention.
A better analogy might be SpecialK and Chris Bryan.
Bryan is/was a better kick.
There is a rumour going around BF and TC that Kreuzer could miss 12 weeks, not 5 - 8.
That would be a disaster, for us and for him.
Looks like we will be depending on Cameron Wood. I would have thought that a nightmare scenario not long ago. What are the Northern Blues going to do for a ruckman?
As to whether Kreuzer stays or is traded, the probability of us recruiting ruck talent this draft has gone up a lot. After all, Warnock rarely lasts more than half a season.
There is a rumour going around BF and TC that Kreuzer could miss 12 weeks, not 5 - 8.
That would be a disaster, for us and for him.
Looks like we will be depending on Cameron Wood. I would have thought that a nightmare scenario not long ago. What are the Northern Blues going to do for a ruckman?
As to whether Kreuzer stays or is traded, the probability of us recruiting ruck talent this draft has gone up a lot. After all, Warnock rarely lasts more than half a season.
So it was a good get grabbing Wood as insurance for Kruezer. Perhaps they knew he was a good chance to break down. Foot injuries for 100kg+ big men is not good.
HUN reporting that Kruezer could miss 6 to 8 weeks with his foot injury.
Guess that means we can elevate Wood from Rookie list?
If true, I think Kruezer may be at end at Carlton..I suspect MM wont put up with a player being continually injured..
Mossie...I think the club will support him but his long term future as a player in the game at any club might start being an issue.
You would have to think we will search for another ruckman next season to give us another option....Wood is good backup and handy around the ground but his ruckwork isnt any better than Rowe's IMO although you could argue he needs game time as the NO 1 ruckman to improve in that area given he has only played 50-60 games from memory.
The only "support" the Club should make is to find him another Club or if not, employment outside football
We cannot "support" injured players on the playing list - we have Carrozzo that has not played for 12 months - with a 2 year extension
Kruezer has to stand literally and metaphysically on his own two feet.
Football is not a charity - its a ruthless on field business, why should it not be ruthless off field?
Dont disagree with anything you have said but I think the club and playing list would see MK as a franchise player, one who makes up the fabric of the club and would be loathe to throw one of these fabric players out the door to another club without having a good go at getting him right. I think like you and would make a business decision but some how I dont think the club will see it that way and will stick with him for a while unless he says he wants to go....
Well given the crap medical advice he's getting he might just want to leave EB1. I would.
Just saw some footage of MK and man he looks skinny. I don't know if they wanted to lighten him up given his injury woes but he kooks two or three preseasons off ruck size.
Just saw some footage of MK and man he looks skinny. I don't know if they wanted to lighten him up given his injury woes but he kooks two or three preseasons off ruck size.
They fecked him up by letting him bulk up too much in the first place!
If injury news is true its bad news for MK. Feel sorry for him personally, but from a club perspective it strengthens the list in terms of player availability. Bring on Wood.
If injury news is true its bad news for MK. Feel sorry for him personally, but from a club perspective it strengthens the list in terms of player availability. Bring on Wood.
My Collingwood outlaws can't believe that we picked up Wood. He is an average VFL player at best. Rowe and Casboult will get games before Wood, if he is upgraded.
My Collingwood outlaws can't believe that we picked up Wood. He is an average VFL player at best..
He showed a bit in the NAB challenge, but you're right. Even a mediocre ruckman from a top 8 side would be traded before being delisted.
If injury news is true its bad news for MK. Feel sorry for him personally, but from a club perspective it strengthens the list in terms of player availability. Bring on Wood.
My Collingwood outlaws can't believe that we picked up Wood. He is an average VFL player at best. Rowe and Casboult will get games before Wood, if he is upgraded.
Your outlaws may very well be spot on DJ, but he at least comes with an able body so provides us with an opportunity that we currently don't have with Kruiz ie availability. We are already better off from a starting point, anything additional that he may bring by way of performance is added value.
Warnock owns everyone in the ruck (excluding sandilands) but at best 50% goes to our advantage.
Really? Not last night, and not by any measure of real success(see the comment below), if all you count is who got first hand to the ball maybe often but again not last night on that one either. I predicted a Nil All draw in the centre against Hampson and that is what was delivered. If a fit Kreuzer had played he would have smashed Hampson, this is the difference between Warnock and a real ruck.
except by the fact that warnock owns nic nat in the ruck
You are kidding yourself, getting first hand to the ball means nothing if your opponent is in control of where you tap it! Warnock is predictable and dumb, sure he gets a hand on the ball but the opposition control where it goes. The best work 206 did last night was on his knees acting as a road block!
We have some of the leagues best midfield out there and they are getting slaughtered by being dependent on a ruck who is not in control of his own game. I'd start by sacking our ruck coach!
LP, you completely missed the point of my comments.
AT BEST he gets 50% to us. Translates too, at least 50% of the time it goes to the opposition or a 50-50 contest.
In reality, he might get it to us 10% of the time. In the end, that is all irrelevant, as the rest of my post points out.
I suspect we're being prepared for a season without MK. Long term injury list... enter Wood.
With my own intimate experience of ankle and foot problems, I'm starting to think that we may be lucky to see MK much for the rest of 2014 unfortunately - the problems just refuse to go away. I think the rest cure is probably the way to go but the timeframe is long in my experience. Agree, Baggers, Wood may have to be elevated.
Whether the club backs Kreuz longer term is an interesting one but would depend on how things look at the end of the year - IMO, very uncertain.
If injury news is true its bad news for MK. Feel sorry for him personally, but from a club perspective it strengthens the list in terms of player availability. Bring on Wood.
My Collingwood outlaws can't believe that we picked up Wood. He is an average VFL player at best. Rowe and Casboult will get games before Wood, if he is upgraded.
But compared to Rowe and Casboult, he looks like a Brownlow favorite. I would be shocked if Rowe gets another senior game for the Navy. He has played plenty of games in the twos and showed nothing but being a liability when he comes into the 1's. Make the the call on MK and bring in Wood I say.
If injury news is true its bad news for MK. Feel sorry for him personally, but from a club perspective it strengthens the list in terms of player availability. Bring on Wood.
My Collingwood outlaws can't believe that we picked up Wood. He is an average VFL player at best. Rowe and Casboult will get games before Wood, if he is upgraded.
But compared to Rowe and Casboult, he looks like a Brownlow favorite. I would be shocked if Rowe gets another senior game for the Navy. He has played plenty of games in the twos and showed nothing but being a liability when he comes into the 1's. Make the the call on MK and bring in Wood I say.
Rowe, rightly or wrongly, is considered backup KD.
Given that Watson was a late exclusion, Rowe was the 'obvious' choice.
At worst, we could swing him forward and swing Hendo/Waite back.
Point is, thats how light on we are for genuine KPPs.
Funny, three years ago people were raving about our ruck riches. Fast forward three years and one is starring for another club (for a pick that went nowhere), one was shed for a middling pick, one looks as if injury will hinder his career and one is unsuited to the modern game. Now we are basically back to square one and potentially relying upon a discard off the rookie list.
That light we thought we saw at the end of the tunnel .... is the 6:14 from Smacktown.
Funny, three years ago people were raving about our ruck riches. Fast forward three years and one is starring for another club (for a pick that went nowhere), one was shed for a middling pick, one looks as if injury will hinder his career and one is unsuited to the modern game. Now we are basically back to square one and potentially relying upon a discard off the rookie list.
That light we thought we saw at the end of the tunnel .... is the 6:14 from Smacktown.
The writing was on the wall, most could not read it or simply refused to believe!
For several seasons we were feared in the ruck, our dominance of clearances was something that only the Dawks challenged. We regularly ranked 1 or 2. We had heaps of other deficiencies holding us back, but our depth in the centre circle was formidable. Now we shot ourselves in the foot and have still not fixed the problems elsewhere, we are our own worst enemy.
This next part is going to make you spew because my next prediction is this, Carlton will use an early 2014 draft pick to secure a potential ruck/forward.
If injury news is true its bad news for MK. Feel sorry for him personally, but from a club perspective it strengthens the list in terms of player availability. Bring on Wood.
My Collingwood outlaws can't believe that we picked up Wood. He is an average VFL player at best. Rowe and Casboult will get games before Wood, if he is upgraded.
But compared to Rowe and Casboult, he looks like a Brownlow favorite. I would be shocked if Rowe gets another senior game for the Navy. He has played plenty of games in the twos and showed nothing but being a liability when he comes into the 1's. Make the the call on MK and bring in Wood I say.
Rowe, rightly or wrongly, is considered backup KD.
Given that Watson was a late exclusion, Rowe was the 'obvious' choice.
At worst, we could swing him forward and swing Hendo/Waite back.
Point is, thats how light on we are for genuine KPPs.
Correct...Rowe will keep getting games as he can play all the KP's unlike Casboult or Wood and that shows how poorly off for KP players we are....his form vs Richmond also seems to divide opinion, some are suggesting he did a fair job. I'm not but with Essendon being fairly tall up forward he will probably get another game...
Funny, three years ago people were raving about our ruck riches. Fast forward three years and one is starring for another club (for a pick that went nowhere), one was shed for a middling pick, one looks as if injury will hinder his career and one is unsuited to the modern game. Now we are basically back to square one and potentially relying upon a discard off the rookie list.
That light we thought we saw at the end of the tunnel .... is the 6:14 from Smacktown.
The writing was on the wall, most could not read it or simply refused to believe!
This part is going to make you spew because my next prediction is this, Carlton will use an early 2014 draft pick to secure a potential ruck/forward.
This is where we make mistakes.....you either pick ruckman or you pick forwards not ruck/forward jack of all trades but masters of none types ie Casboult/Rowe...we need specialist KP players.
This is where we make mistakes.....you either pick ruckman or you pick forwards not ruck/forward jack of all trades but masters of none types ie Casboult/Rowe...we need specialist KP players.
This was always my argument, we kept the hybrids and removed the specialists. Now Jacobs and Hampson first ruck at other clubs while we continue to try and make Kreuzer a forward, and we hang onto Casboult and Rowe in the hope they can be a bit of both. We are our own worst enemy. We got rid of AFL quality ruck specialists, weakened our ruck division in the process and kept some VFL quality hybrids..
if we fare as poorly as it seems we may, there WILL be light at the end of the tunnel. One of the top picks this year is a lad called Wright who plays for Calder. He moves very well for a very tall guy and he rucks quite decently. He is a probable top 5 pick. Oh, I forgot to mention, he has hands with super glue on the fingers.
if we fare as poorly as it seems we may, there WILL be light at the end of the tunnel. One of the top picks this year is a lad called Wright who plays for Calder. He moves very well for a very tall guy and he rucks quite decently. He is a probable top 5 pick. Oh, I forgot to mention, he has hands with super glue on the fingers.
Do we want a ruckman with our first pick given the trend these days is to steal readymades rather than waste time developing these big blokes on your own list.....the next Tom Boyd/Jon Patton is where I see our first pick going
if we fare as poorly as it seems we may, there WILL be light at the end of the tunnel. One of the top picks this year is a lad called Wright who plays for Calder. He moves very well for a very tall guy and he rucks quite decently. He is a probable top 5 pick. Oh, I forgot to mention, he has hands with super glue on the fingers.
Seriously don't mind if we finish on the bottom Q, It may be a blessing at the draft table. As long as there is signs that young crop of draftees have impressive potential ill be stoked.
if we fare as poorly as it seems we may, there WILL be light at the end of the tunnel. One of the top picks this year is a lad called Wright who plays for Calder. He moves very well for a very tall guy and he rucks quite decently. He is a probable top 5 pick. Oh, I forgot to mention, he has hands with super glue on the fingers.
Do we want a ruckman with our first pick given the trend these days is to steal readymades rather than waste time developing these big blokes on your own list.....the next Tom Boyd/Jon Patton is where I see our first pick going
No ruckmen with early picks! You can poach via FA when required.
I agree that you aim for ruckmen through FA.
Yes that will cost you more at the time of recruitment but they are nearly all useless before 24, so you end up blowing 1.5 mill while they are coming up to speed anyway and that's with zero guarantee they'll come any good, there's been a number of top 3 ruckmen who have failed.
So pay the ruckman tax and reduce the risk.
if we fare as poorly as it seems we may, there WILL be light at the end of the tunnel. One of the top picks this year is a lad called Wright who plays for Calder. He moves very well for a very tall guy and he rucks quite decently. He is a probable top 5 pick. Oh, I forgot to mention, he has hands with super glue on the fingers.
Do we want a ruckman with our first pick given the trend these days is to steal readymades rather than waste time developing these big blokes on your own list.....the next Tom Boyd/Jon Patton is where I see our first pick going
No ruckmen with early picks! You can poach via FA when required.
We've learned that lesson the hard way!
if we fare as poorly as it seems we may, there WILL be light at the end of the tunnel. One of the top picks this year is a lad called Wright who plays for Calder. He moves very well for a very tall guy and he rucks quite decently. He is a probable top 5 pick. Oh, I forgot to mention, he has hands with super glue on the fingers.
Do we want a ruckman with our first pick given the trend these days is to steal readymades rather than waste time developing these big blokes on your own list.....the next Tom Boyd/Jon Patton is where I see our first pick going
Actually we haven't failed recruiting ruckmen, we have failed converting them into forwards, all our ruck picks have turned out capable AFL level first rucks. It might be the only recruiting we have done that is a clear success!
I understand Crash's point but I highlight it with this. Most people conveniently forget that Casboult was a junior ruckmen who played one season and one season alone as a forward, based on that one season we recruited him as a forward. We recruited a ruckmen to be a forward. He was a giant kid, a man child , playing amongst boys who out of necessity was re-task as a forward. When as a junior you are 6' taller and 20kg heavier than just about every other opponent it is not too hard to be a success in any KP.
We need to learn from this, look for specialists who have a proven record in a set primary role when compared to the best and if you need to develop their skills for a secondary role, do not try to change what they naturally do best! A forward is a forward, a ruck is a ruck and a defender is a defender.
I feel Carlton has b0rked up most of it's current playing list trying to turn players into something they are not, this I blame on megalomaniac coaches. All the guys were good enough at something to get drafted in the first place, let them show us!
I see. So our ruck division has regression has coincided with our midfields inability to dominate.
Could it be that Judd was that good that he made both our midfield and our rucks look better than they were/are?
We have failed alright. Failed to grasp what our problems really are and jump at shadows accordingly. Once we get a midfield that is better able to be competitive with the better teams I feel our ruck issues might be less of a problem for us.
After all our ball use was our biggest problem against Richmond and it didn't help us against Port Adelaide either.
Disagree, our problem against Richmond was failing to show up for the game up until half time. Port it was failing to show up after half time. We've played four quarters of football out of eight, that is our problem. You would think that considering the last three times we'd played them (Richmond) we'd let them get more than 5 goals clear that perhaps we may show up on time and make sure that didn't happen. Until we put together four quarters of football not even the best midfield in the comp will save us.
Disagree, our problem against Richmond was failing to show up for the game up until half time. Port it was failing to show up after half time. We've played four quarters of football out of eight, that is our problem. You would think that considering the last three times we'd played them (Richmond) we'd let them get more than 5 goals clear that perhaps we may show up on time and make sure that didn't happen. Until we put together four quarters of football not even the best midfield in the comp will save us.
Maybe a good old fashioned gee up at the start of each qtr might help. Also telling a few home truths about how players are playing, yes, you might hurt their feeling but hopefully they'll get over it. ::)
We have failed alright. Failed to grasp what our problems really are and jump at shadows accordingly. Once we get a midfield that is better able to be competitive with the better teams I feel our ruck issues might be less of a problem for us.
After all our ball use was our biggest problem against Richmond and it didn't help us against Port Adelaide either.
Our ball use has and decision making has always been the worst in the league but our supporters prefer to blame the 200cm guys who have the pill dropped on their head from 50m away. Then like mind numbingly stupid commentators they applauded in anticipation when our HBFs runs through the wing and kick over the head of the 200cm leading player, often to a one on one marking contest in the square between our small forward and a Matthew Scarlett or Brian Lake type. I have watched this happen for the last five years, and I have no reason to believe it will change.
As for the rucks, there is some inconsistency in our list management if you believe the ruck is not critical, because we have kept the bloke who can tap and do nothing else! When 206 plays the stats say the taps are won but the clearances lost, when Kreuzer and Hampson were rucking is shared it was often the other way around, and that is why the tap stats are overrated. It is also why I don't rate Casboult and Rowe as viable rucks although last game Rowe was better, not because they lose the tap but because they offer little else in the ruck role. They are as lost when rucking as Kreuzer is when forward.
On talking footy, Malthouse says MK has to learn to be a forward as well as ruck.... It's like a never-ending nightmare. Trade him, let him flourish because it won't be at the blues.
Malthouse has set us up for a world of pain in regards to his ruck comments;
And so it begins with Jon Ralph (http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/the-modern-ruckman-must-be-over-200cm-tall-to-compete-in-land-of-the-giants/story-fndv7pj3-1226873971735).
What you mean to say is that MM has voiced what we already know to be true -the fact that we previously set ourselves up for a world of pain regarding our selection decisions.
On talking footy, Malthouse says MK has to learn to be a forward as well as ruck.... It's like a never-ending nightmare. Trade him, let him flourish because it won't be at the blues.
So that would be two AFL quality 1st rucks we have offloaded inside 13 months because they were not KPFs, in the meantime we keep Casboult and Rowe!
What you mean to say is that MM has voiced what we already know to be true -the fact that we previously set ourselves up for a world of pain regarding our selection decisions.
If you are implying we drafted quality ruckmen and failed to run them into key forwards, correct!
No mater how hard you try you can't turn a pumpkin into a potato, but Carlton turned some pretty good quality rucks into spuds! What is worse having decided they are spuds and moving them on those blokes seem to do pretty well at other clubs, like it is almost instant improvement that is apparently impossible at our club!
Carlton's MC claims it did the right thing, but by who I say? The players maybe, but not the Carlton FC!
Surely you can't lay blame on a coach who tries to discover value in a player, in a role that's contrary to the one his originally recruited for. The fact Kruizer hasn't fulfilled his potential can't be put at the feet of MM, who like the rest of us has realized that the vision of an all dominating Ruckman was more fantasy than fact. You can't blame MM for the fact that Kruizer gets smashed as centre bounces and then can't get his body right to run as an all rounder utility. Surely you can't blame MM for turning Kruiz into a spud. All you can blame him for is not having the ability to turn a spud into a key ruckman. That applies equally for Cas and Rowe albeit for different reasons. Kruiz's body may be his downfall where as the other 2 lack the ability to begin with. In any case the problem doesn't lay with MM. Kruiz's body was smashed by Ratten playing him with injury, and the other 2 shouldn't have been selected to begin with.
Kruiz's body was smashed by Ratten playing him with injury, and the other 2 shouldn't have been selected to begin with.
Huh??
Kruiz's body was smashed by Ratten playing him with injury, and the other 2 shouldn't have been selected to begin with.
Huh??
He was constantly played by Ratten while he had Knee problems.
Fair point, I believe it was Carrots who told us back in 2012 that he was going in to get his knee drained weekly after matches.
I think it was more rumour rather than fact, but it certainly appeared that he played that way.
The irony in the Ralph article, if you have read it, is that the excluding Sandiland the best performed ruckmen are not much taller than Kreuzer, Hale 201cm and McEvoy 200cm. Yet he claims you have to be a giant, perhaps Ralph has a problem with metric conversion, he must perceive 11 cm as 11 inches!
Attributing Sandilands dominance to his height is bogus, it is almost insulting to Sandiland. Sandiland is dominant because he is a good ruckmen in the way Warnock isn't! Sandilands does not have, now or ever, the vertical leap of many other AFL rucks. I doubt after all his foot problems if he even wants to try and get too far off the ground. He uses his weight and strength to supreme advantage, most of Sandiland's result come from him sticking one of his giant paws into the opposing ruckmen and just pushing them off the ball.
Further highlighting Ralph's rubbery logic, he goes on about Sandiland's massive dominance(21.1%), then tells you at the end of the article about Hampson's 22.8% record. Nobody, here or elsewhere would rate Hampson a better ruck than Sandiland, Kreuzer, Mumford, Naitanui or even Maric. That is because those stats are almost as worthless as Warnock's taps.
Then comes Kreuzer isn't overly physical, tell that to Jolly!
Kreuzer is a ruckmen, if allowed to get himself fit he is a far superior ruckmen than Robert Warnock, Warnock is way too one dimensional. That day 206 turned to jelly in front of goal after a tap on the cheek from Enright, to later develop "delayed concussion", has come back to haunt us. It was in Ralph's words a "massive" tell that our club ignored, possibly only equaled by Mark Porter's collapse after a hip and shoulder by a passing midget!
Playing Kreuzer busted doesn't help, either in the past or the present, and there are rumors about both!
Historically Kreuzer's main problems came from trying to turn him into monster forward, he got too heavy too quickly which looks to have triggered a range of leg and hip issues. He initially hurt that leg in a forward marking contest.
Malthouse stating there is no future for Kreuzer in the ruck is absurd, I am not sure anyone actually takes him seriously. He would have been better of claiming Kreuzer's career was over crippled by injury. That would have made far more sense. Like a lot of the anger we have seen in the MM coaches box, I suspect this was nothing more than a shallow side swipe at the kid from a bitter and twisted old man who's time has past!
Again responding to filler articles.
Kreuzer is struggling because he did an ACL on that piece of crap of a surface in the docklands, and has never been able to recapture the form he showed prior which had him on track to becoming a proficient ruckman that could be relied upon to take the odd mark and kick the odd goal up forwad.
The shifting interchange rules, and the fact that the bloke cant run out a game like he used to means that he needs to either become multi faceted (i.e. play as a forward when not rucking) or he become a gun ruckman. Given his body issues, a gun ruckman is not going to be his go moving forward, as a Nic Nat will simply jump over him whilst he remains a bit of a lumbering dinosaur. If we can recall, the ACL that Kreuzer did robbed him of that athleticism and agility that made him the freak he was.
@LP
Historically Kreuzer's main problems came from trying to turn him into monster forward, he got too heavy too quickly which looks to have triggered a range of leg and hip issues. He initially hurt that leg in a forward marking contest.
Hip surgery was done on Kreuzer before he played his first game with the club. The knee injury happened in a ruck contest at Etihad vs Freo. It would more than likely have been too much load on one so young too soon that really was the problem in what we did to him.
Malthouse stating there is no future for Kreuzer in the ruck is absurd, I am not sure anyone actually takes him seriously. He would have been better of claiming Kreuzer's career was over crippled by injury.
Malthouse stated nothing of the sort. He simply stated he will need to play forward.
This is where we make mistakes.....you either pick ruckman or you pick forwards not ruck/forward jack of all trades but masters of none types ie Casboult/Rowe...we need specialist KP players.
This was always my argument, we kept the hybrids and removed the specialists. Now Jacobs and Hampson first ruck at other clubs while we continue to try and make Kreuzer a forward, and we hang onto Casboult and Rowe in the hope they can be a bit of both. We are our own worst enemy. We got rid of AFL quality ruck specialists, weakened our ruck division in the process and kept some VFL quality hybrids..
Jacobs and Hampson were never going to be first rucks at our club due to numbers, so it fair we let them go. Neither would be a forwards backside. Casboult and Hampson are forwards (or backs in Rowe's case too) not here to be ruckmen. They only ruck as short term relief, like many forwards have done, as we often go like crap when we play two ruckman. Only one can ruck, meaning one has to be forward. That clogs up a KP spot with someone who is useless at it and we get run off Be nice have a Corey McKernan type, who could ruck and play forward forward, but we don't. Not any more at least.
Don't think it's that hard.
@Laj
Precisely, and that's why we need on our books:
1 x specialist first ruck, ideally who can also take a mark and kick
1 x competent understudy for first ruck in case of injury
2 x primarily KPFs who can cover first ruck to give specialist ruck a rest.
IMO we should not be trying to play Kreuzer and Warnock in the same games - in fact we should decide which one is to be our first ruck and look to cash in the other one if we can.
When is the Wood going to get the call up since Krooze has been placed on the LTI?
Again responding to filler articles.
Kreuzer is struggling because he did an ACL on that piece of crap of a surface in the docklands, and has never been able to recapture the form he showed prior which had him on track to becoming a proficient ruckman that could be relied upon to take the odd mark and kick the odd goal up forwad.
The shifting interchange rules, and the fact that the bloke cant run out a game like he used to means that he needs to either become multi faceted (i.e. play as a forward when not rucking) or he become a gun ruckman. Given his body issues, a gun ruckman is not going to be his go moving forward, as a Nic Nat will simply jump over him whilst he remains a bit of a lumbering dinosaur. If we can recall, the ACL that Kreuzer did robbed him of that athleticism and agility that made him the freak he was.
@LP
Historically Kreuzer's main problems came from trying to turn him into monster forward, he got too heavy too quickly which looks to have triggered a range of leg and hip issues. He initially hurt that leg in a forward marking contest.
Hip surgery was done on Kreuzer before he played his first game with the club. The knee injury happened in a ruck contest at Etihad vs Freo. It would more than likely have been too much load on one so young too soon that really was the problem in what we did to him.
Malthouse stating there is no future for Kreuzer in the ruck is absurd, I am not sure anyone actually takes him seriously. He would have been better of claiming Kreuzer's career was over crippled by injury.
Malthouse stated nothing of the sort. He simply stated he will need to play forward.
Kruezer like Hampson struggles to take marks and kick goals when placed forward...how many times do I need to say its a specialist position and ruckman dont work as KP Forwards.
Micks losing the plot if he thinks Kruezer will ever make it as a forward.....and 200cm isnt short for a ruckman if you are any good....Ryder is 196cm and gets the job done for Essendon and is a threat when played forward.
Will Minson is 199cm and was the AA ruckman in 2013.....
Mick is making excuses and they are not very good ones....
Again responding to filler articles.
Kreuzer is struggling because he did an ACL on that piece of crap of a surface in the docklands, and has never been able to recapture the form he showed prior which had him on track to becoming a proficient ruckman that could be relied upon to take the odd mark and kick the odd goal up forwad.
The shifting interchange rules, and the fact that the bloke cant run out a game like he used to means that he needs to either become multi faceted (i.e. play as a forward when not rucking) or he become a gun ruckman. Given his body issues, a gun ruckman is not going to be his go moving forward, as a Nic Nat will simply jump over him whilst he remains a bit of a lumbering dinosaur. If we can recall, the ACL that Kreuzer did robbed him of that athleticism and agility that made him the freak he was.
@LP
Historically Kreuzer's main problems came from trying to turn him into monster forward, he got too heavy too quickly which looks to have triggered a range of leg and hip issues. He initially hurt that leg in a forward marking contest.
Hip surgery was done on Kreuzer before he played his first game with the club. The knee injury happened in a ruck contest at Etihad vs Freo. It would more than likely have been too much load on one so young too soon that really was the problem in what we did to him.
Malthouse stating there is no future for Kreuzer in the ruck is absurd, I am not sure anyone actually takes him seriously. He would have been better of claiming Kreuzer's career was over crippled by injury.
Malthouse stated nothing of the sort. He simply stated he will need to play forward.
Kruezer like Hampson struggles to take marks and kick goals when placed forward...how many times do I need to say its a specialist position and ruckman dont work as KP Forwards.
Micks losing the plot if he thinks Kruezer will ever make it as a forward.....and 200cm isnt short for a ruckman if you are any good....Ryder is 196cm and gets the job done for Essendon and is a threat when played forward.
Will Minson is 199cm and was the AA ruckman in 2013.....
Mick is making excuses and they are not very good ones....
Who said make him a key forward?
Mick is making excuses now.... What excuses? He simply stated that Kreuzer needs to add the ability to play forward. Why is this so hard to understand? It doesnt mean turn him into Paul Salmon.
As for what Kreuzer can and cannot do, how about we let him get injury free and play some footy and then we can talk about what he can and cannot do, because based on his last couple of years he cant even do that.
Interesting that Hammer has a higher percentage of taps to advantage (whatever that really means) than Sandilands did in what was seen as a dominant ruck display. I'd be interested in seeing that stat over the year. Hammer isn't much chop around the ground but still light years ahead of Warnock so if he's getting more balls down our midfielder's throats (be it from less taps) then I think we can say we didn't make the right decision on who we let go but maybe no one offered anything for Warnock.
Interesting that Hammer has a higher percentage of taps to advantage (whatever that really means) than Sandilands did in what was seen as a dominant ruck display. I'd be interested in seeing that stat over the year. Hammer isn't much chop around the ground but still light years ahead of Warnock so if he's getting more balls down our midfielder's throats (be it from less taps) then I think we can say we didn't make the right decision on who we let go but maybe no one offered anything for Warnock.
Sandilands would have more taps to advantage than Hammer would.
Sandilands would have a LOT more taps in general though.
The sheer weight of numbers means sandilands % would be lower, but that doesn't mean he is less effective.
Wasn't saying that he was better than Sandilands or that more taps were going to advantage but that compared to Warnock it may be a different story.
Who said make him a key forward?
Mick is making excuses now.... What excuses? He simply stated that Kreuzer needs to add the ability to play forward. Why is this so hard to understand? It doesnt mean turn him into Paul Salmon.
As for what Kreuzer can and cannot do, how about we let him get injury free and play some footy and then we can talk about what he can and cannot do, because based on his last couple of years he cant even do that.
Mick Malthouse.FMD, what do you think a 200cm 103kg player is going to do forward, rove? ::)
Again responding to filler articles.
Kreuzer is struggling because he did an ACL on that piece of crap of a surface in the docklands, and has never been able to recapture the form he showed prior which had him on track to becoming a proficient ruckman that could be relied upon to take the odd mark and kick the odd goal up forwad.
The shifting interchange rules, and the fact that the bloke cant run out a game like he used to means that he needs to either become multi faceted (i.e. play as a forward when not rucking) or he become a gun ruckman. Given his body issues, a gun ruckman is not going to be his go moving forward, as a Nic Nat will simply jump over him whilst he remains a bit of a lumbering dinosaur. If we can recall, the ACL that Kreuzer did robbed him of that athleticism and agility that made him the freak he was.
@LP
Historically Kreuzer's main problems came from trying to turn him into monster forward, he got too heavy too quickly which looks to have triggered a range of leg and hip issues. He initially hurt that leg in a forward marking contest.
Hip surgery was done on Kreuzer before he played his first game with the club. The knee injury happened in a ruck contest at Etihad vs Freo. It would more than likely have been too much load on one so young too soon that really was the problem in what we did to him.
Malthouse stating there is no future for Kreuzer in the ruck is absurd, I am not sure anyone actually takes him seriously. He would have been better of claiming Kreuzer's career was over crippled by injury.
Malthouse stated nothing of the sort. He simply stated he will need to play forward.
Kruezer like Hampson struggles to take marks and kick goals when placed forward...how many times do I need to say its a specialist position and ruckman dont work as KP Forwards.
Micks losing the plot if he thinks Kruezer will ever make it as a forward.....and 200cm isnt short for a ruckman if you are any good....Ryder is 196cm and gets the job done for Essendon and is a threat when played forward.
Will Minson is 199cm and was the AA ruckman in 2013.....
Mick is making excuses and they are not very good ones....
Who said make him a key forward?
Mick is making excuses now.... What excuses? He simply stated that Kreuzer needs to add the ability to play forward. Why is this so hard to understand? It doesnt mean turn him into Paul Salmon.
As for what Kreuzer can and cannot do, how about we let him get injury free and play some footy and then we can talk about what he can and cannot do, because based on his last couple of years he cant even do that.
The excuse being Kruezer cant get the ruck job done because he is only 200cm...why would he say he is too short?....thats just rubbish .
Ability to play forward?...would I be wrong in suggesting that has been tried and failed with Kruezer like it was with Hampson.?..why conduct another time wasting/band aid experiment when the first one was a failure.
How about recruiting specialist KP forwards and letting Kruezer try and concentrate on rucking.....
The excuse being Kruezer cant get the ruck job done because he is only 200cm...why would he say he is too short?....thats just rubbish .
Ability to play forward?...would I be wrong in suggesting that has been tried and failed with Kruezer like it was with Hampson.?..why conduct another time wasting/band aid experiment when the first one was a failure.
How about recruiting specialist KP forwards and letting Kruezer try and concentrate on rucking.....
I feel you EB1, it's like beating your head against a brick wall sometimes but the club is always worth the fight!
Don't give up! ;)
Again responding to filler articles.
Kreuzer is struggling because he did an ACL on that piece of crap of a surface in the docklands, and has never been able to recapture the form he showed prior which had him on track to becoming a proficient ruckman that could be relied upon to take the odd mark and kick the odd goal up forwad.
The shifting interchange rules, and the fact that the bloke cant run out a game like he used to means that he needs to either become multi faceted (i.e. play as a forward when not rucking) or he become a gun ruckman. Given his body issues, a gun ruckman is not going to be his go moving forward, as a Nic Nat will simply jump over him whilst he remains a bit of a lumbering dinosaur. If we can recall, the ACL that Kreuzer did robbed him of that athleticism and agility that made him the freak he was.
@LP
Historically Kreuzer's main problems came from trying to turn him into monster forward, he got too heavy too quickly which looks to have triggered a range of leg and hip issues. He initially hurt that leg in a forward marking contest.
Hip surgery was done on Kreuzer before he played his first game with the club. The knee injury happened in a ruck contest at Etihad vs Freo. It would more than likely have been too much load on one so young too soon that really was the problem in what we did to him.
Malthouse stating there is no future for Kreuzer in the ruck is absurd, I am not sure anyone actually takes him seriously. He would have been better of claiming Kreuzer's career was over crippled by injury.
Malthouse stated nothing of the sort. He simply stated he will need to play forward.
Kruezer like Hampson struggles to take marks and kick goals when placed forward...how many times do I need to say its a specialist position and ruckman dont work as KP Forwards.
Micks losing the plot if he thinks Kruezer will ever make it as a forward.....and 200cm isnt short for a ruckman if you are any good....Ryder is 196cm and gets the job done for Essendon and is a threat when played forward.
Will Minson is 199cm and was the AA ruckman in 2013.....
Mick is making excuses and they are not very good ones....
Who said make him a key forward?
Mick is making excuses now.... What excuses? He simply stated that Kreuzer needs to add the ability to play forward. Why is this so hard to understand? It doesnt mean turn him into Paul Salmon.
As for what Kreuzer can and cannot do, how about we let him get injury free and play some footy and then we can talk about what he can and cannot do, because based on his last couple of years he cant even do that.
The excuse being Kruezer cant get the ruck job done because he is only 200cm...why would he say he is too short?....thats just rubbish .
Ability to play forward?...would I be wrong in suggesting that has been tried and failed with Kruezer like it was with Hampson.?..why conduct another time wasting/band aid experiment when the first one was a failure.
How about recruiting specialist KP forwards and letting Kruezer try and concentrate on rucking.....
Maybe he said it in that way because its a much more polite way of saying what most of us think. That MK is simply not good enough to compete with topclass ruck-man. I get the feeling some would have preferred he simply came out and said "Look Timmy and Duck i think MK is a good kid, plenty of heart and competitive spirit but can't jump or run, he's body is f$&@d and his arms aren't long enough to make up for his lack of athleticism. Actually Timmy my grandma can jump higher than he can atm" would that have eased some of the objections in here regarding his explanation?
Maybe he said it in that way because its a much more polite way of saying what most of us think. That MK is simply not good enough to compete with topclass ruck-man. I get the feeling some would have preferred he simply came out and said "Look Timmy and Duck i think MK is a good kid, plenty of heart and competitive spirit but can't jump or run, he's body is f$&@d and his arms aren't long enough to make up for his lack of athleticism. Actually Timmy my grandma can jump higher than he can atm" would that have eased some of the objections in here regarding his explanation?
Except even as a cripple Kreuzer makes Warnock look like a witches hat!
Who said make him a key forward?
Mick is making excuses now.... What excuses? He simply stated that Kreuzer needs to add the ability to play forward. Why is this so hard to understand? It doesnt mean turn him into Paul Salmon.
As for what Kreuzer can and cannot do, how about we let him get injury free and play some footy and then we can talk about what he can and cannot do, because based on his last couple of years he cant even do that.
Mick Malthouse.
FMD, what do you think a 200cm 103kg player is going to do forward, rove? ::)
Show me the quote. You would think he was talking in riddles the way you are interpreting things.
Maybe he said it in that way because its a much more polite way of saying what most of us think. That MK is simply not good enough to compete with topclass ruck-man. I get the feeling some would have preferred he simply came out and said "Look Timmy and Duck i think MK is a good kid, plenty of heart and competitive spirit but can't jump or run, he's body is f$&@d and his arms aren't long enough to make up for his lack of athleticism. Actually Timmy my grandma can jump higher than he can atm" would that have eased some of the objections in here regarding his explanation?
Except even as a cripple Kreuzer makes Warnock look like a witches hat!
Thats highly subjective.
The facts would probably indicate otherwise. Go back and watch replays of our 2013 season. Starting with 206's first game of the year, he was a key contributor to sone of out most important wins.
Interesting that Hammer has a higher percentage of taps to advantage (whatever that really means) than Sandilands did in what was seen as a dominant ruck display. I'd be interested in seeing that stat over the year. Hammer isn't much chop around the ground but still light years ahead of Warnock so if he's getting more balls down our midfielder's throats (be it from less taps) then I think we can say we didn't make the right decision on who we let go but maybe no one offered anything for Warnock.
I'll say it...we stuffed up trading Hampson and should have got rid of Warnock.....and the two coaches in Ratten and Malthouse stuffed up
by trying to turn both Hampson and Kruezer into forwards and its messed with their development as ruckman.
This is one time I will agree that development was the issue and not the recruiting although if we had recruited proper specialist KP forwards we wouldnt have had this
problem and both players would have been left to develop as ruckman allebit injuries have played their part as well in stalling development.
Again responding to filler articles.
Kreuzer is struggling because he did an ACL on that piece of crap of a surface in the docklands, and has never been able to recapture the form he showed prior which had him on track to becoming a proficient ruckman that could be relied upon to take the odd mark and kick the odd goal up forwad.
The shifting interchange rules, and the fact that the bloke cant run out a game like he used to means that he needs to either become multi faceted (i.e. play as a forward when not rucking) or he become a gun ruckman. Given his body issues, a gun ruckman is not going to be his go moving forward, as a Nic Nat will simply jump over him whilst he remains a bit of a lumbering dinosaur. If we can recall, the ACL that Kreuzer did robbed him of that athleticism and agility that made him the freak he was.
@LP
Historically Kreuzer's main problems came from trying to turn him into monster forward, he got too heavy too quickly which looks to have triggered a range of leg and hip issues. He initially hurt that leg in a forward marking contest.
Hip surgery was done on Kreuzer before he played his first game with the club. The knee injury happened in a ruck contest at Etihad vs Freo. It would more than likely have been too much load on one so young too soon that really was the problem in what we did to him.
Malthouse stating there is no future for Kreuzer in the ruck is absurd, I am not sure anyone actually takes him seriously. He would have been better of claiming Kreuzer's career was over crippled by injury.
Malthouse stated nothing of the sort. He simply stated he will need to play forward.
Kruezer like Hampson struggles to take marks and kick goals when placed forward...how many times do I need to say its a specialist position and ruckman dont work as KP Forwards.
Micks losing the plot if he thinks Kruezer will ever make it as a forward.....and 200cm isnt short for a ruckman if you are any good....Ryder is 196cm and gets the job done for Essendon and is a threat when played forward.
Will Minson is 199cm and was the AA ruckman in 2013.....
Mick is making excuses and they are not very good ones....
Who said make him a key forward?
Mick is making excuses now.... What excuses? He simply stated that Kreuzer needs to add the ability to play forward. Why is this so hard to understand? It doesnt mean turn him into Paul Salmon.
As for what Kreuzer can and cannot do, how about we let him get injury free and play some footy and then we can talk about what he can and cannot do, because based on his last couple of years he cant even do that.
The excuse being Kruezer cant get the ruck job done because he is only 200cm...why would he say he is too short?....thats just rubbish .
Ability to play forward?...would I be wrong in suggesting that has been tried and failed with Kruezer like it was with Hampson.?..why conduct another time wasting/band aid experiment when the first one was a failure.
How about recruiting specialist KP forwards and letting Kruezer try and concentrate on rucking.....
He didn't say Kreuzer cannot ruck. If he did please present the quote to backup your OPINION of what he stated.
Your right he did NOT say that at all.
Is it just me, or is it bizarre to find that anyone could genuinely believe that when MM stated Kreuzer needed to learn to play forward he meant something other than for the 200cm x 103kg player to hold down a key position.
Especially give our KPF riches! ::)
Bizarre, just bizarre!
The root cause of this problem is clearly our lack of KPPs and our misguided approach to fixing that issue. We are serial offenders in this and have wrecked more than one career in the past trying to make one thing out of another, rather than playing guys to their strengths. Could this be a factor in why players are hesitant to come to us, as we have feared in the last few years?
Maybe he said it in that way because its a much more polite way of saying what most of us think. That MK is simply not good enough to compete with topclass ruck-man. I get the feeling some would have preferred he simply came out and said "Look Timmy and Duck i think MK is a good kid, plenty of heart and competitive spirit but can't jump or run, he's body is f$&@d and his arms aren't long enough to make up for his lack of athleticism. Actually Timmy my grandma can jump higher than he can atm" would that have eased some of the objections in here regarding his explanation?
Except even as a cripple Kreuzer makes Warnock look like a witches hat!
Thats highly subjective.
The facts would probably indicate otherwise. Go back and watch replays of our 2013 season. Starting with 206's first game of the year, he was a key contributor to sone of out most important wins.
That's highly subjective DU ;-)
Kreuzer's second and third efforts around the ground give us something that Warnock could never replicate. However, Warnock did rack up quite a few contested possessions against Richmond, not something I've seen from him before.
It's a bit like comparing apples and oranges. Warnock gets his hand on the ball a lot at ruck contests and sometimes that creates an advantage for us. Kreuzer gets his hand on the ball a little less but his second efforts mean that there's a greater chance of the ball ending up with one of our players. They both should take more marks around the ground and they both should be able kick a goal or two when resting in the forward line.
Thats highly subjective.
The facts would probably indicate otherwise. Go back and watch replays of our 2013 season. Starting with 206's first game of the year, he was a key contributor to sone of out most important wins.
You didn't really check the results and stats before you wrote that did you?
HERE (http://finalsiren.com/PlayerCompare.asp?SeasonID=2013&SelectedPlayers=1738,1822,&Compare=Go) they are, their 2013 head to head, justify your claim with these facts!
I am not sure where you can go from there, it is such an unrealistic case you make.
Far out. Your narrowing your sample base to 2014. On 2014 alone MK has failed to even get onto the green grass. Last year MK was influential in one game (i think it was the north game). 206 was amongst our best in a majority of our wins. Mind you last year we performed better with MK out of the side.
Far out. Your narrowing your sample base to 2014. On 2014 alone MK has failed to even get onto the green grass. Last year MK was influential in one game (i think it was the north game). 206 was amongst our best in a majority of our wins. Mind you last year we performed better with MK out of the side.
You can't open the link can you? ;D
Thats highly subjective.
The facts would probably indicate otherwise. Go back and watch replays of our 2013 season. Starting with 206's first game of the year, he was a key contributor to sone of out most important wins.
You didn't really check the results and stats before you wrote that did you?
HERE (http://finalsiren.com/PlayerCompare.asp?SeasonID=2013&SelectedPlayers=1738,1822,&Compare=Go) they are, their 2013 head to head, justify your claim with these facts!
I am not sure where you can go from there, it is such an unrealistic case you make.
Ironic, you have just spent your last few posts discrediting tap out stats and now you seek yo rely on stats to support your argument. I used the term "fact" not "stat". I don't need to see stats, I watched every game some twice and sone 3 times. I know what i saw.
Thats highly subjective.
The facts would probably indicate otherwise. Go back and watch replays of our 2013 season. Starting with 206's first game of the year, he was a key contributor to sone of out most important wins.
You didn't really check the results and stats before you wrote that did you?
HERE (http://finalsiren.com/PlayerCompare.asp?SeasonID=2013&SelectedPlayers=1738,1822,&Compare=Go) they are, their 2013 head to head, justify your claim with these facts!
I am not sure where you can go from there, it is such an unrealistic case you make.
Ironic, you have just spent your last few posts discrediting tap out stats and now you seek yo rely on stats to support your argument. I used the term "fact" not "stat". I don't need to see stats, I watched every game some twice and sone 3 times. I know what i saw.
Good try, we were discussing Kreuzer making Warnock look like a witches hat and you want to discuss the taps. There are another dozen or so columns that put your theory to death and you want to talk about the witches hat one!
You are cherry picking evidence more aggressively than a cornered Dank!
I'm sorry about your expectations for your man 206, but he is a spud of the highest order!
PS; Maybe you know what you think you saw!
Thats highly subjective.
The facts would probably indicate otherwise. Go back and watch replays of our 2013 season. Starting with 206's first game of the year, he was a key contributor to sone of out most important wins.
You didn't really check the results and stats before you wrote that did you?
HERE (http://finalsiren.com/PlayerCompare.asp?SeasonID=2013&SelectedPlayers=1738,1822,&Compare=Go) they are, their 2013 head to head, justify your claim with these facts!
I am not sure where you can go from there, it is such an unrealistic case you make.
Ironic, you have just spent your last few posts discrediting tap out stats and now you seek yo rely on stats to support your argument. I used the term "fact" not "stat". I don't need to see stats, I watched every game some twice and sone 3 times. I know what i saw.
Good try, we were discussing Kreuzer making Warnock look like a witches hat and you want to discuss the taps. There are another dozen or so columns that put your theory to death and you want to talk about the witches hat one!
You are cherry picking evidence more aggressively than a cornered Dank!
Ive been accused of loving Essendon, but to be compared to Dank's is hitting below the belt. :)
You stoop to evil depths to back up your arguments LP ;)
Ive been accused of loving Essendon, but to be compared to Dank's is hitting cruel. :)
You stoop to evil depths to back up your arguments LP ;)
OK lets look at a head to head, 2013 Kreuzer v Warnock
I can summarise the 2013 stats for you, saves working out how to use that link. ;)
Kreuzer played ~50% more games.
Per game he averaged roughly, 20% more kicks, 15% more handballs, 300% more marks, 200% more tackles, 800% more points, 25% more ranking points.
Not all is lost for Warnock, per game he averaged 50% more taps.
Witches hat for 206 seems about right to me! :D
I've never understood why we fight against one another.
Sure we can argue finer points and debate some of the serious topics but when the dust settles surely we need to show a united front to the football public.
I've never understood why we fight against one another.
Sure we can argue finer points and debate some of the serious topics but when the dust settles surely we need to show a united front to the football public.
We like it when arguments get in the way of a good fact! ;D
I've never understood why we fight against one another.
Sure we can argue finer points and debate some of the serious topics but when the dust settles surely we need to show a united front to the football public.
I don't mind a bit of good natured sledging JK but I agree that different points of view should be debated without resorting to personal attacks.
I think the personal attacks arise from a failure to acknowledge valid points made. For example (and I like D_U I think he's a good poster) all he had to do was click on the link LP provided to see that Kreuzer destroyed Warnock statistically last year. Now his opinion may differ but if he just acknowledged 'hey yes I see your point but I still disagree' I think there would be less frustration. TBH I would've been siding with D_U on this one anyway but those stats do make a strong case.
If kreuzer needs to learn how to play forward then Warnock needs to learn how to play football.
If Kreuz could stay on the park I would certainly prefer him to Warnock. Of recent times he's struggled to do that and IMO it could well cause the club to move him on if he can't get over this. An adequate ruck man who is pretty much always available is a better bet than one always at risk of breaking down. Pretty simple really.
I was kidding re the Dank's jibe, I know LP didn't intend it in that way. I was posting on my phone and couldn't be forked opening up the stats link. P2C is right, I ignored the stats - ok they're compelling but I just found that in 2013 some of 206's games had a more positive impact on games. The game against WC where he beat Cox was one example.
I understand the frustration with 206 is that he doesn't mark enough around the ground. The the thing that pisses me off about Kruizer is that he doesn't finish and we get punished. Warnock may do less but what he does do seems to have more impact (in 2013) .
MB is right, they both need to do more, Keuiz needs to learn to play forward, for a bloke his size he needs to stop dropping his head and holding his marks--- AND FINSIH OFF HIS KICKING ffs.
They're both second rate atm, but 206 at least gives you first use- its not his fault our mids don't capitalise. which re-affirms MM's instance that MK learn to play KPF (and ruck in periods) - because if can't ruck n run all day he's forked.
If i remember rightly. he also had a similar impact in that comeback against PA that ultimately got us into the final, whilst MK was watching on from the sickbay.
Point is you can't blame MM for either of their short comings, at least he's trying something to help them rebirth.
Remember when we laughed at the thread at BombersBlitz about Ryder being better than MK?
Time to get him geared up, most here think he's cooked anyway so no big deal if he gets caught and penalised anyway :P
Again responding to filler articles.
Kreuzer is struggling because he did an ACL on that piece of crap of a surface in the docklands, and has never been able to recapture the form he showed prior which had him on track to becoming a proficient ruckman that could be relied upon to take the odd mark and kick the odd goal up forwad.
The shifting interchange rules, and the fact that the bloke cant run out a game like he used to means that he needs to either become multi faceted (i.e. play as a forward when not rucking) or he become a gun ruckman. Given his body issues, a gun ruckman is not going to be his go moving forward, as a Nic Nat will simply jump over him whilst he remains a bit of a lumbering dinosaur. If we can recall, the ACL that Kreuzer did robbed him of that athleticism and agility that made him the freak he was.
@LP
Historically Kreuzer's main problems came from trying to turn him into monster forward, he got too heavy too quickly which looks to have triggered a range of leg and hip issues. He initially hurt that leg in a forward marking contest.
Hip surgery was done on Kreuzer before he played his first game with the club. The knee injury happened in a ruck contest at Etihad vs Freo. It would more than likely have been too much load on one so young too soon that really was the problem in what we did to him.
Malthouse stating there is no future for Kreuzer in the ruck is absurd, I am not sure anyone actually takes him seriously. He would have been better of claiming Kreuzer's career was over crippled by injury.
Malthouse stated nothing of the sort. He simply stated he will need to play forward.
Kruezer like Hampson struggles to take marks and kick goals when placed forward...how many times do I need to say its a specialist position and ruckman dont work as KP Forwards.
Micks losing the plot if he thinks Kruezer will ever make it as a forward.....and 200cm isnt short for a ruckman if you are any good....Ryder is 196cm and gets the job done for Essendon and is a threat when played forward.
Will Minson is 199cm and was the AA ruckman in 2013.....
Mick is making excuses and they are not very good ones....
Who said make him a key forward?
Mick is making excuses now.... What excuses? He simply stated that Kreuzer needs to add the ability to play forward. Why is this so hard to understand? It doesnt mean turn him into Paul Salmon.
As for what Kreuzer can and cannot do, how about we let him get injury free and play some footy and then we can talk about what he can and cannot do, because based on his last couple of years he cant even do that.
The excuse being Kruezer cant get the ruck job done because he is only 200cm...why would he say he is too short?....thats just rubbish .
Ability to play forward?...would I be wrong in suggesting that has been tried and failed with Kruezer like it was with Hampson.?..why conduct another time wasting/band aid experiment when the first one was a failure.
How about recruiting specialist KP forwards and letting Kruezer try and concentrate on rucking.....
He didn't say Kreuzer cannot ruck. If he did please present the quote to backup your OPINION of what he stated.
Malthouse said he cant compete because 200cm is too short...its an astounding comment for a coach to make as the article here suggests:
http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/the-modern-ruckman-must-be-over-200cm-tall-to-compete-in-land-of-the-giants/story-fndv7pj3-1226873971735
Its all points to Malthouse saying Kruezer doesnt have the other attributes required to get the job done and overcome this perceived lack of height ..
Kruezer lacks the spring and physicality according to the article and given he has a serious foot injury I dont see things improving.
Thry, ...Thats dismissive of Kruezer and you know it...telling him he has to learn to play forward is telling him you are not good enough to be my No 1 ruckman,
its a damming statement by Malthouse and if I was Kruezer I would be highly emabarrassed my coach thinks I cant compete anymore.
Bang on that's exactly what I got out of the interview. Mick thinks Kreuzer is a sht ruckman and his future if there is one lies as a forward, but he is yet to master playing forward either.
Remember when we laughed at the thread at BombersBlitz about Ryder being better than MK?
Time to get him geared up, most here think he's cooked anyway so no big deal if he gets caught and penalised anyway :P
I remember Warnock himself made an appearance.
Bang on that's exactly what I got out of the interview. Mick thinks Kreuzer is a sht ruckman and his future if there is one lies as a forward, but he is yet to master playing forward either.
Kreuzer's strength was his mobility for a big man and his ability to win the ball at ground level. Pre-knee injury he used to take the big pack marks.
I just think the injuries have crippled him, can't run as fast, can't jump as high.
No doubt he's been cut down by injury. No continuity right in the middle of his development.
I wouldn't read too much into Malthouse's comments about Kreuzer. Last year he said that Kreuzer would be our main ruckman while he is coaching.
He makes statements to suit his agenda at the time. He may even believe what he's saying at the time but he won't necessarily stick to his words.
I wouldn't read too much into Malthouse's comments about Kreuzer. Last year he said that Kreuzer would be our main ruckman while he is coaching.
He makes statements to suit his agenda at the time. He may even believe what he's saying at the time but he won't necessarily stick to his words.
I would, I would read in he is slipping mentally and that he is not the smart operator he used to be! The bloke is getting on, there is only one way he can go which means he has no long term future regardless of the short term!
When Sheedy started waddling off the cliff he eventually had to be pushed, he welded himself onto the dying embers of his career like limpet stuck on a whale, he even allegedly white-anted Mark Williams in the process to squeeze out just one more year!
Where Sheedy is at now, that is where Malthouse is heading!
I wouldn't read too much into Malthouse's comments about Kreuzer. Last year he said that Kreuzer would be our main ruckman while he is coaching.
He makes statements to suit his agenda at the time. He may even believe what he's saying at the time but he won't necessarily stick to his words.
I would, I would read in he is slipping mentally and that he is not the smart operator he used to be! The bloke is getting on, there is only one way he can go which means he has no long term future regardless of the short term!
When Sheedy started waddling off the cliff he eventually had to be pushed, he welded himself onto the dying embers of his career like limpet stuck on a whale, he even allegedly white-anted Mark Williams in the process to squeeze out just one more year!
Where Sheedy is at now, that is where Malthouse is heading!
Nice mix of metaphors and similes there LP! :))
Nice mix of metaphors and similes there LP! :))
Variety is the spice of debating.
Nice mix of metaphors and similes there LP! :))
Variety is the spice of debating.
Yes indeed, the spice of life is like a forever changing rich tapestry of colours of the rainbow.
Nice mix of metaphors and similes there LP! :))
Variety is the spice of debating.
Yes indeed, the spice of life is like a forever changing rich tapestry of colours of the rainbow.
(http://ed_wp-content_v2.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Mr-Burns-Saying-Excellent.gif)
Bang on that's exactly what I got out of the interview. Mick thinks Kreuzer is a sht ruckman and his future if there is one lies as a forward, but he is yet to master playing forward either.
Kreuzer's strength was his mobility for a big man and his ability to win the ball at ground level. Pre-knee injury he used to take the big pack marks.
I just think the injuries have crippled him, can't run as fast, can't jump as high.
Agree...he is like Samson...his strengths have been cut away and he has no edge to his game anymore and will be worth nothing on the trade market.
Only thing to do is hope his operation is succesful and he can get some of that mobility and spring back...
I wouldn't read too much into Malthouse's comments about Kreuzer. Last year he said that Kreuzer would be our main ruckman while he is coaching.
He makes statements to suit his agenda at the time. He may even believe what he's saying at the time but he won't necessarily stick to his words.
I would, I would read in he is slipping mentally and that he is not the smart operator he used to be! The bloke is getting on, there is only one way he can go which means he has no long term future regardless of the short term!
When Sheedy started waddling off the cliff he eventually had to be pushed, he welded himself onto the dying embers of his career like limpet stuck on a whale, he even allegedly white-anted Mark Williams in the process to squeeze out just one more year!
Where Sheedy is at now, that is where Malthouse is heading!
Sheesh when you put it that way it sounds even worse.
Agree...he is like Samson...his strengths have been cut away and he has no edge to his game anymore and will be worth nothing on the trade market.
Only thing to do is hope his operation is succesful and he can get some of that mobility and spring back...
Pretty much, I would put him on ice for the year and get him right for 2015.
Again responding to filler articles.
Kreuzer is struggling because he did an ACL on that piece of crap of a surface in the docklands, and has never been able to recapture the form he showed prior which had him on track to becoming a proficient ruckman that could be relied upon to take the odd mark and kick the odd goal up forwad.
The shifting interchange rules, and the fact that the bloke cant run out a game like he used to means that he needs to either become multi faceted (i.e. play as a forward when not rucking) or he become a gun ruckman. Given his body issues, a gun ruckman is not going to be his go moving forward, as a Nic Nat will simply jump over him whilst he remains a bit of a lumbering dinosaur. If we can recall, the ACL that Kreuzer did robbed him of that athleticism and agility that made him the freak he was.
@LP
Historically Kreuzer's main problems came from trying to turn him into monster forward, he got too heavy too quickly which looks to have triggered a range of leg and hip issues. He initially hurt that leg in a forward marking contest.
Hip surgery was done on Kreuzer before he played his first game with the club. The knee injury happened in a ruck contest at Etihad vs Freo. It would more than likely have been too much load on one so young too soon that really was the problem in what we did to him.
Malthouse stating there is no future for Kreuzer in the ruck is absurd, I am not sure anyone actually takes him seriously. He would have been better of claiming Kreuzer's career was over crippled by injury.
Malthouse stated nothing of the sort. He simply stated he will need to play forward.
Kruezer like Hampson struggles to take marks and kick goals when placed forward...how many times do I need to say its a specialist position and ruckman dont work as KP Forwards.
Micks losing the plot if he thinks Kruezer will ever make it as a forward.....and 200cm isnt short for a ruckman if you are any good....Ryder is 196cm and gets the job done for Essendon and is a threat when played forward.
Will Minson is 199cm and was the AA ruckman in 2013.....
Mick is making excuses and they are not very good ones....
Who said make him a key forward?
Mick is making excuses now.... What excuses? He simply stated that Kreuzer needs to add the ability to play forward. Why is this so hard to understand? It doesnt mean turn him into Paul Salmon.
As for what Kreuzer can and cannot do, how about we let him get injury free and play some footy and then we can talk about what he can and cannot do, because based on his last couple of years he cant even do that.
The excuse being Kruezer cant get the ruck job done because he is only 200cm...why would he say he is too short?....thats just rubbish .
Ability to play forward?...would I be wrong in suggesting that has been tried and failed with Kruezer like it was with Hampson.?..why conduct another time wasting/band aid experiment when the first one was a failure.
How about recruiting specialist KP forwards and letting Kruezer try and concentrate on rucking.....
He didn't say Kreuzer cannot ruck. If he did please present the quote to backup your OPINION of what he stated.
Malthouse said he cant compete because 200cm is too short...its an astounding comment for a coach to make as the article here suggests:
http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/the-modern-ruckman-must-be-over-200cm-tall-to-compete-in-land-of-the-giants/story-fndv7pj3-1226873971735
Its all points to Malthouse saying Kruezer doesnt have the other attributes required to get the job done and overcome this perceived lack of height ..
Kruezer lacks the spring and physicality according to the article and given he has a serious foot injury I dont see things improving.
Thry, ...Thats dismissive of Kruezer and you know it...telling him he has to learn to play forward is telling him you are not good enough to be my No 1 ruckman,
its a damming statement by Malthouse and if I was Kruezer I would be highly emabarrassed my coach thinks I cant compete anymore.
He still didn't say he is too short to play ruck and the article is a beat up. watch the interview and rather than reading into what he says just listen to it. He says Kreuzer is a short ruck that will need to learn to play forward.
What part of calling him a short ruck means he cannot ruck or cannot compete in the ruck?
Currently he can't do anything anyway so it's all moot but I think we are simply choosing to be sensationalist with what we hear.
Again responding to filler articles.
Kreuzer is struggling because he did an ACL on that piece of crap of a surface in the docklands, and has never been able to recapture the form he showed prior which had him on track to becoming a proficient ruckman that could be relied upon to take the odd mark and kick the odd goal up forwad.
The shifting interchange rules, and the fact that the bloke cant run out a game like he used to means that he needs to either become multi faceted (i.e. play as a forward when not rucking) or he become a gun ruckman. Given his body issues, a gun ruckman is not going to be his go moving forward, as a Nic Nat will simply jump over him whilst he remains a bit of a lumbering dinosaur. If we can recall, the ACL that Kreuzer did robbed him of that athleticism and agility that made him the freak he was.
@LP
Historically Kreuzer's main problems came from trying to turn him into monster forward, he got too heavy too quickly which looks to have triggered a range of leg and hip issues. He initially hurt that leg in a forward marking contest.
Hip surgery was done on Kreuzer before he played his first game with the club. The knee injury happened in a ruck contest at Etihad vs Freo. It would more than likely have been too much load on one so young too soon that really was the problem in what we did to him.
Malthouse stating there is no future for Kreuzer in the ruck is absurd, I am not sure anyone actually takes him seriously. He would have been better of claiming Kreuzer's career was over crippled by injury.
Malthouse stated nothing of the sort. He simply stated he will need to play forward.
Kruezer like Hampson struggles to take marks and kick goals when placed forward...how many times do I need to say its a specialist position and ruckman dont work as KP Forwards.
Micks losing the plot if he thinks Kruezer will ever make it as a forward.....and 200cm isnt short for a ruckman if you are any good....Ryder is 196cm and gets the job done for Essendon and is a threat when played forward.
Will Minson is 199cm and was the AA ruckman in 2013.....
Mick is making excuses and they are not very good ones....
Who said make him a key forward?
Mick is making excuses now.... What excuses? He simply stated that Kreuzer needs to add the ability to play forward. Why is this so hard to understand? It doesnt mean turn him into Paul Salmon.
As for what Kreuzer can and cannot do, how about we let him get injury free and play some footy and then we can talk about what he can and cannot do, because based on his last couple of years he cant even do that.
The excuse being Kruezer cant get the ruck job done because he is only 200cm...why would he say he is too short?....thats just rubbish .
Ability to play forward?...would I be wrong in suggesting that has been tried and failed with Kruezer like it was with Hampson.?..why conduct another time wasting/band aid experiment when the first one was a failure.
How about recruiting specialist KP forwards and letting Kruezer try and concentrate on rucking.....
He didn't say Kreuzer cannot ruck. If he did please present the quote to backup your OPINION of what he stated.
Malthouse said he cant compete because 200cm is too short...its an astounding comment for a coach to make as the article here suggests:
http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/the-modern-ruckman-must-be-over-200cm-tall-to-compete-in-land-of-the-giants/story-fndv7pj3-1226873971735
Its all points to Malthouse saying Kruezer doesnt have the other attributes required to get the job done and overcome this perceived lack of height ..
Kruezer lacks the spring and physicality according to the article and given he has a serious foot injury I dont see things improving.
Thry, ...Thats dismissive of Kruezer and you know it...telling him he has to learn to play forward is telling him you are not good enough to be my No 1 ruckman,
its a damming statement by Malthouse and if I was Kruezer I would be highly emabarrassed my coach thinks I cant compete anymore.
He still didn't say he is too short to play ruck and the article is a beat up. watch the interview and rather than reading into what he says just listen to it. He says Kreuzer is a short ruck that will need to learn to play forward.
What part of calling him a short ruck means he cannot ruck or cannot compete in the ruck?
Currently he can't do anything anyway so it's all moot but I think we are simply choosing to be sensationalist with what we hear.
He said he cant compete.....I'll make it easy. do you think at 200cm MK is too short to compete? and that what MM said is ludicrous...?
If he said MK is struggling with injury, cannot use his spring and mobility because of his sore foot and that is making him uncompetitive then I I dont have a problem.
He says Kreuzer is a short ruck that will need to learn to play forward.
The fact is that Kreuzer is taller than other successful ruckmen such as Ryder and Minson.
I can't link the article, but have a read of Malthouse's assessment the importance of Kreuzer to Carlton's premiership chances published on 15 April 2012.
As I said earlier, Malthouse says whatever suits his interests or agenda at the time.
Taller shorter heavier lighter quicker slower FFS all he said was that most key rucks are big lads, then spun of a number to back his comment re them being big boys. He then went in to say that he feeks Kruiz needs to learn to play forward. And lets face it he cant run so its either that or ciao matteo.
Again responding to filler articles.
Kreuzer is struggling because he did an ACL on that piece of crap of a surface in the docklands, and has never been able to recapture the form he showed prior which had him on track to becoming a proficient ruckman that could be relied upon to take the odd mark and kick the odd goal up forwad.
The shifting interchange rules, and the fact that the bloke cant run out a game like he used to means that he needs to either become multi faceted (i.e. play as a forward when not rucking) or he become a gun ruckman. Given his body issues, a gun ruckman is not going to be his go moving forward, as a Nic Nat will simply jump over him whilst he remains a bit of a lumbering dinosaur. If we can recall, the ACL that Kreuzer did robbed him of that athleticism and agility that made him the freak he was.
@LP
Historically Kreuzer's main problems came from trying to turn him into monster forward, he got too heavy too quickly which looks to have triggered a range of leg and hip issues. He initially hurt that leg in a forward marking contest.
Hip surgery was done on Kreuzer before he played his first game with the club. The knee injury happened in a ruck contest at Etihad vs Freo. It would more than likely have been too much load on one so young too soon that really was the problem in what we did to him.
Malthouse stating there is no future for Kreuzer in the ruck is absurd, I am not sure anyone actually takes him seriously. He would have been better of claiming Kreuzer's career was over crippled by injury.
Malthouse stated nothing of the sort. He simply stated he will need to play forward.
Kruezer like Hampson struggles to take marks and kick goals when placed forward...how many times do I need to say its a specialist position and ruckman dont work as KP Forwards.
Micks losing the plot if he thinks Kruezer will ever make it as a forward.....and 200cm isnt short for a ruckman if you are any good....Ryder is 196cm and gets the job done for Essendon and is a threat when played forward.
Will Minson is 199cm and was the AA ruckman in 2013.....
Mick is making excuses and they are not very good ones....
Who said make him a key forward?
Mick is making excuses now.... What excuses? He simply stated that Kreuzer needs to add the ability to play forward. Why is this so hard to understand? It doesnt mean turn him into Paul Salmon.
As for what Kreuzer can and cannot do, how about we let him get injury free and play some footy and then we can talk about what he can and cannot do, because based on his last couple of years he cant even do that.
The excuse being Kruezer cant get the ruck job done because he is only 200cm...why would he say he is too short?....thats just rubbish .
Ability to play forward?...would I be wrong in suggesting that has been tried and failed with Kruezer like it was with Hampson.?..why conduct another time wasting/band aid experiment when the first one was a failure.
How about recruiting specialist KP forwards and letting Kruezer try and concentrate on rucking.....
He didn't say Kreuzer cannot ruck. If he did please present the quote to backup your OPINION of what he stated.
Malthouse said he cant compete because 200cm is too short...its an astounding comment for a coach to make as the article here suggests:
http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/the-modern-ruckman-must-be-over-200cm-tall-to-compete-in-land-of-the-giants/story-fndv7pj3-1226873971735
Its all points to Malthouse saying Kruezer doesnt have the other attributes required to get the job done and overcome this perceived lack of height ..
Kruezer lacks the spring and physicality according to the article and given he has a serious foot injury I dont see things improving.
Thry, ...Thats dismissive of Kruezer and you know it...telling him he has to learn to play forward is telling him you are not good enough to be my No 1 ruckman,
its a damming statement by Malthouse and if I was Kruezer I would be highly emabarrassed my coach thinks I cant compete anymore.
He still didn't say he is too short to play ruck and the article is a beat up. watch the interview and rather than reading into what he says just listen to it. He says Kreuzer is a short ruck that will need to learn to play forward.
What part of calling him a short ruck means he cannot ruck or cannot compete in the ruck?
Currently he can't do anything anyway so it's all moot but I think we are simply choosing to be sensationalist with what we hear.
He said he cant compete.....I'll make it easy. do you think at 200cm MK is too short to compete? and that what MM said is ludicrous...?
If he said MK is struggling with injury, cannot use his spring and mobility because of his sore foot and that is making him uncompetitive then I I dont have a problem.
He never stated anything about being uncompetitive in the ruck. You are inferring meaning in his comments and that is all.
If you can show me footage of where Mick states he won't be able to be competitive in the ruck or quote him in an article saying as much due to his size, and then I'll happily concede and join your tirade as Kreuzer was ultra competitive as recently as early 2012.
@Thry and elwood
Guys, can we limit the amount of quotes in your replies.
It is getting ridiculous.
Regardless, it's obvious what MM meant, Thryleon has a tendency to disregard the obvious if it contradicts his opinion.
Not at all Carrots. I watched talking footy and saw the interview and it was clear to me that Malthouse meant nothing like what the article states and what ElwoodBlues1 has interpreted.
@kruddler it's hard to fix the quoting on the phone, as selecting all with a touch screen is difficult.
For arguments sake I will happily concede I was wrong if Malthouse can directly be quoted as stating that Kreuzer can't be competitive in the ruck due to his size.
@kruddler it's hard to fix the quoting on the phone, as selecting all with a touch screen is difficult.
That is fair enough, but as you've pointed out here there is an alternative to quoting large amounts of text. Just hit reply (instead of quote) and use @kruddler to get someones attention. ;)
The reality is atm he doesn't beat the other Ruckmen ( of who the best happen to be bigger than himself). The size issue was just one point of difference, but that doesnt mean he was implying that he generally feels he's 2 small to be a good ruckman. Rather it implies, that MK doesn't have the ability to compete with the best atm because he can't run relentlessly without braking down, nor can he jump to compensate. He wasn't going to come out and openly say that, so he jumped to the the obvious ie he needs to find a way to contribute and that's to play forward. If it's true that a ruckman can't play forward, as some in here insist, then you may as well stamp his papers now.
@Thry and elwood
Guys, can we limit the amount of quotes in your replies.
It is getting ridiculous.
Point taken and I'm done anyway... Thry and I differ in opinion on this one and its time to move on...
Below is what Leigh Matthews thinks about Aaron Sandiland.
“Hit outs are useless, it’s only what they contribute to the clearance, running the ball away from the pack.
“So I’m going to make a statement, Aaron Sandilands is therefore the most overrated player in footy, because hit-outs is all he does.”
Sandilands had 11 disposals and suffered in comparison to West Coast ruckman Dean Cox, Matthews said.
“Now that’s a great ruckman, because he’s good at the hit outs, fantastic follower and gets around the ground,” he said.
I must say I do not agree about Sandiland, but I do agree about the value of taps, this is what I have argued for sometime about Warnock's taps, the true value of Kreuzer around clearances, and the stupid trading of Hampson. This is Matthew's view of the value of taps, other clubs will undoubtedly agree, what hope for Carlton, Warnock and our MC?
Carlton's MC must look so foolish to opposition clubs at this moment, think about what we have done in the light of Matthew's statement.
Next draft/trade period we will be recruiting a ruckmen again, and they may cost us more than we got for Hampson!
Perish the thought!
Perish the thought!
I suppose the doubters will get on here and claim Matthew's logic is showing signs of his age, but not Malthouse! ;D
Hampson's time at the club was over. Let's not forget he wasn't any better than the others we have. Ordinary hands, ordinary kick good in ruck contests and pretty poor in terms of around the ground contribution. Let's not forget he was the perennial glass man also and that's all she wrote.
Kreuzer sill has the most potential ability if he can get his body right and have a decent run at it.
Knockers is just the only bloke able to get on the park consistently and even he is somewhat of a glass man.
We all agreed, having three injury prone ruckmen on your list Is not ideal and all three of them broke down together at one point leaving us with feck all in the ruck.
Hampson's time at the club was over. Let's not forget he wasn't any better than the others we have. Ordinary hands, ordinary kick good in ruck contests and pretty poor in terms of around the ground contribution. Let's not forget he was the perennial glass man also and that's all she wrote.
Kreuzer sill has the most potential ability if he can get his body right and have a decent run at it.
Knockers is just the only bloke able to get on the park consistently and even he is somewhat of a glass man.
We all agreed, having three injury prone ruckmen on your list Is not ideal and all three of them broke down together at one point leaving us with feck all in the ruck.
Hampson also injured this week.
Warnock doing his best to prove Matthew's right, being smashed in the ruck by a part timer, a tall HBF who 1AW turned into a step ladder!
Bumbers could ruck Zahar and stitch up 206!
Knockers is just the only bloke able to get on the park consistently and even he is somewhat of a glass man.
Bullcrap, Warnock only played 2/3 the games of Kreuzer last year and the MC played Hampson in the 2s. All the while Warnock played as a witches hat in the 1s and was outpointed by Kreuzer in effectiveness and by some margin.
Tonight Warnock is being touched up by two part timers that Matthew Kreuzer, and Hampson for that matter, would be smashing.
Wake up to yourself, I'll go as far to say Warnock is the worst footballer on our list and by some margin!
If he couldn't win a tap out there's be no place for him that's for sure.
If he couldn't win a tap out there's be no place for him that's for sure.
Lucky 206 is so good at center bounces, we dominate! ::)
Good to see his part time ruck opponent rated best on ground, he is such a nice boy "Our Robbie." Likes to share!
Warnock has to be dropped this week and traded out at years end.......
Warnock has to be dropped this week and traded out at years end.......
Can't believe we traded out Hammer and Jacobs, but kept Warnock!
Little point in winning tap outs if that is all you can do.
Today Levi and Wood both rucked, and took marks around the ground. It was novel seeing a CFC ruckman taking marks around the ground.
Yes, 206 aint the answer in the ruck. Just aint up to it.
Warnock has to be dropped this week and traded out at years end.......
I didn't know Boort participated in trade week!
Warnock has to be dropped this week and traded out at years end.......
I didn't know Boort participated in trade week!
Boort are one goalpost short and have some interest if we supply cement and a post hole digger as part of the deal....
Feck me dead, BumberT laughed when asked about Carlilse in the ruck, he didn't know what to say!
Knockers is just the only bloke able to get on the park consistently and even he is somewhat of a glass man.
Bullcrap, Warnock only played 2/3 the games of Kreuzer last year and the MC played Hampson in the 2s. All the while Warnock played as a witches hat in the 1s and was outpointed by Kreuzer in effectiveness and by some margin.
Tonight Warnock is being touched up by two part timers that Matthew Kreuzer, and Hampson for that matter, would be smashing.
Wake up to yourself, I'll go as far to say Warnock is the worst footballer on our list and by some margin!
LP not everyone is arguing against the points you are making, but Hampson was notoriously injured with us. 3 PCL injuries in the last 3 years, and was not the dominant force you remember.
After all he missed the Doggies game on saturday as well.
Its a bit like the ex girlfriend. When the chips are down in your current relationship, you tend to remember only the good things about the ex, but in reality, Hampson was equally frustrating when he played for us.
Its a bit like the ex girlfriend. When the chips are down in your current relationship, you tend to remember only the good things about the ex, but in reality, Hampson was equally frustrating when he played for us.
Thry, Hampson was frustrating no question, but as a forward exactly like Kreuzer is frustrating as a forward. They are both far better ruckmen than Warnock, perhaps not in the center circle but certainly everywhere else! Warnock is a one trick pony, I have never rated and will never rate a bloke who can only do one thing.
We should have kept the crippled Kreuzer playing and put Warnock on the LTI so we can play Wood!
Its a bit like the ex girlfriend. When the chips are down in your current relationship, you tend to remember only the good things about the ex, but in reality, Hampson was equally frustrating when he played for us.
Thry, Hampson was frustrating no question, but as a forward exactly like Kreuzer is frustrating as a forward. They are both far better ruckmen than Warnock, perhaps not in the center circle but certainly everywhere else! Warnock is a one trick pony, I have never rated and will never rate a bloke who can only do one thing.
We should have kept the crippled Kreuzer playing and put Warnock on the LTI so we can play Wood!
Even Rowe is more value around the ground and his ruckwork is reasonable.....hitouts unless directed straight to your players are overated.....Warnock got plenty but directed them nowhere IMO. As Carlisle showed its more handy to have a player who can get the footy and compete...Hampson's ruck and field play was ok it was just that dumb idea of turning him into a KP Forward that stuffed his career with us up along with injuries.
Exactly ElwoodBlues1.
Realistically if we are going to go the hindsight avenue, we should take the best route at least and state that the major fork up was letting Jacobs go.
He is night and day better than all of them and was at our club too.
That Sydney final, 3rd quarter it was him in tandem with Carrazzo and Judd that almost dragged us back into it.
Even Rowe is more value around the ground and his ruckwork is reasonable.....hitouts unless directed straight to your players are overated.....Warnock got plenty but directed them nowhere IMO. As Carlisle showed its more handy to have a player who can get the footy and compete...Hampson's ruck and field play was ok it was just that dumb idea of turning him into a KP Forward that stuffed his career with us up along with injuries.
Not only was playing them as forwards stupid, it was a contributing factor to their injury problems which makes the idea twice as bad!
Realistically if we are going to go the hindsight avenue, we should take the best route at least and state that the major fork up was letting Jacobs go.
Jacobs was never wasted playing up forward, he couldn't be left there he was too slow and we had the likes of Fev, Kennedy, O'hAilpin and Waite playing forward for most of his time at the Blues.
If Kreuzer and Hampson had received the same respect as ruckmen, allowing them to primarily ruck, they would have surpassed Jacobs by some margin because they could both be mobile enough to do what Carlilse did last night as well as be competitive in the ruck!
Maybe LP, maybe not.
Jacobs can play footy. The others are yet to prove that they can.
Jacobs proved he could play footy with us.
Its not hard. Hampson and Grigg collided last week against us which provided me a moment of sheer hilarity. The guy might have tools to learn how to play, but he still lacks the nous to go with the lack of ability, and even had we played him in the right position we have proven that we cannot develope blokes regardless of their talent level.
Maybe LP, maybe not.
Jacobs can play footy. The others are yet to prove that they can.
Jacobs proved he could play footy with us.
Its not hard. Hampson and Grigg collided last week against us which provided me a moment of sheer hilarity. The guy might have tools to learn how to play, but he still lacks the nous to go with the lack of ability, and even had we played him in the right position we have proven that we cannot develope blokes regardless of their talent level.
Thry you keep focussing on Hampson, but the crux of the debate is about what makes real value as a ruckmen.
By my reckoning the two best individual games by ruckmen in the last ten years were Dean Cox in Perth against Norp(I think) about four or five years ago, and Matthew Kreuzer vs Sydney 2011. In both games they got no more than a couple of dozen taps.
Wood is more crippled than Kreuzer, but as a ruck Wood is worth five Rob Warnocks.
PS: Even the media are taking the piss, after BumberT laughed at the ruck question, the media only named / queried one Carlton player in the Malthouse conference. It was Warnock, and MM refused to comment and it is a pity he didn't do that earlier in the week!
I never really thought much of Warnock LP. He was simply a gamble that has not worked out.
He has shown glimpses, like everyone else, but failed to go on with it.
Hopefully for him it can turn around, but his time is up at Carlton.
Cameron Wood was always rubbish, and unless he has a Brad Ottens-esque turnaround he too will be a player we are moaning about in about 12 weeks.
Unfortunately, Kreuzer was and still is the potential best of the lot, and until he can get his body right we will have no idea how it pans out.
Hindsight, and what's happened since, clearly shows that Jacobs was the one we should've kept.
However, at the time, he was only a rookie and didn't have half the potential as the others.
As it turns out, Hammer, whilst he improved, couldn't reach his lofty potential.
Kreuzer, cannot stay out on the park and has lost his mobility.
Warnock, also had injury worries, and has lived up to not a whole lot besides his height.
Wood can give us something around the ground and up forward.
Rowe can give us something around the ground and up forward AND down back.....given the right matchups.
Right now Wood+Rowe should be our ruckmen.
Warnock has to be dropped this week and traded out at years end.......
He shouldn't of been traded in to the club in the first place but that's another story.
Our ruck division is looking very feeble right now with Warnock being an ineffective beanpole, Kruezer out injured and a possibility of never returning to full fitness whilst Wood is a last gasp back-up.
We traded out Hampson & Jacobs and have not replaced either of them.
If Kreuzer can't get back and as Elwood stated, Warnock has to go, we are going to be like old Mother Hubbard staring at the bare cupboard with Wood the only one left.
Hindsight, and what's happened since, clearly shows that Jacobs was the one we should've kept.
At the time, I argued strongly on here that Jacobs was the one we needed to keep and it should of been out of Warnock & Hampson as to who we traded. Naturally others thought I'd been out in the desert too long and was affected by the sun.
Jacobs had played extremely well in the last couple of games of the season as well as a losing final, clearly he was way better than the others yet we wilted and let him go. We fought tooth and nail with Port to keep Jordan Russell (I also said bugger him and trade him but got howled down) yet we refused to fight for Jacobs with the same veracity.
We have rocks in our head when it comes to business acumen and list management.
we had ruckman because at one stage a few years back, they were a tradable commodity
trouble is, we traded 2, and remain with one we're not sure what he is (currently injured)
the other is a spud that cant kick
Boort are one goalpost short and have some interest if we supply cement and a post hole digger as part of the deal....
I don't know why I'm laughing at that post but I am, its got to that stage now.
Hindsight, and what's happened since, clearly shows that Jacobs was the one we should've kept.
At the time, I argued strongly on here that Jacobs was the one we needed to keep and it should of been out of Warnock & Hampson as to who we traded. Naturally others thought I'd been out in the desert too long and was affected by the sun.
Jacobs had played extremely well in the last couple of games of the season as well as a losing final, clearly he was way better than the others yet we wilted and let him go. We fought tooth and nail with Port to keep Jordan Russell (I also said bugger him and trade him but got howled down) yet we refused to fight for Jacobs with the same veracity.
We have rocks in our head when it comes to business acumen and list management.
Granted, you might have got those ones right, although JR was getting us a 3rd rounder only.
You throw enough darts with your eyes shut, eventually you'll hit the board. :P
But your last line is spot on.
We need to make some big moves now to set us up for the future.
Trade Kreuzer.
Let Gibbs go.
Offer up Yarran to see what people are willing to part with.
Have a chat to Judd and see if there is anything else he wants to do with his footballing career. He might want to go to Melbourne to fulfill a promise he gave his grandma. Make it happen, cash in.
Think outside the box and make something happen.
Hindsight, and what's happened since, clearly shows that Jacobs was the one we should've kept.
However, at the time, he was only a rookie and didn't have half the potential as the others.
As it turns out, Hammer, whilst he improved, couldn't reach his lofty potential.
Kreuzer, cannot stay out on the park and has lost his mobility.
Warnock, also had injury worries, and has lived up to not a whole lot besides his height.
Wood can give us something around the ground and up forward.
Rowe can give us something around the ground and up forward AND down back.....given the right matchups.
Right now Wood+Rowe should be our ruckmen.
At the time Jacobs was our 3rd- 4th ruckman, out of contract and knowing that he decided he wanted to go home knowing he'd be first ruck. We'd never be able to guarantee him that. We had Kreuzer and Hammer out at the time, hence why Jacobs was playing. That 2010 final both Warnock and Jacobs were outstanding. No reason at that point to think Jacabs was going to play in front of Kreuzer and Warnock, he knew that, and went home. Of course when an out of contract player leaves you get royally screwed at the draft table given the alternative is getting nothing for him.
If one had their time again we'd have given West Coast picks 1 and 3, got Judd, kept Kennedy, Jacobs may have stayed then knowing he may have got a ruck gig with Warnock. With Warnock injured often then Jacobs may have ended up first ruck.
Hindisght sight is wonderful.....and bloody painful!
Nathan Brown's comments about Nic Natanui apply equally to our rucks:
Two-time All-Australian forward Nathan Brown added to the criticism of the Eagles' player on Sunday by arguing on The Sunday Footy Show "you can't be elite as a ruckman if you only take one mark in [four] weeks, so Nic Naitanui has got a lot more to do".
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/nic-naitanui-severely-shackled-by-injury-says-worsfold-20140427-zr0d1.html#ixzz30A3gNmuE
Warnock didn't manage any marks against the Eagles and that puts us at a big disadvantage. I thought he had turned the corner against the Bulldogs where he provided a marking target between CHB and CHF but was back to his worst against the Eagles.
Casboult, as the back-up ruckman, was ineffective in the ruck but did very well with his marking around the ground.
Watching the game against Sydney on Saturday night confirmed for me that Warnock is probably one of the worst rucks going around at the moment. I have no idea why we have persisted with this guy. I reckon I could count on one hand the number of great games he has had, 1 or 2 this year, and maybe 1 or 2 last year is about all I can remember.
He continually gets his hand on the ball first in the ruck contest, and invariably knocks it down the throat of an opposition player. I reckon we would be far better off having an extra midfielder in the centre and not contesting the ruck, than continuing with Warnock in the centre.
Get rid of warnock and kruezer and start again....
Get rid of warnock and kruezer and start again....
You trust this lot to get it right?
In four years we have gone from having the leagues most feared, dominant and deep ruck division to one of the weakest if not the weakest!
Feared or over rated?
Get rid of warnock and kruezer and start again....
You trust this lot to get it right?
In four years we have gone from having the leagues most feared, dominant and deep ruck division to one of the weakest if not the weakest!
we never had a feared ruck division....
agree - this lot including Rodgers will never get it right..
our club is dying on the vine now...I dont think people know it, care about it or want to do anything about it....
Maybe time to give Wood a promotion and a run. While no gun player he will be a greater presence around the ground at least plus the most likely to kick a goal or two.
Warnock, with his height will often dominate the tap outs and the opposition know that and rove to him. Sandilands has the same problem as far as tap outs go. Predictability is a curse there. Given Warnock does very little elsewhere, unlike Sandilands, his value become diminshed. Wood won't win as many taps but surprising we might win more clearances as ruck contests won't be as predictable plus, as I said, get a greater presence around the ground and even near goal too.
Get rid of warnock and kruezer and start again....
You trust this lot to get it right?
In four years we have gone from having the leagues most feared, dominant and deep ruck division to one of the weakest if not the weakest!
we never had a feared ruck division....
Do not agree, three or four seasons ago we had the top rated ruck division and had such depth opposition clubs were forced to play extra talls against us to prevent their own rucks being run off their feet. Opponents could not rest when we had two or three in the one side and we benefited accordingly.
Now an opponent "monitoring" Warnock is getting a break which is as good as being benched, Warnock is no marking threat at all, so much so they don't even bother to pick him up in our F50! He can't even bring the ball to ground against medium sized defenders
We are not a threat anymore though, we are now ranked in the bottom half for both ruck and mids, it's a cause and effect scenario as far as I can tell.
Talk about a storm in a teacup.
Kreuzer getting injured hurt our ruck division more than anything else.
Notice our midfield started getting smashed and that coincided with our ruck woes.
Na logic doesnt work on forums.
Talk about a storm in a teacup.
Kreuzer getting injured hurt our ruck division more than anything else.
Notice our midfield started getting smashed and that coincided with our ruck woes.
Na logic doesnt work on forums.
yep Thry - bottom 4 tracking to the wooden spoon next year
Storm in a teacup... ; :-[
Talk about a storm in a teacup.
Kreuzer getting injured hurt our ruck division more than anything else.
Notice our midfield started getting smashed and that coincided with our ruck woes.
Na logic doesnt work on forums.
And that may have something to do with the loss of Kreuz's efforts post the tap, e.g. second efforts in clearances, blocking/tackling opposition mids, other 1%ers and general ground play etc. Warnock does hardly any of that stuff but he probably wins more taps (haven't looked up the stats on that).
Talk about a storm in a teacup.
I can laugh about this, until I get to watch Goldstein turn 206 into his bitch this Friday night!
PS; Goldstein was BOG last week, 5 marks, 5 tackles and 2 goals with 40 hit outs to top it off! (Excluding the taps that is probably a seasons tally for 206!)
Talk about a storm in a teacup.
Kreuzer getting injured hurt our ruck division more than anything else.
Notice our midfield started getting smashed and that coincided with our ruck woes.
Na logic doesnt work on forums.
And that may have something to do with the loss of Kreuz's efforts post the tap, e.g. second efforts in clearances, blocking/tackling opposition mids, other 1%ers and general ground play etc. Warnock does hardly any of that stuff but he probably wins more taps (haven't looked up the stats on that).
Kruezer was good on the ground average in the air- who knows now with his foot, hip and knee ....
Matthews says he is a low B grader at best
No one is laughing LP, it's simply a matter of time. Things will turn around we are better than what we are seeing. I think Buttifant's work won't become prominent till next year and many of our players will surprise everyone next season.
No one is laughing LP, it's simply a matter of time. Things will turn around we are better than what we are seeing. I think Buttifant's work won't become prominent till next year and many of our players will surprise everyone next season.
I have no faith in 206 improving, fitness has nothing to do with it and Buttifant won't make a smidgen of difference!
Warnock is almost 28(Jan 2015) and still plays like he did a decade ago, he should be in his prime now in the same way Jacobs is hitting his straps at just a year younger! They should change his nickname to BFG!
Kreuzer turned 25 in May, he still has two and a half years on Warnock, and even as a cripple Kreuzer is twice the footballer.
Wood getting a go.
Reckon only MK here in a year or two. Maybe not even him.
No one is laughing LP, it's simply a matter of time. Things will turn around we are better than what we are seeing. I think Buttifant's work won't become prominent till next year and many of our players will surprise everyone next season.
Someone has saved 206 from complete embarrassment, he has an angel somewhere helping him avoid a smashing for the most inform ruckmen in the league!
We have a winner.
Yep its over for Warnock....Wood while no star is competitive and can mark the football a skill Warnock hasnt mastered, he is also a threat down forward.
Warnock needs trading out...
Why didn't he get a run before now is a question that needs answering.
Why didn't he get a run before now is a question that needs answering.
^^^^^this :o
Our list management still leaves a lot to be desired. How do we not have a 20 year old ruckman on our list waiting to come on when these guys are gone? We'll end up hoping we can poach one.
Our list management still leaves a lot to be desired. How do we not have a 20 year old ruckman on our list waiting to come on when these guys are gone? We'll end up hoping we can poach one.
Whatever the reason why, invariably you cannot point to the past list management as that won't be an acceptable answer.
Our list management still leaves a lot to be desired. How do we not have a 20 year old ruckman on our list waiting to come on when these guys are gone? We'll end up hoping we can poach one.
Whatever the reason why, invariably you cannot point to the past list management as that won't be an acceptable answer.
Why would you? We had a 23 year old ruckman on the list. We had no need to have his replacement developing their game.
What are you questioning then? List management or not make up your mind man!
You either recruit an 18 year old on slow heat or not. Where is the replacement? I won't say it, people get their knickers in a twist for believing the previous recruiters didn't cover their bases well enough.
What are you questioning then? List management or not make up your mind man!
You either recruit an 18 year old on slow heat or not. Where is the replacement? I won't say it, people get their knickers in a twist for believing the previous recruiters didn't cover their bases well enough.
I don't understand what us leaving ourselves exposed in the ruck in 2014 for 2017 and beyond has anything to do with past list management when we had ruckmen in their early 20s on the list?
Yep its over for Warnock....Wood while no star is competitive and can mark the football a skill Warnock hasnt mastered, he is also a threat down forward.
Warnock needs trading out...
Gets a pass in his first outing. Needs to back it up for the rest of the season so I shall reserve judgement at this time.
What are you questioning then? List management or not make up your mind man!
You either recruit an 18 year old on slow heat or not. Where is the replacement? I won't say it, people get their knickers in a twist for believing the previous recruiters didn't cover their bases well enough.
I don't understand what us leaving ourselves exposed in the ruck in 2014 for 2017 and beyond has anything to do with past list management when we had ruckmen in their early 20s on the list?
We had rucks at similar ages. Today's 20 year old was two years ago's 18 year old recruit. (or Sam Jacobs when we first got him). Would start making a name for himself about next season and become a walk up starter in two years. Closest we have is Watson, closest we had that we delisted was McCarthy.
He wasn't even a real ruckman.
What are you questioning then? List management or not make up your mind man!
You either recruit an 18 year old on slow heat or not. Where is the replacement? I won't say it, people get their knickers in a twist for believing the previous recruiters didn't cover their bases well enough.
I don't understand what us leaving ourselves exposed in the ruck in 2014 for 2017 and beyond has anything to do with past list management when we had ruckmen in their early 20s on the list?
We'll get to 2020 and he'll still be blaming Ratts, just to take the piss.
Yep its over for Warnock....Wood while no star is competitive and can mark the football a skill Warnock hasnt mastered, he is also a threat down forward.
Warnock needs trading out...
While the bell tolls for 206, Wood may not be the long term answer. Like SpecialK there are a lot of questions hanging over Woods head in regards to the ability of his knees and ankle surviving a full pre-season let alone a full season. In the past we should have pushed hard for Jenkins in the Betts deal, back then Jenkins was struggling in the Adelaide 2s and the price was about right, now he'd be a first round pick.
One thing is for sure, the next person who tries to post on here telling us 206s tap work is more important than the other 80% of stuff a normal ruckmen does will get rogered rigid! Goldstein smashed Wood in the tap, Wood was better everywhere else! ;) The same applied in the past to Kreuzer vs Warnock, Hampson vs Warnock and even Jacobs vs Warnock, Warnock's one trick just ain't enough!
Wood actually looks like a ruckman, unfortunately Warnock has always looked like a really tall skinny guy!!
The stats for those who care, LINK (http://finalsiren.com/PlayerCompare.asp?SeasonID=2014&SelectedPlayers=1738,1556,&Compare=Go)
Carey weighs into the debate, HERE (http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-07-25/super-tall-but-no-ability).
2015, enter SpecialK, the guy MM says is too small to ruck! :D
Carey weighs into the debate, HERE (http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-07-25/super-tall-but-no-ability).
2015, enter SpecialK, the guy MM says is too small to ruck! :D
our ruck division is garbage...Kruezer has been in the system over 5 years - trade him.....
Carey weighs into the debate, HERE (http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-07-25/super-tall-but-no-ability).
2015, enter SpecialK, the guy MM says is too small to ruck! :D
our ruck division is garbage...Kruezer has been in the system over 5 years - trade him.....
Yet only three years ago it was the top rated division when they were all 3 years younger!
Carey weighs into the debate, HERE (http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-07-25/super-tall-but-no-ability).
2015, enter SpecialK, the guy MM says is too small to ruck! :D
Paddy Ryder 196cm vs Warnock 206cm...I know who I would choose as my ruckman and it aint the latter....Carey is right....
Paddy Ryder 196cm vs Warnock 206cm...I know who I would choose as my ruckman and it aint the latter....Carey is right....
Absolutely, height and taps mean nada!
Paddy Ryder 196cm vs Warnock 206cm...I know who I would choose as my ruckman and it aint the latter....Carey is right....
Absolutely, height and taps mean nada!
Now we're getting somewhere. Spot on. Kreuzer and Wood with Meat backup in 2015 - yes.
But Hammer ain't super tall.... Carey should get his facts straight......
But Hammer ain't super tall.... Carey should get his facts straight......
201 cm is pretty tall!
Carey weighs into the debate, HERE (http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-07-25/super-tall-but-no-ability).
2015, enter SpecialK, the guy MM says is too small to ruck! :D
Paddy Ryder 196cm vs Warnock 206cm...I know who I would choose as my ruckman and it aint the latter....Carey is right....
Hmmm that Ryder over MK debate isn't looking so ridiculous now... We have some ground to make up on that one...
Paddy Ryder 196cm vs Warnock 206cm...I know who I would choose as my ruckman and it aint the latter....Carey is right....
Absolutely, height and taps mean nada!
Now we're getting somewhere. Spot on. Kreuzer and Wood with Meat backup in 2015 - yes.
Baggers the big IF there is will MK be fit and can he stay fit?
I don't think Warnock is tradeable!
I am not sure he is washed up. He had bad weeks against St Kilda and Swans and it was right to promote Wood.
Maybe Warnock has been crook, had a special problem...?
The Ticket to Ruck has to be given to Kreuzer.
We were lucky to get him, a quality bloke who has had bad bad luck.
Maybe the age of the monster tall is coming to an end.
Warnock is a good type and he puts in.
He would pay his way even if most of his 2015 was with the Northern Blues
I don't think Warnock is tradeable!
I am not sure he is washed up. He had bad weeks against St Kilda and Swans and it was right to promote Wood.
Maybe Warnock has been crook, had a special problem...?
The Ticket to Ruck has to be given to Kreuzer.
We were lucky to get him, a quality bloke who has had bad bad luck.
Maybe the age of the monster tall is coming to an end.
Warnock is a good type and he puts in.
He would pay his way even if most of his 2015 was with the Northern Blues
There are some tells.
- You obviously think winning lots of taps means something, I think they are worthless meaning bad years!
- If he put in blokes like Matthews and Carey wouldn't be picking on him!
- He has been by far the highest paid ruck at Carlton since he arrived!
I don't think Warnock is tradeable!
I am not sure he is washed up. He had bad weeks against St Kilda and Swans and it was right to promote Wood.
Maybe Warnock has been crook, had a special problem...?
The Ticket to Ruck has to be given to Kreuzer.
We were lucky to get him, a quality bloke who has had bad bad luck.
Maybe the age of the monster tall is coming to an end.
Warnock is a good type and he puts in.
He would pay his way even if most of his 2015 was with the Northern Blues
There are some tells.
- You obviously thinks lots of taps means something, I think they are worthless meaning bad years!
- If he put in blokes like Matthews and Carey wouldn't be picking on him!
- He has been by far the highest paid ruck at Carlton since he arrived!
LP, I think Phil agrees with you. He's just saying that we've had some $hitty luck with "The K-Man" and given we won't get $hit for Robbie as a trade, he can earn his cash in the NB's to honour his contract and who knows he may yet rediscover some sort of form.
LP, I think Phil agrees with you. He's just saying that we've had some $hitty luck with "The K-Man" and given we won't get $hit for Robbie as a trade, he can earn his cash in the NB's to honour his contract and who knows he may yet rediscover some sort of form.
My apologies Phil, I didn't read it that way.
(http://www.carltonfc.com.au/staticfile/AFL%20Tenant/Carlton/Images/RuckmenRunningArticle_620X370.jpg)
In fairness, perspective can be a funny thing, but I reckon SpecialK and Warnock are about the same distance away from the camera while Wood is clearly further away. Warnock may be slightly closer.
But if I recall correctly, according to our current coach the bloke on the left is too small to be a front line AFL ruckmen!
As much as I like some of the stuff MM has brought to the club, that bloke dribbles more sh1te than Werribee Sh1te Farm!
(http://www.carltonfc.com.au/staticfile/AFL%20Tenant/Carlton/Images/RuckmenRunningArticle_620X370.jpg)
In fairness, perspective can be a funny thing, but I reckon SpecialK and Warnock are about the same distance away from the camera while Wood is clearly further away. Warnock may be slightly closer.
But if I recall correctly, according to our current coach the bloke on the left is too small to be a front line AFL ruckmen!
Wood looks like he has bulked up in the upper body..I know they all do at the this time of the year but he looks a big unit and it was an area where he was criticised at Collingwood as not
being strong enough and he appears to be well on the way to fixing that issue...
Kruezers only position is front line ruckman IMO.....he is the old fashioned follower rather than a bang and crash ruckman..
Looks fat....
Looks fat....
I suppose the coach has him set to bulk up a bit! :o
Yet it looks like he is really struggling compared to Wood! ::)
There was a photo published of him resuming training a week or so back, with his shirt off he ain't fat! ;)
Agree with IOT. That applies to both Wood and Kreuzer im guessing? he too looks pudgy.
I think that perhaps Malthouse playing Kreuzer as a forward might be the way to go initially to reintroduce him to top line football, and then gradually build him back into the ruck. That should mean that he can build confidence in his body first, and then go on with it.
For what its worth, I think 2015 should be a bit of a gap year for Kreuzer and 2016 should be the year that dictates what happens with kreuzer.
Looks fat....
Maybe he has some extra puddin under that training top but his upper arms look toned so I would be surprsied if he was carrying too much extra fat...he probably needs it anyway as like I said he was pushed out of the road too easily and needs some more bulk...
Warnock needs some work on those upper arms....Jaksch has copped some flak for being too thin but Warnock after many seasons of training doesnt look any better than Jaksch...
(http://www.carltonfc.com.au/staticfile/AFL%20Tenant/Carlton/Photo%20Galleries/2014%20-%20Galleries/Training/Training%20141119/354133-tlsgallerylandscape.jpg)
That's him on the 19th of November 2014, fat bastard trade him now!
PS Correction: Fat midget bastard, too small(For Ruck), too unfit(Too Fat), too slow(Keep Up!), trade him now!
I could be just a little sarcastic!
Agree with IOT. That applies to both Wood and Kreuzer im guessing? he too looks pudgy.
I think that perhaps Malthouse playing Kreuzer as a forward might be the way to go initially to reintroduce him to top line football, and then gradually build him back into the ruck. That should mean that he can build confidence in his body first, and then go on with it.
For what its worth, I think 2015 should be a bit of a gap year for Kreuzer and 2016 should be the year that dictates what happens with kreuzer.
Agree on Kruezer...I'd be looking after him rather than expecting any match winning games and trying to condition his body so he can play out the season.....
(http://www.carltonfc.com.au/staticfile/AFL%20Tenant/Carlton/Images/RuckmenRunningArticle_620X370.jpg)
In fairness, perspective can be a funny thing, but I reckon SpecialK and Warnock are about the same distance away from the camera while Wood is clearly further away. Warnock may be slightly closer.
But if I recall correctly, according to our current coach the bloke on the left is too small to be a front line AFL ruckmen!
Wood looks like he has bulked up in the upper body..I know they all do at the this time of the year but he looks a big unit and it was an area where he was criticised at Collingwood as not
being strong enough and he appears to be well on the way to fixing that issue...
Kruezers only position is front line ruckman IMO.....he is the old fashioned follower rather than a bang and crash ruckman..
atm my ranking
1. Wood
2 Warnock & Kruezer equal 2nd
atm my ranking
1. Wood
2 Warnock & Kruezer equal 2nd
That'll change! ;)
atm my ranking
1. Wood
2 Warnock & Kruezer equal 2nd
That'll change! ;)
Well you'd hope so.
atm my ranking
1. Wood
2 Warnock & Kruezer equal 2nd
That'll change! ;)
Well you'd hope so.
1. Kreuzer
2. Wood
Daylight.
3. Warnock
Not sure what my current opinion is. Need to see him play first. Special-K that is. Once I see a few games from him, I will know if he is cooked or whether he can get back to his best footy. Wood looks a little chunky in the above shot. Too much Maccas ? ;D
Not sure what my current opinion is. Need to see him play first. Special-K that is. Once I see a few games from him, I will know if he is cooked or whether he can get back to his best footy. Wood looks a little chunky in the above shot. Too much Maccas ? ;D
Be careful. ..sticks ate maccas all the time contrary to.david parkins advice.
Mosi. Sticks was a forward that was hard to beat. He could hold down FF or CHF. When he played state of origin for South Australia, he would kill us Vics up in the forward line. If Wood could do that, he could eat Maccas for breakfast, dinner and lunch for all I care. Maybe the high level of carbohydrates would give him the energy he needs to get through 4 quarters of footy. ;D ;)
We could sure use a Sticks at the moment.
(http://www.carltonfc.com.au/staticfile/AFL%20Tenant/Carlton/Images/RuckmenRunningArticle_620X370.jpg)
In fairness, perspective can be a funny thing, but I reckon SpecialK and Warnock are about the same distance away from the camera while Wood is clearly further away. Warnock may be slightly closer.
But if I recall correctly, according to our current coach the bloke on the left is too small to be a front line AFL ruckmen!
As much as I like some of the stuff MM has brought to the club, that bloke dribbles more sh1te than Werribee Sh1te Farm!
Who's the fatso laboring on the right?
atm my ranking
1. Wood
2 Warnock & Kruezer equal 2nd
That'll change! ;)
Well you'd hope so.
1. Kreuzer
2. Wood
Daylight.
3. Warnock
Each performing to his ability and fit... you've got it spot on. Should Kreuzer and Wood remain fit (no injuries) then it could be a long season for 206 'kicking the dew off.'
I was just trying to process this... I can't actually remember how well Kreuzer goes as a true ruck.
I was just trying to process this... I can't actually remember how well Kreuzer goes as a true ruck.
I remember sitting in the b&f the year before he was injured, just a kid. I remember being chuffed at him basically getting votes in every game in the first 10 rounds. Never got best but nearly always polled. I thought he could turn out to be anything.... Long time ago now.
I was just trying to process this... I can't actually remember how well Kreuzer goes as a true ruck.
If you can find it, watch Rnd 13 2011 vs Sydney, SpecialKs 2nd game back after his first major injury, that will remind you! ;)
As a tap ruckman, a fit Kreuzer is competitive against the best. Some of his set play forward line boundary throw in work is superb. However, although he may get beaten in actual hitouts, it is his second and third efforts that lift him above most other ruckmen.
I remember several games during which Kreuzer started in the centre square, but not as the ruckman. His size, strength and ability below his knees gave us an advantage. I'm not saying that having Kreuzer as an on-baller will work all the time, but I suspect that's what Mick means when he says Kreuzer is a multi-position player.
The other thing I like about Kreuzer is his ability to deliver a text book hip and shoulder; no free kick and a sore and sorry opponent :)
I was just trying to process this... I can't actually remember how well Kreuzer goes as a true ruck.
If you can find it match Rnd 13 2011 vs Sydney, SpecialKs 2nd game back after his first major injury, that will remind you! ;)
yes..absolutely correct - MK was phenomenal that game..I still maintain the view he came back too early though, as he is been down hill since then...
I remember several games during which Kreuzer started in the centre square, but not as the ruckman.
Which games were these as I do not remember and I would like to review. My opinion is this would be a bad move.
I remember several games during which Kreuzer started in the centre square, but not as the ruckman.
Which games were these as I do not remember and I would like to review. My opinion is this would be a bad move.
Back in Ratten days he tried this sporadically a few times in conjunction with Hampson rucking. Kreuzer did OK, but we were a bit too slow and not agile enough in the midfield when we had the two ruckmen in there.
But a fit Kreuzer doesn't need that setup, like Cox he can ruck and still rove his own ball.
I remember several games during which Kreuzer started in the centre square, but not as the ruckman.
Which games were these as I do not remember and I would like to review. My opinion is this would be a bad move.
Back in Ratten days he tried this sporadically a few times in conjunction with Hampson rucking. Kreuzer did OK, but we were a bit too slow and not agile enough in the midfield when we had the two ruckmen in there.
But a fit Kreuzer doesn't need that setup, like Cox he can ruck and still rove his own ball.
That's right LP, it was when Ratten was trying to squeeze several ruckmen into the side. It worked OK a couple of times but really depended on the opposition.
That's right LP, it was when Ratten was trying to squeeze several ruckmen into the side. It worked OK a couple of times but really depended on the opposition.
Our coaches / line coaches have generally been dumbar5es.
The setup with the resting ruck option up forward is OK but only if you can deliver the ball half decently. Since the departure of Houlihan our list sprays the ball like a tomcat pissing on the front door, and back then under those two talls conditions when the ruckmen contested inside F50 Eddie Betts would be flying against them rather than crumbing! We had a forward line that wasn't being out-marked yet we had nobody crumbing! The alternative setup was to have blokes like 1AW, Robbo and Simmo bombing the ball forward off the HBF to a small forward line and watching Betts and Garlett get out-marked body on body time after time!
Back in Fev's day he had Houlihan and Scotland hitting him up on leads, that is if we could manage to feed the ball forward through them, the rest of the time it was a chook raffle.
Now with the departure of Scotland I don't think we have a single A Grade ball user on the list, some very talented goal kickers, but not one bloke who can reliably put the ball to the forwards advantage. I maintain Carlton are the worst ball using side in the AFL, and by some margin! It looks like our recruiters put no emphasis on accurate disposal under pressure as a recruit requirement. It's the arrogance of the coaches that cause this situation, they genuinely believe if they are given a super-athlete they can teach them to do the rest, but it's a bullsh1te belief and the Dawks, Cats and Swans have proven it time and time again by recruiting footballers first and slaughtering the opposition regularly!
That's right LP, it was when Ratten was trying to squeeze several ruckmen into the side. It worked OK a couple of times but really depended on the opposition.
Our coaches / line coaches have generally been dumbar5es.
The setup with the resting ruck option up forward is OK but only if you can deliver the ball half decently. Since the departure of Houlihan our list sprays the ball like a tomcat pissing on the front door, and back then under those two talls conditions when the ruckmen contested inside F50 Eddie Betts would be flying against them rather than crumbing! We had a forward line that wasn't being out-marked yet we had nobody crumbing! The alternative setup was to have blokes like 1AW, Robbo and Simmo bombing the ball forward off the HBF to a small forward line and watching Betts and Garlett get out-marked body on body time after time!
Back in Fev's day he had Houlihan and Scotland hitting him up on leads, that is if we could manage to feed the ball forward through them, the rest of the time it was a chook raffle.
Now with the departure of Scotland I don't think we have a single A Grade ball user on the list, some very talented goal kickers, but not one bloke who can reliably put the ball to the forwards advantage. I maintain Carlton are the worst ball using side in the AFL, and by some margin! It looks like our recruiters put no emphasis on accurate disposal under pressure as a recruit requirement. It's the arrogance of the coaches that cause this situation, they genuinely believe if they are given a super-athlete they can teach them to do the rest, but it's a bullsh1te belief and the Dawks, Cats and Swans have proven it time and time again by recruiting footballers first and slaughtering the opposition regularly!
I think Yaz has shown on numerous occasions that he is able to deliver the ball very well to leading forwards. He is good as putting it at their throats, with a very low, pin-pointed pass. Murph does well too. They may not be Heath Scotlands, but they still do pretty well. Other than those two, i'm not very confident.
Bryce Gibbs is usually good at hitting to a teamates advantage, and Menzel is absolue class when he does it but he is usually finishing.
At the end of the day, for an entire list to have the same deficiency, that is a teaching/learning issue as well as recruitment.
Why? Well its a basic that should be being taught much earlier in the piece. Its not even about having a razor accurate disposal, the difference between a good or poor ball user, is the ability to know their limitations.
Simply, you will hit more targets, more frequently to advantage if you pick targets that you can genuinely hit more often than not. If you try and thread the needle to a high risk high reward option, and you hit that target 2 out of 5 times, you will look ordinary for it. If you hit a target 5 out of 5 times because its an "easier" option, then that proves you can sum up a situation and back yourself accordingly to hit the target and you end up a star of the comp because you never waste the footy. (This might be the secret to the Hawks mythology of drafting quality ball users. Their game plan is about short precise quick ball movement after all. They do have genuine class though.)
Now, I dont believe that juniors wouldnt be taught to hit targets to advantage, and we have had too many that have gone from highly rated to poor kicks when transitioning to AFL level, which means that there is something we are not getting right.
Couple that with the game plan of kick it in long and quickly and lock it in, it might have very well have been why we have failed to teach this skill to so many through the journey.
Does my head in how many times we kick the ball to land on the head of our forward instead of kicking it to advantage.
No forward can mark a ball when he just has to stand there and fight with the backs...usually 2 or 3 of them.
We need to kick so our forwards can run onto it to create a better chance. Just my opinion. :)
Thry and Blue_MM, I think you are both confusing finishing with hitting targets.
It's easy for fans to forgive and forget the foibles of the superstars, but by AFL standards Yarran, Murphy, Gibbs are the best on our list yet just average overall.
Unfortunately for us, Judd who is an absolute star in most other areas except perhaps marking is/was also very ordinary by foot hitting targets.
Does my head in how many times we kick the ball to land on the head of our forward instead of kicking it to advantage.
No forward can mark a ball when he just has to stand there and fight with the backs...usually 2 or 3 of them.
We need to kick so our forwards can run onto it to create a better chance. Just my opinion. :)
Exactly BP, I agree 100%!
The best ball users in the game put the ball in areas that draw the forward to it, they don't kick to, behind, on top of, besides or short of the forward.
Thry and Blue_MM, I think you are both confusing finishing with hitting targets.
It's easy for fans to forgive and forget the foibles of the superstars, but by AFL standards Yarran, Murphy, Gibbs are the best on our list yet just average overall.
Unfortunately for us, Judd who is an absolute star in most other areas except perhaps marking is/was also very ordinary by foot hitting targets.
I agree with them being only average overall. I did say that they can at times show some real class with delivery. As has been mentioned, Hoops and Scotland were consistently fantastic. I think in an interview once, Fev said that if his life depended on a good delivery it would have to come from Hoops.
Thry and Blue_MM, I think you are both confusing finishing with hitting targets.
It's easy for fans to forgive and forget the foibles of the superstars, but by AFL standards Yarran, Murphy, Gibbs are the best on our list yet just average overall.
Unfortunately for us, Judd who is an absolute star in most other areas except perhaps marking is/was also very ordinary by foot hitting targets.
Remember the game where Kreuzer kicked three? Each of them came from Kreuzer marking a Judd kick inside 50. Judd had time to size up the situation and kick into space in front of Kreuzer, forcing him to run onto the ball and take what ended up as simple uncontested marks. It wasn't exactly hitting a target but it virtually took everyone else out of the contest. Simple, but very effective!
Judd had a period where his kicking was awful, hard to overcome that perception.
Judd had a period where his kicking was awful, hard to overcome that perception.
He has never been consistent.
Judd had a period where his kicking was awful, hard to overcome that perception.
He has never been consistent.
The bad kicking tended to coincide with his leg injuries especially the achillies when he used to throw a flat foot at ball.
Judd is an easy target for people to pick on if they want to talk about hitting targets.
Often splitting through a clearance, with hands on him putting him off balance, or even harder, going flat stick on the afterburners.
I think that using the footy well has more to do with not being wasteful with the footy resulting into turn of posession or bad targets to hit.
Judd is an easy target for people to pick on if they want to talk about hitting targets.
Often splitting through a clearance, with hands on him putting him off balance, or even harder, going flat stick on the afterburners.
I think that using the footy well has more to do with not being wasteful with the footy resulting into turn of posession or bad targets to hit.
People are too forgiving of Judd's kicking, it's not unreasonable but it's still not exemplary either. In this regard Ablett, Mitchell and many others have him well and truly shaded.
As for kicking in traffic under pressure, I'm sure Mitchell wouldn't use being poked and prodded as an excuse, he'd just hit the target, the right target! ;)