At least Gardi won his last game
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4655
- Joined: Sun 18 Jun 2006 2:04pm
- Location: Melb
- Has thanked: 5 times
- Been thanked: 23 times
Mumford mauled us a fortnight ago. He mauled Geelong last week. Had a shocker yesterday and was beaten comprehensively by Leunberger.
I dunno...I am not sure Bigmac can compete with him atm,he looks spent. Having said that not certain Gardi can stand up for four quarters either. Agree can't have both
Does Baker come in to take on Rohan? He is dangerous atm
I dunno...I am not sure Bigmac can compete with him atm,he looks spent. Having said that not certain Gardi can stand up for four quarters either. Agree can't have both
Does Baker come in to take on Rohan? He is dangerous atm
Bring back the Lockett era
- perfectionist
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9053
- Joined: Mon 30 Jul 2007 3:06pm
- Has thanked: 60 times
- Been thanked: 353 times
- bobmurray
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 7908
- Joined: Mon 03 Oct 2005 11:08pm
- Location: In the stand at RSEA Park.
- Has thanked: 537 times
- Been thanked: 244 times
Re: At least Gardi won his last game
wrong answerplugger66 wrote:[By the way I think that was the only time I typed that so the answer is one.
Will we pick up a player in the SSP window
-
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3266
- Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2007 4:05pm
- Been thanked: 390 times
So please explain to me how Ray coming on for Gardiner changed our forward structure?
From where I was sitting I actually thought that playing with more than 4 forwards, reducing to one because we were zoning back causing Carlton to switch continually, using their loose players, was the difference.
Instead of Riewoldt and Koschitzke having no support, we actually gave support thru Milne (3 goals and he should never venture more than 40 metres from goal - gets cut up for pace in the mid-field), Schnieder (2 goals but ditto with Milne in the mid-field except his left foot can be very dangerous and find him space Milne can not find) and Steven (2 goals and can and did contribute to the mid-field - with a bit of luck he could have had 4).
Apart from these 3, Dal Santo, Goddard, Montagna and Gilbert got forward to kick goals - plus Koschitzke got 2 whilst playing forward, assisted Schnieder who had done earlier work and crashed a few contests and Dawson went forward leaving Blake on 17 (but too small without support).
In terms of chase pressure and running to space as an option, Peake did a tremendous job and, indeed, was our only runner because the rest of our team jogs.
If you think Ray coming on improved our structure and our forward line, it did not.
In fact, given Riewoldt being beaten as he was and having minimal impact, substituting Gardiner robbed our forward structure because it forced Koschitzke to ruck periodically - and his value forward was amply on view hence we were deficient forward when he was called upon to ruck.
Carlton losing their second ruckman before half time allowed us to play the dice with our own substitution.
From where I was sitting I actually thought that playing with more than 4 forwards, reducing to one because we were zoning back causing Carlton to switch continually, using their loose players, was the difference.
Instead of Riewoldt and Koschitzke having no support, we actually gave support thru Milne (3 goals and he should never venture more than 40 metres from goal - gets cut up for pace in the mid-field), Schnieder (2 goals but ditto with Milne in the mid-field except his left foot can be very dangerous and find him space Milne can not find) and Steven (2 goals and can and did contribute to the mid-field - with a bit of luck he could have had 4).
Apart from these 3, Dal Santo, Goddard, Montagna and Gilbert got forward to kick goals - plus Koschitzke got 2 whilst playing forward, assisted Schnieder who had done earlier work and crashed a few contests and Dawson went forward leaving Blake on 17 (but too small without support).
In terms of chase pressure and running to space as an option, Peake did a tremendous job and, indeed, was our only runner because the rest of our team jogs.
If you think Ray coming on improved our structure and our forward line, it did not.
In fact, given Riewoldt being beaten as he was and having minimal impact, substituting Gardiner robbed our forward structure because it forced Koschitzke to ruck periodically - and his value forward was amply on view hence we were deficient forward when he was called upon to ruck.
Carlton losing their second ruckman before half time allowed us to play the dice with our own substitution.
Did you actually watch the game? When MG was playing they had to have 3 talls in the forward line more often than they would want as you cant play off the bench all the time. When they went to 2 talls it allowed our fowards to at least stop Carlton getting the ball in the backline and building from there. We have defensive pressure all of a sudden.To the top wrote:So please explain to me how Ray coming on for Gardiner changed our forward structure?
From where I was sitting I actually thought that playing with more than 4 forwards, reducing to one because we were zoning back causing Carlton to switch continually, using their loose players, was the difference.
Instead of Riewoldt and Koschitzke having no support, we actually gave support thru Milne (3 goals and he should never venture more than 40 metres from goal - gets cut up for pace in the mid-field), Schnieder (2 goals but ditto with Milne in the mid-field except his left foot can be very dangerous and find him space Milne can not find) and Steven (2 goals and can and did contribute to the mid-field - with a bit of luck he could have had 4).
Apart from these 3, Dal Santo, Goddard, Montagna and Gilbert got forward to kick goals - plus Koschitzke got 2 whilst playing forward, assisted Schnieder who had done earlier work and crashed a few contests and Dawson went forward leaving Blake on 17 (but too small without support).
In terms of chase pressure and running to space as an option, Peake did a tremendous job and, indeed, was our only runner because the rest of our team jogs.
If you think Ray coming on improved our structure and our forward line, it did not.
In fact, given Riewoldt being beaten as he was and having minimal impact, substituting Gardiner robbed our forward structure because it forced Koschitzke to ruck periodically - and his value forward was amply on view hence we were deficient forward when he was called upon to ruck.
Carlton losing their second ruckman before half time allowed us to play the dice with our own substitution.
Can you explain why in the first half Carlton had so many extra possession and uncontested marks in the forward line and then in the second half we actually got more and held their run from the backline. Could be coincidence or could be we had only 2 lumberers forward instead of 3. It also allowed Kosi to go into the second ruck role and get at least a little into the game. Kosi didnt get a kick in the first half so that wasnt robbing our forward line of anything by rucking.
And you cant let you bad calls of Milney go. Always knocking him. Now you dont want him to go further than 40 metres from goal but then knock the lack of chase. Fair dinkum.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4661
- Joined: Thu 28 Dec 2006 8:34am
- Location: Jurassic Park
I agree that there isn't room for both Mac and Gards in the team next week. But unfortunately, I think Mac has to be the one who misses. One of the main reasons we lost last time against Sydney is because of Mumfords phenomenal tap ruck work, he massacred Mac. This is no knock on Mac's game at the moment, would still put him in the top 5 players for us this year, but it's horses for courses. We need a big beastly ruck man who can hold his own in the actual ruck department. Mac is fine against most ruckmen, but against someone like Mumford it's no shame to the kid to say that just this week, we need the pure tap work of Gardiner. Bring back Mac the following week.
Problem is, we will really struggle to beat Sydney with Mac in the ruck against Mumford.
Problem is, we will really struggle to beat Sydney with Mac in the ruck against Mumford.
- Junction Oval
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 2867
- Joined: Tue 30 Nov 2010 11:16am
- Been thanked: 19 times
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18635
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 1:36am
- Has thanked: 1979 times
- Been thanked: 865 times
SaintTom wrote:I agree that there isn't room for both Mac and Gards in the team next week. But unfortunately, I think Mac has to be the one who misses. One of the main reasons we lost last time against Sydney is because of Mumfords phenomenal tap ruck work, he massacred Mac. This is no knock on Mac's game at the moment, would still put him in the top 5 players for us this year, but it's horses for courses. We need a big beastly ruck man who can hold his own in the actual ruck department. Mac is fine against most ruckmen, but against someone like Mumford it's no shame to the kid to say that just this week, we need the pure tap work of Gardiner. Bring back Mac the following week.
Problem is, we will really struggle to beat Sydney with Mac in the ruck against Mumford.
Kosi didn't play that week because of illness iirc, so mac had to do it himself all day.
Going by this article Gardiner will play - with quotes from Lyon
http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/ ... fault.aspx
http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/ ... fault.aspx
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4939
- Joined: Fri 05 Jun 2009 3:05pm
- Has thanked: 343 times
- Been thanked: 489 times
Plugger is right (sadly)plugger66 wrote:Did you actually watch the game? When MG was playing they had to have 3 talls in the forward line more often than they would want as you cant play off the bench all the time. When they went to 2 talls it allowed our fowards to at least stop Carlton getting the ball in the backline and building from there. We have defensive pressure all of a sudden.To the top wrote:So please explain to me how Ray coming on for Gardiner changed our forward structure?
From where I was sitting I actually thought that playing with more than 4 forwards, reducing to one because we were zoning back causing Carlton to switch continually, using their loose players, was the difference.
Instead of Riewoldt and Koschitzke having no support, we actually gave support thru Milne (3 goals and he should never venture more than 40 metres from goal - gets cut up for pace in the mid-field), Schnieder (2 goals but ditto with Milne in the mid-field except his left foot can be very dangerous and find him space Milne can not find) and Steven (2 goals and can and did contribute to the mid-field - with a bit of luck he could have had 4).
Apart from these 3, Dal Santo, Goddard, Montagna and Gilbert got forward to kick goals - plus Koschitzke got 2 whilst playing forward, assisted Schnieder who had done earlier work and crashed a few contests and Dawson went forward leaving Blake on 17 (but too small without support).
In terms of chase pressure and running to space as an option, Peake did a tremendous job and, indeed, was our only runner because the rest of our team jogs.
If you think Ray coming on improved our structure and our forward line, it did not.
In fact, given Riewoldt being beaten as he was and having minimal impact, substituting Gardiner robbed our forward structure because it forced Koschitzke to ruck periodically - and his value forward was amply on view hence we were deficient forward when he was called upon to ruck.
Carlton losing their second ruckman before half time allowed us to play the dice with our own substitution.
Can you explain why in the first half Carlton had so many extra possession and uncontested marks in the forward line and then in the second half we actually got more and held their run from the backline. Could be coincidence or could be we had only 2 lumberers forward instead of 3. It also allowed Kosi to go into the second ruck role and get at least a little into the game. Kosi didnt get a kick in the first half so that wasnt robbing our forward line of anything by rucking.
And you cant let you bad calls of Milney go. Always knocking him. Now you dont want him to go further than 40 metres from goal but then knock the lack of chase. Fair dinkum.
- stevie
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4898
- Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2010 9:09am
- Location: Gold Coast
- Has thanked: 194 times
- Been thanked: 144 times
Still trying to work out how Mumford is suddenly the big gun ruckman.
He has no more jump than Ben, lumbers a fair bit. I think his tank seems to gloss up his standing more.
A bit like jolly being put in a good team - he was a hack in his final Shytney years.
Run the mumbo jumbo into the f****** ground and that'll show him for the GOP that he is
He has no more jump than Ben, lumbers a fair bit. I think his tank seems to gloss up his standing more.
A bit like jolly being put in a good team - he was a hack in his final Shytney years.
Run the mumbo jumbo into the f****** ground and that'll show him for the GOP that he is
- borderbarry
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6676
- Joined: Mon 19 Apr 2004 11:22pm
- Location: Wodonga
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6043
- Joined: Mon 21 May 2007 5:31pm
- Location: Currumbin, Quoinslairnd
We can't head into a finals campaign with one ruckman fit. We needed to know Gardi can back up. Would be amazed if MG played again next week.plugger66 wrote:Well it is the 21 year old who got us here or the 30 year old with one game. Maybe you need to take the blinkers off because both cant play. It actually hinders our forward with both in the side.SainterK wrote:I reckon you've gotta get rid of your anti-gardi agenda plugger...
I want the selection commitee to select a side based on beating the Swans, if that includes big Mick or not, we'll see.
I can live with it if he is in or out, but for some reason, you appear to dislike him in the side.
Are you Ben's manager?
"The inches we need are everywhere around us. They're in every break in the game. Every minute, every second. On this team we fight for that inch. On this team we tear ourselves and everyone around us to pieces for that inch. We claw with our fingernails for that inch. Because we know when we add up all those inches that's gonna make the f***in' difference between winning and losing! Between living and dying!'
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4939
- Joined: Fri 05 Jun 2009 3:05pm
- Has thanked: 343 times
- Been thanked: 489 times
Are you serious? Play a big lumbering ruckman as the sub? That will give us stacks of run late in the game......gringo wrote:I think Gardi will start on the ground, Ben will be a sub in case Gardi gets injured. Armo will take someones midfield spot, probably Gears even though he played quite well last night.
If Gardi breaks down, which if there is a doubt about that then don't pick him to start off with, then we still have Blake and Kosi. You don't play a 2nd lumbering ruckman in case the 1st one picked breaks down.
Surely Ben will get the nod though. Dropped a couple of sitters last night and needs to get back to those sure hands. Gardi was ok when on the ground, but Ben has proven himself this year.