Originally Posted by
Ludwig
I've regained my composure now and can provide some additional analysis to Scottee's original post.
Our match committee seemed to have recommitted to the failed 2 ruckman policy, or at least giving the forward �dream� trio of Buddy, Tippo and Reid another life. Although Naismith is our best pure ruckman, he hasn�t been anything special this year. He holds up well in the ruck contests, but doesn�t add much around the ground and hasn�t kicked a goal in his 13 games this year.
Tippett offers the best general option of having an adequate ruckman who can go forward and kick a goal. This type of ruckman (Ryder, McEvoy, Kreuzer, Gawn) seems the way to go in 2017. I don�t think Tippett offers enough to play mainly as a key forward, especially with a plethora of other targets, like Buddy, Reid and Rohan. How much more value is added by having Tippett in our forward line? Or is he just clogging up space for others to lead into. As a ruckman drifting forward, he has good value.
An article on the Swans website is talking up the 2 ruckman policy as a benefit in case the primary ruckman gets injured during the game. Making a selection in the expectation of a player injury is laughable. Why not play and extra tall defender in case one of our defenders gets injured? It seems to be playing to our weaknesses rather than our strengths. We are weak in the ruck, so let�s play 2 of them, as if 2 Jesse Whites make 1 Buddy Franklin.
It seems that little was learned from the Adelaide game. We had to limit ourselves to playing one ruckman in the 4th quarter because it was evident that we couldn�t afford to carry both on the ground at the same time. That extra ruckman was taking the place of a much needed key defender. Tom Lynch ran amok, got 24 possession, 7 marks and kicked a goal, which Mitch McGovern was too good for Melican and kicked 4 goals. But we could do nothing about this, because we had no options. Rampe and Grundy were already tied up covering Walker and Jenkins. Adelaide, on the other hand, were able to switch Keith off Franklin after he kicked 2 goals on him, because they had Talia, Lever and Jake Kelly to fall back on. Talia held Buddy to his one miracle goal for the rest of the game.
If we go deep into finals we are likely to come up against both Adelaide and GWS, both teams with tall forward lines. We have repeatedly been caught out in these mismatches, our only solution is to limit the effectiveness of our forward line in the last 3 minutes of quarters by playing Reid in defence.
If we want to play both Naismith and Tippett, we have to resign ourselves to moving Reid into defence. He will effectively be a wingman playing against the likes of Tom Lynch and Rory Lobb. It�s not the worst option, but I believe we would get more value playing one ruckman, keeping Reid in the forward line and bringing Aliir in to bolster the defence and be that player that usually pairs up on the opposition tall wingman. It also gives us the option to have a plan B in case a problem arises where a designated defender is having a bad day with his matchup. He can also provide ruck relief and the option of switching with Reid if thinks aren�t going well; just to give the team a different look.
Dean Towers has improved this year, but he still falls over when the going gets tough. He is skillful and athletic, so he will makes some good plays in most games. But there were many times when we needed him to lay a tackle or at least help putting physical pressure in a contested situation where he let us down. Nic Newman is the kind of player we need for the finals and should replace Towers.
We all love Will Hayward and I don�t think there would be an issue if this were 2018, but he is simply not physically developed enough to handle finals football this year. Otherwise, he�s a great addition to the team. If Cunningham is fully fit and ready to resume where he left off before he got injured, he would be the logical replacement, but he hasn�t quite shown that level in the NEAFL so far, although he hasn�t been bad. I would lean slightly to giving Dawson a go, just to see if he can produce something close to his NEAFL form at AFL level. He probably would have been the NEAFL MVP this year had he played the same number of games as the winner. If it doesn�t work, Harry will have another reserves game next week and we can take it from there. Rose also deserves consideration, given his recent form.
Bookmarks