#19 Cameron Wood

[Brenny]

Monco, I reckon you need to update your opinion of Minson. He has improved a lot over the last year or two, and has played a fair part in making life difficult for us in previous games. Why the Scraggers had him running around in the twos till this week, I have no idea.

Ignoring Brown, our third best ruckman is probably Chris Dawes. Yes! - but obviously he has other tasks. Cloke has taken hitout duty now and again too, and he's certainly built for it, but you wuildn't waste Trav in a ruck role. I suppose that leaves Keefe, though he is more of a giant KPP.

Spot on about Minson.

He did many stupid things last year, but last night I thought that was his best game in a very long time.

Was sitting near some dogs supporters, they also said they couldn't believe how well he played.

Just putting this out there, have you considered that perhaps a reason why Minson played such a great game and surprised all Dogs fans was because Wood allowed him the freedom to do as he pleased?

It's like the old saying, 'you can only play as well as your opponent lets you!' I said Wood was Ok, but Minson killed him (well, maybe not killed him but beat him), and one good game from Minson against Wood does not make Minson any less of a spud that he has always been. My opinion on Minson stands until I see at least half a season of this type of ruck work from him.

I think our overall strength around the ground should be enough to cover Wood (in finals) as our #1 ruckman if "touch wood" we ever lose Jolly. Couldn't have said that before mid-2010 though.

Same could be said about Wood, played well only because it was against Minson.

But at the end of the day, as you said, you can only play aswell as your opponent.

But regardless, Minson played well as did Wood. Apart from the tap outs, their games were dead set even.

Minson was tearing up the VFL and I think justified his position in the seniors this week.

Not bagging Wood or Minson. As I said, look at the stats... games were dead set even and I do believe SC points are a good example of how well somebody played. Usually they are spot on. 111/112 points.

[Monco Matt]

Monco, I reckon you need to update your opinion of Minson. He has improved a lot over the last year or two, and has played a fair part in making life difficult for us in previous games. Why the Scraggers had him running around in the twos till this week, I have no idea.

Ignoring Brown, our third best ruckman is probably Chris Dawes. Yes! - but obviously he has other tasks. Cloke has taken hitout duty now and again too, and he's certainly built for it, but you wuildn't waste Trav in a ruck role. I suppose that leaves Keefe, though he is more of a giant KPP.

Spot on about Minson.

He did many stupid things last year, but last night I thought that was his best game in a very long time.

Was sitting near some dogs supporters, they also said they couldn't believe how well he played.

Just putting this out there, have you considered that perhaps a reason why Minson played such a great game and surprised all Dogs fans was because Wood allowed him the freedom to do as he pleased?

It's like the old saying, 'you can only play as well as your opponent lets you!' I said Wood was Ok, but Minson killed him (well, maybe not killed him but beat him), and one good game from Minson against Wood does not make Minson any less of a spud that he has always been. My opinion on Minson stands until I see at least half a season of this type of ruck work from him.

I think our overall strength around the ground should be enough to cover Wood (in finals) as our #1 ruckman if "touch wood" we ever lose Jolly. Couldn't have said that before mid-2010 though.

Same could be said about Wood, played well only because it was against Minson.

But at the end of the day, as you said, you can only play aswell as your opponent.

But regardless, Minson played well as did Wood. Apart from the tap outs, their games were dead set even.

Minson was tearing up the VFL and I think justified his position in the seniors this week.

Not bagging Wood or Minson. As I said, look at the stats... games were dead set even and I do believe SC points are a good example of how well somebody played. Usually they are spot on. 111/112 points.

I think we can draw two conclusions here:

1.) Both Wood & Minson are of similar ability and nullify each other to the point that both appear to play good games when they are opponents.

2.) Tearing it up the VFL is like placing a winning bet on Hay List in the country and then backing Hay List in to beat Black Caviar and watching Hay List get creamed and wondering why that can be? VFL = AFL circa 1965.

[Brenny]

Monco, I reckon you need to update your opinion of Minson. He has improved a lot over the last year or two, and has played a fair part in making life difficult for us in previous games. Why the Scraggers had him running around in the twos till this week, I have no idea.

Ignoring Brown, our third best ruckman is probably Chris Dawes. Yes! - but obviously he has other tasks. Cloke has taken hitout duty now and again too, and he's certainly built for it, but you wuildn't waste Trav in a ruck role. I suppose that leaves Keefe, though he is more of a giant KPP.

Spot on about Minson.

He did many stupid things last year, but last night I thought that was his best game in a very long time.

Was sitting near some dogs supporters, they also said they couldn't believe how well he played.

Just putting this out there, have you considered that perhaps a reason why Minson played such a great game and surprised all Dogs fans was because Wood allowed him the freedom to do as he pleased?

It's like the old saying, 'you can only play as well as your opponent lets you!' I said Wood was Ok, but Minson killed him (well, maybe not killed him but beat him), and one good game from Minson against Wood does not make Minson any less of a spud that he has always been. My opinion on Minson stands until I see at least half a season of this type of ruck work from him.

I think our overall strength around the ground should be enough to cover Wood (in finals) as our #1 ruckman if "touch wood" we ever lose Jolly. Couldn't have said that before mid-2010 though.

Same could be said about Wood, played well only because it was against Minson.

But at the end of the day, as you said, you can only play aswell as your opponent.

But regardless, Minson played well as did Wood. Apart from the tap outs, their games were dead set even.

Minson was tearing up the VFL and I think justified his position in the seniors this week.

Not bagging Wood or Minson. As I said, look at the stats... games were dead set even and I do believe SC points are a good example of how well somebody played. Usually they are spot on. 111/112 points.

I think we can draw two conclusions here:

1.) Both Wood & Minson are of similar ability and nullify each other to the point that both appear to play good games when they are opponents.

2.) Tearing it up the VFL is like placing a winning bet on Hay List in the country and then backing Hay List in to beat Black Caviar and watching Hay List get creamed and wondering why that can be? VFL = AFL circa 1965.

Agree with point 1.

Unfortunately with point 2, the gap between AFL and VFL is getting bigger. So it's the only things teams have to go by. Unless they bring back the reserves??

I agree with your point 2, but unless there is a comp that's near AFl the gap will always be quite large.

[stui magpie]

I believe the centre tap outs are more vital.

I believe it was 12/12 or something along those lines?

I'm the complete opposite. I reckon the centre bounces are totally over rated. the way teams set up, even if you smack it straight down a team mates throat it's unlikely to lead to much of an advantage.

The stoppages around the ground is where the gold can be mined. If you can set up your structure in the congestion to hevae 1 or more players free, and have a ruck who can deliver the ball to one of them, that is rolled gold.

[jackcass]

I believe the centre tap outs are more vital.

I believe it was 12/12 or something along those lines?

I was just about to make the same comment. Minson out-muscled Wood in the around the ground ruck contests but it was pretty even in the centre. Overall, thought Wood's game was very good.

[pietillidie]

The stats in The Aged showed the Wood/Minson hit outs were closer than reported on the afl.com.au site, too:

afl.com.au: 29-56
The Aged: 37-54

That may be an error, but either way hit out stats are surely amongst the most dodgy both technically and as a guide to anything meaningful, even if you got pedantic about it and took game time into account.

[uuuuu..... The LoneSTAR]

1. I would suggest Wood is a more skilled player overall than Minson. Let's not forget he's also 2 years younger and has played less than 50 games compared to Wil's 100 odd!
Having said that, I think Cam should be progressing better.

2. Although the 'hit-out' stat may not give a clear indication if an advantage was gained, a lopsided ledger tends to suggest someone was owned in the ruck contests on the night.

[Duff Soviet Union]

1. I would suggest Wood is a more skilled player overall than Minson. Let's not forget he's also 2 years younger and has played less than 50 games compared to Wil's 100 odd!
Having said that, I think Cam should be progressing better.

2. Although the 'hit-out' stat may not give a clear indication if an advantage was gained, a lopsided ledger tends to suggest someone was owned in the ruck contests on the night.

Again, who cares if he was "owned" in the hit outs if we smashed them in the clearances anyway? Hit outs are worthless. How many times a game do you see a ruckman hit it down a midfielders throat? Once, twice? How many times did it happen yesterday? I don't remember one. That's not an isolated incident either. The correlation between hit outs and team clearances is zero. Not minimal, not "smaller than some people think, zero.

[uuuuu..... The LoneSTAR]

Again, who cares if he was "owned" in the hit outs if we smashed them in the clearances anyway? Hit outs are worthless. How many times a game do you see a ruckman hit it down a midfielders throat? Once, twice? How many times did it happen yesterday? I don't remember one. That's not an isolated incident either. The correlation between hit outs and team clearances is zero. Not minimal, not "smaller than some people think, zero.

I try not to get caught up in stats too much. IMHO someone who can win ruck contests as part of their artillery is a valuable asset.

The ability to plan offense from a stoppage is a distinct advantage as opposed to being on the back foot.

Regarding yesterdays game, I thought the dogs looked to put the ball over the boundary line at every opportunity. Would they be doing that if Jolly was dictating the ruck??..... maybe, maybe not?

[AN_Inkling]

^^I'm not sure they intentionally put the ball out, more to do with the conditions and lack of options. We went out of bounds plenty going forward too.

If that was the plan, it didn't work for them. We won the clearances.

[1eyedpie]

^^I'm not sure they intentionally put the ball out, more to do with the conditions and lack of options. We went out of bounds plenty going forward too.If that was the plan, it didn't work for them. We won the clearances.

Yes I thought this was the case too. Many a time we went deep to the pocket forcing it over the line and creating the stoppage close to goal.

[HAL]

Which ones?