-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Nankervis !!
- Thread starter Tigaman
- Start date
I have been harping on for years that hit outs are the most overrated statistic in the game. Give me a ruckman who makes his mids walk taller and clear a path for them any day. Love the work the Nank has been doing so far, clearly our best performer out of the three new recruits!Barnzy said:
;D
tha8ball said:
He's already passed Stafford on what he has done in his first 3 games for us, all Stafford did was get suspended. I hope Nankervis turns out nothing like Stafford.
Barnzy said:
You rang? Far too busy and (usually) too sensible to spend much time on PRE these days, I'm sorry. But since you mention it:
- You won't have to search too hard to find I was a big advocate of RFC getting Nank late 2016
- At least matched by Kreuzer, beaten by Grundy, and was thrashed in HOs by, wait-for-it - Giles and Vardy of Wet Toast, who combined for 52 HOs to 27 with Elton only credited with 5.
- It may have escaped your notice our pair were credited with 4 CLR, Elton 0. Giles and Vardy, 5 combined. That is -1, Branzy.
- It may have escaped your notice also that the huge difference in our CLRs was due to a certain D. Martin who is in brilliant form, with 15. Next best Cotch 5, not much after. Otherwise, WCE crew would have won CLRs strongly with combo of Shuey 10, Gaff 7, Priddis 5, Redden 4
- Possibly you could examine the impact of PA getting Ryder back (until now!) with his HOs; any link to their improved results 2017?
- Sandi dominated HOs against Dogs, but that's why they won the flag. They have superb CLR players, but wasn't enough this time
Re Hampson:
- To repeat for the umpteenth time: my contention was a) he was the best choice in '16 and that b) he put in a solid effort, improved on most criteria
- I argue it's much better to win HOs if possible. However, HOTA is more material. But this depends on successful work and tactics of whole midfield team; obviously not solely on the ruck
- He was injured from pre-season; placed on LTIL. Not relegated; an irrelevant term therefore
Furthermore (and this again demonstrates why I should not be up late on PRE because I could add a lot more, and should be in bed already), I am very satisfied with Nank's effort and progress thus far. BUT, I am concerned about the lack of support for him (hope Griff is fit to play this week and all season!!??), plus the similar dependence on Martin's brilliance. Presto given 2 CLRs, Caddy 1 in this last match!
I expect we should beat Brisvegas, but as much as I was there and relished the win at the G, I can see the other coaches plotting our downfall already. It looks pretty simple perhaps: curtail Martin, some of the SFs who are light, small and very young anyway, have a top ruck reduce Nank's effect ... Not rocket science.
I'm not one to get carried away; the scars of a long-time RFC follower - about any one player, or 3 early games. IF the Scum or Wet Toast could kick straighter, the ladder might look quite different. But,
GO TIGES.
Geelong dont play a ruck in the last quarter against North.
Grigg does his trick against Pies.
Libba nominates to ruck against Sandi.
Teams are playing an extra mid and not worrying about the hit out.
Teams losing hitouts constantly winning clearances and games.
I think we can officially say the hit out is dead and dusted as a serious indicator of anything other than you are likely to lose the clearance.
Grigg does his trick against Pies.
Libba nominates to ruck against Sandi.
Teams are playing an extra mid and not worrying about the hit out.
Teams losing hitouts constantly winning clearances and games.
I think we can officially say the hit out is dead and dusted as a serious indicator of anything other than you are likely to lose the clearance.
This morning when Nankervis was training with the other rucks, he spent a good 20 mins practising 'soft taps'. And they were beautiful. I'm not surprised he avoids hitting it to disadvantage.
I will say though, that Hampson trained with the main group for the second half. He's probably not far off fitness...
I will say though, that Hampson trained with the main group for the second half. He's probably not far off fitness...
Richmond Rucks Comparative Clearances 2017
Round 1
Nankervis/Griffiths = 3/1
Kreuzer/Casboult = 4/1
Round 2
Nankervis/Griffiths* = 7/1
Grundy/White = 6/1
Round 3
Nankervis/Elton = 4/0
Giles/Vardy = 3/2
By and large the best single number to look at as a guide to Nank's day is clearances. Comparative for context. He's a ground ruck not an aerial ruck. A tank not a helicopter. We want him to get individual clearances and stop them getting clearances, particularly their rucks.
I've just put these together but you can see straight away that they bear out the notion that Nank's best game for us by a street was against Grundy and that Giles and Vardy did far better against him than we would have liked.
The other number is tackles but I can't get comparative tackles in the ruck area. Toby's tackles will be mainly in the ruck area. Clearances/tackles matters. If you're getting ten clearances you've got the ball - no need to tackle. OTOH if your opponent is getting ten clearances and you're not tackling what the *smile* are you doing? If TOby walks off the park with ten clearances and six tackles he's probably BOG. Very loose but some guide to Toby's performance defensively:
Ruck Tackles 2017
Round 1
Nankervis/Griffiths = 3/6
Kreuzer/Casboult = 4/2
Round 2
Nankervis/Griffiths* = 2/0
Grundy/White = 2/2
Round 3
Nankervis/Elton = 2/4
Giles/Vardy = 4/0
It is clear that Nank is not laying enough tackles at this stage. We're cultivating young Nank's ball-winning game and he's going for the ball not the man. Fair enough. We saw him outGrundy Grundy a couple of weeks ago. At crucial stages. But last week Giles (who is not much chop) was running around by himself with the football. There's a price to pay.
IMO Nank was a bit off against WCE. I think it's because it's the first time he's faced a ruck pair. So far it's been one ruck and a part timer. Giles and Vardy as a pair equalled our man. And of course, our man was unsupported so tired. Fair enough. And he's a child. There's no damnation here. It's about weaknesses and improvement.
When you overlook or excue machine a bloke's failures you miss the choice observation of the improvement. Improvement is the good stuff.
Nank is going to come up against much better pairs than WCE served up last week. And it's his second area of vulnerability.
While we look at his ground ruck numbers we're overlooking another big factor. The aerial ruck game. We're going to have to look at that as it unfolds over the season.
* Griffiths injured. Occasionally replaced by Grigg as a ploy.
Round 1
Nankervis/Griffiths = 3/1
Kreuzer/Casboult = 4/1
Round 2
Nankervis/Griffiths* = 7/1
Grundy/White = 6/1
Round 3
Nankervis/Elton = 4/0
Giles/Vardy = 3/2
By and large the best single number to look at as a guide to Nank's day is clearances. Comparative for context. He's a ground ruck not an aerial ruck. A tank not a helicopter. We want him to get individual clearances and stop them getting clearances, particularly their rucks.
I've just put these together but you can see straight away that they bear out the notion that Nank's best game for us by a street was against Grundy and that Giles and Vardy did far better against him than we would have liked.
The other number is tackles but I can't get comparative tackles in the ruck area. Toby's tackles will be mainly in the ruck area. Clearances/tackles matters. If you're getting ten clearances you've got the ball - no need to tackle. OTOH if your opponent is getting ten clearances and you're not tackling what the *smile* are you doing? If TOby walks off the park with ten clearances and six tackles he's probably BOG. Very loose but some guide to Toby's performance defensively:
Ruck Tackles 2017
Round 1
Nankervis/Griffiths = 3/6
Kreuzer/Casboult = 4/2
Round 2
Nankervis/Griffiths* = 2/0
Grundy/White = 2/2
Round 3
Nankervis/Elton = 2/4
Giles/Vardy = 4/0
It is clear that Nank is not laying enough tackles at this stage. We're cultivating young Nank's ball-winning game and he's going for the ball not the man. Fair enough. We saw him outGrundy Grundy a couple of weeks ago. At crucial stages. But last week Giles (who is not much chop) was running around by himself with the football. There's a price to pay.
IMO Nank was a bit off against WCE. I think it's because it's the first time he's faced a ruck pair. So far it's been one ruck and a part timer. Giles and Vardy as a pair equalled our man. And of course, our man was unsupported so tired. Fair enough. And he's a child. There's no damnation here. It's about weaknesses and improvement.
When you overlook or excue machine a bloke's failures you miss the choice observation of the improvement. Improvement is the good stuff.
Nank is going to come up against much better pairs than WCE served up last week. And it's his second area of vulnerability.
While we look at his ground ruck numbers we're overlooking another big factor. The aerial ruck game. We're going to have to look at that as it unfolds over the season.
* Griffiths injured. Occasionally replaced by Grigg as a ploy.
SCOOP said:
9 was a good gross against Collingwood, SCOOP. Against Grundy's 8.
This bloke is gunna get to 10+ average.
lamb22 said:
Some days he just won't be able to get it as much, Robert. In time we will need him to tighten up. But right now he has a pretty free rein. He's learning the caper, well and quickly. Let him bust his arse getting the bloody thing.
Dyer'ere said:
That's it, Jack. Let the young fella continue to have a crack at the game and the footy. He seems to enjoy the contest. And, as you say, "he's learning the caper", so I am a bit inclined to give him some freedom to go with his instincts and natural style of playing. The Tigers have, potentially, a ruckman who could be a future influencing and dominating big man force.
