Maybe the revew didn't go as well as we thought?

[SainterK]

Interesting listening to a grab from the Jimmy Gwilt presser on SEN just now.

He said Richmond had 22 contributors, we were lucky to have half that.

None of this 'it was a good try' kind of mindset.

They are striving to be better.

[Banger724]

Sounds about right... watching the game, I felt we were lucky to be as close as we were for the majority of the game, particularly first half.

[Beno88]

Sounds about right... watching the game, I felt we were lucky to be as close as we were for the majority of the game, particularly first half.

We kicked 1.8 and two out on the full in the third quarter and kept Richmond to six inside 50s. The game should have been over at 3/4 time.

[plugger66]

Sounds about right... watching the game, I felt we were lucky to be as close as we were for the majority of the game, particularly first half.

We kicked 1.8 and two out on the full in the third quarter and kept Richmond to six inside 50s. The game should have been over at 3/4 time.

Yep but it should have been over at quarter time first. Taking in the whole game we were lucky to be so close and we could have pinched it.

[Richter]

Interesting listening to a grab from the Jimmy Gwilt presser on SEN just now.

He said Richmond had 22 contributors, we were lucky to have half that.

None of this 'it was a good try' kind of mindset.

They are striving to be better.

Whilst it was a great open game, he has a point.

Jimmy picked up a whole 3 kicks and 1 handball. Only trumped by Cripps with one less kick.
The last time Jimmy got so little of the ball was round 22, 2007.... nearly 5 years ago...

12 of our blokes got less than 10 kicks each.

[saintly]

Sounds about right... watching the game, I felt we were lucky to be as close as we were for the majority of the game, particularly first half.

We kicked 1.8 and two out on the full in the third quarter and kept Richmond to six inside 50s. The game should have been over at 3/4 time.

agree with that!

if we had kicked straighter in that quarter we would have won!

[saintly]

Sounds about right... watching the game, I felt we were lucky to be as close as we were for the majority of the game, particularly first half.

We kicked 1.8 and two out on the full in the third quarter and kept Richmond to six inside 50s. The game should have been over at 3/4 time.

Yep but it should have been over at quarter time first. Taking in the whole game we were lucky to be so close and we could have pinched it.

agree with that as well. we were lucky to be so close at quarter time.

[gringo]

Sounds about right... watching the game, I felt we were lucky to be as close as we were for the majority of the game, particularly first half.

We kicked 1.8 and two out on the full in the third quarter and kept Richmond to six inside 50s. The game should have been over at 3/4 time.

Yep but it should have been over at quarter time first. Taking in the whole game we were lucky to be so close and we could have pinched it.

What? Yeah we should have thrown in the towel and Richmond should have beaten us in the first quarter, but what does that mean???? So your saying Richmond were so much better they should have had an unassailable lead by the end of the first quarter? I thought you always used peoples lack of football knowledge to knock them when you don't agree but you say some really dumb things for a footy genius.

[plugger66]

We kicked 1.8 and two out on the full in the third quarter and kept Richmond to six inside 50s. The game should have been over at 3/4 time.

Yep but it should have been over at quarter time first. Taking in the whole game we were lucky to be so close and we could have pinched it.

What? Yeah we should have thrown in the towel and Richmond should have beaten us in the first quarter, but what does that mean???? So your saying Richmond were so much better they should have had an unassailable lead by the end of the first quarter? I thought you always used peoples lack of football knowledge to knock them when you don't agree but you say some really dumb things for a footy genius.

Please read other posts before you comment. The other guy said it should have been over at three quarter time. Just made a point it could easily have been over at quarter time. I have no idea where you get the idea of throwing in the towel. That is strange. next time you post read the whole lot of quotes and then lie down and think about what you are going to write but still dont write it. Take a Bex and have an hours break and then write on what has been written and not what you think has been written.

[gringo]

Yep but it should have been over at quarter time first. Taking in the whole game we were lucky to be so close and we could have pinched it.[/quote]


What? Yeah we should have thrown in the towel and Richmond should have beaten us in the first quarter, but what does that mean???? So your saying Richmond were so much better they should have had an unassailable lead by the end of the first quarter? I thought you always used peoples lack of football knowledge to knock them when you don't agree but you say some really dumb things for a footy genius.[/quote]


Please read other posts before you comment. The other guy said it should have been over at three quarter time. Just made a point it could easily have been over at quarter time. I have no idea where you get the idea of throwing in the towel. That is strange. next time you post read the whole lot of quotes and then lie down and think about what you are going to write but still dont write it. Take a Bex and have an hours break and then write on what has been written and not what you think has been written.[/quote]


I can read and it still looks like a stupid thing to say and makes no valid point. He had a perfectly valid point when he said it could be over at 3 quarter time so you ridiculed his opinion by saying that it could have been over at quarter time. So your either a smart arse or an idiot.

[plugger66]

Yep but it should have been over at quarter time first. Taking in the whole game we were lucky to be so close and we could have pinched it.

What? Yeah we should have thrown in the towel and Richmond should have beaten us in the first quarter, but what does that mean???? So your saying Richmond were so much better they should have had an unassailable lead by the end of the first quarter? I thought you always used peoples lack of football knowledge to knock them when you don't agree but you say some really dumb things for a footy genius.[/quote]


Please read other posts before you comment. The other guy said it should have been over at three quarter time. Just made a point it could easily have been over at quarter time. I have no idea where you get the idea of throwing in the towel. That is strange. next time you post read the whole lot of quotes and then lie down and think about what you are going to write but still dont write it. Take a Bex and have an hours break and then write on what has been written and not what you think has been written.[/quote]


I can read and it still looks like a stupid thing to say and makes no valid point. He had a perfectly valid point when he said it could be over at 3 quarter time so you ridiculed his opinion by saying that it could have been over at quarter time. So your either a smart arse or an idiot.[/quote]


Lets get this straight. His point is valid and mine isnt. I was making a point that you cant say things like that because the game could have been different earlier for the same reasons as what he said. Really you need to read with 2 eyes and use your brain at the same time. It will help you understand things. Take a bex please.

[MrCordz]

Yep but it should have been over at quarter time first. Taking in the whole game we were lucky to be so close and we could have pinched it.

What? Yeah we should have thrown in the towel and Richmond should have beaten us in the first quarter, but what does that mean???? So your saying Richmond were so much better they should have had an unassailable lead by the end of the first quarter? I thought you always used peoples lack of football knowledge to knock them when you don't agree but you say some really dumb things for a footy genius.[/quote]


Please read other posts before you comment. The other guy said it should have been over at three quarter time. Just made a point it could easily have been over at quarter time. I have no idea where you get the idea of throwing in the towel. That is strange. next time you post read the whole lot of quotes and then lie down and think about what you are going to write but still dont write it. Take a Bex and have an hours break and then write on what has been written and not what you think has been written.[/quote]


I can read and it still looks like a stupid thing to say and makes no valid point. He had a perfectly valid point when he said it could be over at 3 quarter time so you ridiculed his opinion by saying that it could have been over at quarter time. So your either a smart arse or an idiot.[/quote]
Chill out gringo.

[bobmurray]

Yep but it should have been over at quarter time first. Taking in the whole game we were lucky to be so close and we could have pinched it.

What? Yeah we should have thrown in the towel and Richmond should have beaten us in the first quarter, but what does that mean???? So your saying Richmond were so much better they should have had an unassailable lead by the end of the first quarter? I thought you always used peoples lack of football knowledge to knock them when you don't agree but you say some really dumb things for a footy genius.

[asiu]

Fire up Gringo.

[asiu]

who da ya reckon reads your reams of requoted quotes ya rabbits !
.... get a real job.

[Teflon]

Learn to read Dingo ya dopey sap

[The Redeemer]

Whilst we kicked 1.8, from memory 3 of those were rushed and another few were almost impossibly shots from the boundary. Whilst we should have kicked a few more goals than just the one, there is a bit of an over-reaction to the 8 behinds.

[To the top]

We played an ordinary first half against West Coast but got back except for some extraordinary umpiring decisions, we played an ordinary first quarter against Carlton but got back to win and we played an even more ordinary first quarter against Sydney but again got back to win.

No doubt our return from Milne (multiple), Riewoldt (multiple) then Kosi, Milera, Cripps and Sippos from set shots inside the F50 were our undoing in the end against Richmond.

Plus Milera looking for Riewoldt to run onto the ball in the goal square - he should have slotted the goal.

[kalsaint]

Whilst we kicked 1.8, from memory 3 of those were rushed and another few were almost impossibly shots from the boundary. Whilst we should have kicked a few more goals than just the one, there is a bit of an over-reaction to the 8 behinds.

Not so. We had plenty of the ball and had made some poor decisions with disposal options.

Picking the right battle would have improved the score line by up to 4 goals rather than butchering the ball at times.

Yes, you can argue that decision making is part of the game as is; pressure, ball drops, kicking etc. They all contributed to Richmonds poor kicking earlier in the game. They also contributed to Saints poor finishing in Q3.

Overall 1 8 and 2 out of bounds could easily have been 4 goals 6 behinds. An additional 16 points to the tally.

Remember Saints had more scoring shots in all quarters after Q1. Generally the team's finishing still needs improvement and Nick missed 3 that were getable too. Kosi missed a sure thing in Q2.

[Enrico_Misso]

Kosi's miss was demoralising and inexcusable.
Reminded me a bit of "that" miss in the 2010 replay.

Interesting Grant Thomas' criticisms of Kosi tonight about his lack of professionalism.
Probably explains why he has only had 1 top ten finish in our B&F.
He will go down as a player who never delivered on his potential (expect for that golden 4 week period).

[SainterK]

Grant Thomas is welcome to his opinion, but as much as he would have us convinced otherwise, he no longer was relevant or privy to how guys like Milne and Kosi operate, how they prepare, how they are regarded internally...

He hasn't coached them since 2006, hate to be obvious, but that's 6 long years ago.

It provokes discussion, but it's too long ago now to be relevant surely?

Only matters what Watters thinks of them.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/i ... 1qlsm.html

http://www.afl.com.au/tabid/208/default ... sid=126829

[asiu]

.i heard kos talk about that issue

perceived views about his unfullfilled abilities , ie ... he should be another rooey ... fail to take into account his journeys issues.
... given his 'lot' , kos is happy with what he can deliver and would love to be better.