Strategy The great, big ruckmen thread

[krisholio14]

I still think Blake is no 2, but some of his second efforts, or lack thereof, are of concern to me. I have been of the belief that this part of his game would come on this year.

Unfortunately for me, I have been wrong thus far.

 

[Claude Balls]

My point is, if Blake has been so sh1t for a month why aren't the midfielders adjusting for that fact.

If they are positioned wrong then they need to be held accountable as much as the ruckman. Why aren't they roving to the opposition ruckman?

Maybe, just maybe, they are out of position becuase Blake has been winning the ruck contests and they are backing him in by positioning themselves accordingly.

How will they adjust? By moving to the a space where they think Blake will NOT hit it? Your last paragraph doesn't even make sense. If Blake WAS "winning the ruck contests", and they were "backing him in accordingly", they would NOT be out of position.

I suggest Blake is not winning the ruck contests (despite what the stats say) yet the mids are not deliberately roving the opposition's taps because that would be counterproductive and compromising. Blake can actually get his palm to the ball 20 times a game... it's just that he's so ungainly and crude with his touch that 18 of these taps are as likely to be roved by the umpire as our own players.

 

[catswhiskers]

I don't think anyone is saying Blake is no good.
He was competitive on Sunday against two very experienced and capable ruckmen. Its just that Mummy was competitive in the ruck and good around the ground and got a start as a defender.
This is where those close to the action earn their money. Its a tough decision.

 

[Pivo]

How will they adjust? By moving to the a space where they think Blake will NOT hit it? Your last paragraph doesn't even make sense. If Blake WAS "winning the ruck contests", and they were "backing him in accordingly", they would NOT be out of position.

I suggest Blake is not winning the ruck contests (despite what the stats say) yet the mids are not deliberately roving the opposition's taps because that would be counterproductive and compromising. Blake can actually get his palm to the ball 20 times a game... it's just that he's so ungainly and crude with his touch that 18 of these taps are as likely to be roved by the umpire as our own players.

I don't think roving to opposition ruckmen is counter-productive at all, rather good tactics. It becomes counter-productive if it becomes a week-in, week-out excerise.

I don't think that is the case at Geelong.

In the Centre Clearance thread a poster cited Dane Swan as saying he'll start roving to the opposition ruckmen's 'hit zones' if the Collingwood ruckmen are losing their position. So it appears that he'll re-position himself in the event of his ruckman losing. Opposition teams have been doing it to Fremantle for years.

I can understand why my last comment is confusing, I meant over the course of the year Blake has been winning the majority of his contests in ruck and, as such, the Geelong midfield probably kept backing him in and continued to 'roll the dice'. I don't know whether Blake and Mumford won the tapouts in the last quarter - if they did then you may be right in that the taps were going to the wrong place.

I guess my point is, in a longwinded way - the midfield is just as responsible for clearances as the ruckmen are.

 

[TMS]

I voted for Mumford in the poll, but it doesn't mean that I think Blake is useless as a ruckman. Like a few others have said, it's what Blake does outside of contesting the ruck that concerns me.

Twice on Sunday I saw Blake handball to a team-mate and simply stop, as though his job was done. The sad fact is that both times he put his team-mate under immense pressure, resulting in tackles. What I've loved watching about the Cats these past few years is their selflessness to protect each other as much as possible, particularly shepherding for the ball carrier. Blake does not do this, and I can't understand why - it's a simple thing to add to his game and I believe it would earn him more respect from his team-mates, opponents and Geelong supporters.

For me, Mumford is ahead because of his presence around the ground - not just at the stoppages. I see him put his body on the line for his team-mates, and I see him refuse to take a backward step against more experienced opponents - even saw him getting stuck into Brogan during a Cats' set shot at goal!

Not everything Mumford does is perfect - he gets caught or coughs up the ball too - but it's the little team-first things present in his game that are not present in Blakey's that put him in front IMO.

 

[SmothOperRaider]

I voted for Mumford in the poll, but it doesn't mean that I think Blake is useless as a ruckman. Like a few others have said, it's what Blake does outside of contesting the ruck that concerns me.

Twice on Sunday I saw Blake handball to a team-mate and simply stop, as though his job was done. The sad fact is that both times he put his team-mate under immense pressure, resulting in tackles. What I've loved watching about the Cats these past few years is their selflessness to protect each other as much as possible, particularly shepherding for the ball carrier. Blake does not do this, and I can't understand why - it's a simple thing to add to his game and I believe it would earn him more respect from his team-mates, opponents and Geelong supporters.

For me, Mumford is ahead because of his presence around the ground - not just at the stoppages. I see him put his body on the line for his team-mates, and I see him refuse to take a backward step against more experienced opponents - even saw him getting stuck into Brogan during a Cats' set shot at goal!

Not everything Mumford does is perfect - he gets caught or coughs up the ball too - but it's the little team-first things present in his game that are not present in Blakey's that put him in front IMO.

Good post, especially about shepherding & working off the ball. One other thing I noticed at times on Sunday was that our players don't totally ignore a loose Mumford when moving the pill out of the backline in the way they now seem to do with Blake, which speaks volumes to me.

 

[foxdog50]

Well the poll atm 39 to Mummy & 9 Blake, looks like everyone wants the Mummy ahead of Blake when Otto comes back...

 

[vinum coupe]

Well the poll atm 39 to Mummy & 9 Blake, looks like everyone wants the Mummy ahead of Blake when Otto comes back...

And it doesn't matter because it wont happen.

 

[Catman]

Posts below your post prove that this stat is more subjective than others so forgive me if I don't think it's canon. Have you got this stat for the preceding 3 games? And what is the source?

Source is Champion Data, official statisticians of the AFL.

 

[Grey Matter]

Well the poll atm 39 to Mummy & 9 Blake, looks like everyone wants the Mummy ahead of Blake when Otto comes back...

In 2007 when Blake had his big cry the cats responded by getting rid of Steven King. There is talk now that West may also be on his way due to lack of opportunities, which leads me to wonder what if Mumford has the same thoughts, I would think there would be no shortage of takers for big Mummy either. To think we could lose King, West and Mumford to keep someone as average as Blake is beyond belief but not beyond the realms of possibility. Blake is not and never will be a number 1 ruckman, which makes it time for the cats to start planning for the time when Ottens either retires or becomes a permanent forward.

 

[Belisarius]

Just read that Trent West had a good day in the twos last week.

I remember reading from reading previous threads he has some pace and aggression at 198 cm - and so he could be a dark horse for a back man's job on a tall forward. Trouble is his stats do not look good when he has taken to the park in the seniors.

Thompson said in an interview recently both Mummy and Blake were tired before the break. Why not take the opportunity to to rest Blake before the finals and trial out West again, and give him some time down back as well. I cannot see it hurting the team - especially as Ottens seems to be really on the mend and will back in 3 or so weeks.

I just can't see Blake being dropped by the Geelong selectors - even though most postings support the retention of Mummy over Blake. Loyalty ? It is a fine balancing act but there will be outcry on this forum if Blake plays badly in the finals coming up.

 

[TMS]

Some fuel for the fire? From today's Geelong Advertiser:

Interestingly, Shane Mumford has been named first ruck for the Cats, with Mark Blake on the bench, as the two compete for the second ruck spot when Brad Ottens returns from injury.

Source: http://www.geelongadvertiser.com.au/article/2009/07/03/82255_gfc.html

 

[Pivo]

Some fuel for the fire? From today's Geelong Advertiser:

Source: http://www.geelongadvertiser.com.au/article/2009/07/03/82255_gfc.html

Agreed that Blake needs a rocket under his butt so hopefully (for me as a supporter of his) he responds.

It is a good move I think.

 

[OldStyle2007]

The Writing is literally On The Wall !

 

[Ninty]

They should have listed West on the extended bench - that would have Blake thinking.

 

[rocker_oz33]

They should have listed West on the extended bench - that would have Blake thinking.

and Dawson as well

 

[Richo75]

Some fuel for the fire? From today's Geelong Advertiser:
Interestingly, Shane Mumford has been named first ruck for the Cats, with Mark Blake on the bench, as the two compete for the second ruck spot when Brad Ottens returns from injury.

Source: http://www.geelongadvertiser.com.au/article/2009/07/03/82255_gfc.html

Mmm it certainly could be a message for Blake!
I'd prefer to see the Mummy continue on because I like his second efforts, especially for his size.

 

[vinum coupe]

Bump.

Whoops!.

Mummy was r*ped in that first 20 minutes. I could not care less who our #1 ruck is but he would want to be giving us first use IF he gets his hands on it.

Mummy got it a fair bit and it was hooked straight to the saints.

As soon as Blake came on the whole game changed.

Mummy was awesome towards the end.

 

[rizzo]

Both were shithouse today. A proper second ruck i really needed. I hope Westy gets a go this week.

 

[jakethesnake]

Mumford was woeful in the first quarter, and I was very worried. But he bounced back, and was superb at ground contests throughout the rest of the game. His tapping is a worry, but that will come with time.

Several times Mumford, and Blake, got rid of the opposing ruckman, but palmed it straight to Saints players. A massive worry that is. One tap led to a full turn around from Geelong's forward line and goal to the Saints. Not good enough.

Blake was woeful around the ground, but won the taps. The clincher in his horrible day was when he trailed the Saints ruckman as he took that massive mark and match winning goal in Q4.

 

[Belisarius]

Bump.

Whoops!.

Mummy was r*ped in that first 20 minutes. I could not care less who our #1 ruck is but he would want to be giving us first use IF he gets his hands on it.

Mummy got it a fair bit and it was hooked straight to the saints.

As soon as Blake came on the whole game changed.

Mummy was awesome towards the end.

Turned out to be a bad move to start Mumford on the ball in such a heated contest. Oh well. I think he got better as the game went - and Blake not being able to contest with Gardiner near the goals will see a lot of teams target this situation more often. I think Mummy can at least make more of a contest, especially as he gains more time on the field over the next few weeks. He seems to have some upside to me.

 

[rizzo]

Mumford was woeful in the first quarter, and I was very worried. But he bounced back, and was superb at ground contests throughout the rest of the game. His tapping is a worry, but that will come with time.

Several times Mumford, and Blake, got rid of the opposing ruckman, but palmed it straight to Saints players. A massive worry that is. One tap led to a full turn around from Geelong's forward line and goal to the Saints. Not good enough.

Blake was woeful around the ground, but won the taps. The clincher in his horrible day was when he trailed the Saints ruckman as he took that massive mark and match winning goal in Q4.

I remember as that ball went in and saw gardiner and blake and knew exactly what was about to happen. Although I think the result would have been the same if Mumford was on him in that situation. IIRC 2 of Gardiners 4 were on Mumford.

 

[jakethesnake]

I would like to think that Mumford would have at least made some physical presence be known in that contest.

 

[Barabbas]

Turned out to be a bad move to start Mumford on the ball in such a heated contest. Oh well. I think he got better as the game went - and Blake not being able to contest with Gardiner near the goals will see a lot of teams target this situation more often. I think Mummy can at least make more of a contest, especially as he gains more time on the field over the next few weeks. He seems to have some upside to me.

Teams are definitely exploiting this, see Cox & Sandilands taking it straight out of the ruck in the forward line. I'm not here to bash Blake but his defensive game needs work, either that or be damaging the other way - but that seems less likely. Regardless of whether Mumford's 2nd yet or not he is developing remarkably well at this stage in his career.

 

[PendlesIsAStar]

Josh Fraser is soft and a squibb, funnily enough he owned Blake when they have gone head to head (who could forget Fraser's 10 possie two goal first quarter effort against Blake in the 2007 H&A game, that was before they decided to put Ottens in the ruck late in the 1st).

Ironic in the fact that much like Blake he watches his opponent rather than the ball in ruck contests, which is why they are both soft!

What a disgraceful comment. Clearly you, Schmegg have no idea!

Fraser best on ground on Friday night against the Bombers should put you back in your box! His Fantasy footy and Supercoach performances this season have been stellar!