+1BigMart wrote:Radical changes
No
Just obvious ones?!
Why can't we just do what Luke Bev does and drop players who don't perform
Changes v Hawks
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6582
- Joined: Sat 11 Jun 2011 4:52pm
- Location: Here
- Has thanked: 1276 times
- Been thanked: 463 times
Re: Changes v Hawks
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!
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1860
- Joined: Thu 01 May 2008 6:30pm
- Location: Mentone
- Has thanked: 17 times
- Been thanked: 263 times
Re: Changes v Hawks
To do this you need to have some idea about who is not performing rather than just having a perceived whipping boy (i.e Gilbert)Jacks Back wrote:+1BigMart wrote:Radical changes
No
Just obvious ones?!
Why can't we just do what Luke Bev does and drop players who don't perform
One year will be our year
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4243
- Joined: Thu 25 Mar 2004 2:47pm
- Location: incarnate
- Has thanked: 286 times
- Been thanked: 694 times
Re: Changes v Hawks
We are a developing side, and we need to develop the players that will lead us to a flag.longtimesaint wrote:Do any of you posters that want radical changes ever watch the matches? -there is so much rubbish spoken.
Dropping either Webster or Gilbert is plain stupid -Webster had a quiet game and made one bad turnover but was among oukvery best the week before.
Gilbert is one of our most desperate players and does more 1%'eras than anyone.
To bring in a kid like White who is not even in the best at Sandy is laughable.
It is time to realize that we are a developing side and at this stage will not often best top four sides.
With another pre-season and further draft/trading we might be there next year.
Nee!
- Con Gorozidis
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23532
- Joined: Thu 19 Jun 2008 4:04pm
- Has thanked: 100 times
- Been thanked: 78 times
Re: Changes v Hawks
Sinclair must play.
Dunstan should go out.
Then give Long a spell and bring in DMac.
Out: Dunny,Long, Longer
In: Hickey, Sinclair, DMac
Stevens for Gilbo an option just to see where Stevens is at and rest Gilbo.
Dunstan should go out.
Then give Long a spell and bring in DMac.
Out: Dunny,Long, Longer
In: Hickey, Sinclair, DMac
Stevens for Gilbo an option just to see where Stevens is at and rest Gilbo.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23010
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
- Has thanked: 8904 times
- Been thanked: 3883 times
Re: Changes v Hawks
Stevens has concussion.Con Gorozidis wrote:Sinclair must play.
Dunstan should go out.
Then give Long a spell and bring in DMac.
Out: Dunny,Long, Longer
In: Hickey, Sinclair, DMac
Stevens for Gilbo an option just to see where Stevens is at and rest Gilbo.
Might not be fit to even play.
- Impatient Sainter
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4089
- Joined: Tue 05 Apr 2016 3:30pm
- Has thanked: 2622 times
- Been thanked: 1077 times
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1860
- Joined: Thu 01 May 2008 6:30pm
- Location: Mentone
- Has thanked: 17 times
- Been thanked: 263 times
Re: Changes v Hawks
In : Hickey & Sinclair
Out: Longer & Long
Hickey more atheletic and fresher against McEvoy.
We need plenty of pace and run to beat Hawks.
Out: Longer & Long
Hickey more atheletic and fresher against McEvoy.
We need plenty of pace and run to beat Hawks.
One year will be our year
- Con Gorozidis
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23532
- Joined: Thu 19 Jun 2008 4:04pm
- Has thanked: 100 times
- Been thanked: 78 times
Re: Changes v Hawks
Fair call. Scrub Stevens.saynta wrote:Stevens has concussion.Con Gorozidis wrote:Sinclair must play.
Dunstan should go out.
Then give Long a spell and bring in DMac.
Out: Dunny,Long, Longer
In: Hickey, Sinclair, DMac
Stevens for Gilbo an option just to see where Stevens is at and rest Gilbo.
Might not be fit to even play.
Out: Dunny,Long, Longer
In: Hickey, Sinclair, DMac
Gives us more run and carry (the way to beat hawks) and Sinclair cant get less touches than Dunstan (12).
- WellardSaint
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8256
- Joined: Sat 26 May 2012 11:25am
- Location: Perth- the best weather in Oz, but the worst rednecks.
- Has thanked: 1849 times
- Been thanked: 869 times
Re: Changes v Hawks
Fitness test for Kobysaynta wrote:Stevens has concussion.Con Gorozidis wrote:Sinclair must play.
Dunstan should go out.
Then give Long a spell and bring in DMac.
Out: Dunny,Long, Longer
In: Hickey, Sinclair, DMac
Stevens for Gilbo an option just to see where Stevens is at and rest Gilbo.
Might not be fit to even play.
A real Sainter will pledge allegiance to the ❤![🤍](//cdn.jsdelivr.net/gh/twitter/twemoji@latest/assets/svg/1f90d.svg)
and despise the Pies, the Blues, and the Injectors.
Remember one of the 10 Commandments : Thou shalt have no other team before thee
Remember one of the 10 Commandments : Thou shalt have no other team before thee
-
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3266
- Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2007 4:05pm
- Been thanked: 390 times
Re: Changes v Hawks
In the last quarter we were out contested with Geelong always seeming to have that one extra player - and those players on the end of the contests having pace and flair.
Our ruck contest fell away, so the ball was being put to the advantage of their mids exclusively who had the supports noted above.
Then we had a few things going against us like the ball bouncing on its end and back over Montagna's head and some protection being afforded certain Geelong players.
And not defending the goal square off marking contests so our small defenders need to be looked at.
Plus we had Longer being exposed for mobility and impact so Geelong virtually with one extra player.
So look at the aspects of the game where we were exposed, noting we were able to cover those aspects for 3 quarters before the holes saw us exposed in the last quarter.
Geelong out structured us all day - and it told in the end.
That is a coaching and selection issue.
So, for next week, we firstly have to look at our structure acknowledging who our next opponent is, and where.
We can not go into a game giving away such an advantage because it will come back to bite us.
And look at the ability of EVERY player to run, carry and deliver whenever they are on the end of the contest chain and are put in space.
Because Geelong killed us there too.
In the last quarter they just had one too many for us to actually force the ball into a contest.
Our ruck contest fell away, so the ball was being put to the advantage of their mids exclusively who had the supports noted above.
Then we had a few things going against us like the ball bouncing on its end and back over Montagna's head and some protection being afforded certain Geelong players.
And not defending the goal square off marking contests so our small defenders need to be looked at.
Plus we had Longer being exposed for mobility and impact so Geelong virtually with one extra player.
So look at the aspects of the game where we were exposed, noting we were able to cover those aspects for 3 quarters before the holes saw us exposed in the last quarter.
Geelong out structured us all day - and it told in the end.
That is a coaching and selection issue.
So, for next week, we firstly have to look at our structure acknowledging who our next opponent is, and where.
We can not go into a game giving away such an advantage because it will come back to bite us.
And look at the ability of EVERY player to run, carry and deliver whenever they are on the end of the contest chain and are put in space.
Because Geelong killed us there too.
In the last quarter they just had one too many for us to actually force the ball into a contest.
- Joffa Burns
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 7081
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 5:48pm
- Has thanked: 1871 times
- Been thanked: 1570 times
Re: Changes v Hawks
White Winmar wrote:Clubs were lining up to give usa Kate first rounder, early second rounder for him. Rejected them all. Thanks genius.
I'll take this one thanks
![Cool 8-)](./images/smilies/icon_cool.gif)
Proudly assuming the title of forum Oracle and serving as the inaugural Saintsational ‘weak as piss brigade’ President.
-
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3602
- Joined: Wed 21 May 2008 8:51pm
- Location: Tassie
- Has thanked: 479 times
- Been thanked: 310 times
Re: Changes v Hawks
Outs: Longer, Long, Bruce and Dunstan
Ins: Hickey, Sinclair, Marshall and Stevens
Longer not good enough around the ground
Long now knows where he needs to improve to play AFL
Bruce and Dunstan need the kick in the arse a stint in the VFL should provide!!
Ins: Hickey, Sinclair, Marshall and Stevens
Longer not good enough around the ground
Long now knows where he needs to improve to play AFL
Bruce and Dunstan need the kick in the arse a stint in the VFL should provide!!
- Dave McNamara
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5709
- Joined: Wed 21 Sep 2011 2:44pm
- Location: Slotting another one from 94.5m out. Opposition flood? Bring it on...! Keep the faith Saintas!
- Has thanked: 80 times
- Been thanked: 74 times
Re: Changes v Hawks
Once again, I reckon we lacked that extra midfielder/running-type player.
Blitszards (sp?) provided them with what was effectively that extra player, and particularly in the latter part of the third, he had a real impact. And in that final quarter, the extra runner could well have meant our runners wouldn't have tired as much.
For next week, and assuming no fitness issues...
- Stevens in for Long. (Sorry to see Long go though.)
- Hickey (or anyone else on the list) for Billy.
- Next in line - Sinclair and White (whom I reckon we need to look at fast tracking a bit, if possible).
Paddy: is not ready to be returned yet! Marto is correct. He ain't AFL-level fit, and it's holding up his progress - big time!!!
I'd take the (apparently) controversial step of pulling him from playing for several weeks (or more), so he can concentrate full time on hitting-the-track and hitting-the-gym. Come back a new man in the latter part of the season, and he'll show us some of what he can really do!
And also, I still want some more from DS's man Dunstan.
PS: From listening to Richo's post-game address to us members:
Sinclair would have to be a pretty good shot for next week.
But the standout point for me - Billy. Wow! Talk about textbook 'being damned with faint praise'.
Blitszards (sp?) provided them with what was effectively that extra player, and particularly in the latter part of the third, he had a real impact. And in that final quarter, the extra runner could well have meant our runners wouldn't have tired as much.
For next week, and assuming no fitness issues...
- Stevens in for Long. (Sorry to see Long go though.)
- Hickey (or anyone else on the list) for Billy.
- Next in line - Sinclair and White (whom I reckon we need to look at fast tracking a bit, if possible).
Paddy: is not ready to be returned yet! Marto is correct. He ain't AFL-level fit, and it's holding up his progress - big time!!!
I'd take the (apparently) controversial step of pulling him from playing for several weeks (or more), so he can concentrate full time on hitting-the-track and hitting-the-gym. Come back a new man in the latter part of the season, and he'll show us some of what he can really do!
And also, I still want some more from DS's man Dunstan.
PS: From listening to Richo's post-game address to us members:
Sinclair would have to be a pretty good shot for next week.
But the standout point for me - Billy. Wow! Talk about textbook 'being damned with faint praise'.
It's Dave, man. Will you open up? I got the stuff with me! -------Who?
Dave, man. Open up ------------------------------------------ -----Dave???
Yeah, Dave. ---------------------------------------------------------Dave's not here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOiG1hAr ... detailpage
![Mr. Green :mrgreen:](./images/smilies/icon_mrgreen.gif)
Dave, man. Open up ------------------------------------------ -----Dave???
Yeah, Dave. ---------------------------------------------------------Dave's not here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOiG1hAr ... detailpage
![Mr. Green :mrgreen:](./images/smilies/icon_mrgreen.gif)
- Linton Lodger
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2467
- Joined: Mon 18 Aug 2014 2:07pm
- Has thanked: 86 times
- Been thanked: 256 times
Re: Changes v Hawks
Some of you may get your wishes, I reckon Richo might be making a few changes after seeing him on AFL360 last night. He looked like he was seething, particularly when Chris Scott said that in the end the game wasn't won by the tactical battle, that it was his leaders that stood up and went up a level in the final quarter. The look on Richo's face was sheer disappointment and annoyance, he agreed with Scott and it was obvious he was really disappointed with how we responded when the game was up for grabs. He wasn't a happy camper at all. Good to see.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1081
- Joined: Sat 27 Apr 2013 7:44pm
- Been thanked: 52 times
Re: Changes v Hawks
I hope he put the blowtorch on himself for some selection howlers - we basically played 2 men short with Longer and Long having near zero impact on the entire game. I'm not fazed by Long, he has talent and looks a player, but why was he fast tracked into the side with no runs on the board?? and that stinks i reckon!! Go back to Sandy young lad, rack up 20-30 posi's and a couple of goals for a month and do what Minch, Lonie, templeton before him have all had to do to squeeze into a defensive forward slot. As for Longer, I guess they had to give him a go to keep his hunger up, but he was really really bad. So we essentailly were 2 men down on output.Linton Lodger wrote:Some of you may get your wishes, I reckon Richo might be making a few changes after seeing him on AFL360 last night. He looked like he was seething, particularly when Chris Scott said that in the end the game wasn't won by the tactical battle, that it was his leaders that stood up and went up a level in the final quarter. The look on Richo's face was sheer disappointment and annoyance, he agreed with Scott and it was obvious he was really disappointed with how we responded when the game was up for grabs. He wasn't a happy camper at all. Good to see.
- desertsaint
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10404
- Joined: Sun 27 Apr 2008 2:02pm
- Location: out there
- Has thanked: 186 times
- Been thanked: 701 times
Re: Changes v Hawks
re Long - he looked like he would steo right in during the JLT and some kids do that - see Pepper-Powell and Long's mate at Geelong. So worth the test - unfortunately he looks a fair way off so back he goes - but maybe that decision should have been made after his first game.Saint wagga wrote:I hope he put the blowtorch on himself for some selection howlers - we basically played 2 men short with Longer and Long having near zero impact on the entire game. I'm not fazed by Long, he has talent and looks a player, but why was he fast tracked into the side with no runs on the board?? and that stinks i reckon!! Go back to Sandy young lad, rack up 20-30 posi's and a couple of goals for a month and do what Minch, Lonie, templeton before him have all had to do to squeeze into a defensive forward slot. As for Longer, I guess they had to give him a go to keep his hunger up, but he was really really bad. So we essentailly were 2 men down on output.Linton Lodger wrote:Some of you may get your wishes, I reckon Richo might be making a few changes after seeing him on AFL360 last night. He looked like he was seething, particularly when Chris Scott said that in the end the game wasn't won by the tactical battle, that it was his leaders that stood up and went up a level in the final quarter. The look on Richo's face was sheer disappointment and annoyance, he agreed with Scott and it was obvious he was really disappointed with how we responded when the game was up for grabs. He wasn't a happy camper at all. Good to see.
"The starting point of all achievement is desire. "
- White Winmar
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5014
- Joined: Tue 02 Jun 2009 10:02pm
Re: Changes v Hawks
She'd certainly be more useful.Joffa Burns wrote:White Winmar wrote:Clubs were lining up to give usa Kate first rounder, early second rounder for him. Rejected them all. Thanks genius.
I'll take this one thanks
I started with nothing and I've got most of it left!
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 11322
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 12:57am
- Location: South of Heaven
- Has thanked: 1312 times
- Been thanked: 447 times
Re: Changes v Hawks
She never held a candle to her mother. Goldie could coach a football team, too.White Winmar wrote:She'd certainly be more useful.Joffa Burns wrote:White Winmar wrote:Clubs were lining up to give usa Kate first rounder, early second rounder for him. Rejected them all. Thanks genius.
I'll take this one thanks
Curb your enthusiasm - you’re a St.Kilda supporter!!
![Image](https://i.imgur.com/LkJcQq3.jpg?2)
![Image](https://i.imgur.com/LkJcQq3.jpg?2)
- White Winmar
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5014
- Joined: Tue 02 Jun 2009 10:02pm
Re: Changes v Hawks
Mum was handy in the army as well.
I started with nothing and I've got most of it left!
- Johnny Member
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4157
- Joined: Thu 05 Oct 2006 12:27pm
- Been thanked: 1 time
Re: Changes v Hawks
To be fair - we don't have anyone even close to the ability and experience of Selwood or Dangerfield.Linton Lodger wrote:Some of you may get your wishes, I reckon Richo might be making a few changes after seeing him on AFL360 last night. He looked like he was seething, particularly when Chris Scott said that in the end the game wasn't won by the tactical battle, that it was his leaders that stood up and went up a level in the final quarter. The look on Richo's face was sheer disappointment and annoyance, he agreed with Scott and it was obvious he was really disappointed with how we responded when the game was up for grabs. He wasn't a happy camper at all. Good to see.
Dropping blokes won't change that.
-
- 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 v Hawks
Selwood and Dangerfield were looking around in the last quarter I reckon almost wondering why they were getting the ball so easy- sure they are class, but without any pressure they look even better. Those who didn't bother running with them, or playing too far off them, should be in the firing line, as not only did they let two champs off the hook, they barely got the ball themselves!
Maybe Richo should ask himself about his defensive setup in the last quarter, as it bombed out badly, and not the first time this season.
Maybe Richo should ask himself about his defensive setup in the last quarter, as it bombed out badly, and not the first time this season.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 11322
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 12:57am
- Location: South of Heaven
- Has thanked: 1312 times
- Been thanked: 447 times
Re: Changes v Hawks
Ah, good old Private Benjamin!White Winmar wrote:Mum was handy in the army as well.
Curb your enthusiasm - you’re a St.Kilda supporter!!
![Image](https://i.imgur.com/LkJcQq3.jpg?2)
![Image](https://i.imgur.com/LkJcQq3.jpg?2)
- Bernard Shakey
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 11237
- Joined: Sun 18 Mar 2007 11:22pm
- Location: Down By The River 1989, 2003, 2009 & 2013
- Has thanked: 120 times
- Been thanked: 137 times
Re: Changes v Hawks
White is in the best at Sandy and was named as such in The Age.longtimesaint wrote:Do any of you posters that want radical changes ever watch the matches? -there is so much rubbish spoken.
Dropping either Webster or Gilbert is plain stupid -Webster had a quiet game and made one bad turnover but was among oukvery best the week before.
Gilbert is one of our most desperate players and does more 1%'eras than anyone.
To bring in a kid like White who is not even in the best at Sandy is laughable.
It is time to realize that we are a developing side and at this stage will not often best top four sides.
With another pre-season and further draft/trading we might be there next year.
My best for Sandy last week were Pierce, White and Rice.
Old enough to repaint, but young enough to sell
- Joffa Burns
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 7081
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 5:48pm
- Has thanked: 1871 times
- Been thanked: 1570 times
Re: Changes v Hawks
Fair enough but how do you know if a player is performing to the coaching staff instruction and expectation?Jacks Back wrote:+1BigMart wrote:Radical changes
No
Just obvious ones?!
Why can't we just do what Luke Bev does and drop players who don't perform
Not sure they should be dropped because a couple of Sainsational punters suggest on a fan website they are not performing.
Paddy was an obvious one as he was not doing the team basics.
How does anyone on here know how Gilbert or Dustan performed in the roles they were asked to play?
Might have been great or woeful? You can never doubt their effort or commitment.
Proudly assuming the title of forum Oracle and serving as the inaugural Saintsational ‘weak as piss brigade’ President.