Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 37 to 48 of 60

Thread: Injuries - Naismith ACL

  1. #37
    Interesting photo from yesterday's training of Cameron and Amarty contesting a ball-up. Amarty is pretty solidly built, particularly across the thighs and hips, and is looking strong across the shoulders in this photo. [URL="http://www.sydneyswans.com.au/news/2018-03-08/gallery-wednesdays-training-in-pictures"] Admittedly in the photo it also looks like his vertical leap is about 6 inches. Still, he's in there, and I reckon will get a run against GWS on Friday. He doesn't look to be giving away as much in height or bulk to Cameron as the published stats suggest: Cameron 204cm 100kg; Amarty 196cm 88kg.

    And I love the swam of mids waiting at the fall in that picture. Get used to that.

    I feel for Naismith, but must admit earlier in the year I had him at number 3 ruck option behind Tippett and Sinclair. I've also been sold on the idea of only taking in one dedicated ruck and playing Towers, Aliir and Parker as chop outs (Parker in particular in attacking 50). Any opinions on Pink? He's a rangy fellow, but I've not seen him in action.

    Some concern was raised above about stripping back line of height if Aliir goes to the middle, but I think that we have that covered (touch wood).

    Could the Swans and Eagles get together and lobby for a no-centre-bounce, no ball-up, no boundary throw season opener?

  2. #38
    Captain of the Side Captain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Northern Beaches
    Posts
    3,556
    Bad news about Naismith.

    Cameron isn't the answer.

    Sinclair to be main ruck with Aliir, Reid and/or Towers providing a chop out would be my solution.

  3. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by Ludwig View Post
    At present we do not have a good option that involves a big man beating another big man at stoppages, so we just do something else. We should play the stoppages defensively, trying for a loose ball situation. If we don't win the first loose ball situation, we should be setup in a position behind the ball to get a turnover from a forced kick from the opposition.

    We should also try to keep the ball in play, avoiding stoppages and taking advantage of having an extra mobile player in lieu of the opposition typically immobile ruckman. If you look at our recent drafts of players like Hayward, Florent, Ling and Stoddart, it is quite evident that we are quickly evolving in this direction. We are not the stoppage team that benefited from a powerful ruckman and players like Kirk, Bolton and ROK.
    I hate to agree with Ludwig but... There have been several people on here begging the Swans to develop a more possession based, uncontested style. Perhaps this terrible injury to poor Sam N will force the Swans to play more in that way? We may actually have the players to play it this year.

    Dean Towers as "second ruck" has been a big success I think. There was a centre bounce against Brisbane where he was breaking away from the pack with the ball... He does that on a regular basis.

    Big concern is our #1 ruck as we now realistically only have one player - Sinkers, who can play that role (unless Cameron / Amartey perform a miracle) and realistically he's going to get injured at some point, leaving us with zero options. If it was me I'd be attacking it from both ends - that is trying to do everything possible to get Cameron / Amartey / Pink up to speed (but I think its a long shot) and working out how to play with 2 smaller more mobile players in the ruck - such as Towers and Aliir. Even for that to work is a stretch as we don't actually have another player who's shown they can hold down the ruck role other than Reid - and I really hope he doesn't become the ruckman by default.

    We went OK with Goodesy in the ruck. I don't remember was he #1 or back up? And did we mostly lose or win the hitouts back then?

  4. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by Billericay View Post
    We went OK with Goodesy in the ruck. I don't remember was he #1 or back up? And did we mostly lose or win the hitouts back then?
    Back up ruck - Jason Ball was #1 ruck, with Donkey Doyle his replacement when injured (Qual Final v Port). Goodes was always a secondary until he did his PCL in Perth.
    The reality is, there will be days this year when guys like Gawn and Preuss tear us apart in the middle. We need clear plans to deal with it, similar to how Richmond managed to have Grigg attend a contest and just get it at ground level.

  5. #41
    Veterans List Ludwig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Chiang Mai
    Posts
    9,310
    Quote Originally Posted by Billericay View Post
    I hate to agree with Ludwig but... There have been several people on here begging the Swans to develop a more possession based, uncontested style. Perhaps this terrible injury to poor Sam N will force the Swans to play more in that way? We may actually have the players to play it this year.

    Dean Towers as "second ruck" has been a big success I think. There was a centre bounce against Brisbane where he was breaking away from the pack with the ball... He does that on a regular basis.

    Big concern is our #1 ruck as we now realistically only have one player - Sinkers, who can play that role (unless Cameron / Amartey perform a miracle) and realistically he's going to get injured at some point, leaving us with zero options. If it was me I'd be attacking it from both ends - that is trying to do everything possible to get Cameron / Amartey / Pink up to speed (but I think its a long shot) and working out how to play with 2 smaller more mobile players in the ruck - such as Towers and Aliir. Even for that to work is a stretch as we don't actually have another player who's shown they can hold down the ruck role other than Reid - and I really hope he doesn't become the ruckman by default.

    We went OK with Goodesy in the ruck. I don't remember was he #1 or back up? And did we mostly lose or win the hitouts back then?
    1. Agreeing with Ludwig should be avoided if at all possible. Could become addictive.
    2. The Brisbane game showed that we are already moving toward a ball control game plan, more reminiscent of Hawthorn than the Swans of recent history, but that's because the personnel is changing that can support this kind of game plan.
    3. Right on Towers. I stated many times over the past year that I didn't think Towers was in our best 22, unless he played in the ruck, and it's exactly because of his ability to create a high quality inside 50 from the stoppage. This offsets the loss of the majority of the hitouts because our stoppage players are expecting to lose the hitout and can read the play off the opposition ruckman tap.
    4. Sinkers is a very mediocre player not in keeping with our new attacking game plan. Playing Sinclair is conceding that position to the opposition instead of taking a more aggressive countermove.
    5. Goodes was a fantastic ruckman who won a Brownlow in that position, albeit as the #2 ruckman, but was such a force to be reckoned with. In fact, I would say Goodes was the prototype ruckman for the modern game.
    Last edited by Ludwig; 8th March 2018 at 02:44 PM.

  6. #42
    Veteran Site Admin
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    16,393
    Quote Originally Posted by Ludwig View Post
    1. Goodes was a fantastic ruckman who won a Brownlow in that position, albeit as the #2 ruckman, but was such a force to be reckoned with. In fact, I would say Goodes was the prototype ruckman for the modern game.
    I don't think Goodes was a prototype. That suggests he was first of a kind.

    I remember in the mid to late 1990s, Roos and Luff both playing as a mobile ruckman. They generally didn't take centre bounces but did play around the ground as the team's primary ruck. Goodes did take some centre bounces, so I guess he was a little different, but he certainly wasn't the first smaller man to play as a ruckman.

    I doubt Roos and Luff were either. Those who've been following the game longer than I have can probably relate tales about smaller, more mobile ruckmen dominating (just as smaller full forwards were once the go).

    Trends towards smaller, mobile players or towards giants come and go. It wasn't so long ago that clubs were thrilled to find a moderately mobile 205+ cm ruck, having seen how Sandilands could dominate games when he was fit. We found Naismith. The Pies found Cox. Even just last year the Dogs drafted English. Those deemed no longer tall enough to be proper ruckmen became the new breed of full-forwards - Daniher, for example, or Wright.

    And then after the Tigers win a premiership with one moderately sized key forward and a lot of small forwards, some are suggesting that the days of even a second tallish forward target are numbered. Sentiments will change soon if, say, the Giants win the 2018 premiership with Paton, Cameron, Himmelberg and Lobb dominating in the air.

  7. #43
    SOME OF THE FORMER RUCKING GREATS

    190cm � Sam Newman (Geelong)

    191cm - Polly Farmer (Geelong)

    189cm � John Nicholls (Carlton)

    188cm � Noel Teasdale (Richmond)

  8. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by O'Reilly Boy View Post
    Interesting photo from yesterday's training of Cameron and Amarty contesting a ball-up. Amarty is pretty solidly built, particularly across the thighs and hips, and is looking strong across the shoulders in this photo. [URL="http://www.sydneyswans.com.au/news/2018-03-08/gallery-wednesdays-training-in-pictures"] Admittedly in the photo it also looks like his vertical leap is about 6 inches. Still, he's in there, and I reckon will get a run against GWS on Friday. He doesn't look to be giving away as much in height or bulk to Cameron as the published stats suggest: Cameron 204cm 100kg; Amarty 196cm 88kg.
    To me that photo shows up every bit of the 12 kg weight difference. Cameron looks way more solid through his shoulders and back, it's harder to tell with the limbs.

    Some great photos there. That one of Will jumping is awesome! Also love the photo of Heeney v Rampe - Heeney looks very determined.

  9. #45
    There is a lot of skepticism about Cameron being able to ruck which I feel is unfair. He spent most of last year out with injury and hasn't had the opportunity to show his wares. Last week was his first game for a year. Lets see what happens tomorrow and then make a fair assessment please.

    I still wonder when we will find out more about Dawson and Ling. Dawson is the interesting one as it appears he is on the outer by the Swans Brains Trust. In my mind, he has far more talent than Robinson, Foote, Cunningham and Rose. My thoughts for what they are worth

  10. #46

  11. #47
    Veteran Site Admin
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    16,393
    Quote Originally Posted by rickmat View Post
    Dawson is the interesting one as it appears he is on the outer by the Swans Brains Trust. In my mind, he has far more talent than Robinson, Foote, Cunningham and Rose. My thoughts for what they are worth
    It's been mentioned in several threads that Dawson has been injured. Longmire said at the AGM that he was about six weeks away, though I can't remember if that was six weeks until he was ready to resume full training or six weeks until he was ready to play. I think it was the latter. (And from memory, I think Longmire said it was a quad issue.) Longmire spoke positively about Dawson and the club's hopes for him.

  12. #48
    Veterans List Ludwig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Chiang Mai
    Posts
    9,310
    Quote Originally Posted by liz View Post
    I don't think Goodes was a prototype. That suggests he was first of a kind.
    I should have said that Goodes is the paragon of the modern ruckman. If you can get a big guy like Dean Cox, who can do it all, it's probably a better ruck option than a Goodes, but they are few and far between. It will be interesting to see how Amartey progresses. He fits the Goodes type mould, a bit undersized, but very athletic. He also looks as though he will fill out into a powerful player as well.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO