Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
samoht wrote:A coach is only as good as his last year.
I agree - because ultimately they "ALL" end up on the scrap heap -
its funny the more "semantic" types use the exact same argument against SW
Sorry i didnt realise RL lost just about all the players? Must have missed that news. Also the parts about hiring people without telling the board. Yep very similar in every way. You cant honestly think they are only as good as their last year because they all eventually get the sack? Is Jeans and SW thought about the same because they both basically got sacked and had poor last years? No because I reckon most people for the last few years of a great player or coach. I dont think Dermott lost much because he was no good at the pies or Swans as I dont think jeans lost anything because he was no good at the Tigers.
SainterK wrote:Bakes only admitted recently that he shouldn't of played.
Only found out Eddy had broken bones last year.
If he'd said after the replay that this stuff had happened, I'd probably have asked the question?
Would you of?
Or you think it's irrelevant?
I think its irrelevant now. I must say i have never heard bakes say he shouldnt have played. And yes you may have asked the question back then but I also think you would answered it with well RL would know better than us. The thing is we know our players and injuries and the such but because we lost we say its the wrong move. Im guessing that Geelong or the pies also had injuries but because they won it doesnt matter. Steve Johnson played last week and most likely will this week and he can hardly work. Hawkins the same last year.
He did, on open mike.
Presti put up his hand and said he waning right, they made a big song and dance about it...and Leon Davis was dropped for under performing.
samoht wrote:We are going round and round in circles, plugger!
I think I've overdone it. I can see there are two opposing camps here, and that's fine.
I agree. All I hope is AR is better than any coach the club has ever had and that our recruiting at least gets up to AFL standard. Signs are good on the second point going by last season but we need to do that for at least 3 more seasons. Im not sold on Pelchens first 2 years though. Hopefully an upward trend.
Con Gorozidis wrote:ok so back to the question posed in the first place.
This whole forum is still wallowing in 09/10 and needs to move on.
forget his god damn past - what of his future?
get the crystal balls out !
Think injuries will see him struggle this week but having said that we always seem to go for the sides that win the first week but the record suggest they hardly every win the second week. He will coach next year at Freo but he would be a fantastic coach for the GC or GWS the following year.
Con Gorozidis wrote:ok so back to the question posed in the first place.
This whole forum is still wallowing in 09/10 and needs to move on.
forget his god damn past - what of his future?
get the crystal balls out !
Think injuries will see him struggle this week but having said that we always seem to go for the sides that win the first week but the record suggest they hardly every win the second week. He will coach next year at Freo but he would be a fantastic coach for the GC or GWS the following year.
Well I have to agree with all that. History tells us top 4 sides usually win this week (although port ran a very close 5th) and if RL is to win that elusive flag - it would have to be at the GC or GWS - which isnt out of the question.
Guy McKenna would be pissed off after doing the hard yards - but its a cruel game.
samoht wrote:A coach is only as good as his last year.
I agree - because ultimately they "ALL" end up on the scrap heap -
its funny the more "semantic" types use the exact same argument against SW
Sorry i didnt realise RL lost just about all the players? Must have missed that news. Also the parts about hiring people without telling the board. Yep very similar in every way. You cant honestly think they are only as good as their last year because they all eventually get the sack? Is Jeans and SW thought about the same because they both basically got sacked and had poor last years? No because I reckon most people for the last few years of a great player or coach. I dont think Dermott lost much because he was no good at the pies or Swans as I dont think jeans lost anything because he was no good at the Tigers.
Too much mayo. I'm not an insider so can't comment on the politics but 'just about all the players' you are talking about 3 or 4 senior blokes in particular I reckon.
I saw we got games into the young blokes and the development of youth was very good. Steven, Armo, Gears, Newnes, Curren, Webster, and to some extent Hickey, Stanley and Roberton flourished under Watters.
In many ways SW did rub a few of the clique the wrong way and he forgot his position in the pecking order - this only led to his downfall. SW didn't damage the team either short term or long term.
samoht wrote:A coach is only as good as his last year.
I agree - because ultimately they "ALL" end up on the scrap heap -
its funny the more "semantic" types use the exact same argument against SW
Sorry i didnt realise RL lost just about all the players? Must have missed that news. Also the parts about hiring people without telling the board. Yep very similar in every way. You cant honestly think they are only as good as their last year because they all eventually get the sack? Is Jeans and SW thought about the same because they both basically got sacked and had poor last years? No because I reckon most people for the last few years of a great player or coach. I dont think Dermott lost much because he was no good at the pies or Swans as I dont think jeans lost anything because he was no good at the Tigers.
Too much mayo. I'm not an insider so can't comment on the politics but 'just about all the players' you are talking about 3 or 4 senior blokes in particular I reckon.
I saw we got games into the young blokes and the development of youth was very good. Steven, Armo, Gears, Newnes, Curren, Webster, and to some extent Hickey, Stanley and Roberton flourished under Watters.
In many ways SW did rub a few of the clique the wrong way and he forgot his position in the pecking order - this only led to his downfall. SW didn't damage the club in any way either short term or long term.
Well I reckon youre completely wrong. it was young and older players but believe what you wish. I have no way of proving it so no mayo there. You have no inside info but you come up with that last paragraph. Plenty of mayo there. As for playing younger guys can you tell me what choice he had. Maybe we should have kept him then. Obviously you think its another mistake in whole line of mistakes.
When the young blokes made their debut SW had a choice of either supporting them whether we won or lost or he could have done a Lyon. He chose to support them and build their confidence instead of blaming them for losses
SainterK wrote:Maybe we'll find out more about Watters over the years?
So far the only thing out there by Scott or the players, is Kosi saying he couldn't believe he was sub in his last game. Which I have no issue with.
Scott also saying he has little say in who was retained, which I believe to be the case.
Maybe you are correct, but rest assured that from a very reliable source I was PM'ed what Watters was doing down the club.
Mark Fine was spot on, and when I was made aware of what was going on I had to post I was totally wrong to bag Fine.
The reason Watters has been so quiet, is because he knows the club has much more on him than he does on the club.
If the club spilt the beans, Watters would look very unprofessional.
I have little doubt he went out with a bang...so none of it would surprise me.
He suffered for the fact that he inherited a side after Ross Lyon, similar to Matthew Knights.
Was never going to work IMHO, the club had issues that weren't reconciled, probably still aren't.
Stories of him removing posters of the grand final losses from the rooms, cause second shouldn't be celebrated. People will react to that differently, some on here will see it as disrespectful...others as trying to change the culture.
SainterK wrote:Maybe we'll find out more about Watters over the years?
So far the only thing out there by Scott or the players, is Kosi saying he couldn't believe he was sub in his last game. Which I have no issue with.
Scott also saying he has little say in who was retained, which I believe to be the case.
I doubt many players would talk. Some even bagged Kosi for that simple comment but they do talk to people they know and word gets around. The guy had lost the plot from what i heard. And it wasnt just the players who he lost it with. I would suggest that he would have been picked up elsewhere if he was doing ok but at the moment he is coaching an under 13 side or something similar.
Scollop wrote:When the young blokes made their debut SW had a choice of either supporting them whether we won or lost or he could have done a Lyon. He chose to support them and build their confidence instead of blaming them for losses
He had no choice. We were in a rebuild. Imagine if he came out and didnt support them when hlaf the team were young. As I said I take it you think the club made a mistake in getting rid of him. Is that right or wrong?
SainterK wrote:
I have little doubt he went out with a bang...so none of it would surprise me.
He suffered for the fact that he inherited a side after Ross Lyon, similar to Matthew Knights.
Was never going to work IMHO, the club had issues that weren't reconciled, probably still aren't.
Stories of him removing posters of the grand final losses from the rooms, cause second shouldn't be celebrated. People will react to that differently, some on here will see it as disrespectful...others as trying to change the culture.
So Scotty cracked under pressure and did some stupid things. Geeez i didn't know we hung blokes for doing a dummy spit. It's Ok for some I suppose
SainterK wrote:
I have little doubt he went out with a bang...so none of it would surprise me.
He suffered for the fact that he inherited a side after Ross Lyon, similar to Matthew Knights.
Was never going to work IMHO, the club had issues that weren't reconciled, probably still aren't.
Stories of him removing posters of the grand final losses from the rooms, cause second shouldn't be celebrated. People will react to that differently, some on here will see it as disrespectful...others as trying to change the culture.
So Scotty cracked under pressure and did some stupid things. Geeez i didn't know we hung blokes for doing a dummy spit. It's Ok for some I suppose
Yep only some stupid things. Losing most players young and old and hiring people without telling the board. I think most coaches do that when the pressure is on. The last one was . Well there wasnt a last one.
Scollop wrote:When the young blokes made their debut SW had a choice of either supporting them whether we won or lost or he could have done a Lyon. He chose to support them and build their confidence instead of blaming them for losses
He had no choice. We were in a rebuild. Imagine if he came out and didnt support them when hlaf the team were young. As I said I take it you think the club made a mistake in getting rid of him. Is that right or wrong?
Look I know our club doesn't ever make mistakes and in the presser the president and everyone explained it perfectly to the public so I concede. the club did the right thing
