R1 2009 v Your R1 2010

[Jacosh]

Off the top of my head

Vickery to come in and play forward, off the bench.

Can someone please explain to me why people keep putting Vickery in the forward line as his prominant position?? He has played ruck for 90% of his career and occasionally as a forward. He is a ruckman and that is where he should line up come round one, against Kruz.

The same happened with Patto, he was recruited as a CHF/forward and because of our ruck shortages when Simmo went down, Graham was injured and one other was out he was put in the ruck. He was and is too short and did not have the leap, agility or strength to pull that position off and if those players were not injured he would have played out of the ruck about 20% instead of 100%. But as fate would have it everyone bagged Patto as a ruckman....... but he never was one. Vickery is a part time forward at best, he is more of a ruckman that moves forward to kick a couple now and then.

Vickery played his junior football against Natnui and the like and his position is ruck, moving forward. Vickery is a ruckman who should rest at FF but it is NOT his prominant position.

Correct me if im wrong but i believe TV is as good a fwd as ruck, He played fwd quite a bit as a jnr from memory and even in the TAC cup they put him fwd as much as possible.

[WA Tiger]

Can someone please explain to me why people keep putting Vickery in the forward line as his prominant position?? He has played ruck for 90% of his career and occasionally as a forward. He is a ruckman and that is where he should line up come round one, against Kruz.

The same happened with Patto, he was recruited as a CHF/forward and because of our ruck shortages when Simmo went down, Graham was injured and one other was out he was put in the ruck. He was and is too short and did not have the leap, agility or strength to pull that position off and if those players were not injured he would have played out of the ruck about 20% instead of 100%. But as fate would have it everyone bagged Patto as a ruckman....... but he never was one. Vickery is a part time forward at best, he is more of a ruckman that moves forward to kick a couple now and then.

Vickery played his junior football against Natnui and the like and his position is ruck, moving forward. Vickery is a ruckman who should rest at FF but it is NOT his prominant position.

Um because he is 27kg soaking wet. Put him in against more solid bodies for an extended amount of time and your asking for trouble. How about you let him develop?

And how the hell is plonking him at FF against big bodied FB's going to help him develop when he will be smashed from every angle not just front on?????? PLEASE wake up. What size was Kruz when he played his first year...... smaller than Vickery is now mate thats for sure!! Vickery is a ruckman and he needs to develop in the ruck first and formost....IMO

How about you let him develop..... where he should play!!

[WA Tiger]

Off the top of my head

Vickery to come in and play forward, off the bench.

Can someone please explain to me why people keep putting Vickery in the forward line as his prominant position?? He has played ruck for 90% of his career and occasionally as a forward. He is a ruckman and that is where he should line up come round one, against Kruz.

The same happened with Patto, he was recruited as a CHF/forward and because of our ruck shortages when Simmo went down, Graham was injured and one other was out he was put in the ruck. He was and is too short and did not have the leap, agility or strength to pull that position off and if those players were not injured he would have played out of the ruck about 20% instead of 100%. But as fate would have it everyone bagged Patto as a ruckman....... but he never was one. Vickery is a part time forward at best, he is more of a ruckman that moves forward to kick a couple now and then.

Vickery played his junior football against Natnui and the like and his position is ruck, moving forward. Vickery is a ruckman who should rest at FF but it is NOT his prominant position.

Correct me if im wrong but i believe TV is as good a fwd as ruck, He played fwd quite a bit as a jnr from memory and even in the TAC cup they put him fwd as much as possible.

So please re-read my last sentence then!! But he is more a ruckman than a forward, we (some) are trying as supporters to play another young player out of his position and then we can all sit back and ridicule him for being no good as a forward like Patto and even Tuck for that matter when he HAD to play ruck......

Daniel was right, Edwards played off the backline last year WTF and he wasn't the only one, play the players where they are suited and Vickery should go against Kruz opening bounce in this game IMO!!

[Jacosh]

Off the top of my head

Vickery to come in and play forward, off the bench.

Can someone please explain to me why people keep putting Vickery in the forward line as his prominant position?? He has played ruck for 90% of his career and occasionally as a forward. He is a ruckman and that is where he should line up come round one, against Kruz.

The same happened with Patto, he was recruited as a CHF/forward and because of our ruck shortages when Simmo went down, Graham was injured and one other was out he was put in the ruck. He was and is too short and did not have the leap, agility or strength to pull that position off and if those players were not injured he would have played out of the ruck about 20% instead of 100%. But as fate would have it everyone bagged Patto as a ruckman....... but he never was one. Vickery is a part time forward at best, he is more of a ruckman that moves forward to kick a couple now and then.

Vickery played his junior football against Natnui and the like and his position is ruck, moving forward. Vickery is a ruckman who should rest at FF but it is NOT his prominant position.

Correct me if im wrong but i believe TV is as good a fwd as ruck, He played fwd quite a bit as a jnr from memory and even in the TAC cup they put him fwd as much as possible.

So please re-read my last sentence then!! But he is more a ruckman than a forward, we (some) are trying as supporters to play another young player out of his position and then we can all sit back and ridicule him for being no good as a forward like Patto and even Tuck for that matter when he HAD to play ruck......

Daniel was right, Edwards played off the backline last year WTF and he wasn't the only one, play the players where they are suited and Vickery should go against Kruz opening bounce in this game IMO!!

I dont need to re-read you last sentance. Its very clear, i am simply disagreeing with you.
Vickery isnt ready to go up against kruzer yet IMO.
Besides the whole point of my post was that he wont be being played out of position as a fwd, he is as much a fwd as a ruckman. Comparing him playing as a fwd to Edwards in the bacline is comparing apples to oranges.
I have faith in the new coaching team that they will play people in the right position,if that means letting someone like Vickery develop by getting some more game time as a fwd before putting him in the ruck then so be it.

[cub]

Vickery will be a good player guys, just don't expect any miracles next year.

[WA Tiger]

Off the top of my head

Vickery to come in and play forward, off the bench.

Can someone please explain to me why people keep putting Vickery in the forward line as his prominant position?? He has played ruck for 90% of his career and occasionally as a forward. He is a ruckman and that is where he should line up come round one, against Kruz.

The same happened with Patto, he was recruited as a CHF/forward and because of our ruck shortages when Simmo went down, Graham was injured and one other was out he was put in the ruck. He was and is too short and did not have the leap, agility or strength to pull that position off and if those players were not injured he would have played out of the ruck about 20% instead of 100%. But as fate would have it everyone bagged Patto as a ruckman....... but he never was one. Vickery is a part time forward at best, he is more of a ruckman that moves forward to kick a couple now and then.

Vickery played his junior football against Natnui and the like and his position is ruck, moving forward. Vickery is a ruckman who should rest at FF but it is NOT his prominant position.

Correct me if im wrong but i believe TV is as good a fwd as ruck, He played fwd quite a bit as a jnr from memory and even in the TAC cup they put him fwd as much as possible.

So please re-read my last sentence then!! But he is more a ruckman than a forward, we (some) are trying as supporters to play another young player out of his position and then we can all sit back and ridicule him for being no good as a forward like Patto and even Tuck for that matter when he HAD to play ruck......

Daniel was right, Edwards played off the backline last year WTF and he wasn't the only one, play the players where they are suited and Vickery should go against Kruz opening bounce in this game IMO!!

I dont need to re-read you last sentance. Its very clear, i am simply disagreeing with you.
Vickery isnt ready to go up against kruzer yet IMO.
Besides the whole point of my post was that he wont be being played out of position as a fwd, he is as much a fwd as a ruckman. Comparing him playing as a fwd to Edwards in the bacline is comparing apples to oranges.
I have faith in the new coaching team that they will play people in the right position,if that means letting someone like Vickery develop by getting some more game time as a fwd before putting him in the ruck then so be it.

If Vickery isn't ready to go up against Kruz at the moment then why was Kruz (with a smaller frame and in his first year) going up against the best ruckmen in the competition for 20 rounds?

Thats great your disagreeing and it makes for a good argument but IMO he should be ready to go full time into the ruck and part time as a forward when drifting down that way, as he should also do the same drifting back to help out when he can. I wasn't comparing Edwards to Vickery either I was comparing how it affects players when they are played out of their natural positions.

[WA Tiger]

Vickery will be a good player guys, just don't expect any miracles next year.

No one is expecting miricles, but a contributed effort in the ruck would be expected one would think.

[WilliamPowell]

I actually think Vickery is a very very good forward.

Will he be a good ruckman - YEP no dispute there

The kid has footy smarts which means he can play either

Long term the question is what is his best position going to be?

Most would say as a ruckman, personally I wouldn't be surprsied if it is as a KP Forward

[Hellenic Tiger]

Comparisons with Kruezer are apt at this stage of TV career.
However just as Kruezer, Ty was recruited primarily as a ruckman.
Just like Kruezer in his first season Ty was more remembered for his play up forward than his ruckwork. I remember Kruezer kicking 3 in the last quarter at AAMI when the Scum beat the Bogans there in 2008.
Assuming that Kruezer was a little more consistent in the ruck this year and up forward I would tend to think the same will apply to Ty.

Will end up being a very good player for us either way whether forward or ruckman.

For those of us who watched in the 1990's our current CEO had a very respectable career as a CHF and in his later years as a ruckman. Take it easy people the kid has shown enough signs that he will be at the minimum a serviceable player whether it be a ruckman of forward.

[torch]

15. Farmer          2. Thursfield           18. Rance                 
14. Polo            16. McGuane            17. Newman
                                                                           
32. Cousins          3. Deledio             30. Tambling 

9. Cotchin          37. Post                 20. Morton
35. White            8. Riewoldt            26. Nahas

5. Simmonds

23. Jackson          41. Foley

40. Moore          25. Graham          21. Tuck          22. Martin
       

[WA Tiger]

Comparisons with Kruezer are apt at this stage of TV career.

Comparisons regarding their similar build is all I was referring too TB. I just believe if Kruz at his size in his first season could go up against the best ruckman for 20 rounds then surley Vickery could do the same next year and he will be bigger. He is about the same size and Kruz now and come round one they should go toe to toe.... IMO.

I do agree with the rest of your post though.

[Infamy]

Comparisons with Kruezer are apt at this stage of TV career.

Comparisons regarding their similar build is all I was referring too TB. I just believe if Kruz at his size in his first season could go up against the best ruckman for 20 rounds then surley Vickery could do the same next year and he will be bigger. He is about the same size and Kruz now and come round one they should go toe to toe.... IMO.

I do agree with the rest of your post though.

Sorry WAT, Kreuzer had cameos in the ruck in his 2nd year, but he certainly wasn't their #1 ruckman. Playing our kids in the ruck too much as their bodies are developing then you end up with an injury affected player like Josh Fraser. Play him in the ruck against other younger ruckmen, but he shouldn't be competing against guys like Sandilands.

[WA Tiger]

Comparisons with Kruezer are apt at this stage of TV career.

Comparisons regarding their similar build is all I was referring too TB. I just believe if Kruz at his size in his first season could go up against the best ruckman for 20 rounds then surley Vickery could do the same next year and he will be bigger. He is about the same size and Kruz now and come round one they should go toe to toe.... IMO.

I do agree with the rest of your post though.

Sorry WAT, Kreuzer had cameos in the ruck in his 2nd year, but he certainly wasn't their #1 ruckman. Playing our kids in the ruck too much as their bodies are developing then you end up with an injury affected player like Josh Fraser. Play him in the ruck against other younger ruckmen, but he shouldn't be competing against guys like Sandilands.

I didn't say he was their #1 ruckman but I actually thought he played a hell of a lot in the ruck and he did go up against the best when he had a smaller frame like Vickery. I really think Vickery could make a statement in this game and I don't believe he would be affected in any way including injuries. I know he will probably play off the bench relieving Simmonds & Graham in this game and playing forward as well. But I would like to see him line up at the first bounce and see what he has got.

[Infamy]

I don't understand the need to try and rush his development so early. He's 12 months into what is hopefully a 12-15 year career, you don't want to impact his prime years by battering his young body against 120kg behemoths now. Let him develop physically first and gradually increase his exposure to more and more ruck contests.

[WA Tiger]

No rush Infamy but he is a ruckman in the making and needs more exposure to the ruck this year IMO, let's start that round one.