Carlton Supporters Club

So.....anyone still think we need 2 rucks in the team? Anyone??

Didn't think so.

Silly statement, the Handbaggers had no rucks at all so tonight is not a measure of ruck tactics.

It's still horses for courses, it will always be horses for courses.

Well there's something you don't see everyday. :D

Chris Scott basically in 'awe' of Carlton at the presser. ;)

So.....anyone still think we need 2 rucks in the team? Anyone??

Didn't think so.

I believe that we should be asking the AFL to cancel Jeremy Cameron’s play on after the siren goal.  It was a blatant umpiring error and there was no subsequent play so cancelling it is the right thing to do.

Apart from Fantasia who should never grace the seniors again, it was a terrific all-round team effort.

We won games without a ruck last year.
What's their excuse?

So.....anyone still think we need 2 rucks in the team? Anyone??

Didn't think so.

You bloody beauty! Not sure what I enjoyed more - absolutely smashing the AFL’s love child or hearing the crestfallen tone in the Ch 7 commentators voices.

Did you know Carlton have scored more goals from free kicks than any other side?
MORE GOALS FROM FREE KICKS THAN ANY OTHER SIDE!

I believe that we should be asking the AFL to cancel Jeremy Cameron’s play on after the siren goal.  It was a blatant umpiring error and there was no subsequent play so cancelling it is the right thing to do.

I thought it was his best performance for the season.  Low bar, I know, but it was an improved performance.

I saw it but I didn't believe it.
He has an agenda whenever he opens his mouth.
Just trying to work out what it is!

That was remarkably poor and needs investigation and sanction. That goal should not stand.

I saw it but I didn't believe it.
He has an agenda whenever he opens his mouth.
Just trying to work out what it is!

They were OK in patches, they were just overwhelmed by a 'machine'.
And I'm not sure Scott, and a whole lot of other coaches, slept too well last night.

Seems to have been lost on a few commentators, but I thought Walsh tapping the orange on his shoulders after the goal was a 'nod' to the "Respects" jumper.

Seems to have been lost on a few commentators, but I thought Walsh tapping the orange on his shoulders after the goal was a 'nod' to the "Respects" jumper.

Seems to have been lost on a few commentators, but I thought Walsh tapping the orange on his shoulders after the goal was a 'nod' to the "Respects" jumper.

Seems to have been lost on a few commentators, but I thought Walsh tapping the orange on his shoulders after the goal was a 'nod' to the "Respects" jumper.

So who loses their place to Cerra, Cotters, Martin and Motlop?

Twelve individual goal kickers, four of whom kicked multiple goals including Charlie’s handful.  That’s a damn good effort particularly against a team that beat us earlier in the season.

We’re going OK when the midfielders, defenders and ruck are kicking goals.

Oh, has anyone mentioned that we won by ten goals? 😇

Chris Scott really didn’t have an alternative to acknowledging how well we played but I think that he may have been just a little stunned when he fronted his presser.

I believe that we should be asking the AFL to cancel Jeremy Cameron’s play on after the siren goal.  It was a blatant umpiring error and there was no subsequent play so cancelling it is the right thing to do.

The Owies tackle on Tuohy, just superb

Actually, Krud, we have a real problem with our 2nd ruck. Rucking Cripps and Kennedy is not sustainable against a decent team. They try hard, they're strong and they can come up with a few moments of magic, but it is a real weakness in our game.

What the solution may be, I don't know yet. I like Pittonet and what he brings to the team, but Tom de Koning has really pulled up his socks with the #1 role.
That said, Tom isn't a great ruckman. He won tonight because Geelong were stupid enough not to play a real ruckman against him. They paid and paid and paid for that stupidity. How they didn't play Conway, I don't know. Conway would have evened up the midfield with his strength and taps, even though Tom would slaughter him around the ground.
But, no, they had to try SdK and Blicavs. Blicavs wasn't disgraced in the ruck, but it meant he could do roles he would be better armed to do. It was idiocy, and I'm glad they paid they full price.
But that doesn't excuse us to thinking of doing the same thing.

If Harry Lemmey had come on a bit, I would have liked to tried him in the role. However, he isn't close to it at the moment.

What is the answer? Maybe we will need to play Pitto as well as Tom. Tom has already shown that his ruck work is his least strong area, for all his athleticism. Start Pitto and sub his off late, having a fitter Tom to finish off?
Maybe. But it is a conundrum we need to address. Especially before we play Collingwood or Sydney.

How about he was giving credit where credit was due.

How about he was giving credit where credit was due.

Nah, Laura Kane will come and tell us that the natural arc of run up plus the angle of the dangle minus pi squared divided by the price of fish in China clearly demonstrates the umpire got it 110% correct.

Which would mean, given the umpire called play on the quarter ended and the goal did not stand.  The only way that goal should stand is in fact if you say the umpire was wrong - which he wasn't.  Percentage could be crucial come end of year - I genuinely believe the club should challenge it.

Crash, how is it a weakness in our game?
How often does the #2 ruck turn a game on its head or provide the difference? They simply don't.

The only thing that worries me with solo rucking TDK - or Pitto or any other ruck is what happens if they go down early.  I have always believed you need a second ruck you can live with rucking for the bulk of the game if your number 1 goes down - don't need them to win but just not be a liabilty.  And then someone to give them a bit of a chop-out.  If that person gets beaten but it's only for brief spells then so be it.  And hopefully they make a contest in the ruck and/or add value at ground level whist they ae relieving in the ruck.  The problem is Pitto is only any good in the ruck.  Cant rest him anywhere but bench.  Most teams who run 2 rucks only have 1 big forward and rest the rucks forward.  When we run Pitto in the ruck and TDK forward with Charlie and Harry we become top-heavy even given they are all mobile and athletic.  I would not have thought this but the evidence seems clear,  Perhaps faster and more defensively minded small forwards than what we had in earlier this year might help this.  Suppose we rotated Williams, Cincotta, Fogarty and Cottrell as small forwards - there would be plenty of speed and defensive pressure there and they have shown the ability to hit the scoreboard more than I would have expected.  Might TDK  and the 2 KPF work then?  I'd like to trial it before finals time.  The worry of going 1 ruck into a grannie is multiplied - a ruthless opponent might just "awkwardly" cannon into TDK very early on and leave rucking say Harry for 80-90% game time with chop-out from Crippa/Kennedy - and against a top flight ruckman that would be a huge worry.  Of course if Hudson O'Keeffe or Harry Lemmey were to come on maybe they could factor into the equation, but whilst I like both (and Liam McMahon from our VFL list for that matter) they are fair way off AFL ready and in the case of O'Keeffe long term injured.

The benefit of a 2nd ruck is to give the 1st ruck a chop out because it is ASSUMED that when the 1st ruck is resting, that a mid/KPF rucking hurts our game to the extent that we will sacrifice another player on the ground to make that time less damaging.
That time is 20-25% of the game. Max.

Lets look at last night.
Harry+Cripps+Kennedy+Weitering combined for a total of 34 ruck contests. They combined for 9 hitouts (2 to advantage).
Blicavs was geelong '2nd ruck'. He attended 43 ruck contests and managed 12 hitouts (2 to advantage).

Our 'backup rucks' are competing against opposition 'backup rucks' and holding their own in that very specific area of hitouts.
I don't think i need to point out that our clearances certainly do not decrease when we play a backup ruck as half the time they are the first to the ball because they know exactly where it is going first.....or they tap to themselves.

Don't want to use last nights game?
Try last weeks.
Harry+Cripps+Kennedy = 30 contests - 4 hitouts - 2 to advantage
vs
2m Peter as 'backup ruck' = 27 contests - 13 hitouts - 2 to advantage.

So our hack mids drew even with 2m Peter in the ruck.

Question: So why are we suffering with our mixed bag of backup rucks?
Answer: We are not.

We MIGHT be able to increase our ruck dominance by adding a second ruck, but that would decrease our effectiveness in another area of the game as we dop someone to make way for them. What will we actually gain?

Now, as you all know, i've certainly got nothing against Pittonet....and he was in terrific form this year including his last game before injury, BUT we simply do not need 2 rucks.
I don't care if its Pitto.
I don't care if its TDK.
Choose 1, and stick to it. Its working.

The reason we have played 2 rucks to this point in time (IMO) is to try and jumpstart TDK so he can reach the point he has now. We all knew he had it in him, we just needed to see it. He's producing it, there is no need to babysit him anymore.
Let him ruck.

Well there's something you don't see everyday. :D

Chris Scott basically in 'awe' of Carlton at the presser. ;)

Crash, how is it a weakness in our game?
How often does the #2 ruck turn a game on its head or provide the difference? They simply don't.

The benefit of a 2nd ruck is to give the 1st ruck a chop out because it is ASSUMED that when the 1st ruck is resting, that a mid/KPF rucking hurts our game to the extent that we will sacrifice another player on the ground to make that time less damaging.
That time is 20-25% of the game. Max.

Lets look at last night.
Harry+Cripps+Kennedy+Weitering combined for a total of 34 ruck contests. They combined for 9 hitouts (2 to advantage).
Blicavs was geelong '2nd ruck'. He attended 43 ruck contests and managed 12 hitouts (2 to advantage).

Our 'backup rucks' are competing against opposition 'backup rucks' and holding their own in that very specific area of hitouts.
I don't think i need to point out that our clearances certainly do not decrease when we play a backup ruck as half the time they are the first to the ball because they know exactly where it is going first.....or they tap to themselves.

Don't want to use last nights game?
Try last weeks.
Harry+Cripps+Kennedy = 30 contests - 4 hitouts - 2 to advantage
vs
2m Peter as 'backup ruck' = 27 contests - 13 hitouts - 2 to advantage.

So our hack mids drew even with 2m Peter in the ruck.

Question: So why are we suffering with our mixed bag of backup rucks?
Answer: We are not.

We MIGHT be able to increase our ruck dominance by adding a second ruck, but that would decrease our effectiveness in another area of the game as we dop someone to make way for them. What will we actually gain?

Now, as you all know, i've certainly got nothing against Pittonet....and he was in terrific form this year including his last game before injury, BUT we simply do not need 2 rucks.
I don't care if its Pitto.
I don't care if its TDK.
Choose 1, and stick to it. Its working.

The reason we have played 2 rucks to this point in time (IMO) is to try and jumpstart TDK so he can reach the point he has now. We all knew he had it in him, we just needed to see it. He's producing it, there is no need to babysit him anymore.
Let him ruck.

Machine is a great word to describe how the team went about it last night. A machine is made of parts and those parts perform a function. All the part performed well and none of the parts broke off last night. The main part, the engine, just purred along and didn't miss a beat, tuned to perfection. And when the other machine tried to launch an overtake, the machine operator  shifted the gearbox into 4th gear and away the machine went over the finish line. After the game my mate and I both thought that despite the 10 goal win against a quality side, we had  another couple of gears left over so the machine analogy is quite apt this morning.

Apparently the 2 De Koning boys were the 2 highest rated players on the ground. Tom at 35.5 (highest rating for any player this season) and Sam at 26 points. I assume this is the Champion Data rating system.

It's the second story on this page.

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/teams/carlton-blues/afl-news-2024-carlton-blues-win-over-geelong-cats-sit-second-on-premiership-power-rankings-behind-sydney-swans/news-story/75997f181e5d50293ef979fc7a56c7ed

FMD the AFL sometimes makes things more difficult than they need to be.

I mean, they claim they review every goal. So why didn’t we hear that voice from the box say, “Looking at this angle, we can see that the player deviated from his line and so played on after the siren. Result is on the scoreboard.”

Watching in real-time I thought McGovern played it well by planting his feet, not moving, but pointing and calling attention to the umpire.

Upon reflection, however, maybe he would have been better to sprint off his line as soon as Cameron deviated? Obviously that would have risked a 50 metre penalty but might, just might have conned the umpire?

Unfortunately, field umpire errors are outside the scope of the score review system.

If fans took anything from last nights result and ruck contests, it's surely the risk of going in with just one ruck or no ruck, because lose them early and you end up in the same situation as the Handbaggers last night! :o

Claiming last night's TDK result as a case for solo ruck is at best a stretch.

Heeding the warning of the potentially devastating result of not having a ruck is unequivocal.

You might sneak a result in the season but in finals, well good luck with that. Can you imagine losing Cripps tot he stoppage contest in finals games because he is forced to ruck? Can you imagine losing BigH from the F50 in a final because he's on ruck duty?

The umpire called "Play On"!!!, that should be the end of it. Play on after the siren it is game over!!!

I saw it but I didn't believe it.
He has an agenda whenever he opens his mouth.
Just trying to work out what it is!

"We weren't so bad tonight, it's just that Carlton were so good....'

With Cerra, Martin, Motlop, Carroll, Marchbank, Pittonett, Cuningham, Cottrell and Young to a lesser extent waiting in the wings, the Match Committee are going to have some big decisions to make. I would think that Cerra, Martin, Marchbank, Motlop and Cottrell would normally be automatic ins but I don't see where they fit in without destabilising the balance of the team. It is a bit like the one ruck two ruck debate. There are a lot of right answers to choose from. We need to make sure we choose the best right answer.

Have to agree there. I think Charlie has not hit his best as yet as he was last year. Definitely think he can improve. Has missed some easy set shots and also some marks as well, although under immense pressure at times.

And the number of times he was held and no free kicks paid to him is infuriating.

Watch out if both Harry and Charlie have a blinder on the same day.

MEMO TO SAM WALSH : stop slamming your head into the turf when tackled trying to milk a free kick, it worked against Dangerfield but the others made you look silly, you are better than that.

MEMO TO SAM WALSH : stop slamming your head into the turf when tackled trying to milk a free kick, it worked against Dangerfield but the others made you look silly, you are better than that.


Speaking with Raydan about how much I have enjoyed Cowan's rise to prominence and he made an interesting observation. The reason why Zac Williams was trialled up forward was as a direct result of how settled & reliable Cowan has been at half-back, they couldn't keep playing Williams there either. This move forced Zac into becoming a better player in a position none of us had considered he was even suited for, a huge win-win for everyone.

Charlie Curnow is "coasting" at the moment, he's content with having a little highlight reel moment where he bobs up and kicks a nice goal, the rest of the time he has his hands on his hips and is spectating., we all know he has no second efforets and refuses to chase. This is not good enough IMO, he has to learn that the players upfield are working their butts off to get the aggot up his end and he should have the decency to reward those efforts by applying himself harder and longer in a match, He'd kick 12 a week if he did. 

Contrast that to McKay who is running all over the ground, being part of the transition chain and is marking when & where needed, he is not as gifted as Curnow but gives his all 100% of the time because of it.

Can’t tell if this is serious or sarcasm.

So many Cookers on social media aligning Walsh’s with May’s last night. WTF? This is why BT has to go.

Not only is he a substandard commentator, his stupid biased comments are dangerous.

He’s the Donald Trump of commentators - inciting hatred and sowing division by tossing out stupid, unjustifiable and extreme comments which appeal to the deplorables.

Cerra - walk up start AGREE
Martin - banished forever ALMOST AGREE
Motlop - can he force Owies or Durdin out ?? NOT AT THE MOMENT
Carroll - what position should he play ?? HALF BACK WEST COAST
Marchbank - banished forever AGREE
Pittonett - only in an emergency ALMOST AGREE
Cuningham - traded out at season's end AGREE
Cottrell - there is a place for him AGREE, LIKE CERRA WE MISS HIM
Young - only in an emergency AGREE

Danger drilled Walsh's head into the turf, that is not being disputed. Go back and look at a couple of the other times Walsh was tackled and you will see what I am referring to.

Dangerfield has form for careless tackles and attacks on the ball and shouldnt be given the elite player get out of jail free card.

we played 4 q ( we kicked 1,6 in 3rd) but 80 tackles is huge for our team

Cant see Walsh milking a free by using his head as a tamping tool for the MCG surface.....its true other players like May have been trying to milk frees by giving the appearance their head has been driven into the turf but Walsh isnt one of them.

MEMO TO SAM WALSH : stop slamming your head into the turf when tackled trying to milk a free kick, it worked against Dangerfield but the others made you look silly, you are better than that.

Cerra - walk up start
Martin - banished forever
Motlop - can he force Owies or Durdin out ??
Carroll - what position should he play ??
Marchbank - banished forever
Pittonett - only in an emergency
Cuningham - traded out at season's end
Cottrell - there is a place for him
Young - only in an emergency

I wouldn't drop anybody for Martin, don't trust him. 

Apparently Martin has head up to qld to have the same calf treatment that saw him in good nick come finals time.

I like Martin, but this smacks of getting a bit desperate which might mean his body has simply broken down again. 

For mine, I dont care about the names, it's all about the team performance and for the first time I'm really comfortable with where the coaches can take us.

You must have missed Charlie’s mark deep in defence 🙄

Charlie and Harry have different roles.  Apart from his ruck role, Harry plays further up the ground.  Charlie’s role means that he rarely goes past the centre, unless he’s  needed in defence.

If Charlie is “coasting”, let’s have more of it I say!

I'd be curious to see the data on Charlie. To suggest he's coasting seems pretty rich. You can check out his awards and achievements on wikipedia. You don't get to that level if you're half arsed and in second gear. He's a jet, and we're lucky to have him. 17 other clubs would crawl over cut glass and offer him a king's ransom if they could.

Absolutely!

He has arguably one of the hardest jobs in footy and he’s maintained the same output since his return from what many thought were career ending injuries and despite increased opposition attention.

Enjoy his ability, athleticism, opportunism and passion and ignore the bullsh1t about him cruising, not chasing, not tackling and/or being selfish. 

He’s in the leadership group for good reason, and it’s not about memberships.

He certainly plays the game as a fwd differently to almost everyone else. I have said that he is lazy but I don't think that's true, he is just extremely smart and opportunistic. The instant he realises he is no chance to mark it for example, he is thinking of the next contest and how he can impact it. He is as good off the ground as he is in the air, his ground level work was on show the other night. He is indeed a very special footballer.

That sums him up perfectly G2C.

The goal that he kicked when he gathered a loose ball in traffic on the 50m arc was outstanding … but more or less routine for Charlie.

How exactly does one slam their own head into the turf?

If that was the case, Geelong would be employing a biomechanics expert to get Dangerfield off his suspension.

Watch it again, Walsh’s arms are pinned and he has no control as centripetal force propels his head in an accelerating arc into the turf.

As for the Williams-Cowan scenario, Cowan’s form in the Magoos would have played a part.  However, his opportunity arose because Williams put his hand up to play as a defensive forward and his logical replacement in defence, Cincotta, was given the tagging role.  It’s actually a win-win-win.

Cerra - walk up start. Agreed.
Martin - banished forever. Has X factor but too injury prone. So I think that instead of bringing him in straight away, play him in the VFL for a couple of weeks and then bring him back into the team via the sub.
Motlop - can he force Owies or Durdin out ??. Durdin to go out. Owies bleeds blue blood like SOS. His is consistent and hits the scoreboard consistently. Number 3 behind Charlie and Harry for goals.
Carroll - what position should he play ?? Needs more time maybe? Cannot break into the team on a consistent basis.
Marchbank - banished forever. Injury prone as well, but maybe highly regarded by the MC as he has come straight into the team at times.
Pittonett - only in an emergency. I am torn about this one. Horses for courses I suppose. TDK will need a rest at some stage before finals. He is still a young man  in rucking terms and we will need him at his best to ensure we go deep into the finals and play in the last Saturday in September.
Cuningham - traded out at season's end. Agreed. Talented but too inconsistent as per Martin.
Cottrell - there is a place for him. Agreed.
Young - only in an emergency. I had high hopes for him, but after seeing him yesterday in the VFL, I shake my head and think where is this guy going with his football.

Dangerflog is involved in so many "accidents", we should remain him Mr Damage!

That sums him up perfectly G2C.

The goal that he kicked when he gathered a loose ball in traffic on the 50m arc was outstanding … but more or less routine for Charlie.

There wasnt enough made of that.  They should have shown that replay from 5 different angles.   It looked like he bounced it up to himself, while under pressure from 2 blokes,  then jetted away and threw it on the left, from 45 out......  should be up there for goal of the year

Walsh's shoulder/body hits Dangers leg accentuating his head hitting the ground. I think he might get off. Pay the free and move on.

Did the umpire call play on though?

The umpire raised both hands, absolutely.
The umpire raises both hands to signify the end of the quarter though.

If the umpire calls plays on, they lift both arms up in front of them in a similar fashion, but it a more sweeping action.

The 'signal' from the umps is being misinterpreted IMO.

BT says, "umpire has called play on, goal has been kicked, what's the decision".

lol.....BT says lots of things. Whether they are true or not is like throwing a dart at the dartboard.

I've watched it, multiple times. I listened to BT call it live, and back over it afterwards.
I have no faith in him understanding the nuances of what i've described, and even if he does, he won't admit fault.

So, besides BT, is anyone able to show that the umpire called 'play on' because honestly, i don't think he did.

Come Brownlow night that will probably be how it turns out.
 .

I reckon BT saw the umpire's arms raised for end of quarter and misinterpreted the situation.  I didn't think Cameron ran too far off the line anyway.

Absolutely.

BT thought he saw something, didn't realise it was something else and ran with it.
As mentioned, i haven't heard anyone else say the umpire called play on, just BT.

As for Cameron running too far offline....thats debateable. TBH, i don't care one way or another. I'd prefer it to happen in a game we win by 10 goals than in a close one.

Watching the game, my wife steap in the room to watch some of the footy with me, bang the Cowman kicks a goal. Wife "why are they booing him" Me "no babe thats not a boo thats a Mooooooooooooo" AND did you know Carlton kick the most goals from free kicks. Is that because A) Other teams cannot kick straight or B) I am now convinced when BRIAN commentates he and the rest cannot say one good thing about us when we are winning, plenty when we are losing
Go BAGGERS

He looked pretty straight running to me too.

Not sure what all the fuss is about.  Mcgoverb turns to his left as well to accentuate it a little.

Watching On the couch and 360 just now.
I cannot believe the garbage Robbo and Dunstall are coming out with to defend Dflogs tackle on Walsh.
Do they not realise that you don’t need to bring a player to the ground to effect a tackle anymore ?
Dflog, by kicking his legs out in front of himself abandoned his duty of care to Walsh because he removed his own ability to control the tackle !
He pinned Walshes arms, so he couldn’t legally dispose of the ball, all he needed to do was hang on and he would have been rewarded for his tackle.

Dflog, by kicking his legs out in front of himself abandoned his duty of care to Walsh because he removed his own ability to control the tackle !
He pinned Walshes arms, so he couldn’t legally dispose of the ball, all he needed to do was hang on and he would have been rewarded for his tackle.

I hope he gets off. They play thr chess this week.

Watching On the couch and 360 just now.
I cannot believe the garbage Robbo and Dunstall are coming out with to defend Dflogs tackle on Walsh.
Do they not realise that you don’t need to bring a player to the ground to effect a tackle anymore ?
Dflog, by kicking his legs out in front of himself abandoned his duty of care to Walsh because he removed his own ability to control the tackle !
He pinned Walshes arms, so he couldn’t legally dispose of the ball, all he needed to do was hang on and he would have been rewarded for his tackle.

So.....anyone still think we need 2 rucks in the team? Anyone??

Didn't think so.

As good as the ruck looked tonight against near zero opposition, for me the story of the night was the difference in pressure our SFs delivered, even Fantasia was passable, and it was clearly the major difference between Rnd 7 and tonight. They never got an easy exit from our F50, and they got the fumbles from being constantly under pressure.

The Owies tackle on Tuohy, just superb, Owies best game for the club by some margin!

I posed the question in the pre-game thread, could we play Cincotta as a tagger on Stewart, Tuohy or Guthrie? Yes we can!

Fancy thinking that if a team made Stewart accountable it could pay off! :o

Was tonight our 1st genuine 4-Qtr effort for the season, even for a couple of brief periods when we lost momentum, we never stopped applying the pressure?

Charlie Curnow is "coasting" at the moment, he's content with having a little highlight reel moment where he bobs up and kicks a nice goal, the rest of the time he has his hands on his hips and is spectating., we all know he has no second efforets and refuses to chase. This is not good enough IMO, he has to learn that the players upfield are working their butts off to get the aggot up his end and he should have the decency to reward those efforts by applying himself harder and longer in a match, He'd kick 12 a week if he did. 

Contrast that to McKay who is running all over the ground, being part of the transition chain and is marking when & where needed, he is not as gifted as Curnow but gives his all 100% of the time because of it.

I don't think there is any question that we are a better balanced team with TDK rucking solo but I would hate to be relying on that team structure in a grand final or elimination final and have TDK injured without a suitable replacement. Having to move Harry into the ruck with Cripps and Kennedy as the backups might be catastrophic - especially against an opponent with strong ruck options.

Not suggesting a change to our navy blue jersey but I was surprised at how good the orange highlights looked on the match uniform this week - although the orange numbers were slightly more difficult to read than the white ones are.

Could not agree more.

One play that I thought deserved special mention was the intercept mark and goal by Cincotta. 

Generally agree RiverRat, although I did like the orange numbers myself.

Traditionalists will be against it

What are the chances of a ruck being injured on grand final day?
Remembering, they won't have a game the following week so will be jabbed up to the eyeballs if required to get through the game.
It would need to be a VERY significant injury.
Rucks don't get injured like they used to due the way the rules are now interpreted.

People keep saying we can't put Harry in the ruck because its too dangerous.
Harry is more likely to get injured playing his usual role as we see him get smashed each week in marking contests.
He might welcome the change in the ruck and it could give us an unexpected point of difference.

No, we are more likely to lose because we lack the run and pressure required because we've gone in too tall.
I'm happy to 'take my chances' on the solo ruck knowing we have Harry, Cripps, Kennedy to step up when/where required.

We lost the 1973 GF after Richmond knocked Southby and Nicholls out of the match.  I know that was during the bad old days but serious injuries do happen and concussions can also result in players being counted out.

So nothing from the past 50 years then? ;)

Times have changed and those days (good or bad) are long gone.

What are the chances of a ruck being injured on grand final day?
Remembering, they won't have a game the following week so will be jabbed up to the eyeballs if required to get through the game.
It would need to be a VERY significant injury.
Rucks don't get injured like they used to due the way the rules are now interpreted.

People keep saying we can't put Harry in the ruck because its too dangerous.
Harry is more likely to get injured playing his usual role as we see him get smashed each week in marking contests.
He might welcome the change in the ruck and it could give us an unexpected point of difference.

No, we are more likely to lose because we lack the run and pressure required because we've gone in too tall.
I'm happy to 'take my chances' on the solo ruck knowing we have Harry, Cripps, Kennedy to step up when/where required.

Imagine if our A Grader had been knocked out in the first 30 secs of such an important game!! Danger should be thankful it's only a week and not a total slur on his reputation if the consequences had been worse!!

I'd consider playing a tandem this week and rucking pittonet vs nankervis.  Might be a week to freshen up someone who's a bit sore.

Id be expecting Richmond to go the knuckle this week led by Nankervis being overly unco and crashing into our players or catching them with swinging arms etc ..