Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
Annoyedsaint wrote: ↑Sun 12 May 2019 11:31am
Time to go. Seriously...how many more games of that shite do we have to suffer through. Embarrassing he has survived this long.
While I’m at it...
Dunstan - list clogger of the highest order
Newnes - been there far too long for zero return. Incredibly disappointing player
Long - overhyped player. A tackle and fluke goal with5 possessions every week doesn’t cut it!!!
Kent - not much of a fan, too slow, cannot kick!! An arsey goal again doesn’t cut it!!
Phillips - typical we get the dud brother. I lost count of the times he turned it over
I could go on....so over these bulltish performances year in year out.
Rubbish, pure rubbish.
Don't get sucked in Saynta.
Posters that have admitted they were wrong about Hanna's gastro and the club didn't create a cover story.
Total = 1.
Don't get sucked in to what Ted??
The coach and team stinks, my definition of stinks is being no where near finals with the same cattle and coach for far too long.
If you can't see that and others can't see that then no wonder we have been consistently no good for so long, you're happy to put up with being a bottom feeder.
This is why we stay down the bottom and Hawthorn stay there for 5 mins. What planet are you living on?
My take on the last 3 losses is that it was the players who failed to do what they did in the first 5 games and blame should not be directed to Alan Richardson. Time and time again when St Kilda pushed forward the ball was delivered directly to an opposing player, these turnovers quite often resulting in a score to the other team. Neither Richo, nor any of his assistants should accept responsibility for this, and I have no doubt they find this just as frustrating as we do.
The fact remains that St Kilda'a current teams still lack the vital ingredient of experience: in 2018 St Kilda had not one player named in the All Australian squad of 40, and the lack of any elite players deprives the team of on field leadership talent.
In 2019 it is increasingly important, in the absence of runners bringing out coaches' instructions, for a team's leaders to execute the game plan, to lead by example because they possess the crucial skills to set up plays.
In all 3 losses, St Kilda's disposal skills have been poor - even Seb Ross, one of the team's most experienced midfielders and regularly gaining up to 30+ disposals, failed to do very much other than bomb the ball towards the forward line: "on a wing and a prayer" football that is not going to bring the team much success.
Things will change for the better once Dan Hannebery and Jack Steven are fit to play, likewise Jake Carlisle and Dylan Roberton have been sorely missed in defence.
The current trend is not looking good, with Collingwood, Carlton and Port Adelaide coming up in the next 3 rounds, all teams with far superior experience and elite talent on paper.
On the positive side I do believe that this year the Saints are playing a better brand of football, their defeats have not been thrashings, and I'm sure that if they can recover the form they displayed in the 4 wins, coupled with the return from injury of Steven, Carlisle, Hannebery and Max King, St Kilda could easily win another 4, maybe more in 2019.
It remains to be seen if Richo will survive at the end of the season if the Saints fail to make the finals, as has been suggested. In the press on the weekend it was reported that teams are tending to retain their senior coaches a lot more nowadays, partly because there is a dearth of proven coaches "in waiting", and also because in today's football world coaching has become so much more scientific, with teams having up to 40 assistants and specialists in their football departments.
When one door closes and another door opens, you are probably in prison..
Sometimes, someone unexpected comes into your life out of nowhere, makes your heart race, and changes you forever. We call those people cops.
"blame should not be directed towards Alan Richardson"
Wow!! What's his role? What should Richo be accountable for.
One thing Richo did this year which is refreshing is that he took responsibility for making a call on a player who was not right and Richo admitted it was his call and it was a mistake. All footy followers respect that and it means the coach is accountable for team selection
The next step in Richo's 6 year apprenticeship will be for him to come out after a match and admit that a loss was his fault. Once he starts being accountable and once the coaching team takes responsibility, only then will we begin to head in the right direction. He needs to lead. His players will respect him a lot more if he focusses on making them better, rather than focussing on deflecting ANY responsibility for losses.
Why should we continue to hear that it's the players skills or confidence or any of a myriad of excuses that shift the blame to the players? This is not how you build confidence and build belief in your young players. Take the pressure off the players. Do your bloody job and show us that you can turn a young talented kid into a star.
If you play the low risk policy of the same players in the same positions and the result is that we keep getting losses, then you just need to own it. Come out after a loss and take responsibility; "I let down my players. I should've made some changes earlier in the match. I could have taken more of a risk at team selection". OWN IT RICHO
It's Richo's responsibility for his players to execute. No excuses. We cannot let Richo continue to blame his players for losses. I understand we have injuries, but the guys available need their coaches support. It's a running theme since early last year to point the finger at the players and it is not helpful. The CEO and the footy department keep backing him in when he makes these excuses. It's unbelievable. It has to stop
Yorkeys wrote: ↑Mon 13 May 2019 12:34pm
Alan's (Richo…….) approach is sterile, unentertaining, boring, predicable, frustrating and immensely disappointing to members. Goodness knows what sponsors think. Not good in general for a competitive professional sport that sees itself in the entertainment business. Terrible for the Club concerned.
...Battle at FF
...Marshall CHF
....Steele an attacking centre,
....Brown is reasonable at FB
....Joyce might be able to be an adequate mobile CHB
.... Pierce if he recovers to ruck otherwise Billy.
I remember Shane Warne so pleased that Ross Lyon had left and that we finally were free to play a more attacking style. The shackles of Lyon were released so to speak.
Were we reasonable in 2012, yes, maybe just due to legacy players still there? Or because of new coach?
I think Lyon was perceived as dour and possibly sterile too, in terms of gameplay. (Altho he did rest or leave out players I didn't agree with) His personality quirks aside he was dour and predictable, no?
Don't mind your player position ideas..not sure about Pierce but i still don't know enough - even a little - about the players in general, so I'm spinning off bits I've read etc.
Yorkeys wrote: ↑Mon 13 May 2019 12:34pm
Alan's (Richo…….) approach is sterile, unentertaining, boring, predicable, frustrating and immensely disappointing to members. Goodness knows what sponsors think. Not good in general for a competitive professional sport that sees itself in the entertainment business. Terrible for the Club concerned.
...Battle at FF
...Marshall CHF
....Steele an attacking centre,
....Brown is reasonable at FB
....Joyce might be able to be an adequate mobile CHB
.... Pierce if he recovers to ruck otherwise Billy.
I remember Shane Warne so pleased that Ross Lyon had left and that we finally were free to play a more attacking style. The shackles of Lyon were released so to speak.
Were we reasonable in 2012, yes, maybe just due to legacy players still there? Or because of new coach?
I think Lyon was perceived as dour and possibly sterile too, in terms of gameplay. (Altho he did rest or leave out players I didn't agree with) His personality quirks aside he was dour and predictable, no?
But Ross was also uncompromising. He demanded that his players performed or there were comsequences. In only his second year at the club, Lyon dropped Milne and Dal Santo early in 2008. It put everyone on notice. Richo is in his 6th year and the dropping of Nathan Brown is the first time I think that he had relegated a senior player to the reserves.
However we have been competitive all year, with a list that has been decimated by injury. There were players running around on the weekend that are a long way off deserving a place in the side. They are getting blooded as there is no one else.
I am highly concerned that we cant play interstate under Richo I think it goes to the core of the Richo issue. In fair weather the players do their thing and make him look good. When there is a challenge he is not up to the task. The adults that are now in the coaching department have made the change in fortune for the Saints not Richo.
Part of my concern is also the lack of players 'coming on'. We either dont recruit well, or, we arent getting the potential out of players. My thought is the development and that is at the heart of the coaching panel, eg Richo.
magnifisaint wrote: ↑Mon 13 May 2019 4:10pm
I will reserve my judgement on Richardson until the end of the year. No finals and he's gone.
That would have been a fantastic call if the Saints CEO and board reserved their decision until the end of Richo's previous contract.
Do you think Freo will be looking to extend Lyon's contract if he can't make finals this year or next year?
After being head coach for 4 years and with no finals, we decided to extend Richo's contract (this will be his 6th full year) and give him a pass for NO finals regardless. Nice job if you can get it. Staggering!
I think Carlton will also make a change if they do not make finals next year?
We cant blame Richo for the loss against WCE because their all skill eg kicking and marking is so far superior to ours. However who ever changed our approach going into the F50 against GWS got it terribly wrong and that negative approach smacks of a Richo influence.
Anyone that went to the game Sat night would have seen we'd be coming through the middle, many times with a 3 on 3 in the 50m arc, but then either kick out to the boundary, or completely stop, go sideways and or backwards.
I'm sorry, but the head coach wears that. Being too afraid of turning it over stops you scoring and thus we kick 9 or 10 goals every game. What's worse is, our skills are so bad (by same duds I mentioned), we end up turning it over up the ground anyway. Might as well risk kicking a goal and turn it over deep in the 50.
The loss was 18 points but never had a realistic chance of winning, but looks after the percentage a little more. We got flogged, scoreboard didn't reflect the true result.
Annoyedsaint wrote: ↑Mon 13 May 2019 6:21pm
Anyone that went to the game Sat night would have seen we'd be coming through the middle, many times with a 3 on 3 in the 50m arc, but then either kick out to the boundary, or completely stop, go sideways and or backwards.
I'm sorry, but the head coach wears that. Being too afraid of turning it over stops you scoring and thus we kick 9 or 10 goals every game. What's worse is, our skills are so bad (by same duds I mentioned), we end up turning it over up the ground anyway. Might as well risk kicking a goal and turn it over deep in the 50.
The loss was 18 points but never had a realistic chance of winning, but looks after the percentage a little more. We got flogged, scoreboard didn't reflect the true result.
And there lies the dilemma. Chip it around on the fringes of the F50 vs bomb it in long and direct. What defines the conditions to choose the former vs the latter? There must be so many variables and even if those conditions take into account the players ability to execute, and if the players know those rules and conditions inside out, the options players choose in the heat of battle maybe beyond their capacities or high risk.
I think we are at least chipping in and we've shown resilience to keep on challenging right through the games so far. However, with a lack of class, it might be time to implement Russian tank building tactics. Design tanks where a few mm off here and there won't mean the whole tank falls apart. If the commanders fail to execute protocol, Siberia.
Ahhh, but I never said bomb it in. 3 on 3, but they need to know where they are running too as well. No use having them all next to each other and not moving, thus the long bomb.
There's so much space for them to move and keep on the move. Then it's up to the kicker to pick the best option and worse case put it in a spot where is can be a 50/50 contest.
If it's in a half decent spot the backline panics and gives a free away.
Granted we try to keep it away from McGovern, but a lot of the time he had an opposite so wasn't roaming free to be 3rd man up to intercept.
We are 4 and 4 but are 12th due to a crap percentage (i.e. not scoring enough and still no 100 point game. But let's keep the same blokes in the same positions.
As ex-president Peter Summers said:
“If we are going to be a contender, we may as well plan to win the bloody thing.”
The_Dud wrote: ↑Mon 13 May 2019 11:32pm
He’s a dead man walking, why waste time and possibly damage the club more by having him stick around?
I hope you are right but it serves no purpose sacking him mid season. There are so many reasons he has over stayed his time, but another half a season ain't going to change anything. He has been a dud from the get go and Finnis should also be penalised for renewing his contract.
As for sacking mid season or round 16-17, if there’s no chance of finals (which is very high as it is), I’m all for it.
We owe him nothing, can’t believe my membership is still going towards his wages, absolute joke.
The problem under Richo has been consistency- his teams play great for a quarter or two then many players go missing. Right now it's back to 2018 form.
prwilkinson wrote: ↑Mon 13 May 2019 2:46pm
At this point, Richo would have to take a dump on his desk and set fire to the place to get fired.
... he could probably also go on a bronzing spree in the boardroom post-dump and pre-arson attack and still not get the bullet.
I will never, ever be able to understand why Finnis extended the Cho's contract. No one was going to poach him and he'd not exactly lit it up in his initial tenure.
