The Roar
The Roar

AFL
Advertisement

The nine AFL clubs that should drop their ruckmen

Roar Rookie
21st May, 2017
Advertisement
Shane Mumford is out. (again). (AAP Image/Tracey Nearmy)
Roar Rookie
21st May, 2017
65
2812 Reads

The last ten premiership sides enjoy some very similar traits.

In most cases they are one of the best teams in the league in terms of winning and maintaining possession. This ball winning ability enables them to score heavily while also limiting the number of entries into their defensive fifty that they give up.

What these sides don’t display is any trend of ruck superiority by the way of hit-out dominance over their opponents. Premiership teams in this period have been just as likely to finish in the bottom half as the top half of league hit-out rankings and none of them have finished higher than third in this category.

Given that there is no strong correlation between the numbers of hit-outs won and team success, it would seem clear that a ruckmen must be able to add significantly in traditionally non-core ruck activities.

The criteria to measure this would include a ruckman’s ability to improve their side in at least one of the following areas: (1) midfield depth and running capacity, (2) defensive rebounding and intercept marking prowess, or (3) ability to provide an around the grounds marking or forward fifty scoring option that doesn’t allow opponents easy rebounding opportunities when the ball is turned over.

Measured against this criteria, the ruckman from Round 9 teams (as well Round 8 Port Adelaide and Gold Coast teams) that don’t contribute consistently enough in these areas to continue warrant selection are: Shane Mumford (GWS), Sam Jacobs (Adelaide), Zac Smith (Geelong), Billy Longer (St Kilda), Toby Nankervis (Richmond), Matthew Leunberger (Essendon), Nathan Vardy (WCE), Aaron Sandilands (Fremantle) and Jarrod Witts (Gold Coast Suns).

Greater Western Sydney's Shane Mumford

(AAP Image/Tracey Nearmy)

The nine clubs these players represent would be better served by looking at alternative ruck options – options that are more aligned with improving key performance metrics that have a stronger correlation with success.

Advertisement

Melbourne’s Cameron Pedersen is the poster boy for the new look ruckman. Standing at a relatively short 193 centimetres his career to this points has been that of a journeymen and somewhat accidental ruckman.

Although Pedersen might not look like the traditional AFL ruckman and lose the hit-out count more often that he wins it (and in most cases comprehensively), his overall impact as both a goal scorer and around the ground marking option more than compensates.

Also importantly, Pedersen as a third tall forward as opposed to a ruckman, is relatively cheaper than many current first choice ruckman, meaning funds can be better spent on players whose performances will more directly relate to wins for your club.

One might be at first considered crazy, for suggesting you would take Pedersen over a four-time All-Australian in Aaron Sandilands as your first choice ruck, but if a vote for Pedersen also meant you could afford to attract an additional player to your club, one of a good to very good standard, be they a contested possession player or a running half back with great foot skills – the choice in the today’s AFL is an easy one.

The AFL has long prided itself of being a game for all shapes and sizes, if this is to continue and for there to be a place for taller players in the game there will need to be a rule change.

Of the rule changes currently being trialled in pre-season or feeder competitions, the only one that would seem to have the potential to be a saviour for the taller player is the concept of zones. Whereby, at all times, teams must maintain a minimum number of players inside their forward and defensive 50 metre areas.

In a game where the ability to run off a taller opponent inside the forward fifty is limited, and thus the aerobic requirement on a forward is less, there is a stronger case for the inclusion of a taller marking options. Without such a rule change the days of each team selecting a traditional AFL ruckmen are numbered if not already gone.

Advertisement
close