Author Topic: Shane Tuck [merged]  (Read 69061 times)

Offline eliminator

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 3902
Re: Tuck
« Reply #600 on: August 08, 2011, 05:20:11 PM »
 "He should use Tucky to his full protential & have him protecting & releasing Cotchin & Martin" totally agree. Use Tuck's strength in getting hard ball and get better ball users around him

Online one-eyed

  • Administrator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 100506
    • One-Eyed Richmond
Shane Tuck - The bodyguard (Age)
« Reply #601 on: August 10, 2011, 03:09:56 AM »
The bodyguard
Jake Niall
August 10, 2011


OF THE various factors cited as responsible for the disturbing blowouts in recent weeks and for the vast gap between best and worst teams, the most underestimated is what you might call the Shane Tuck trap.

Tuck has played only six games this season, but has played in three winning teams. When the Tigers were smashed by Carlton by 103 points in round 15, neither Tuck nor fellow hard body Brad Miller were in the 22, and they didn't play in the club's no less humiliating loss to Gold Coast a fortnight later.

To the chagrin of many Richmond people, including Kevin Bartlett, Tuck is regularly overlooked for selection, even though he would appear to be more capable of competing - certainly physically - than many of the skinny cubs who play regularly.

The reason Tuck doesn't play more often is no mystery. He's an older journeyman, with some disposal limitations, and the Tigers would prefer to put games into youngsters than invest in a 29-year-old who won't be part of their next premiership-contending team (whenever that happens).

Having slumped to their lowest ebb in the Carlton and Gold Coast games, the Tigers recalled Tuck for the Geelong game in round 18, which shaped as a massacre. Tuck, presumably aware of what's at stake - his career - responded with 32 disposals to be one of Richmond's best. He followed up with 29 touches against West Coast.

Geelong beat Richmond by 10 goals but, in the context of the beatings inflicted by Geelong, Collingwood and Carlton over inexperienced and lowly teams of late, a 62-point loss to the Cats borders on respectable.

The Tigers were far better against the Eagles in Perth on Sunday, despite the 57-point margin. At three-quarter-time, they trailed by 27 and were competitive for much of the game.

The presence of Tuck and Miller against West Coast undoubtedly helped coach Damien Hardwick to sandbag the extent of the loss, just as Melbourne might have suffered fewer blowouts this year had it retained James McDonald and Cameron Bruce and given its answer to Tuck and Miller - Joel Macdonald - more games.

Richmond and Melbourne are more prone to severe beatings than, say, Sydney, because they've taken uncompromising paths in building a list, adopting a Logan's Run approach (a 1970s sci-fi film in which everyone is incinerated on their 30th birthday).

It is no coincidence that the clubs that have taken the most pure versions of youth policies are those that have suffered the greatest blowouts. Gold Coast, obviously, is the standout example.

With half a team comprised of teenagers every week, thrashings are not only expected and even predicted by the Suns, they're considered excusable. Kids simply cannot compete with the men of Geelong.

The Port Adelaide that was subjected to the club's largest defeat had just half a dozen 100-game players, and one of them was Chad Cornes, who has been used sparingly this year for the same reason as Tuck. Collingwood might have given some kids a game - Luke Rounds and Alex Fasolo - but those youngsters were surrounded by hard bodies; the Pies had no less than 13 players with 100 games-plus experience on Saturday.

As Port football operations chief and ex-Bulldogs coach Peter Rohde noted last night, the ''bigger, stronger, mature'' teams have increased their advantage over the young sides, ''especially as the year's worn on''.

Rohde and others in list-management roles observe that the list-building template today is to invest games in youngsters as soon as possible. Necessarily, this means fewer opportunities for the likes of Tuck and Miller, whose only hope of getting a regular game is to perform the role of bodyguards for the kids - protecting them from physical punishment that mature monsters can mete out.

As in life, inequality has many causes in the AFL. But the fashion of pursuing a pure youth track, best illustrated by Tuck's tribulations, is perhaps the elephant in the blowout room.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/the-bodyguard-20110809-1il12.html#ixzz1UYJi6vn3

Offline yellowandback

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 4025
Re: Shane Tuck [merged]
« Reply #602 on: August 10, 2011, 06:34:50 AM »
If they must de-list him, put him on the rookie list. Compared to Hislop & Miller, he is a far better option.

It's that simple Spud
"I discussed (it) with my three daughters, my wife and my 82-year-old mum, because it has really affected me … If those comments … were made about one of my daughters, it would make the hairs on the back of my neck stand up. I would not have liked it at all.”

Jackstar is back again

  • Guest
Re: Shane Tuck [merged]
« Reply #603 on: August 10, 2011, 07:07:11 AM »
Club have made a mistake with Tuck.they won't up to it either

Offline Oiafi

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 626
  • Against logic there is no armour like ignorance.
Re: Shane Tuck [merged]
« Reply #604 on: August 10, 2011, 11:37:54 AM »
Club have made a mistake with Tuck.they won't up to it either

In your opinion. Fellow posters decide how much that opinion is worth for themselves.

Offline Loui Tufga

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 4853
  • Beaver BLT
Re: Shane Tuck [merged]
« Reply #605 on: August 10, 2011, 11:56:54 AM »
Club have made a mistake with Tuck.they won't up to it either

Fellow posters decide how much that opinion is worth for themselves.

SFA, IMO :lol

Offline MintOnLamb

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 3866
  • You have to think anyway, so why not think big? DT
Re: Shane Tuck [merged]
« Reply #606 on: August 15, 2011, 09:58:22 AM »
How can the club not take up Tucks contract.
Just give him another year get him to get the tough ball. I reckon he would have been the difference in 3 games this year. Carlton opener, St Kilda and Sydney. Probably Port as well as he get in and grabs the ball.

I thought Post played a good game. Edwards did some really good stuff and although one raindrop doesn't make a storm at least he had some recognition and results from the 1 percenters.

Foley's disposal wasn't the best and Farmer still has work to do.

I find it interesting to note that when Tuck makes a bad kick everyone is onto him, when the cotch makes a bad decision well that is OK.

When Cotch was shut down maybe switch with Delidio for 10 minutes, give lids a short run in the centre and Cotch a chance to deliver from the backline. Would this be unrealistic??

End of the day they are only footy players and are going to make mistakes. At least they are having a dip.

Great effort and I thought Thursfield combined well with Rance. There were some good desperate efforts and the team seemed to 'Gel"

Good to see Jacky R reverse leading and also delivering to reverse leads.

At the end of the day if we delist Tucky and Thursfield I think a great mistake. Post should get more game time. Will be exciting next year with Grimes and Moore back in. I also thought that the back line was much better without McGuane. Is there any light for him??
Rance is getting better and better. Nahas was excellent.

Offline Fruity Morgan

  • Jack Dyer medallist
  • ***
  • Posts: 186
Re: Shane Tuck [merged]
« Reply #607 on: August 15, 2011, 10:13:57 AM »
I guess it's not all about Tuck.  Depends on whether he has any trade value and also whats available at Coburg and in the draft.

Offline Owl

  • Magnificent Bastard
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 7012
  • Bring me TWO chickens
Re: Shane Tuck [merged]
« Reply #608 on: August 15, 2011, 10:19:38 AM »
I think Tucky was out working on things too.  In the past he was very good at winning ball but it was what he did with it, now he is making good use of the ball he wins.  He seems to be marking a lot more than in the past too and competing around the ground in a more positive way than just bulldozing through packs.  I don't think at the start of the year he would of been playing like that, some of these things are new dimensions to his game and they have made him a lot more potent.
Lots of people name their swords......

Offline Fruity Morgan

  • Jack Dyer medallist
  • ***
  • Posts: 186
Re: Shane Tuck [merged]
« Reply #609 on: August 15, 2011, 10:43:34 AM »
I think Tucky was out working on things too.  In the past he was very good at winning ball but it was what he did with it, now he is making good use of the ball he wins.  He seems to be marking a lot more than in the past too and competing around the ground in a more positive way than just bulldozing through packs.  I don't think at the start of the year he would of been playing like that, some of these things are new dimensions to his game and they have made him a lot more potent.

i agree.  In the past he was like a tougher version of Andrew Raines.  Get the ball and boot it.  Sort of like a defensive Wayne Campbell but with more heart.

Offline MintOnLamb

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 3866
  • You have to think anyway, so why not think big? DT
Re: Shane Tuck [merged]
« Reply #610 on: August 15, 2011, 10:54:19 AM »
You know Owl I think you are right. Tuck's disposal has improved in these 3 games back.
I would imagine that our coaches would work with players to identify their weaknesses deficiencies and improve their overall game. So well done to the coaching staff :clapping :whistle ????

Offline MintOnLamb

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 3866
  • You have to think anyway, so why not think big? DT
Re: Shane Tuck [merged]
« Reply #611 on: August 15, 2011, 10:55:58 AM »
Interesting to note Andrew Raines seems to be developing nicely.

Offline Owl

  • Magnificent Bastard
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 7012
  • Bring me TWO chickens
Re: Shane Tuck [merged]
« Reply #612 on: August 15, 2011, 01:06:34 PM »
I realise this but everyone is sh it canning the decision to leave him out so long.  I was trying to be subtle lol
I actually thought Raines could of been or maybe still could be a good footballer.
Lots of people name their swords......

Offline eliminator

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 3902
Re: Shane Tuck [merged]
« Reply #613 on: August 15, 2011, 01:50:05 PM »
Tuck played very well against the swans. He set up scoring opportunities. He deserves to get another contract. He has a positive effect on the side.

Ox

  • Guest
Re: Shane Tuck [merged]
« Reply #614 on: August 15, 2011, 01:56:50 PM »

I find it interesting to note that when Tuck makes a bad kick everyone is onto him, when the cotch makes a bad decision well that is OK



 :clapping :clapping :clapping :clapping

stuffen rawlings,wallace and stuff have all burnt tuck.

IMBECILE COACHES.