I would argue that the club didnt really see Cox and Cameron as 1st rucks when we had Lynch on the list. Agree that Lynch was less versatile. But so is the even smaller Begg.Not sure I see the same analytics as you.
Lynch had Cameron and cox in front of him as well as Grundy, and was less versatile than cox and Cameron.
Cox is now 32. There’s at least one spot up for grabs for the next best developing ruckman in coming years. Frampton is a key defender despite his admirable stint assisting us when Cameron cox anD begg were all injured.
Better off we have two young players developing than one…. Steene is miles off in terms of physical development and should be afforded whatever time he needs.
Plenty of room for begg . I wouldn’t be throwing him under the bus too soon. He needs a good second half of the year and obviously build on some weaknesses… but I’d prefer we gave him at least one more year especially while Steene is not ready.
I see Begg having definately at least 3 rucks in front of him with Cox, Cameron and Frampton showing AFL level ruck traits.. I agree the club sees Frampton as a backman but his utility as a ruck is certainly in front of Begg due to his bigger size, marking ability and his tap work. The club would at this stage prefer Frampton in the ruck and Ruscoe in the backline rather then Begg in the ruck and Frampton in the backline imo.
Cox is playing some career best footy and he has 2 years left at minimum in my opinion. I even feel a raw Steene has also gone past him as a ruck.
I dont mind Begg and he looks an interesting prospect, but do we need 5 players who can play ruck? Which one of the five is the least useful over the next 2-3 years at an AFL level?
If he gets a contract next year good for him and who am I to question the development staff at the Pies. But we need to delist at least 3-4 players at the end of the year and Begg is around the mark as a bottom 3 player.