Ben Rutten Captain?

[Vader]

Chilled and apologies - just sick of doing 2 mins of research to find peoples claims are often FOS. No issue with off the cuff remarks or opinions being misguided or made in an exaggerated context. It's when people try to disagree with someone else and get shit wrong. Starting to irk me - yes.. more chill bring more chill

VB definitely best 22 when fit.
Questions I have on him though are:
Has he peaked? I think he may have.
Can he stay fit to play at least 20+ games a year? I'm not sure he can.

Now IF the above 2 were correct - would you still want him as Captain? (i.e. lets say he can only manage 15-18 games a year at a level of output that does not have him in our top 10 B&F for games played)

His record is as follows:
2005: 11 games
2006: 19/25 (broken wrist)
2007: 23/23
2008: 23/23
2009: 21/23
2010: 11/14

The 2010 season isn't finished yet and assuming he doesn't get injured again he will play 19 of a possible 22 games. Given that he hasn't missed a game since R4, there is no reason to expect that he will miss any between R15-22.

So, since establishing himself in the best 22 he's missed a grand total of 11 games out of 108. That's actually a pretty GOOD record.

Other than the back injury which he suffered late last year, his only injury worth noting was the broken wrist in 2006 - an impact injury, which hardly makes him injury prone.

You've conceded that he's in the best 22. The myth about his durability has been debunked. His team-mates all recognise his leadership qualities, even if the fans in the stand don't. Why should he not be duly elected as the club's next Captain?

 

[Allefgib]

I dont actually think thats true at all.

He was back amongst the best pretty early in his return (e.g. was one of the best v richmond). Had one or two games that were below his usual standard (didnt like his v hawthorn game for example), but apart from that hes actually been amongst the best players fairly frequently.

Ive got the suspicion that the best and fairest will reflect fairly favourably on him in terms of votes per game.

Maybe its the fact that hes not new and shiny anymore thats got people overlooking the awesome work he does?

No I think it's more that he has 'peaked'. Now his peak may make a good captain - but he hasn't come on like many had hoped. Espeically in terms of the bullet like raking passes for mine. He can pull those out from time to time but his ability to do it consistently and become a really damaging weapon going forward probably isn't there like people had hoped it might be.

Your point on Knight missing games is well-made. Especially since I don't mind the look of him as Captain. Would need to truly prove his body issues are right to be a chance.

 

[Southerntakeover]

Chilled and apologies - just sick of doing 2 mins of research to find peoples claims are often FOS. No issue with off the cuff remarks or opinions being misguided or made in an exaggerated context. It's when people try to disagree with someone else and get shit wrong. Starting to irk me - yes.. more chill bring more chill

VB definitely best 22 when fit.
Questions I have on him though are:
Has he peaked? I think he may have.
Can he stay fit to play at least 20+ games a year? I'm not sure he can.

Now IF the above 2 were correct - would you still want him as Captain? (i.e. lets say he can only manage 15-18 games a year at a level of output that does not have him in our top 10 B&F for games played)

No worries.

In answer to your questions...

Has he peaked?-

I see no reason to think he has. In age terms hes still very young. His best football is ahead of him. I do think that perhaps his progression has slowed in the last few years, for a combination of reasons. Affected pre-seasons being key amongst them. The first year was a foot, which as i understand it is a freakish style of injury... The big questions been how his back has recovered. If they have reason to believe its going fine, which it appears they do, then theres no dramas there. In 2007/2008 he was one of our best midfielders, and demonstrated an ability to control games. Im pretty firm in my belief that he could return to this style of form.

The worrying type of injuries you generally see are soft tissue injuries... players that often pull hamstrings/drivers etc and miss months at a time. (Chris Knights) are the ones that you should watch intently. I dont think this is a problem with vB. As the evidence shows, hes played 20+ games almost every season in his career, and only missed games from pretty severe complaints. (e.g. breaking his arm diving infront of Mal Michael). Its worth noting that Dangerfields certainly no secure thing fitness wise... has a history of both soft tissue injuries, on top of the crazy run into the goal post, five players tackling him style injuries.

So yeah, based on my opinions on these two issues, i certainly do believe hes good enough to be our captain.

 

[Allefgib]

No worries.

In answer to your questions...

Has he peaked?-

I see no reason to think he has. In age terms hes still very young. His best football is ahead of him. I do think that perhaps his progression has slowed in the last few years, for a combination of reasons. Affected pre-seasons being key amongst them. The first year was a foot, which as i understand it is a freakish style of injury... The big questions been how his back has recovered. If they have reason to believe its going fine, which it appears they do, then theres no dramas there. In 2007/2008 he was one of our best midfielders, and demonstrated an ability to control games. Im pretty firm in my belief that he could return to this style of form.

The worrying type of injuries you generally see are soft tissue injuries... players that often pull hamstrings/drivers etc and miss months at a time. (Chris Knights) are the ones that you should watch intently. I dont think this is a problem with vB. As the evidence shows, hes played 20+ games almost every season in his career, and only missed games from pretty severe complaints. (e.g. breaking his arm diving infront of Mal Michael). Its worth noting that Dangerfields certainly no secure thing fitness wise... has a history of both soft tissue injuries, on top of the crazy run into the goal post, five players tackling him style injuries.

So yeah, based on my opinions on these two issues, i certainly do believe hes good enough to be our captain.

Good answers. I hope you're right!

(except for those bits about Knights/Danger - I never see VB as a game breaker but those 2.... season breakers if fit and playing to full potential!)

 

[Allbetsroff]

I hope Van Berlo's playing ability some day equals Southerntakeover's rage in defence and extreme man love for Van Berlo.

 

[Allefgib]

You've conceded that he's in the best 22. The myth about his durability has been debunked. His team-mates all recognise his leadership qualities, even if the fans in the stand don't. Why should he not be duly elected as the club's next Captain?

No reason other than - lets follow the process and hope everyone considers all possible candidates before casting a vote. There may be better options. Also - just because he played lots of games years ago pre-back injury.. doesn't mean he'll get back to that level of durability. I really hope he does but it remains to be seen.

I'm not sure I 'conceded' he's in the best 22. I just agreed/stated he was. You make it sound like I said he wasn't. What I did say was that he wasn't top 10 in the B&F the last 3 years.

I also personally think he has peaked as a player in terms of his ability to be damaging with his use of the ball. Now that doesn't mean he won't get fully fit and win 40 touches a game and use the ball well enough to be an elite player of the competition. I actually think he has more chance of averaging 40 touches than being a consistently good user of the footy to be honest!

Anyway, my personal views are he could do a good job but I think we have guys that have more upside and offer us more as captain than he could. Those two for me are Danger and Knights. As STO rightly pointed out though.. their durability is very much in question. Lets face it.. most our list struggles for that!

 

[jenny61_99]

You state that Knights has more upside than VB. Why is that?

 

[Allefgib]

You state that Knights has more upside than VB. Why is that?

careful.... I stated that I THINK, for me, Knights has more upside. not a fact - just an opinion. It's an important distinction to make.

Why?

IMO:

When fit and firing - He is a gamebreaker. He can win games off his own boot. He is a linebreaker. He is more explosive, one of the most explosive players at the club according to Charlie Walsh a few years back. The ability to break with the football and deliver it LONG will only become more and more important with the style of footbal played today. In my, and many others, opinion he is the player we are missing most from our damaging style play late last year.

VB is a great workhorse with a great engine. He can play the run with roles if required, he can go back and do a job there if required. He can play a tough midfielder and also the link man option around the ground. But he doesn't break lines, he doesn't break games open with his kicking abilities. In fact his kicking abilities are very inconsistent at times. He has that racking stab pass that at times looks elite.. but he just can't seem to execute it consistently (so maybe upside there.. but I think he's peaked with that IMO).

For all of the above I see Knighta having more upside.

But now STO has me scared he'll be the prone to soft tissue injury type

Can you comment at all Jenny on Knights' relationship with the other players and leadership abilities? When he first came to the club he seemed full of promise as a future leader, throwing himself into extra-curricular obligations with the club etc. He seems to inspire and lead by example on the field but.. how do the other players perceive him as a leader?

 

[cmndstab]

Knights is very highly regarded by the club as a leader and well liked by the players from what I've heard. Right up there with the likes of VB and Goodwin in terms of being a fanatical trainer.

However, at this stage, I think all VB has to do is convince the medical staff that he's a good chance to go into this preseason uninjured and he's got the job. Dangerfield is the only other outstanding candidate in my opinion and there's no good reason to thrust the responsibility on him so early when he's still finding his feet and we already have an option that's absolutely ready to be a captain.

Thompson maybe, but incidents in the past are going to count against him. Rutten could do it but I do wonder about his ability to keep backing it up at the highest level. Knights could do the job too, but has been having real problems with injuries. In the end it just boils down to VB already being all we need him to be, providing he can make it on to the park. If anyone can make it on to the park, VB can. Assuming he is truly over the injury he had in the preseason (my word all throughout the preseason was that they weren't sure if he'd ever recover from it and they had no idea how to help the recovery beyond simply waiting on it) there is no reason not to make him the captain, whereas everyone else has some reason not to.


Anyone who thinks he's not firmly in our best 22 is underestimating him severely (or overestimating 22 other players).