Own reserves team no mater the cost
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
Re: Own reserves team no mater the cost
matrix wrote:well eric should cough up some dough then
what would be better in peeps opinions
the moor
or
the sea
?
is there more space down at seaford to get cars in etc if it was developed?
No still a lot more car parking at Moorabbin but who knows how that council would go with us playing there. That would be my preferred aption though.
Re: Own reserves team no mater the cost
Last year he wasn't on an AFL list..this year he is...and lo and behold he shows some form on a "small" ground...gets upgraded and does well...I think you're really clutching at straws to blame the size of the ground on player development..hayes66 wrote:One player and he has only had a handful of games at Sandy. He spent last year playing mainly at Bendigo (QEO) and Windy Hill.zebraman wrote:Sam Dunell seems to have developed ok on such a small groundhayes66 wrote:Agree. It's a must. Our development of young players is being hindered, not only by not having our own VFL team but playing at Sandy. The ground is too small and not good for developing players. Both Geelong and Collingwood play their home games on far better grounds.
I think they are far better grounds than Sandy.
" The universal aptitude for ineptitude makes any human accomplishment an incredible miracle "
-
bigred
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 11463
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 7:39am
- Has thanked: 25 times
- Been thanked: 609 times
Re: Own reserves team no mater the cost
I thought the Sandy/Stk affiliation was working pretty well this year.
Can someone please explain where the hell we are going to get the money to pay for our own magoos with 35,000 members, half a major sponsor and no ground at our disposal?
What would you say? Two million a year to start with?
Not a hope in hell.
Can someone please explain where the hell we are going to get the money to pay for our own magoos with 35,000 members, half a major sponsor and no ground at our disposal?
What would you say? Two million a year to start with?
Not a hope in hell.
"Now the ball is loose, it gives St. Kilda a rough chance. Black. Good handpass. Voss. Schwarze now, the defender, can run and from a long way".....
Re: Own reserves team no mater the cost
My concerns regards a small ground are as follows. One, midfielders need to be able to run because they play on grounds like, the MCG, Subi, AAMI etc. Sandy, in my opinion, isn't good for developing players to learn to run. It's a close physical game, without the run and spread. People complain that Ledger can't run enough. Sandy can't be good for him. Watters has already stated, Dunnell needs to develop his endurance. Playing at Sandy will not help him.
Secondly, young players when they are drafted can lack body strength. They then have to play on a small ground which demands, hard, continual body contact. Yes, they need to play a physical game but not the continual physical requirements that Sandy demands. I think it hinders their young developing bodies.
Thirdly, I believe if we had a young developing centre half forward, Sandy would also hinder him. The reason being because of the size of the Sandy ground, he would be continually out of the play. Kicks from the midfield generally go straight to the deep forward, bypassing the centre half forward.
The Sandy ground was traditionally used for 16 a side not 18.
Yes, some players will still play AFL after playing on Sandy but the two questions still remain, have they been developed as well as they could of been? Secondly, some of the ones that don't make it because of lack of run etc, Was playing on a very small ground good for them?
Secondly, young players when they are drafted can lack body strength. They then have to play on a small ground which demands, hard, continual body contact. Yes, they need to play a physical game but not the continual physical requirements that Sandy demands. I think it hinders their young developing bodies.
Thirdly, I believe if we had a young developing centre half forward, Sandy would also hinder him. The reason being because of the size of the Sandy ground, he would be continually out of the play. Kicks from the midfield generally go straight to the deep forward, bypassing the centre half forward.
The Sandy ground was traditionally used for 16 a side not 18.
Yes, some players will still play AFL after playing on Sandy but the two questions still remain, have they been developed as well as they could of been? Secondly, some of the ones that don't make it because of lack of run etc, Was playing on a very small ground good for them?