Tippett!!

[Swansongster]

Which will come first? 300 games for ROK or 300 pages for the Tippett thread?

I'm putting my money on the Tippett thread.

[caj23]

While many supporters see few problems with this, the evidance suggests that the Swans don't intend to play Tippett together with a second "resting" ruckman, they intend him to be the second "resting" ruckman.

I haven't seen any evidence which suggests this is the case

From my own personal POV I think he is best utilised as a full time forward as that is where he is most dangerous, I don't think he ever had big stints in the ruck at the Cows.

I think we can fit the 2 ruckman in with Tippet and Reid as the 2 KPFs and Goodes can run through the midfield

In anycase I'm sure the MC is on to it

[Ludwig]

If Tippett were ready to come in this week, I would suspect that it would be Everett that goes out. This is a similar structure to last year when we played the 2 rucks, but LRT was part of the forward mix. If we look at it from a 2012 base structural perspective, Tippett comes in and LRT goes into defence replacing AJ. So I think caj23 is probably right about this. Maybe the structural test will be if Everett can hold his spot in the senior team untill Tippett's ready.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

What evidence would that be?

I haven't seen any evidence which suggests this is the case

From Post #3479
"During an interview during last weeks game I actually heard Kurt claim himself to be a Ruckman who could play up forward. I thought that pretty rich, given his preference for uninterrupted forward play was claimed to be a reason for his disgruntlement with Adelaide."
Also
Cookies must be enabled | Herald Sun

[Go Swannies]

While many supporters see few problems with this, the evidance suggests that the Swans don't intend to play Tippett together with a second "resting" ruckman, they intend him to be the second "resting" ruckman.

So you reckon we'll play our first ruckman and drop Mummy? Interesting.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

So you reckon we'll play our first ruckman and drop Mummy? Interesting.

I didn't realise Pyke had gone past Mummy.

[Go Swannies]

I didn't realise Pyke had gone past Mummy.

That would appear to be the case over the past three games. It would be hard to see either being dropped in R13. So maybe Sam goes? Interesting dilemma - or do we just play perpetually tall?

[alt_mattr]

Play tall! Why not? From my point of view the normal trade off with tall players is that what you lose in pace, tackling and in the "maul" you gain in marking contests. I don't think we lose any pace with Pyke and Tippet and I don't think we lose much at ground level with LRT or Mummy. Plus LRT, Mummy and Pyke are tackling machines. I think the fact that we have such capable talls will mean we can play more of them than you might normally expect.

Also, the new "contact below the knees" rule might make tall players who keep their feet in the contest quite useful. Anyone at ground level chasing the ball will be bumping into those tall shins all the time

Finally, the big men get taller as the game goes on an other players tire. The last 15 minutes of most games is an exercise in attrition since the interchange rule changes and a bunch of tall blokes scattered about the field who can lift their arms higher than anyone else can leap late in a tough game will be worth a lot on the score board. Again, we have the fit falls to play this role.

I am sure you have all picked up by now that I love watching the big men fly so perhaps this is wishful thinking on my part but I see no problems with LRT, Pyke, Mummy, Reid, Goodes and Tippet in the same side and reckon you could even fit one more if he was playing well enough (Dre).

[ugg]

That would appear to be the case over the past three games. It would be hard to see either being dropped in R13. So maybe Sam goes? Interesting dilemma - or do we just play perpetually tall?

We played Reid, LRT, Mumford, Pyke, Goodes all in the one forward line last year. LRT has gone back to defence to fill in AJ's spot so there is no reason why Tippett can't take LRT's spot in the forward line.

[Ludwig]

We played Reid, LRT, Mumford, Pyke, Goodes all in the one forward line last year. LRT has gone back to defence to fill in AJ's spot so there is no reason why Tippett can't take LRT's spot in the forward line.

It would seem that it's Everitt's spot (who effectively took LRT's spot in the forward line) that is up for grabs when Tippett is available. It may turn out to be pick 4 out of 5 from Mummy, Pyke, Tippett, Sam and Dre. I assume that Goodes stays under all circumstances.

[caj23]

From Post #3479
"During an interview during last weeks game I actually heard Kurt claim himself to be a Ruckman who could play up forward. I thought that pretty rich, given his preference for uninterrupted forward play was claimed to be a reason for his disgruntlement with Adelaide."
Also
Cookies must be enabled | Herald Sun

I heard that interview Ruck, he said he was a forward who could play as a 2nd ruckman, I admit that my ears did actually @@@@@ up when I heard that.

Still can't see Pyke/Mummy combo being broken up for Tippet as I'm not sure that his ruckwork is that good and IMO we need him as a full time option in the forward line

[jono2707]

My impression was that we didn't fork out all that cash for a part-time ruckman but rather a full-time full forward a-la Bazza and Plugger......