http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-05-09/the-inquirer-are-ruckmen-valuable Something Skippos and I regularly disagree on. I'm of the thinking that unless you have yourself an elite ruckman who can effect the game in both the hitout game and around the ground they're pretty useless and easily replaced/negated. Skippos obviously thinks they're extremely important and a essentially a necessity to win a premiership. Thoughts?
I read that earlier today and was pleasantly surprised. You're 10% more likely to win a game if you win the hitouts to advantage. That's a pretty big increase in chances just due to what the ruckman offers at the tap, let alone around the ground.
inb4 everyone votes option 2 because they agree with the latter bit not the point itself such a leading question/answer combo
In todays game your ruckman needs to be able to impact the game on the ground. A pure tap ruckman wont survive in today's game, although I see how valuable it is to have a ruckman putting it down blokes throats
Not a necessity, but it goes a long way. Need to judge them on work around the ground as opposed to hit outs more harshly though. For example: Ruckwork - Maric = Hampson Around the ground - Maric >>>>Hampson But generally people only bring hit-outs into the convo when judging rucks.
I've wonder what percentage of winning hitouts translates to being able to carry someone who does less round the field? Can someone who wins 65% of hitouts do 20% less round the field in other aspects then someone who wins 50% of hitouts and be considered more effective?
I'd happily sacrifice 15% of Hammer's hit-outs if it meant he did 15% extra around the ground personally.
