I was thinking that too... We beat them once last season and REALLY should have won the other match against the dogs too. I'm quietly confident they'll give a very strong showing against the dogs.Con Gorozidis wrote:With Carlisle = I think we could beat the Dogs.
Without him will be tough.
But the media are in love with the Dogs and Geelong so if we can get a win this week it will be huge.
Changes against the Dogs
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
- prwilkinson
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 1999
- Joined: Tue 21 Sep 2010 12:17pm
- Has thanked: 66 times
- Been thanked: 132 times
Re: Changes against the Dogs
- matrix
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 21475
- Joined: Mon 21 May 2007 1:55pm
- Has thanked: 4 times
- Been thanked: 4 times
Re: Changes against the Dogs
not quiteLinton Lodger wrote:Half of those 30 touches went out on the full or to the opposition.saint-stu wrote:Seriously? Seb had 30 touches. It's been a very slow burn but I think he has finally arrived.saynta wrote:Nice post but I would put my money on your boy Dunstan getting theflick way way before SebLinton Lodger wrote:Out: Ross & Gresham
In: McCartin & Sinclair
7 clangers
70% eff
did well
- degruch
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8948
- Joined: Mon 19 May 2008 4:29pm
- Location: Croydonia
- Has thanked: 146 times
- Been thanked: 237 times
Re: Changes against the Dogs
Won't happen...unless he pulls up sore after that hit, Dunny will be back in this week. Didn't see much of Eli and Meatball looks the goods to replace him, but showing form in a VFL practice match is hard to gauge.Linton Lodger wrote:He is a beast & will be a clearance king.freely wrote:Drop Dunstan? Really? Game high 9 tackles...
I thought our smaller forward line worked well and looked a point of difference against Port...do we need Paddy? Will Sunday's set up work 2 weeks in a row? The Dogs will have their hands full stopping both Billings and Lonie from getting the ball from Bruce's/Roo's feet, plus we had a good spread of contributors in the F50.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1081
- Joined: Sat 27 Apr 2013 7:44pm
- Been thanked: 52 times
Re: Changes against the Dogs
IN: Minchington
OUT: Gresham
I'm very tempted to get McCartin straight back in, but a couple of weeks in the twos to really get up and running couldn't hurt. Otherwise liked our small quick foreward setup and think both Roo and Bruce will be better for the run as well! Great to see lots of youngsters demanding the selectors to take notice from Sandy. When our yougn guns are dominating the VFL that is when we will really have some good depth going and start to get super exciting!
OUT: Gresham
I'm very tempted to get McCartin straight back in, but a couple of weeks in the twos to really get up and running couldn't hurt. Otherwise liked our small quick foreward setup and think both Roo and Bruce will be better for the run as well! Great to see lots of youngsters demanding the selectors to take notice from Sandy. When our yougn guns are dominating the VFL that is when we will really have some good depth going and start to get super exciting!
- bigred
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 11463
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 7:39am
- Has thanked: 25 times
- Been thanked: 609 times
Re: Changes against the Dogs
I'm starting to get this creeping feeling that they may leave Paddy in the magoos for another week.
"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".....
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 675
- Joined: Tue 15 Mar 2016 7:03pm
- Has thanked: 85 times
- Been thanked: 136 times
Re: Changes against the Dogs
"Paddy will certainly come into calculations this week" Nick Riewoldtbigred wrote:I'm starting to get this creeping feeling that they may leave Paddy in the magoos for another week.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1860
- Joined: Thu 01 May 2008 6:30pm
- Location: Mentone
- Has thanked: 17 times
- Been thanked: 263 times
Re: Changes against the Dogs
I think he has had enough apprenticeship and it is time to get Paddy in to the team.Myron Gaines wrote:"Paddy will certainly come into calculations this week" Nick Riewoldtbigred wrote:I'm starting to get this creeping feeling that they may leave Paddy in the magoos for another week.
I know Minchington got a lot of possessions on Sunday but it was a VFL practice match against an undermanned Box Hill.
I believe Sinclair would be a better inclusion thus week -he was influential in our win against the Bulldogs last year.
One year will be our year
Re: Changes against the Dogs
There is some logic to that. They are being extremely cautious bringing guys back from injury. Paddy missed all the NAB praccie games so could still be a bit underdone and dogs are going to be damn quick so no where to hide. It also lets Rooey play forward in his 300th and really strut his stuff - thats the position he was born to play - a marking, leading, goal kicking monster.bigred wrote:I'm starting to get this creeping feeling that they may leave Paddy in the magoos for another week.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23010
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
- Has thanked: 8902 times
- Been thanked: 3883 times
Re: Changes against the Dogs
I would certainly hope so.Myron Gaines wrote:"Paddy will certainly come into calculations this week" Nick Riewoldtbigred wrote:I'm starting to get this creeping feeling that they may leave Paddy in the magoos for another week.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18579
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 1:36am
- Has thanked: 1905 times
- Been thanked: 841 times
Re: Changes against the Dogs
He's kicked seven. That ought to work in his favour, one would think.saynta wrote:I would certainly hope so.Myron Gaines wrote:"Paddy will certainly come into calculations this week" Nick Riewoldtbigred wrote:I'm starting to get this creeping feeling that they may leave Paddy in the magoos for another week.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23010
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
- Has thanked: 8902 times
- Been thanked: 3883 times
Re: Changes against the Dogs
Ross Lyon never rewarded solid performances in the Vfl with games in the firsts except for a couple of losers like Eddie and McQualter.bigcarl wrote:He's kicked seven. That ought to work in his favour, one would think.saynta wrote:I would certainly hope so.Myron Gaines wrote:"Paddy will certainly come into calculations this week" Nick Riewoldtbigred wrote:I'm starting to get this creeping feeling that they may leave Paddy in the magoos for another week.
Failure to reward effort is very bad for morale and quickly kills enthusiasm/
I think Richo is smarter than that.
Last edited by saynta on Wed 30 Mar 2016 12:59pm, edited 1 time in total.
- QuestionOfAccuracy
- Club Player
- Posts: 610
- Joined: Wed 11 Jul 2007 3:00pm
- Contact:
Re: Changes against the Dogs
First off, there is 0% chance Geary gets dropped this week. It just won't happen.
His disposal is awful (which has been evident for years), but he's in the leadership group and he plays on forward of all sizes. The one like-for-like youngster (Wright) isn't in blistering form right now.
Sinclair is the most logical inclusion for this week. I liked Gresham's game, but Sinclair has more runs on the board and by all reports he had a great outing at Sandy on the weekend.
I reckon they'll want Paddy to have another game at Sandy before throwing him into the seniors, particularly seeing as this is going to be a frenetic paced game this weekend.
His disposal is awful (which has been evident for years), but he's in the leadership group and he plays on forward of all sizes. The one like-for-like youngster (Wright) isn't in blistering form right now.
Sinclair is the most logical inclusion for this week. I liked Gresham's game, but Sinclair has more runs on the board and by all reports he had a great outing at Sandy on the weekend.
I reckon they'll want Paddy to have another game at Sandy before throwing him into the seniors, particularly seeing as this is going to be a frenetic paced game this weekend.
- skeptic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 16885
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 7:10pm
- Has thanked: 3580 times
- Been thanked: 2844 times
Re: Changes against the Dogs
I think you have to drop Gresh and Eli on that performance
Minch is a must on that performance. You need at least another player to play ruck so I think Holmes comes in, and Hickey spends some time up forward.
McCartin misses again. Let him work a bit harder for his spit.
Now how do we get Sinclair into the team?
I would like to see Lee get a game too but am not sure how
Minch is a must on that performance. You need at least another player to play ruck so I think Holmes comes in, and Hickey spends some time up forward.
McCartin misses again. Let him work a bit harder for his spit.
Now how do we get Sinclair into the team?
I would like to see Lee get a game too but am not sure how
Re: Changes against the Dogs
I have no stats to back this up, and I was doing other things while watching the game, but I thought Gresham was our only forward who consistently got his hands on the ball in the last quarter. Leave him in. Make the guys in the seconds earn their spots with two good games in a row.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9068
- Joined: Wed 29 Jun 2005 10:39pm
- Location: A distant beach
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 426 times
Re: Changes against the Dogs
Definitely think we need another taller forward in to stretch the Dogfence. I thought a few of our players just didn't get into the game against PA. Dempster got a whack to the head and obviously couldn't give 100%, Dustan got a blow to the body early and seemed a bit slow for the rest of the game, Webster got too easily pushed off contests I thought, and of course there's the Geary factor. Maybe we should rest Dempster and Dustan, drop Eli and Gresham and make way for Sinclair, Minch, Paddy and Holmes or Membrey?
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4882
- Joined: Fri 05 Jun 2009 3:05pm
- Has thanked: 327 times
- Been thanked: 465 times
Re: Changes against the Dogs
I'm blown away by the overall consensus that Eli should go out of the team.
I thought from a potential point of view he had improved 100%. He looked far more composed with the ball than he had in the past, and quite dangerous. I'm not interested in blokes who get 'Joe the goose' goals over the top which improve their stats. He was clean with the ball, and I actually think he might actually become a player. I certainly wouldn't be dropping him yet. He played mainly fwd which is a very hard spot to accumulate big stats.
For mine Roberton isn't AFL standard. He's too slow, and I hold my breath every time he gets the ball. If we're to drop anyone it would be him. Otherwise give the kids another crack. Most of them earnt it. Most will get dropped at some stage again, but whilst they are contributing which almost all of them did, then they should stay.
We need a young, vibrant energetic team to put the doggies off their game.
I thought from a potential point of view he had improved 100%. He looked far more composed with the ball than he had in the past, and quite dangerous. I'm not interested in blokes who get 'Joe the goose' goals over the top which improve their stats. He was clean with the ball, and I actually think he might actually become a player. I certainly wouldn't be dropping him yet. He played mainly fwd which is a very hard spot to accumulate big stats.
For mine Roberton isn't AFL standard. He's too slow, and I hold my breath every time he gets the ball. If we're to drop anyone it would be him. Otherwise give the kids another crack. Most of them earnt it. Most will get dropped at some stage again, but whilst they are contributing which almost all of them did, then they should stay.
We need a young, vibrant energetic team to put the doggies off their game.
- skeptic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 16885
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 7:10pm
- Has thanked: 3580 times
- Been thanked: 2844 times
Re: Changes against the Dogs
Moods wrote:
For mine Roberton isn't AFL standard. He's too slow, and I hold my breath every time he gets the ball. If we're to drop anyone it would be him.
Mmm...
Don't think you'll win many friends with that POV
- degruch
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8948
- Joined: Mon 19 May 2008 4:29pm
- Location: Croydonia
- Has thanked: 146 times
- Been thanked: 237 times
Re: Changes against the Dogs
That IS the Doggies game...if we get engaged in a like for like battle they'll eventually run us down IMO, they've had another couple years run at it. Stick with the same forward line, get some more dash (Sinclair), and I certainly wouldn't be cutting our run out of defence (Roberton and Savage).Moods wrote:We need a young, vibrant energetic team to put the doggies off their game.
Re: Changes against the Dogs
Well Eli only had the ten disposals. I think it will be Gresh for Minch or Sinclair. Eli might keep his spot if they want Paddy to get a genuine VFL game under his belt for fitness and let Roo dominate forward all day on his 300th. I think Roberton is more suited to that third tall defensive back and will take that over when Demps and Fisher finish up. His marking in the first half was outstanding.Moods wrote:I'm blown away by the overall consensus that Eli should go out of the team.
I thought from a potential point of view he had improved 100%. He looked far more composed with the ball than he had in the past, and quite dangerous. I'm not interested in blokes who get 'Joe the goose' goals over the top which improve their stats. He was clean with the ball, and I actually think he might actually become a player. I certainly wouldn't be dropping him yet. He played mainly fwd which is a very hard spot to accumulate big stats.
For mine Roberton isn't AFL standard. He's too slow, and I hold my breath every time he gets the ball. If we're to drop anyone it would be him. Otherwise give the kids another crack. Most of them earnt it. Most will get dropped at some stage again, but whilst they are contributing which almost all of them did, then they should stay.
We need a young, vibrant energetic team to put the doggies off their game.
- dragit
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 13047
- Joined: Tue 29 Jun 2010 11:56am
- Has thanked: 605 times
- Been thanked: 315 times
Re: Changes against the Dogs
Templeton had 4 kicks & Gresham had 3
I'm pretty confident Minchington will add more to the side than either of those players did last week.
If selection integrity is fair dinkum he has to replace one of those players…
I'm pretty confident Minchington will add more to the side than either of those players did last week.
If selection integrity is fair dinkum he has to replace one of those players…
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1081
- Joined: Sat 27 Apr 2013 7:44pm
- Been thanked: 52 times
Re: Changes against the Dogs
Agree with this! I would personally like to keep Templeton in the side, because although his numbers aren't huge, I think he is one of our better players at forward 50 entries and is generally clean with disposal, I like that classy aspect of his game. I haven't seen enough of Gresham, but what i saw on the weekend, he still looked a little green for mine.dragit wrote:Templeton had 4 kicks & Gresham had 3
I'm pretty confident Minchington will add more to the side than either of those players did last week.
If selection integrity is fair dinkum he has to replace one of those players…
- magnifisaint
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 7936
- Joined: Sun 02 May 2004 2:52am
- Has thanked: 216 times
- Been thanked: 578 times
Re: Changes against the Dogs
The point of the game is to get the ball. One gets it over 20 times and disposes of it well the other only gets it 8 times. You can't do anything with it if you don't get it. Templeton out!Moods wrote:I'm blown away by the overall consensus that Eli should go out of the team.
I thought from a potential point of view he had improved 100%. He looked far more composed with the ball than he had in the past, and quite dangerous. I'm not interested in blokes who get 'Joe the goose' goals over the top which improve their stats. He was clean with the ball, and I actually think he might actually become a player. I certainly wouldn't be dropping him yet. He played mainly fwd which is a very hard spot to accumulate big stats.
For mine Roberton isn't AFL standard. He's too slow, and I hold my breath every time he gets the ball. If we're to drop anyone it would be him. Otherwise give the kids another crack. Most of them earnt it. Most will get dropped at some stage again, but whilst they are contributing which almost all of them did, then they should stay.
We need a young, vibrant energetic team to put the doggies off their game.
Posting 20 years of holey crap!
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 359
- Joined: Mon 30 Oct 2006 5:04pm
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 2 times
- Been thanked: 11 times
Re: Changes against the Dogs
Well if it is as easy as that, Lonie goes as well. He only had it 9 times.magnifisaint wrote:The point of the game is to get the ball. One gets it over 20 times and disposes of it well the other only gets it 8 times. You can't do anything with it if you don't get it. Templeton out!Moods wrote:I'm blown away by the overall consensus that Eli should go out of the team.
I thought from a potential point of view he had improved 100%. He looked far more composed with the ball than he had in the past, and quite dangerous. I'm not interested in blokes who get 'Joe the goose' goals over the top which improve their stats. He was clean with the ball, and I actually think he might actually become a player. I certainly wouldn't be dropping him yet. He played mainly fwd which is a very hard spot to accumulate big stats.
For mine Roberton isn't AFL standard. He's too slow, and I hold my breath every time he gets the ball. If we're to drop anyone it would be him. Otherwise give the kids another crack. Most of them earnt it. Most will get dropped at some stage again, but whilst they are contributing which almost all of them did, then they should stay.
We need a young, vibrant energetic team to put the doggies off their game.
Michington in his afl games last year had 9,9,11,10 and 8 disposals. Eli gets a lot of ball when he plays in the VFL as well. Personally I think Eli and Gresh should get another go, both looked pretty good with ball in hand.
No Change.
If at first you don't succeed, sky diving is not for you.
- matrix
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 21475
- Joined: Mon 21 May 2007 1:55pm
- Has thanked: 4 times
- Been thanked: 4 times
Re: Changes against the Dogs
What do they have up forward? Any monsters?
Chips and demoster should be ok yeah?
Surely with bruce roo hickey and possibly paddy we will be way to tall for them up the forward line?
Chips and demoster should be ok yeah?
Surely with bruce roo hickey and possibly paddy we will be way to tall for them up the forward line?