Carlton Supporters Club

At 19:20 on a Sunday night. Not a great time.

Night before a public holiday, so not quite as bad.....

So, do we go in unchanged again or are there changes to be made?  Looking at the 2s I see Carroll is named - is he able to play given he subbed on or will he be a late out for the 2s today?

Presumably it'll be Goldstein rucking with Wright as backup? If so, it'll be TDK and Harry again and I reckon Harry offers more around the ground while on-ball than Wright does. And TDK would have Goldstein covered around the ground too. So no changes on that front IMO.

Only change I could see is if Motlop fires in the VFL then he would come in....likely for Fantasia. Other than Wright and Jones, I don't think Bombers are that tall in the forward line unless I'm missing someone. Stringer will be a tough match up but one I could see Kemp taking on.

Obviously resting him ahead of next week....given the travel factor too?

Goldstein not playing today against GC. A late change.

Goldy was “managed” when Witts didn’t get up for Gold  Coast; a decision that backfired with Moyle and Walter having the better of Bryan and Wright.

I don’t think Pittonet will come up so it will be an easy decision for the MC; De Koning and McKay vs Goldstein and Wright.

I’m looking forward to seeing the McKay twins do battle.  I hope tempers don’t fray.

"Essendon coach Brad Scott will seek clarification from the umpiring department after two crucial decisions went against the Bombers late in their 11-point defeat to Gold Coast on Sunday night."

Scott obviously starting to panic and wants to highlight 'umpire injustice' against his team so that they get 'a fair deal' on Sunday night!   That's an old trick Scotty!!

He has a point with the two issues he highlighted.

Yes, but both teams got some dodgy calls, as is usually the case.

I guess it depends on when and where they occur.

Of course, Scott is well aware that we “consulted” the AFL after the Gold  Coast game and will want to neutralise any advantage we may have garnered.

there quick ball movement particular from our fwd line ( when we go the long bomb into f50) they will set up and rebound to there open fwd 50 with space everywhere .Hope our coaches have a different plan going forward.

https://bit.ly/4bZFMPl

Mike from Carlton North had a very interesting question for the McKay Bros podcast...haha.

https://www.facebook.com/reel/1007509424041865

Mike from Carlton North had a very interesting question for the McKay Bros podcast...haha.

https://www.facebook.com/reel/1007509424041865

Redman ruled out for Essendon.

very important out.  He's not great but thats a bit of run off half back that they miss and he's also one of those solid but unspectacular triers in the nic Newman mould.

Parish, Duursma, and Hobbs out still also weakens their midfield and this is where we should win the game comfortably imo.

Redman ruled out for Essendon.

I wonder if Cincotta gets the job on Merrett this week?

Is Langford playing?

Couch, Bairstow, Hocking, Mansfield, Stoneham....never forget

Is Langford playing?

So if Pitto passes his test is he in with TDK?

I'm torn, but I think a rested Goldstein with 2MP might be a step too far. 2MP is not a great ruck, but his size makes him a handful in our D50 which will drag a solo TDK to the wrong end of the ground for our liking. But I get the concerns about the CheatsFC run and carry and the berserker game style.

Also, when you have an opposition coach known as "The Tunnelling King", you know your talls aren't going to have their usual advantage.

So if Pitto passes his test is he in with TDK?

I'm torn, but I think a rested Goldstein with 2MP might be a step too far. 2MP is not a great ruck, but his size makes him a handful in our D50 which will drag a solo TDK to the wrong end of the ground for our liking. But I get the concerns about the CheatsFC run and carry and the berserker game style.

Also, when you have an opposition coach known as "The Tunnelling King", you know your talls aren't going to have their usual advantage.

I'd probably just play the one ruck and be backing Harry to break even with Wright.

Before our last game this was our scoring off turn over differential this year.


With Pittonet: -32
Without Pittonet: +131

At this point, the footy experts tell us that our 1 wood is strength and power around stoppage and contest. We are not a great transition / turnover team, and we don't really play surge footy. We have a choice between adding to our strength around contest, or diluting that somewhat and trying to match other teams in speed and mobility.

At this point, the footy experts tell us that our 1 wood is strength and power around stoppage and contest. We are not a great transition / turnover team, and we don't really play surge footy. We have a choice between adding to our strength around contest, or diluting that somewhat and trying to match other teams in speed and mobility. There's a reasonable case to be made for both, and both involve rolling the dice, but I'd suggest playing to our strengths and maximizing our strong hand in one space, is to be preferred. I'd play both Pittonet and De Koning, assuming  both are legitimately fit. 

Here is the thing though, what actually adds to our strength the best?
Having a fresh(er) ruck with a better chance of hitting our mids at a stoppage
or
Having another fresh(er) mid around the stoppage due to the ability to include one more mid/runner in the side due to 1 ruck.

THAT is the crux of the 1-ruck vs 2-ruck debate from the beginning (which people continually overlook).

My argument is that the little extra benefit provided by tapwork is undone by the fatiguing mids by comparison to the alternative.
Fresher (more) mids = greater pressure = greater turnovers etc etc etc.

IMO the team benefits more by an extra small.

Here is the thing though, what actually adds to our strength the best?
Having a fresh(er) ruck with a better chance of hitting our mids at a stoppage
or
Having another fresh(er) mid around the stoppage due to the ability to include one more mid/runner in the side due to 1 ruck.

THAT is the crux of the 1-ruck vs 2-ruck debate from the beginning (which people continually overlook).

My argument is that the little extra benefit provided by tapwork is undone by the fatiguing mids by comparison to the alternative.
Fresher (more) mids = greater pressure = greater turnovers etc etc etc.

IMO the team benefits more by an extra small.

Disagree. We scored 7 of our 8 goals in the last qtr against Port from Transition. A record apparently. That's what we need to go deep in September. One ruckman is a big part of this.

I don't disagree that the 1 ruck argument has merit. I'm just not sure the case is black and white, and I don't think the club does either. Either way you roll the dice, and either way you lose something.

Freo currently have the same problem, Melbourne had it last year.

Freo currently have the same problem, Melbourne had it last year.

I remember.....I went into football shock after we lost.

I'd probably just play the one ruck and be backing Harry to break even with Wright.
If Draper was playing along with Goldstein. then I would have gone with Pittonet and TDK.
FWIW I'd be backing TDK to jump all over Goldstein in the middle and give us first use.

For me I cant wait to finally see the McKay twins go at it. Bragging rights at stake and I dare say some interesting tactics and antics might be dragged out of their kit bags.

Did you see Harry and Ben on the club website?

Ben was quite serious when asked about match ups and explained that defenders don't stay on the one opponent but he would probably spend time on Charlie.

Harry's response; "He's too good for you.  He'll kick ten.  You'd better come to me!"

Cracked me up!  :))

That's the problem
It's not something that's measurable (one ruck, or two), because there are so many things that come into play.
You can look at win/losses, but that doesn't take into account the quaility of the opposition and a whole lot of other variables that occur during the length of a season, like venue, injury, form, fitness, training loads, roles, weather etc

Whichever way we go this weekend the result will determine the direction of the debate for the next week.
And one option or the other will get a boost ::)

The only thing you can really confirm is what i've already said.
That is
- The amount of time a ruck plays on the bench and the extra load that puts on the other guys picking up the slack with extra minutes.
- The ruck stats (HTA-RC%) of 2 vs 1 ruck games
- Possessions of 2 rucks vs 1 ruck comparisons (extra (dis)advantage around the ground.

The rest is up for debate.....and has been....repeatedly.

Yep
But there are a heap of variables that come into play and affect the overall picture.
Just as an example....

We play Binns instead of Pittonet.
A young bloke still finding his feet, he ends up with a dozen possessions.
The extra runner provides a  bit of extra spell for some of our mids.
But we lose all of the contribution to the mids that Pittonet would generate.
It's never a case of "all gain and no loss".
That's the balance you have to determine as a coaching group.

How significant is that extra rest a runner provides?
Do players like Cripps and Walsh's onfield time reduce significantly because of the extra runner on the bench?
Given that the breaks would be spred over most of our runners, how much extra rest does each actually get?
What is the effect of reducing the game time of our prime movers?
They get a bit of extra rest and that may be beneficial.
But if they're not out there, we lose their influence.
Whose going to spend the most time on the bench.?
There's a fair chance it's the fringe player or one of his ilk.

It's not just a case of extra runner, extra rest.
It's much more complicated than that, and why, when working these combinations out, you need a good bit of football knowledge and experience.

Yep
But there are a heap of variables that come into play and affect the overall picture.
Just as an example....

We play Binns instead of Pittonet.
A young bloke still finding his feet, he ends up with a dozen possessions.
The extra runner provides a  bit of extra spell for some of our mids.
But we lose all of the contribution to the mids that Pittonet would generate.
It's never a case of "all gain and no loss".
That's the balance you have to determine as a coaching group.

How significant is that extra rest a runner provides?
Do players like Cripps and Walsh's onfield time reduce significantly because of the extra runner on the bench?
Given that the breaks would be spred over most of our runners, how much extra rest does each actually get?
What is the effect of reducing the game time of our prime movers?
They get a bit of extra rest and that may be beneficial.
But if they're not out there, we lose their influence.
Whose going to spend the most time on the bench.?
There's a fair chance it's the fringe player or one of his ilk.

It's not just a case of extra runner, extra rest.
It's much more complicated than that, and why, when working these combinations out, you need a good bit of football knowledge and experience.

It's not just a case of extra runner, extra rest.
It's much more complicated than that, and why, when working these combinations out, you need a good bit of football knowledge and experience.

When discussing risks and costs to the team when running two rucks, it can't be ignored the there are risks and costs to the team when running one ruck, there is no free lunch.

Tactics have to be sustainable all season long and viable for finals!

It's a vexxed question this one or two ruckmen.

Seems to moi that every argument for two and every argument for one, is valid and reasonable. I don't envy the MC on this one. Thing is, I believe, both blokes are rippers and really good within their skill sets... which are different! What a terrific problem.

Horses for courses? Perhaps against cheats.com.au this Sunday we replace Fantasia (who really is not doing a great deal at present) with Pitto? Not like for like, but perhaps this is the game to do it. Carroll remains as sub, or maybe this is the game to have Billy as the sub... bit of later speed over the grass?

Taking a runner away from rotation is bad news imo. We have more legs to hurt the oppo on the rebound as the game goes on. Don't think we will lose if we play two rucks all it does it takes runners away in rotation and score from turnover will fall down and need to depend on score from stoppages

Having Pitto and TDK in is not as big a negative as it seems, because TDK is far more aerobic, agile and athletic than most other rucks. You might lose a little bit relative to another genuine Mid, but nowhere near as much as if we ran two Pitto types, and not that much compared to some typical utility.

Your solo ruckman goes down in the first 15 mins and you're in trouble! One of your twin towers is displaced and Cripps and Kennedy are left to pick up the ruck scraps. It's a calculated risk!!

....and this is compariing against basically our worst player in Fantasia. Should i do a comparison against another mid??

To maximise TDK's potential impact when Pitto is rucking, we need to experiment with other ways to utilise TDK, e.g. as a tall defender (even Casboult developed into a better than average defender at one stage) or perhaps as a 'Richo-style' wingman.

I feel like this ruck debate has hijacked this thread. Can we create a separate thread for those that want to keep it going, I'm over it.

I think that this situation is one that MUST be guarded against - especially in an elimination, preliminary or grand final.  Therefore, it seems crazy to not formulate (and perfect) ongoing plan/s to play two ruckmen - except when injury intervenes or the opposition represents no serious competitive threat in that area.

Given Pitto's comparative lack of positional options, the logical route would seem to have him take the bulk of the ruckwork early in the game with the option of replacing him with the substitute later in the game or when the need arises. 

To maximise TDK's potential impact when Pitto is rucking, we need to experiment with other ways to utilise TDK, e.g. as a tall defender (even Casboult developed into a better than average defender at one stage) or perhaps as a 'Richo-style' wingman.

For this round the Pitto scenario is just about the only decision that needs to be made, even Fantasia probably did enough last game to be safe.

For this round the Pitto scenario is just about the only decision that needs to be made, even Fantasia probably did enough last game to be safe.

Not sure about that LP. To my eyes, Fantasia was fumbly when he went for the ball with some heat on him. He is not quick anymore and can't kick over a jam tin.
I'd rather any other young developing  player.

Fantasia is out following an injury in the Port game
.

https://www.carltonfc.com.au/news/1572345?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR0vfeG5Fj-4JxT4QM4up2_ujINIufkpKmHiE6ngtP0MW2cIKka-4GTMCis_aem_ARFv-1Zy8l-zHPXa07_Mh1eweEA0-tlSA6OAKnui3EbmcPFgyPJ0hyXYEwU-2DdQE_wmSjJ8eFNMg27m5KaEb9RQ

Fantasia is out following an injury in the Port game

https://www.carltonfc.com.au/news/1572345?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR0vfeG5Fj-4JxT4QM4up2_ujINIufkpKmHiE6ngtP0MW2cIKka-4GTMCis_aem_ARFv-1Zy8l-zHPXa07_Mh1eweEA0-tlSA6OAKnui3EbmcPFgyPJ0hyXYEwU-2DdQE_wmSjJ8eFNMg27m5KaEb9RQ

Just the one ruckman. :D

Good inclusions

Is Pittonet still injured, or was he declared fit and omitted ? The former seems more likely ?

He was a test but could have passed and been overlooked.

I suspect that he would have been named on the bench if fit.

Not if you're going on their form in the VFL.  They were all poor to average and don't deserve a senior game if the way they played in the VFL is important.

I had this thought as well. I hope the MC knows what they're doing.

2 goals Motlop lock it in

Hold you to that Tex!  ;)

I assume Carroll will play and Durdin sub.

I assume Carroll will play and Durdin sub.

We aren't stupid @kruddler, we can see you've cherry-picked the Sydney game data which was TDK's worst by 300% minimum and Fantasia's 2nd best for the season, it was also the worst result for a bunch of our other players this season.

When you lower yourself to these tactics to try and make a point you diminish your argument rather than assist it.

I 'cherry picked' the last game we played 2 rucks.
You are only as good as your last game.
If Pitto hadn't got injured, i would've had another game to pick from.

Anyhow, rather than stare at the information presented to you, and do some self reflection and reevaluating of your way of thinking, you choose to attack me and my posting.

Now you've got that out of the way, you actually going to entertain the issue at hand?

Do it again with the Geelong game

TDK plays best as #1 ruck.
Yes, he has played some good games (this year) as backup ruck, but they are the exception, not the rule.

If I were Voss, Id be using Motlop as the sub.  Whilst he couldnt get near it last week, hes at least got the excuse of not being available for the year, and has generally only flashed into games in bursts anyway.

Durdin probably did enough to get the sub role ahead of him, but only Carroll has shown enough to go into the starting lineup at this point.

I didn't realise Ben is 2cm taller than Harry. I always thought Harry was the taller one.

I didn't realise Ben is 2cm taller than Harry. I always thought Harry was the taller one.

Harry’s official height has dropped from 203cm to 200cm over the last couple of seasons 🙄

Watch the interview with Ben and Harry again; Harry has 4-5cm on Ben.

Harry’s official height has dropped from 203cm to 200cm over the last couple of seasons 🙄

Watch the interview with Ben and Harry again; Harry has 4-5cm on Ben.

Harry’s official height has dropped from 203cm to 200cm over the last couple of seasons 🙄

Watch the interview with Ben and Harry again; Harry has 4-5cm on Ben.

Jees the inclusions are underwhelming on last weeks 2nds game.  Binns was far and away the best of them and it was his worst game for the year, Durds was busy-ish but not impactful and Marchy and Mots stank it up.  On the strength of last week I couldn't contemplate rewarding any of them other than Binns, and that's more on body of work than that performance.

Just looking at Essendon's tall forwards suggests to me that Marchy might be a chance, but I can't see Boyd missing out.

We have been going with eight defenders but one of them is Cincotta in his midfield role and that won't change.

Binns for Fantasia would be close to like for like.  That would probably see Carroll as the sub again and reward him for his performance in the Magoos.  If Carroll is in the 22, I suspect that Motlop will get the sub role over Binns.

Durdin for Fantasia... no surprises there.

Didn't think he'd survive. He can't handle the pressure and pace of the game anymore. Experiment over, time to move on.

Durdin for Fantasia... no surprises there.

Durdin must have excelled at training. His VFL form has been poor … but he’s not Robinson Crusoe there 🙁

I would have played Binns ahead of Durdin.  He wasn’t brilliant against the Bullants but he has been in decent form.

I hope Hewett isn’t the sub 🙏

Durdin must have excelled at training. His VFL form has been poor … but he’s not Robinson Crusoe there 🙁

I would have played Binns ahead of Durdin.  He wasn’t brilliant against the Bullants but he has been in decent form.

I hope Hewett isn’t the sub 🙏

Although his performance last week was meh, for a small forward his stats were ok.  3 tackles, 15 disposals.  Giving the ball lived at the other end of the ground for long periods its passable but I'd really like to see banging the door down.

Durdin is a more like for like with Fantasia, and maybe Binns is too much of an experiment in a big game.

I assumed Carroll would be playing and Durdin sub?

I think similarly, Carroll in and someone else Sub, but I'm not sure it's clear if it will be Durdin, could we have a late change?

I suppose we will know at 2pm!

More like 7pm

They will always have a couple of emergencies who won't play today in the event of injuries in the warm up.

I assumed Carroll would be playing and Durdin sub?

Outright second place on offer.
And the draw opens up in the back half.

SALIVATING

Blues by 5 points tonight...

Blues by 5 points tonight...