hes either an aussie or hes not. i dont see any divides
Yes but you also dont see the potential of 200cm+ CHFs / CHBs pinch hitting in the ruck; in the era of Leigh Brown winning a flag in this very role. So diversity and flexibilty may not be your strong points 
cant i reckon you have your wires crossed.
have never said 200cm players should not be used as ruckmen but i have said we should not forgo our tall structure in doing so.
brown made up up a trimvirate of brown cloke and dawes. when he went on the ball they still had their two tall kpfs. brown wasnt expected to play kp and ruck.
pods hawkins and ottens ring a bell at no time would they be without their two kpps. otto would just rest in a pocket and provide a 3rd tall target who had to be respected.
wce kennedy lynch darling with one of the two in cox and natanui going forward.
most sideskeep their structure we dont.
most of the time we have just jack and vickery and when vickery spends his time on ball leaving just jack to be double and triple teamed.not a good scenario for a team who bombs it long a lot.
ive always said we have a genuine ruckman in vickey who should be developed in time as our #1 ruck. we should not be asking him to perform at chf and spend significant time in the ruck 30/40% of a game. hes a bonus player to us because like ottens hes capable of playing forward. all ive ever really asked is we actually develop vickery in his ruck role more and we maintain structure when he is in the ruck.
hence ive constantly called for griffiths or stbury to be developed as a forward creating our own triumvirate of riewoldt, griffiths, and vickery as the third tall/second ruck.
surely we can learn from what other clubs have done succesfully and what has bought them success.
we all agree our forward line doesnt function too well just maybe the structure is all wrong.
