Mark Seaby

[Beerman]

yes, pick your best 22 on that criteria alone, bugger unfair.

Ask Seaby if he wants to be in the side because it's unfair or on sentiment.

I think he'd rather be in the side, actually, whatever the reason

[Matimbo]

If the interchange rule was back to the old setup ( i.e. no stupid red vest), would Seaby be in our best 22? I think yes. We know this rule change has pretty much excluded the 2nd ruckman in most sides.

[Hartijon]

I think he'd rather be in the side, actually, whatever the reason

He is our Stuart McGill.No one has mentioned the effect of him being there on Mummy who cannot afford to play badly.His prescence and ability to come in and perform keeps Mummy honest.I also think its crazy to overwork Mummy. Seaby will get plenty of chances if we keep overworking Mummy.I also think its a myth that the top sides play only one ruckman.

[GongSwan]

If the interchange rule was back to the old setup ( i.e. no stupid red vest), would Seaby be in our best 22? I think yes. We know this rule change has pretty much excluded the 2nd ruckman in most sides.

I've said it before, the sub rule has destroyed Seaby's career, he would def be playing every week under the old i/c rules, and Mummy would be better off at the end of the year, many a ruckman will have shorter careers under this rule

[Kirkari]

Looks like he's going to Tassie this weekend. Tough for him to have to play "back-up" ruckman role, but great for the Swans to have him.

[Captain]

Seaby gives us depth that most teams would be massively jealous of. So much better then some of the hacks we have had in the past when the number 1 and 2 ruckman were injured.

[Dirtyburt]

I've said it before, the sub rule has destroyed Seaby's career, he would def be playing every week under the old i/c rules, and Mummy would be better off at the end of the year, many a ruckman will have shorter careers under this rule

Disagree, there is just a change in the way ruck man play. We are lucky to have a big tap ruckman with a great tank and good second/third effort ability. The role is changing, the new ruck is blokes like big nicnat, Ryder, roughie etc etc.

The big ruckman using their body days are gone.

[goswannie14]

Disagree, there is just a change in the way ruck man play. We are lucky to have a big tap ruckman with a great tank and good second/third effort ability. The role is changing, the new ruck is blokes like big nicnat, Ryder, roughie etc etc.

The big ruckman using their body days are gone.

That's what they said on 1977 when Teasdale won the Brownlow, then the big fellas came back into fashion again.

[Dirtyburt]

That's what they said on 1977 when Teasdale won the Brownlow, then the big fellas came back into fashion again.

Ahhh but the rules were different then. I am hankering for those days, but unless they change the rules again, they are gone

The game is too quick

[Ruck'n'Roll]

Is it just my imagination, or is everyone that knows the second ruckman is dead under 6ft3?

[The_Jam]

I know this is a little old, but it supports the idea that big-bodied ruckmen are valuable still:

News

For those that did not click through, the point was that while we tend to look at overall Hit-outs to assess ruckmen, when we go deeper and start assessing Hit-outs to advantage (to a player) or effective Hit-outs (Hit-outs that lead to first disposal for own team) the big bodied ruckmen are on top.

[wolftone57]

He is our Stuart McGill.No one has mentioned the effect of him being there on Mummy who cannot afford to play badly.His prescence and ability to come in and perform keeps Mummy honest.I also think its crazy to overwork Mummy. Seaby will get plenty of chances if we keep overworking Mummy.I also think its a myth that the top sides play only one ruckman.

Geelong, Collingwood, Hawthorn would if Bailey was fit, Eagles and now North. It is definitely a myth!