Quite adept at pedalling backwards. Boo Hoo.RODOS wrote:pff, im just highlighting the fact we have depth and it's encouraging you pleb.Viking3 wrote:The centre square and stoppage dominance was just as much, if not more, an issue with our midfielders. Doesn't matter which ruck gets the tap, the midfield has a 50/50 chance of getting to the ball first.RODOS wrote:sheesh yourself, on his day hickey can be as damaging as any, but if he keeps playing like he did last night then we have to consider alternatives. If we played melbourne again this coming weekend instead of west coast, given the way we were absolutely dominated in the centre square and stoppages, would you play hickey again, or give longer a try? honest question. I'd be inclined to give longer a run with marshall providing the chop out, unless we managed to figure out why it was hickey played so poorly (8 touches and 18 hit outs to gawn's 13 touches and 49 hit outs) and how to fix it .Viking3 wrote:If Hickey's not up to it??? Sheesh. Gawn was AA last year. We played the Dees twice with Hickey winning 2-0!! If Hickey's not up to it???RODOS wrote:Anyone at the game?
Apparently paddy, battle and marshall all kicked 2 goals in the first, 38-12 at quarter time
Would love if Paddy and Marshall in particular put in really strong performances. Having Marshall play as that ruck forward would make playing Longer a viable option, which could help us with what transpired yesterday arvo against the dees.
Love hickey but if he's not up to it against a player like gawn we may need the physical attributes of longer to keep our mids in it. But he'll need a chop out.
Battle is fighting it out with membrey as it stands and members has a few credits in the bank, but would love for the young boy to kick a few more too.
Is Acres playing?
Heads may roll after yesterday's performance
edit: half time, Goals: Marshall 4, McCartin 3, Battle 2, Montagna 1, Weickhardt 1
Disposals: Sinclair 20, Verma 19, Acres 16
But with that said, the throwing the ball up thing (as mentioned by others) was not good for hickey, and frankly if they're going to throw it up, then they should throw it up as high the ball goes when it gets bounced. It looks like basketball out there with their dinky throws. Takes the whole reading the ball part out of the equation.
I'm not saying I don't think hickey is up to it, but just incase one of the many variables (injuries, motivation, mental health, rule changes, etc) have an adverse effect on his game, we have rowan marshall and billy longer.
... sheesh
You already have Marshall leap frogging Pierce and Holmes and in essence McCartin who still has to come in. Or are we going to play Longer, McCartin, Bruce and Marshall?
Sheesh.
And yes, you were inferring that Hickey wasn't up to it. They were your words not mine.
Sheesh.
It's ONE game.
Double Sheesh.
I don't know who comes in for who I wasn't trying to pick the team, i'm not going to humour your aggressive posting style from here on. cheers
Sandy v Port Melb
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 379
- Joined: Mon 04 Sep 2006 10:21am
- Location: McKinnon
- Been thanked: 8 times
Re: Sandy v Port Melb
Give me one flag & I'll go to my grave a happy man.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 247
- Joined: Sun 01 Apr 2012 12:15pm
Re: Sandy v Port Melb
Heard Meatball broke his thumb or hand?? This true?
Who else was injured?
Who else was injured?
saintbrat wrote:Nice day for a trip to TBBO
nice to beat Port Melbourne any time
even better to beat them by a big margin
lots of coaches in attendance
Dempster didn't play
Pierce played minutes in both Dev game and Seniors
Unfortunately Marshall is a rooke-
a couple of 'injuries' coming out of it maybe- thumbs and/or fingers, cramping - was quite warm
Verma is Sandy Player-
Re: Sandy v Port Melb
ok i'll bite. Not sure if you can read very well or your comprehension may be lacking, but i'll try not to humiliate you too badly. You may, now this might be a long shot, but you may be familiar with the word 'if'. If is an interesting word, it can be a conjunction or a noun. The way that I used it was in the form of a conjunction, meaning it creates a clause, 'assuming that x, then y', 'on the condition that you've only just celebrated your tenth birthday, then I should go easier on you', one more? 'if you are not a twat you will acknowledge that you are trying to punch above your intellectual weight and give up'. But seeing as I used the word 'if' there, it shows that I am still not sure. The truth is I am sure, you are a twat and you should save yourself time and face and let this reply go through to the keeper.Viking3 wrote:Quite adept at pedalling backwards. Boo Hoo.RODOS wrote:pff, im just highlighting the fact we have depth and it's encouraging you pleb.Viking3 wrote:The centre square and stoppage dominance was just as much, if not more, an issue with our midfielders. Doesn't matter which ruck gets the tap, the midfield has a 50/50 chance of getting to the ball first.RODOS wrote:sheesh yourself, on his day hickey can be as damaging as any, but if he keeps playing like he did last night then we have to consider alternatives. If we played melbourne again this coming weekend instead of west coast, given the way we were absolutely dominated in the centre square and stoppages, would you play hickey again, or give longer a try? honest question. I'd be inclined to give longer a run with marshall providing the chop out, unless we managed to figure out why it was hickey played so poorly (8 touches and 18 hit outs to gawn's 13 touches and 49 hit outs) and how to fix it .Viking3 wrote:If Hickey's not up to it??? Sheesh. Gawn was AA last year. We played the Dees twice with Hickey winning 2-0!! If Hickey's not up to it???RODOS wrote:Anyone at the game?
Apparently paddy, battle and marshall all kicked 2 goals in the first, 38-12 at quarter time
Would love if Paddy and Marshall in particular put in really strong performances. Having Marshall play as that ruck forward would make playing Longer a viable option, which could help us with what transpired yesterday arvo against the dees.
Love hickey but if he's not up to it against a player like gawn we may need the physical attributes of longer to keep our mids in it. But he'll need a chop out.
Battle is fighting it out with membrey as it stands and members has a few credits in the bank, but would love for the young boy to kick a few more too.
Is Acres playing?
Heads may roll after yesterday's performance
edit: half time, Goals: Marshall 4, McCartin 3, Battle 2, Montagna 1, Weickhardt 1
Disposals: Sinclair 20, Verma 19, Acres 16
But with that said, the throwing the ball up thing (as mentioned by others) was not good for hickey, and frankly if they're going to throw it up, then they should throw it up as high the ball goes when it gets bounced. It looks like basketball out there with their dinky throws. Takes the whole reading the ball part out of the equation.
I'm not saying I don't think hickey is up to it, but just incase one of the many variables (injuries, motivation, mental health, rule changes, etc) have an adverse effect on his game, we have rowan marshall and billy longer.
... sheesh
You already have Marshall leap frogging Pierce and Holmes and in essence McCartin who still has to come in. Or are we going to play Longer, McCartin, Bruce and Marshall?
Sheesh.
And yes, you were inferring that Hickey wasn't up to it. They were your words not mine.
Sheesh.
It's ONE game.
Double Sheesh.
I don't know who comes in for who I wasn't trying to pick the team, i'm not going to humour your aggressive posting style from here on. cheers
So, to wrap it up, the sentence was 'IF hickey is not up to it'. IF, as in, IF hickey's girlfriend breaks up with him and he puts in a bad month of form, IF one of hickey's loved ones pass and he isn't too keen on chasing a football, IF! In no way was I saying that Hickey isn't up to it, what I was doing was merely using a clause to explore possible scenarios.
Now, IF hickey continues to put in that kind of a performance, THEN you're gonna have to learn embrace change.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 379
- Joined: Mon 04 Sep 2006 10:21am
- Location: McKinnon
- Been thanked: 8 times
Re: Sandy v Port Melb
RODOS wrote:ok i'll bite. Not sure if you can read very well or your comprehension may be lacking, but i'll try not to humiliate you too badly. You may, now this might be a long shot, but you may be familiar with the word 'if'. If is an interesting word, it can be a conjunction or a noun. The way that I used it was in the form of a conjunction, meaning it creates a clause, 'assuming that x, then y', 'on the condition that you've only just celebrated your tenth birthday, then I should go easier on you', one more? 'if you are not a twat you will acknowledge that you are trying to punch above your intellectual weight and give up'. But seeing as I used the word 'if' there, it shows that I am still not sure. The truth is I am sure, you are a twat and you should save yourself time and face and let this reply go through to the keeper.Viking3 wrote:Quite adept at pedalling backwards. Boo Hoo.RODOS wrote:pff, im just highlighting the fact we have depth and it's encouraging you pleb.Viking3 wrote:The centre square and stoppage dominance was just as much, if not more, an issue with our midfielders. Doesn't matter which ruck gets the tap, the midfield has a 50/50 chance of getting to the ball first.RODOS wrote:sheesh yourself, on his day hickey can be as damaging as any, but if he keeps playing like he did last night then we have to consider alternatives. If we played melbourne again this coming weekend instead of west coast, given the way we were absolutely dominated in the centre square and stoppages, would you play hickey again, or give longer a try? honest question. I'd be inclined to give longer a run with marshall providing the chop out, unless we managed to figure out why it was hickey played so poorly (8 touches and 18 hit outs to gawn's 13 touches and 49 hit outs) and how to fix it .Viking3 wrote:If Hickey's not up to it??? Sheesh. Gawn was AA last year. We played the Dees twice with Hickey winning 2-0!! If Hickey's not up to it???RODOS wrote:Anyone at the game?
Apparently paddy, battle and marshall all kicked 2 goals in the first, 38-12 at quarter time
Would love if Paddy and Marshall in particular put in really strong performances. Having Marshall play as that ruck forward would make playing Longer a viable option, which could help us with what transpired yesterday arvo against the dees.
Love hickey but if he's not up to it against a player like gawn we may need the physical attributes of longer to keep our mids in it. But he'll need a chop out.
Battle is fighting it out with membrey as it stands and members has a few credits in the bank, but would love for the young boy to kick a few more too.
Is Acres playing?
Heads may roll after yesterday's performance
edit: half time, Goals: Marshall 4, McCartin 3, Battle 2, Montagna 1, Weickhardt 1
Disposals: Sinclair 20, Verma 19, Acres 16
But with that said, the throwing the ball up thing (as mentioned by others) was not good for hickey, and frankly if they're going to throw it up, then they should throw it up as high the ball goes when it gets bounced. It looks like basketball out there with their dinky throws. Takes the whole reading the ball part out of the equation.
I'm not saying I don't think hickey is up to it, but just incase one of the many variables (injuries, motivation, mental health, rule changes, etc) have an adverse effect on his game, we have rowan marshall and billy longer.
... sheesh
You already have Marshall leap frogging Pierce and Holmes and in essence McCartin who still has to come in. Or are we going to play Longer, McCartin, Bruce and Marshall?
Sheesh.
And yes, you were inferring that Hickey wasn't up to it. They were your words not mine.
Sheesh.
It's ONE game.
Double Sheesh.
I don't know who comes in for who I wasn't trying to pick the team, i'm not going to humour your aggressive posting style from here on. cheers
So, to wrap it up, the sentence was 'IF hickey is not up to it'. IF, as in, IF hickey's girlfriend breaks up with him and he puts in a bad month of form, IF one of hickey's loved ones pass and he isn't too keen on chasing a football, IF! In no way was I saying that Hickey isn't up to it, what I was doing was merely using a clause to explore possible scenarios.
Now, IF hickey continues to put in that kind of a performance, THEN you're gonna have to learn embrace change.
I don't need to say much here.
I question your "IF" inference after ONE game of 2017, and you attack the man and make it personal.
Maybe you are a little insecure about your own intellect!
By the way, it actually is my birthday today. And I'm 12, not 10.
Give me one flag & I'll go to my grave a happy man.
Re: Sandy v Port Melb
well now i feel like a jerk. ApologiesViking3 wrote:RODOS wrote:ok i'll bite. Not sure if you can read very well or your comprehension may be lacking, but i'll try not to humiliate you too badly. You may, now this might be a long shot, but you may be familiar with the word 'if'. If is an interesting word, it can be a conjunction or a noun. The way that I used it was in the form of a conjunction, meaning it creates a clause, 'assuming that x, then y', 'on the condition that you've only just celebrated your tenth birthday, then I should go easier on you', one more? 'if you are not a twat you will acknowledge that you are trying to punch above your intellectual weight and give up'. But seeing as I used the word 'if' there, it shows that I am still not sure. The truth is I am sure, you are a twat and you should save yourself time and face and let this reply go through to the keeper.Viking3 wrote:Quite adept at pedalling backwards. Boo Hoo.RODOS wrote:pff, im just highlighting the fact we have depth and it's encouraging you pleb.Viking3 wrote:The centre square and stoppage dominance was just as much, if not more, an issue with our midfielders. Doesn't matter which ruck gets the tap, the midfield has a 50/50 chance of getting to the ball first.RODOS wrote:sheesh yourself, on his day hickey can be as damaging as any, but if he keeps playing like he did last night then we have to consider alternatives. If we played melbourne again this coming weekend instead of west coast, given the way we were absolutely dominated in the centre square and stoppages, would you play hickey again, or give longer a try? honest question. I'd be inclined to give longer a run with marshall providing the chop out, unless we managed to figure out why it was hickey played so poorly (8 touches and 18 hit outs to gawn's 13 touches and 49 hit outs) and how to fix it .Viking3 wrote:If Hickey's not up to it??? Sheesh. Gawn was AA last year. We played the Dees twice with Hickey winning 2-0!! If Hickey's not up to it???RODOS wrote:Anyone at the game?
Apparently paddy, battle and marshall all kicked 2 goals in the first, 38-12 at quarter time
Would love if Paddy and Marshall in particular put in really strong performances. Having Marshall play as that ruck forward would make playing Longer a viable option, which could help us with what transpired yesterday arvo against the dees.
Love hickey but if he's not up to it against a player like gawn we may need the physical attributes of longer to keep our mids in it. But he'll need a chop out.
Battle is fighting it out with membrey as it stands and members has a few credits in the bank, but would love for the young boy to kick a few more too.
Is Acres playing?
Heads may roll after yesterday's performance
edit: half time, Goals: Marshall 4, McCartin 3, Battle 2, Montagna 1, Weickhardt 1
Disposals: Sinclair 20, Verma 19, Acres 16
But with that said, the throwing the ball up thing (as mentioned by others) was not good for hickey, and frankly if they're going to throw it up, then they should throw it up as high the ball goes when it gets bounced. It looks like basketball out there with their dinky throws. Takes the whole reading the ball part out of the equation.
I'm not saying I don't think hickey is up to it, but just incase one of the many variables (injuries, motivation, mental health, rule changes, etc) have an adverse effect on his game, we have rowan marshall and billy longer.
... sheesh
You already have Marshall leap frogging Pierce and Holmes and in essence McCartin who still has to come in. Or are we going to play Longer, McCartin, Bruce and Marshall?
Sheesh.
And yes, you were inferring that Hickey wasn't up to it. They were your words not mine.
Sheesh.
It's ONE game.
Double Sheesh.
I don't know who comes in for who I wasn't trying to pick the team, i'm not going to humour your aggressive posting style from here on. cheers
So, to wrap it up, the sentence was 'IF hickey is not up to it'. IF, as in, IF hickey's girlfriend breaks up with him and he puts in a bad month of form, IF one of hickey's loved ones pass and he isn't too keen on chasing a football, IF! In no way was I saying that Hickey isn't up to it, what I was doing was merely using a clause to explore possible scenarios.
Now, IF hickey continues to put in that kind of a performance, THEN you're gonna have to learn embrace change.
I don't need to say much here.
I question your "IF" inference after ONE game of 2017, and you attack the man and make it personal.
Maybe you are a little insecure about your own intellect!
By the way, it actually is my birthday today. And I'm 12, not 10.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 379
- Joined: Mon 04 Sep 2006 10:21am
- Location: McKinnon
- Been thanked: 8 times
Re: Sandy v Port Melb
No problem.RODOS wrote:well now i feel like a jerk. ApologiesViking3 wrote:RODOS wrote:ok i'll bite. Not sure if you can read very well or your comprehension may be lacking, but i'll try not to humiliate you too badly. You may, now this might be a long shot, but you may be familiar with the word 'if'. If is an interesting word, it can be a conjunction or a noun. The way that I used it was in the form of a conjunction, meaning it creates a clause, 'assuming that x, then y', 'on the condition that you've only just celebrated your tenth birthday, then I should go easier on you', one more? 'if you are not a twat you will acknowledge that you are trying to punch above your intellectual weight and give up'. But seeing as I used the word 'if' there, it shows that I am still not sure. The truth is I am sure, you are a twat and you should save yourself time and face and let this reply go through to the keeper.Viking3 wrote:Quite adept at pedalling backwards. Boo Hoo.RODOS wrote:pff, im just highlighting the fact we have depth and it's encouraging you pleb.Viking3 wrote:The centre square and stoppage dominance was just as much, if not more, an issue with our midfielders. Doesn't matter which ruck gets the tap, the midfield has a 50/50 chance of getting to the ball first.RODOS wrote:sheesh yourself, on his day hickey can be as damaging as any, but if he keeps playing like he did last night then we have to consider alternatives. If we played melbourne again this coming weekend instead of west coast, given the way we were absolutely dominated in the centre square and stoppages, would you play hickey again, or give longer a try? honest question. I'd be inclined to give longer a run with marshall providing the chop out, unless we managed to figure out why it was hickey played so poorly (8 touches and 18 hit outs to gawn's 13 touches and 49 hit outs) and how to fix it .Viking3 wrote:If Hickey's not up to it??? Sheesh. Gawn was AA last year. We played the Dees twice with Hickey winning 2-0!! If Hickey's not up to it???RODOS wrote:Anyone at the game?
Apparently paddy, battle and marshall all kicked 2 goals in the first, 38-12 at quarter time
Would love if Paddy and Marshall in particular put in really strong performances. Having Marshall play as that ruck forward would make playing Longer a viable option, which could help us with what transpired yesterday arvo against the dees.
Love hickey but if he's not up to it against a player like gawn we may need the physical attributes of longer to keep our mids in it. But he'll need a chop out.
Battle is fighting it out with membrey as it stands and members has a few credits in the bank, but would love for the young boy to kick a few more too.
Is Acres playing?
Heads may roll after yesterday's performance
edit: half time, Goals: Marshall 4, McCartin 3, Battle 2, Montagna 1, Weickhardt 1
Disposals: Sinclair 20, Verma 19, Acres 16
But with that said, the throwing the ball up thing (as mentioned by others) was not good for hickey, and frankly if they're going to throw it up, then they should throw it up as high the ball goes when it gets bounced. It looks like basketball out there with their dinky throws. Takes the whole reading the ball part out of the equation.
I'm not saying I don't think hickey is up to it, but just incase one of the many variables (injuries, motivation, mental health, rule changes, etc) have an adverse effect on his game, we have rowan marshall and billy longer.
... sheesh
You already have Marshall leap frogging Pierce and Holmes and in essence McCartin who still has to come in. Or are we going to play Longer, McCartin, Bruce and Marshall?
Sheesh.
And yes, you were inferring that Hickey wasn't up to it. They were your words not mine.
Sheesh.
It's ONE game.
Double Sheesh.
I don't know who comes in for who I wasn't trying to pick the team, i'm not going to humour your aggressive posting style from here on. cheers
So, to wrap it up, the sentence was 'IF hickey is not up to it'. IF, as in, IF hickey's girlfriend breaks up with him and he puts in a bad month of form, IF one of hickey's loved ones pass and he isn't too keen on chasing a football, IF! In no way was I saying that Hickey isn't up to it, what I was doing was merely using a clause to explore possible scenarios.
Now, IF hickey continues to put in that kind of a performance, THEN you're gonna have to learn embrace change.
I don't need to say much here.
I question your "IF" inference after ONE game of 2017, and you attack the man and make it personal.
Maybe you are a little insecure about your own intellect!
By the way, it actually is my birthday today. And I'm 12, not 10.
Play on.
Give me one flag & I'll go to my grave a happy man.
- saintbrat
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 44575
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 4:11pm
- Location: saints zone
- Has thanked: 6 times
- Been thanked: 188 times
Re: Sandy v Port Melb
he certainly wasn't happy with it- but didn't get detail- well bandaged.coopergrech wrote:Heard Meatball broke his thumb or hand?? This true?
Who else was injured?
StReNgTh ThRoUgH LoYaLtY
Rejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation, continuing steadfastly..!!
MEMBERSHIP 2014 31,134 Membership 2015 32,746 MEMBERSHIP 2016 - 38,101
MEMBERSHIP 2017 42,095 , Membership 2018 46,998
MEMBERSHIP 2019 43,106 http://saintsational.net/viewtopic.php? ... 9#p1816890
MEMBERSHIP 2020 48,588 http://saintsational.net/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=100107
Rejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation, continuing steadfastly..!!
MEMBERSHIP 2014 31,134 Membership 2015 32,746 MEMBERSHIP 2016 - 38,101
MEMBERSHIP 2017 42,095 , Membership 2018 46,998
MEMBERSHIP 2019 43,106 http://saintsational.net/viewtopic.php? ... 9#p1816890
MEMBERSHIP 2020 48,588 http://saintsational.net/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=100107
- saintbrat
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 44575
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 4:11pm
- Location: saints zone
- Has thanked: 6 times
- Been thanked: 188 times
Re: Sandy v Port Melb
http://sandringhamfc.com.au/footy-match ... spx?id=587
The Sandringham Zebras produced a solid pre-season showing defeating the Port Melbourne- Borough 134-68 at Trevor Barker Oval on Sunday.
It was a dominant performance by the Zebras, controlling the game on both the field and scoreboard from start to finish.
Led by Luke Verma and Jack Sinclair with 32 and 27 disposals respectively, the Zebras look to be in good shape as they head into the regular season.
The Zebras midfield proved to be the key as they dominated the centre clearances and dictated the tempo of the contest.
Sandringham won the opening 8 centre clearances of the match and finished with 31 clearances opposed to 19, solidifying their dominance from the outset.
Rowan Marshall and Josh Battle dominated in attack, kicking 9 goals between them and putting the contest well out of reach for the Borough. McCartin also slotted home 3 of his own, only helping his cause for senior selection.
The Zebras now have a week off but will be back in action on the 9th of April when they take on Williamstown at Burbank Oval.
Sandringham 6.2 11.8 15.11 20.14 (134)
Port Melbourne 1.6 3.7 6.11 9.14 (68)
GOALS: Marshall 5, Battle 4, McCartin 3, Weickhardt 2, Answerth 2, Acres, Montagna, Curren & Sziller.
The Sandringham Zebras produced a solid pre-season showing defeating the Port Melbourne- Borough 134-68 at Trevor Barker Oval on Sunday.
It was a dominant performance by the Zebras, controlling the game on both the field and scoreboard from start to finish.
Led by Luke Verma and Jack Sinclair with 32 and 27 disposals respectively, the Zebras look to be in good shape as they head into the regular season.
The Zebras midfield proved to be the key as they dominated the centre clearances and dictated the tempo of the contest.
Sandringham won the opening 8 centre clearances of the match and finished with 31 clearances opposed to 19, solidifying their dominance from the outset.
Rowan Marshall and Josh Battle dominated in attack, kicking 9 goals between them and putting the contest well out of reach for the Borough. McCartin also slotted home 3 of his own, only helping his cause for senior selection.
The Zebras now have a week off but will be back in action on the 9th of April when they take on Williamstown at Burbank Oval.
Sandringham 6.2 11.8 15.11 20.14 (134)
Port Melbourne 1.6 3.7 6.11 9.14 (68)
GOALS: Marshall 5, Battle 4, McCartin 3, Weickhardt 2, Answerth 2, Acres, Montagna, Curren & Sziller.
StReNgTh ThRoUgH LoYaLtY
Rejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation, continuing steadfastly..!!
MEMBERSHIP 2014 31,134 Membership 2015 32,746 MEMBERSHIP 2016 - 38,101
MEMBERSHIP 2017 42,095 , Membership 2018 46,998
MEMBERSHIP 2019 43,106 http://saintsational.net/viewtopic.php? ... 9#p1816890
MEMBERSHIP 2020 48,588 http://saintsational.net/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=100107
Rejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation, continuing steadfastly..!!
MEMBERSHIP 2014 31,134 Membership 2015 32,746 MEMBERSHIP 2016 - 38,101
MEMBERSHIP 2017 42,095 , Membership 2018 46,998
MEMBERSHIP 2019 43,106 http://saintsational.net/viewtopic.php? ... 9#p1816890
MEMBERSHIP 2020 48,588 http://saintsational.net/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=100107
Re: Sandy v Port Melb
Holy s*** Marshall with 5. I'm trying not to get too excited by this guy but he's starting to put himself on a pedestal as our fwd-ruck option. Can actually mark and kick goals, pretty athletic from what I've heard. Like so far. And BAttle doing everything right. The best players often shine at an early age and he's not hiding his light under bushell so far.saintbrat wrote: GOALS: Marshall 5, Battle 4.
- Impatient Sainter
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4089
- Joined: Tue 05 Apr 2016 3:30pm
- Has thanked: 2622 times
- Been thanked: 1077 times
- saintbrat
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 44575
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 4:11pm
- Location: saints zone
- Has thanked: 6 times
- Been thanked: 188 times
Re: Sandy v Port Melb
reminder Rowan is a Rookie-Impatient Sainter wrote:Here one for the sceptics what about replacing Bruce with Marshall....?
and he isn't really ' young' has had a a couple of years at north Ballarat
StReNgTh ThRoUgH LoYaLtY
Rejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation, continuing steadfastly..!!
MEMBERSHIP 2014 31,134 Membership 2015 32,746 MEMBERSHIP 2016 - 38,101
MEMBERSHIP 2017 42,095 , Membership 2018 46,998
MEMBERSHIP 2019 43,106 http://saintsational.net/viewtopic.php? ... 9#p1816890
MEMBERSHIP 2020 48,588 http://saintsational.net/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=100107
Rejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation, continuing steadfastly..!!
MEMBERSHIP 2014 31,134 Membership 2015 32,746 MEMBERSHIP 2016 - 38,101
MEMBERSHIP 2017 42,095 , Membership 2018 46,998
MEMBERSHIP 2019 43,106 http://saintsational.net/viewtopic.php? ... 9#p1816890
MEMBERSHIP 2020 48,588 http://saintsational.net/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=100107
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6566
- Joined: Sat 11 Jun 2011 4:52pm
- Location: Here
- Has thanked: 1245 times
- Been thanked: 450 times
Re: Sandy v Port Melb
It's ridiculous that the VFL season starts so late (15th April) compared with the AFL season. How are the reserves players supposed to prove themselves in game situations with this stupid draw?
As ex-president Peter Summers said:
“If we are going to be a contender, we may as well plan to win the bloody thing.”
St Kilda - At least we have a Crest!
“If we are going to be a contender, we may as well plan to win the bloody thing.”
St Kilda - At least we have a Crest!
- White Winmar
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5014
- Joined: Tue 02 Jun 2009 10:02pm
Re: Sandy v Port Melb
He is a very promising type, especially in lieu of what happened on Saturday. I don't wish I'll on anyone, but he would be a very handy acquisition if we could upgrade him. Are we still able to upgrade a rookie mid season, without anyone on the LTI?saintbrat wrote:reminder Rowan is a Rookie-Impatient Sainter wrote:Here one for the sceptics what about replacing Bruce with Marshall....?
and he isn't really ' young' has had a a couple of years at north Ballarat
I started with nothing and I've got most of it left!
- saintsRrising
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 30077
- Joined: Mon 15 Mar 2004 11:07am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 709 times
- Been thanked: 1228 times
Re: Sandy v Port Melb
No, they have just be too lazy to edit their quotes to the last comment or two..BigMart wrote:And that is why quoting is ridiculous
Over-quoting is just as bad as not quoting at all IMO. Both are poor form.
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....
- kosifantutti
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8578
- Joined: Fri 21 Jan 2005 9:06am
- Location: Back in town
- Has thanked: 525 times
- Been thanked: 1527 times
- Bernard Shakey
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 11231
- Joined: Sun 18 Mar 2007 11:22pm
- Location: Down By The River 1989, 2003, 2009 & 2013
- Has thanked: 118 times
- Been thanked: 136 times
Re: Sandy v Port Melb
Hurt his hand in the first quarter. Had it strapped at quarter time, but only lasted five minutes after that.coopergrech wrote:Heard Meatball broke his thumb or hand?? This true?
Old enough to repaint, but young enough to sell
Re: Sandy v Port Melb
Not rediculous!Jacks Back wrote:It's ridiculous that the VFL season starts so late (15th April) compared with the AFL season. How are the reserves players supposed to prove themselves in game situations with this stupid draw?
You have to remember cricket finals are just finishing so grounds were/are not available. Council maintenance staff have to have time to renew and fix up any problems before allowing football games.
Officially, Cricket Clubs have access until 31 March.
Re: Sandy v Port Melb
Not rediculous!Jacks Back wrote:It's ridiculous that the VFL season starts so late (15th April) compared with the AFL season. How are the reserves players supposed to prove themselves in game situations with this stupid draw?
You have to remember cricket finals are just finishing so grounds were/are not available. Council maintenance staff have to have time to renew and fix up any problems before allowing football games.
Officially, Cricket Clubs have access until 31 March.
Re: Sandy v Port Melb
yeah my bad, not lazyness, just not used to posting on forums so didn't realise the space it would take up.saintsRrising wrote:No, they have just be too lazy to edit their quotes to the last comment or two..BigMart wrote:And that is why quoting is ridiculous
Over-quoting is just as bad as not quoting at all IMO. Both are poor form.
on another note it would be nice if we could see some footage of marshall, five goals, did he get many touches or hit outs anyone know?
- saintsRrising
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 30077
- Joined: Mon 15 Mar 2004 11:07am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 709 times
- Been thanked: 1228 times
Re: Sandy v Port Melb
Unfortunately I have not seen any other stats on him for the game. But at least he gave us something to be excited about this week.RODOS wrote:
on another note it would be nice if we could see some footage of marshall, five goals, did he get many touches or hit outs anyone know?
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....