Mega Thread What Shane Tuck Does

[NQTIGER]

Todays loss has nothing to do with me...

Point the finger at the 'development' of your younger players...

Tucky did his role...even Dimma had the grace to acknowledge that...

Dont worry about him JAK its the usaul dribble from the "developmet over winning Brigade" heavan help us if we actually win a game.......the sky will fall.

 

[Rayzorwire]

Its amazing, Tuck played, we won the clearances by 11, won the contested possessions by 5 and yet we were belted by 10 goals. Yet the Tuck man fetish brigade, who ironically accuse Hardwick of having unwarranted man fetishes, are out in force talking up how great a game their man fetish played today.

Have you no decency RT?

It's Tuck's fault practically every player we have used the ball poorly and our game plan is a ragged-arse joke?

You've told us all season how Tuck is too old, too slow, can't follow or contribute to our game plan, has sub-par skills compared to everyone else, can't play anywhere but at the bottom of packs in the middle, couldn't possibly be useful to shelter the kids for the years we'll really need them, and has absolutely no claim to being treated with the same respect as other veterans of his standing at other clubs.

I saw a game where he was plenty quick enough, beat premiership players of all shapes and sizes, alternated between best onballer and best defender on the ground in two separate halves, was a crucial difference between a bad loss and another nightmare humiliation, helped the kids enormously, showed as much skill as anyone on the ground and just as often, and displayed in terms as high as the goal posts that the coaching staff were fools of the highest order to treat him the way they have.

Which part of the above has you chirping like someone who has proven their point, rather than someone whose judgement has proven to be every bit as appalling as Dimmer's?

Isn't this the point where any reasonable person who has argued the positions you have, decides that they also need to wear some of the egg running off Hardwick's face regarding Tuck?

However I feel as though the solution you believe in is very short sighted, Tuck is 30 years and doesn't have any great attributes other than ball winning ability...

Which is why he played defense better than Newman ever has today?

Out of mad curiosity, just how many Selwood's, Bartel's, Kelly's, Corey's, Cotchin's, Martin's, Deledio's and Foley's would he have to beat week after week to earn the right to a game ahead of 6-possession first season kids and serial never-beens?

By the way your efficiency stat means absolutely nothing to me, its a crap stat.

I made no reference to any 'efficiency stat,' at which point it's tempting to cross-reference your inability to spot and remember who said what on an internet forum with who does what on a football field.

 

[TimeFor11]

Rayzor Cotchin had 38 disposals and 13 clearances! Sorry but that is a ridiculous game and Tuck's wouldn't have been better and certainly wasnt up until 3QT. I thought you said something about efficiency in your previous essay, nevertheless one of the likeminded Tuck lovers did mention it.

Disposal is efficient if player A handball touches player B before opposition doesn't matter if you handball to stationary player that is about to get slammed.

Deledio coming out of backline handballs it too Tuck, clear that Varcoe will follow the sprinting Deledio Tuck still handballs to Lids who is dispossesed. That is just an example, Tuck gets it HBF ****s around handballs to a real spud in Jackson who goes to Graham who goes back to Jackson who gets pinged HTB. Decision making by Tuck harmed us there.

Your experienced players have to be pretty special when it comes to not make **** ups, Newman doesn't turn the ball over or put his team mate in a worse position a habit Tuck has thats why he plays and Tuck doesn't.

 

[nut]

Its amazing, Tuck played, we won the clearances by 11, won the contested possessions by 5 and yet we were belted by 10 goals. Yet the Tuck man fetish brigade, who ironically accuse Hardwick of having unwarranted man fetishes, are out in force talking up how great a game their man fetish played today.

WWe just played arguably the best side in the last 4-5 years.... If Tuck had of played against Port, dogs, Saints, Carlton rnd 1, GC e could well be entrenched in the 8.....
Our young players would be high on confidence and we may well have played alot better today.

 

[Frustrated Tiger]

Red card this:

Everything the pro-Tuck camp has been saying all season has been vindicated.
Time for the club apologists to be gracious and admit their error.
That Tuck has not been given a game until now is scandalous. What aren't we being told?

I agree, come clean......

 

[RICHOLEGEND12]

Rayzor Cotchin had 38 disposals and 13 clearances! Sorry but that is a ridiculous game and Tuck's wouldn't have been better and certainly wasnt up until 3QT. I thought you said something about efficiency in your previous essay, nevertheless one of the likeminded Tuck lovers did mention it.

Disposal is efficient if player A handball touches player B before opposition doesn't matter if you handball to stationary player that is about to get slammed.

Deledio coming out of backline handballs it too Tuck, clear that Varcoe will follow the sprinting Deledio Tuck still handballs to Lids who is dispossesed. That is just an example, Tuck gets it HBF ****s around handballs to a real spud in Jackson who goes to Graham who goes back to Jackson who gets pinged HTB. Decision making by Tuck harmed us there.

Your experienced players have to be pretty special when it comes to not make **** ups, Newman doesn't turn the ball over or put his team mate in a worse position a habit Tuck has thats why he plays and Tuck doesn't.

you sir are an idiot

you named 2 tuck stuff ups. The first you say tuck shouldnt have passed it to deledio because he was being chased by varcoe....deledio should also have awareness to not call for it. how many times in a game is the one-two handballl used? many. and it works most of the time

the second is that he handballed it to a "spud" named jackson. its not tucks fault he plays with these so called "spuds" you cant not pass to a player in your team because they are a "spud". who passed it to tuck so he was crammed against the boundary line in the first place

how many times was the ball passed to tucky in a dangerous position where he either stood up in the tackle or evaded a player and then passed to someone who would clear the ball.

 

[_RT_]

Have you no decency RT?

It's Tuck's fault practically every player we have used the ball poorly and our game plan is a ragged-arse joke?

You've told us all season how Tuck is too old, too slow, can't follow or contribute to our game plan, has sub-par skills compared to everyone else, can't play anywhere but at the bottom of packs in the middle, couldn't possibly be useful to shelter the kids for the years we'll really need them, and has absolutely no claim to being treated with the same respect as other veterans of his standing at other clubs.

I saw a game where he was plenty quick enough, beat premiership players of all shapes and sizes, alternated between best onballer and best defender on the ground in two separate halves, was a crucial difference between a bad loss and another nightmare humiliation, helped the kids enormously, showed as much skill as anyone on the ground and just as often, and displayed in terms as high as the goal posts that the coaching staff were fools of the highest order to treat him the way they have.

Which part of the above has you chirping like someone who has proven their point, rather than someone whose judgement has proven to be every bit as appalling as Dimmer's?

Isn't this the point where any reasonable person who has argued the positions you have, decides that they also need to wear some of the egg running off Hardwick's face regarding Tuck?

I'll say it again Tuck played, got 30 odd touches like he has time and again in the past, we won not only the clearances but also the contested possession count and still lost by 10 goals, which should have been 100+ had the Cats not eased up. Yet here you are proclaiming that its proof that Hardwick and co have got it all wrong not to play him. If anything, given that the end result was pretty much the same as it would have been had he not played, it would suggest that they have been right all along not to play him. In fact Hardwick sums it up in his presser after the match:

Hardwick defended his decision to leave Tuck on the sidelines, citing team balance as the crucial factor as to why the 29-year old has managed just five games this season despite eye-catching performances in the VFL.

"It's more about trying to get the best fit for the side. Obviously with the amount of midfielders we have going through there, it's just a matter of you can't have too many inside midfielders," he said.

"At the end of the day 'Tucky' played his role today and did it very well. But with [Dustin] Martin, [Trent] Cotchin and [Nathan] Foley, which one do I leave out?"

"But 'Tucky' to his credit has been a star. The way he accepts things, he knows where he is at and he comes in and he performed a very good role today."

Having said that todays game was a good effort by him and he could have easily just said stuff it and just coasted, but I stand by my opinion that he is not a viable long term option for us.

 

[camsmith]

i having nothing against tuck, he is a consistantly solid contributor but when we were winning ealier in the year and last half of last year he wasnt in the team. i think 3/4 of our team has gone backwards in the last 2 months where he has stayed himself. whether thats good for richmonds future is the real question

i stand corrected about last year, but this year im sure about

Sorry but fed up with people simply making shit up about Tucky.

Before todays game he had only played in 4 games, vs North, Brisbane, Essendon (dreamtime game) and Port. We won three of those games...

Seriously some people are so against Tuck they can't even acknowledge when he has a good game. I think it would have been unfair to write him off after this game anyway, after so long on the sidelines he would have been forgiven for taking time to adjust to the pace of AFL footy but it seems he doesn't need much time to pick it up. Much to the annoyance of some here.

No doubt the deluded few will just wait it out until he has a down game. I hope Hardwick was asked tough questions after the game for once re: Tuck.

 

[camsmith]

I'll say it again Tuck played, got 30 odd touches like he has time and again in the past, we won not only the clearances but also the contested possession count and still lost by 10 goals, which should have been 100+ had the Cats not eased up. Yet here you are proclaiming that its proof that Hardwick and co have got it all wrong not to play him. If anything, given that the end result was pretty much the same as it would have been had he not played, it would suggest that they have been right all along not to play him.

You have got to be kidding me.

Shit there is only so much Tuck can do ffs, to a point he improves the performance of players around him but he can't suddenly work miracles and bring every player up to AFL standard.

Seriously Tuck can't ****ing win with some on here. You're as bad as the coaching staff, no matter what happened today you would have found some argument that suits your predetermined view that Tuck shouldn't be playing.

 

[nut]

Those that continue to bag Tuck have NFI.... and unfortunately even Hardwick seems to as well.

I would respect Hardwick if had of sacked Tuck last season.... But no we keep and disadvantage our side by 1. taking a spot on the list and 2. Not playing him....

 

[TimeFor11]

Yeah we have NFI yet he will be gone at seasons end. He ain't taking us to glory folks.

 

[nut]

Yeah we have NFI yet he will be gone at seasons end. He ain't taking us to glory folks.

Nether was Richo... Cousins... Miller...... etc,.... Can I ask him why he is on the list???

 

[_RT_]

Sorry but fed up with people simply making shit up about Tucky.

Before todays game he had only played in 4 games, vs North, Brisbane, Essendon (dreamtime game) and Port. We won three of those games...

Seriously some people are so against Tuck they can't even acknowledge when he has a good game. I think it would have been unfair to write him off after this game anyway, after so long on the sidelines he would have been forgiven for taking time to adjust to the pace of AFL footy but it seems he doesn't need much time to pick it up. Much to the annoyance of some here.

No doubt the deluded few will just wait it out until he has a down game. I hope Hardwick was asked tough questions after the game for once re: Tuck.

As I posted above Hardwick did make mention of Tuck in the post match and as he said, we've got Cotchin Martin Foley & Tuck fighting for 3 spots in the 21 each week. Of those 4 players, which player would you leave out if you're looking at developing players for the long term future of the side rather than short term results like wins that get us to 11th instead of 13th?

 

[camsmith]

As I posted above Hardwick did make mention of Tuck in the post match and as he said, we've got Cotchin Martin Foley & Tuck fighting for 3 spots in the 21 each week. Of those 4 players, which player would you leave out if you're looking at developing players for the long term future of the side rather than short term results like wins that get us to 11th instead of 13th?

You edited your post soon before/after I posted... so didn't see that part.

I would disgaree that those three players are the only players Tuck could come into the side for.. We saw today Tuck can play a number of roles..

 

[_RT_]

You edited your post soon before/after I posted... so didn't see that part.

I would disgaree that those three players are the only players Tuck could come into the side for.. We saw today Tuck can play a number of roles..

He played those roles because we were short 2 players from early in the first quarter. His main role is as an inside midfielder and if you've got Martin(20) Cotchin(21) & Foley(24?) available alongside a 29 year old Tuck and you're looking at long term development of players you're always going to play the 3 youngsters ahead of him unless there is injury or poor form. While he can probably play in other spots you're not going to play him in them ahead of younger kids either. For example we're not going to play him as a HBF/BP ahead of someone like Batchelor and while we would get short term benefit from playing him as a HFF, we need to get more games into someone like Helbig to fast track his development as well.

 

[TimeFor11]

Nether was Richo... Cousins... Miller...... etc,.... Can I ask him why he is on the list???

Miller is not someone I wanted. Tuck is no Richo or Cousins, he has never been in top 150 players in the comp and those 2 at one point were top 5.

 

[nut]

He is 30... top 5 B&F last season and he represents a clearance machine that we have lacked in every game this seasons.

We have relied to heavily on Cotchin to be the extractor. Tuck would enable Cotchin to work on his outside game wear he would be MORE valuable.

I know the reasons why Tuck hasn't been played and I dont agree with them.

It's not like we have 5-6 players pushing 30 years old. I really think Tuck would help Players like Martin and Cotchin "develop". And it's not like we have a many players that have the experience and leadership that Tuck has.

 

[RICHOLEGEND12]

Miller is not someone I wanted. Tuck is no Richo or Cousins, he has never been in top 150 players in the comp and those 2 at one point were top 5.

your saying shane tuck was never even in the top 150 players in the league. i beg to differ

2009 ( played 19 games)

9th in average disposals per game ( played 19 games. players above tuck played 22,25,22,25,23,22,22,24)

5th in contested possesions

69.41 effective (chris judd 70.48 just to show a comparison)


i know stats dont tell the whole story, and im not comparing tuck to players like judd. but i think he was at least in the top 150 players in the league

 

[CamTinley]

Miller is not someone I wanted. Tuck is no Richo or Cousins, he has never been in top 150 players in the comp and those 2 at one point were top 5.

In the last half of 2008 Tuck was the best player in the competition. Champion data produce stats that are pretty much taken universally as the best indicator of a players performance.

In the last half of 2008, Tuck got more points and more average points per game than Gary Ablett Jnr.

This debate is ridiculous, Tuck is still one of the best players in the competition.

I wrote in February 2011, in a now deleted Richmond thread entitled "Schulz has a good day" that Richmond would lose their first four games and that following that 4th loss regardless of how he played, Tuck would be made the scapegoat and would not play again. I was pretty close to getting that spot-on.

I know that when it is all over Tuck will sit back and wonder what could have been.

 

[Richo_Daffy]

this guy hasnt played a senior game in how long? comes back gets 32 touches at 91% effeciency although that stat is not really reflective. anyhow how many players can do that? a few years ago he lead the comp in clearences he hasnt lost that. he is tall, can mark, a beautiful kick for goal. could easily be used in the forward line. martin, cotchin, foley all inside mids you say aswell, you need to rotate these guys through there.
i hope he goes to the gws next year and continues his career as i cant see us holding onto him, which is a huge shame.

 

[Rodney Dangerfield]

Rayzor Cotchin had 38 disposals and 13 clearances! Sorry but that is a ridiculous game and Tuck's wouldn't have been better and certainly wasnt up until 3QT. I thought you said something about efficiency in your previous essay, nevertheless one of the likeminded Tuck lovers did mention it.

Disposal is efficient if player A handball touches player B before opposition doesn't matter if you handball to stationary player that is about to get slammed.

Deledio coming out of backline handballs it too Tuck, clear that Varcoe will follow the sprinting Deledio Tuck still handballs to Lids who is dispossesed. That is just an example, Tuck gets it HBF ****s around handballs to a real spud in Jackson who goes to Graham who goes back to Jackson who gets pinged HTB. Decision making by Tuck harmed us there.

Your experienced players have to be pretty special when it comes to not make **** ups, Newman doesn't turn the ball over or put his team mate in a worse position a habit Tuck has thats why he plays and Tuck doesn't.

This is what does my head in.
By putting forward the 'great Cotchin game"you are completely contradicting yourself regarding Tuck.
We love Cotch he's a gem bit he made some horrendous mistakes today missing targets that left me staggered,made poor choices etc but yeah he win the ball.
Tuck has had games just like that too but the good he brings far far outweighs the bad just like Cotchin.He plays his heart out just like Cotchin.
People cream their pants over this Martin don't argue shit. How many times did you see today and every other time Tuck plays a big bodied smart player just shake off tackles and dispose to advantage?

He's not a world beater but he has a pretty solid game Tuck and brings it week in,week out(when invited) unconditionally in all conditions against all oppositions win or lose.

My arguement against the school of thought or the throw away bullshit line I call it that we can't play him he's not part of the future is why?
Why would far inferior players with absolutely no chance of coming within cooee of Tuck now or in future be played or kept ahead of him because they're 23 and he's 30?
I've yet to hear a reasonable answer.

 

[JAKLAUGHING]

I've yet to hear a reasonable answer.

Quiet right...its always the 'pat' ...toe the line...cliched answers....Tuckys not part of the future!!!....

Well thats an argument you could use for all the players....that mythological way out yonder future...

 

[NQTIGER]

Ahhhhh the future and can anyone tell us hoe many of these players from sunday will be in our next premiersip side?


We all accept that shane wont be , but who will be?

The aim of the game is to win a flag, not be an excuse of a club .

Our players are so used to getting their arses handed to them its second nature, like i said a while ago we dont need to learn how to lose , we have developed that to a fine art.

By not playing your BEST side we will continue to develop losing.

 

[1980GFVideo]

People cream their pants over this Martin don't argue shit.

Thank goodness someone found that tacky rubbish also.

The number of players from other clubs that shake tackles without needing the extension of the arm. But a young player gets the tag because of his compensating for younger body strength.

I like to see players written up as to what they can do but cannot stand the slobbering over them.

I also hope Tuck goes where he will get a fair go. If he is on our list next year it will only because there are no takers. He would be perfect for GWS and I hope he gets a nice pay packet for his last years of footy.

 

[TimeFor11]

Look I have to work today so look forward to continuing this later tonight. To the Fremantle supporter go put that little line Tuck best player in 2008 on the main board. Champion data is a rigid system doesn't take into account how many touches your opponent gets or your decision making. He has never won our b and f so he ain't been our best yet he was the comp best. It's a case of a player getting better the less he is selected.