Ruckmen: are they overrated?

[1892]

As a 'pies supporter the answer is clearly no.

2002-03 - Clark Keating smashes us in 2 grand finals
2007 - Ottens smashes us in the preliminary final
2010 - recruit Jolly win the flag
​

More recently we've seen how much difference Grundy playing well makes to our chances. The GWS game is a great example, Mumford was great in the first quarter - GWS dominated, Grundy was great from Q2 onwards - we dominated.

 

[Beer n Skittles]

They're underrated, it seems like a lot of people don't notice how much they can bring their mids into the game.

 

[Rotayjay]

Having a great ruckman is nice (if memory serves anyway, been 6 years since we've had a truly elite one) but it is the position which can most easily be covered up by serviceable back up or quality midfielders around the ball ups and bounces.

If you don't have a key forward it completely limits your options, if you don't have a gun key defender you'll get smashed by the power forwards. If you don't have good half backs your attack has no build up from the back half, if you don't have good mids you can't get the ball forward, and if you don't have good smaller forwards you are relying exclusively on marks from your talls or midfielders kicking running goals.

If you don't have a gun ruckman, you can still win with 3rd man up options, serviceable ruckmen who simply provide a good contest, and midfielders who can shark the ball.

This is another good point - hits the nail on the head in my opinion. The last time a side won the flag without much of a forward line was Sydney in 2005. The last time a side won the flag without much of a backline or midfield was ... never? The last time a side won a flag without much in the way of rucks was eleven months ago.

 

[Debris]

This is another good point - hits the nail on the head in my opinion. The last time a side won the flag without much of a forward line was Sydney in 2005. The last time a side won the flag without much of a backline or midfield was ... never?

Sydney did not have much of a forward line in 2012.

 

[Rotayjay]

Sydney did not have much of a forward line in 2012.

True I guess.

 

[Superstar swan]

if you look at recent premiers, its a fairly straight forward conclusion. Elite rucks are handy but a canadian rugby player will do

 

[SSSSSS]

Brent Renouf Premiership ruckman.

All that needs to be said.

If you have a good ruckman good for you. Seem more like the cherry on top unless you actively look to build the side around them ala Melbourne.

 

[The Blue Baggers]

Good ones aren't !!

 

[skilts]

The measure of a ruckman is not whether he is selected in the All Australian Pretend We're American Award. It's how the ruckmen in the Grand Final perform. It is rare indeed for a team to win a premiership when their ruckman is thrashed in a GF, though it might have happened a few times.

 

[Korn]

Far too many ordinary ruckmen in the competition, and congestion footy nowadays diminishes the importance of the role of a ruckman in the modern game.

 

[Mateyman]

This is another good point - hits the nail on the head in my opinion. The last time a side won the flag without much of a forward line was Sydney in 2005. The last time a side won the flag without much of a backline or midfield was ... never? The last time a side won a flag without much in the way of rucks was eleven months ago.

The ruckman is one player. A whole midfield/defence/forward group is like 6-10, so you would expect over more players the overall impact to be bigger

 

[VineyIsLORD]

If you have a really good one its obvious how important they are.

Likewise if you have a really bad one.

Absolutely crucial for structures.

That said, they appear overrated because by position they are some of the highest paid players in the league. You have to pay even average ones a premium in wages, because height and coordination don't usually go together. Gawn is freakishly coordinated for his height, same with Naitanui obviously.

Guys like Robbie Warnock made over 400k per year when 500k was considered a big contract. That makes little sense unless you remember that tall blokes get paid more than their output because there aren't many tall guys who can play sports, let alone at an elite level.

If you don't have an elite one, then you make up for it in other ways and hope that the rucks you do have can at least compete or negate when playing against an elite one.

That bloke from St Kilda is a great example of this. I can't even name him as he's fairly low profile, but he absolutely took an All Australian Max Gawn out of the game twice this year. If your rucks can at least do that, you've made up the difference.

But when Gawn/Naitanui is smashing the opposition rucks and taking marks and kicking goals, it becomes so much easier for the midfield to run forward with confidence.

 

[VineyIsLORD]

Brent Renouf Premiership ruckman.

All that needs to be said.

If you have a good ruckman good for you. Seem more like the cherry on top unless you actively look to build the side around them ala Melbourne.

They definitely give you options when you have a elite one.

Nothing worse as a supporter than seeing battler ruckmen getting obliterated by a Gawn, Goldstein or Naitanui and watching your midfield chase theirs all day.

 

[SSSSSS]

They definitely give you options when you have a elite one.

Nothing worse as a supporter than seeing battler ruckmen getting obliterated by a Gawn, Goldstein or Naitanui and watching your midfield chase theirs all day.

I think that's the thing with ruckman. You either have an elite one or you have a battler. An A-grade ruckman will win you games on his own. A C-grade ruckman will just hold his position sturcturally and allow you to strengthen other areas.

If you are somewhere in the middle you are just deadweight.

 

[VineyIsLORD]

I think that's the thing with ruckman. You either have an elite one or you have a battler. An A-grade ruckman will win you games on his own. A C-grade ruckman will just hold his position sturcturally and allow you to strengthen other areas.

If you are somewhere in the middle you are just deadweight.

Pretty much. I think probably more than any other position there is a huge gulf between the elite rucks and the average ruck.

Whereas even the average CHF is a good player, same with the average midfielder.

An average ruck needs to compete and play to a game plan, and do a job to negate an elite ruck when he's playing against one. If he fails to do that, he becomes a complete liability. But you can win flags with an average ruck, even one who barely gets his hands on the pill.

The elite rucks are some of the outright best players in the game and will literally win you a few extra games each year almost singlehandedly. They're worth every penny.

 

[Testekill]

A great ruckman can elevate a team in a fantastic way but a bog-standard ruckman isn't really going to offer too much. That's the big thing, unless you have an elite/pushing elite ruckman then the ruck is a pretty nothing position.

 

[Leather Poisoning]

Ruckmen only matter if you don't have them.

Most of the time rucks are relatively evenly matched so the difference is negligible.

When you've got a Goldstein or sandi or gawn type though then you've got a real advantage.

However if you have big average ruckmen (think Hawks with big boy and hale) then one of them goes down you're going to get exposed even if the other team only had boggers as well.

Worst part of ruckmen is that they're useless for 3-5 years of senior footy before they come good. That's why I like seeing Hawks trade in rucks. Hopefully we get one this offseason as well.

 

[Superstar swan]

Is it just me or do good ruck stand out more in shit teams?

 

[VineyIsLORD]

Ruckmen only matter if you don't have them.

Most of the time rucks are relatively evenly matched so the difference is negligible.

When you've got a Goldstein or sandi or gawn type though then you've got a real advantage.

However if you have big average ruckmen (think Hawks with big boy and hale) then one of them goes down you're going to get exposed even if the other team only had boggers as well.

Worst part of ruckmen is that they're useless for 3-5 years of senior footy before they come good. That's why I like seeing Hawks trade in rucks. Hopefully we get one this offseason as well.

The dangerous thing about opting to trade for them is that they cost a lot generally.

Hawks are in a good spot because their team are perennial contenders, so free agents and the like want to do and play there.

But other teams have made some bad contracts trading for ruckmen, or at least spent a lot more than they would have liked.

Warnock at Carlton is a prime example.

But overall a good post, they do take time, even longer than forwards.

 

[Leather Poisoning]

The dangerous thing about opting to trade for them is that they cost a lot generally.

Hawks are in a good spot because their team are perennial contenders, so free agents and the like want to do and play there.

But other teams have made some bad contracts trading for ruckmen, or at least spent a lot more than they would have liked.

Warnock at Carlton is a prime example.

But overall a good post, they do take time, even longer than forwards.

Warnock at Carlton, geezus, I'd forgotten about that.

They're a good addition to a team on the rise though, as you say.

 

[avishka5]

If you have a really good one its obvious how important they are.

Likewise if you have a really bad one.

Absolutely crucial for structures.

That said, they appear overrated because by position they are some of the highest paid players in the league. You have to pay even average ones a premium in wages, because height and coordination don't usually go together. Gawn is freakishly coordinated for his height, same with Naitanui obviously.

Guys like Robbie Warnock made over 400k per year when 500k was considered a big contract. That makes little sense unless you remember that tall blokes get paid more than their output because there aren't many tall guys who can play sports, let alone at an elite level.

If you don't have an elite one, then you make up for it in other ways and hope that the rucks you do have can at least compete or negate when playing against an elite one.

That bloke from St Kilda is a great example of this. I can't even name him as he's fairly low profile, but he absolutely took an All Australian Max Gawn out of the game twice this year. If your rucks can at least do that, you've made up the difference.

But when Gawn/Naitanui is smashing the opposition rucks and taking marks and kicking goals, it becomes so much easier for the midfield to run forward with confidence.

 

[juss]

As a single position, not a group of players, pound for pound by position I think the ruck has more effect on the game than any other position. They are involved in so many contests at every stoppage and around the ground. Imagine the Hawks or Sydney with Max Gawn running around for them this year.

 

[schmuttt]

I think that's the thing with ruckman. You either have an elite one or you have a battler. An A-grade ruckman will win you games on his own. A C-grade ruckman will just hold his position sturcturally and allow you to strengthen other areas.

If you are somewhere in the middle you are just deadweight.

Good post. Hawks have done well because they'd rotate Hale and McEvoy/Ceglar and grind the other guy down and limit his influence. Geelong have also done this well with Smith and Stanley.

A lot of rucks have been horrendously overrated (Warnock prime example), but watching us play this year I had to pinch myself at times when Gawn was just flat out winning us the game. A ruckman at that level is extremely rare and a huge weapon for any team.

One thing that definitely doesn't work is the crap Essendon tried last year against NN then Goldy. I still remember McKernan try as he might couldnt get anywhere near Goldstein that night.

 

[00Stinger]

Is it just me or do good ruck stand out more in shit teams?

Just you i think.



Sent from my SM-G925I using Tapatalk

 

[Damon_3388]

As a 'pies supporter the answer is clearly no.

2002-03 - Clark Keating smashes us in 2 grand finals
2007 - Ottens smashes us in the preliminary final
2010 - recruit Jolly win the flag
​

More recently we've seen how much difference Grundy playing well makes to our chances. The GWS game is a great example, Mumford was great in the first quarter - GWS dominated, Grundy was great from Q2 onwards - we dominated.

I kind of wonder what might have been with Josh Fraser sometimes. We drafted him at #1 as a skinny 17-year-old in 2000 (when he was genuinely the #1 junior in the country, even as an under-ager), and he showed some promise as a forward in 2002 (37 goals in 25 games), and some promise as a ruckman in 2003-2004 as well as times later on, but he never quite seemed consistently comfortable or adequate. Meanwhile, guys like Anthony Rocca, Steven McKee, Tristen Walker, Jason Cloke (all 189cm of him), Guy Richards (39 games in 7 years, but earnt a Brownlow vote and Rising Star nomination along the way!), Cameron Cloke, Justin Crow, Brent Hall, David Fanning (possibly the worst footballer to get a regular game at Collingwood since the turn of the century) and Shane Wakelin (a couple of games in 2005) all manned the ruck at various times for Collingwood from 2000-2006, while we waited for Fraser to properly come on and enter what should have been his prime (2007-2011, ages 25-29).

Should he have been developed primarily as a forward? Should his physical development have been more of a priority and focus early on? It's crazy to think that he's only still 34 years old now, and he was discarded by Collingwood at age 28, at the end of 2010. He could have been the second ruck/forward in that Collingwood premiership side (Jolly is only two months older than Fraser), but for whatever reason, he just couldn't ever quite put it together or continue to prove his worth over time. He was a decent footballer overall, but definitely a missed opportunity of a player too.