me too. do you still think raph's a dud?The_Dud wrote: very happy tho
that's more like it ... end of the flood?
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18614
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 1:36am
- Has thanked: 1959 times
- Been thanked: 859 times
- mbogo
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2499
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:40pm
- Location: Hogwarts
- Been thanked: 32 times
Barks was pretty chuffed at the game, Thomas and I saw him - even though Rix was out - if Teflon posted to a game-day thread they cannot be the same person, unless B4E has an Internet wireless CPU embedded in the brain - but then again that is entirely possible.
BTW I do not see Rix getting back in - not after yesterday.
BTW I do not see Rix getting back in - not after yesterday.
This is a team game and there is no room for individuals who think they are above walking through the fire.
- BAM! (shhhh)
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2134
- Joined: Thu 24 May 2007 5:23pm
- Location: The little voice inside your head
I saw 3 big differences that led to the game looking very different - and a reduction of flooding was NOT one of them...
1/ When Freo had the ball, they didn't chip with it in their back half looking for the loose players exposed as the Saints moved back. Instead, they handballed a lot to try and set up their run, which meant the pressure exerted by the players moving back caused turnovers and contests instead of slowing the game down. They also weren't nearly as effective in chipping around in their half forward line, kicking to contests inside 50 where we had numbers.
When they did move it quickly down field, our backs did an excellent job of standing up, making sure that Pavlich generally kicked from around 50m. Tarrant had some closer opportunities, but was his usual woeful self accuracy wise.
2/ When the Saints had the ball, their kicking was much more accurate. When they were patient, they hit targets. Often you'd see all the players on the ground flooded into a single wing, but the Saints did an excellent job of forcing the man up contests either by going back the the corridor (and the run through the middle was fantastic) and then creating space at hitting their tagerts/
3/ Any game plan looks better when the team is winning contests and kicking accurately. Accurate kicking ticked the scoreboard along and foreced Freo to play into the Saints hands. A big game from the G train made things look much more positive.
There are a number of things an opposition team can do to nullify the '07 Saints, and Freo failed in these areas... given the way West Coast play, next week should at least be interesting as well.
1/ When Freo had the ball, they didn't chip with it in their back half looking for the loose players exposed as the Saints moved back. Instead, they handballed a lot to try and set up their run, which meant the pressure exerted by the players moving back caused turnovers and contests instead of slowing the game down. They also weren't nearly as effective in chipping around in their half forward line, kicking to contests inside 50 where we had numbers.
When they did move it quickly down field, our backs did an excellent job of standing up, making sure that Pavlich generally kicked from around 50m. Tarrant had some closer opportunities, but was his usual woeful self accuracy wise.
2/ When the Saints had the ball, their kicking was much more accurate. When they were patient, they hit targets. Often you'd see all the players on the ground flooded into a single wing, but the Saints did an excellent job of forcing the man up contests either by going back the the corridor (and the run through the middle was fantastic) and then creating space at hitting their tagerts/
3/ Any game plan looks better when the team is winning contests and kicking accurately. Accurate kicking ticked the scoreboard along and foreced Freo to play into the Saints hands. A big game from the G train made things look much more positive.
There are a number of things an opposition team can do to nullify the '07 Saints, and Freo failed in these areas... given the way West Coast play, next week should at least be interesting as well.
"Everything comes to he who hustles while he waits"
- Henry Ford
- Henry Ford
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23243
- Joined: Sat 13 Mar 2004 11:44pm
- Has thanked: 741 times
- Been thanked: 1796 times
Isnt that the whole point?Life Long Saint wrote: I agree that Thomas' stubborness probably cost him his job. And it nearly cost Mark Thompson his too. But he yielded to the wishes of his board and allowed a football manager to help out. Interesting to see where the Cats are now with the stability of a constant senior coach.
Bomber Thompson licked his wounds, recognised he was not able to manage the many hats Cook and others at the club said he was managing - it was affetcing his coaching. So whats he do? Agrees with the Board for the footballmanager position, the club sought some outside leadership help *(which they rave about) and hiows Bomber coaching now???????........while Grant Thomas insists nup hes still the man to do the lot - dumb move Grant.
No one said the Board made their decision on game plan - you introduced that aspect to the discussion not me - its pretty clear to me the Board had numerous elements of the footy dept they wanted change with - the coach being one after he wouldnt budge.
“Yeah….nah””
- Life Long Saint
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5518
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 12:54pm
- Has thanked: 62 times
- Been thanked: 481 times
- Contact:
Yep! We're in vehement agreement! Very little to do with on-field performance...ergo...why did we need a dramatic change to our style?Teflon wrote:Isnt that the whole point?
Bomber Thompson licked his wounds, recognised he was not able to manage the many hats Cook and others at the club said he was managing - it was affetcing his coaching. So whats he do? Agrees with the Board for the footballmanager position, the club sought some outside leadership help *(which they rave about) and hiows Bomber coaching now???????........while Grant Thomas insists nup hes still the man to do the lot - dumb move Grant.
No one said the Board made their decision on game plan - you introduced that aspect to the discussion not me - its pretty clear to me the Board had numerous elements of the footy dept they wanted change with - the coach being one after he wouldnt budge.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23243
- Joined: Sat 13 Mar 2004 11:44pm
- Has thanked: 741 times
- Been thanked: 1796 times
Its interesting isnt it? The players this year have talked about there not actually being a great deal of difference in Thomas/Lyon game plans - IMHO the difference we are seeing is a playing group still coming to terms with subtle changes to the way we have played - in short more accountability and less bombing going fwd which I am incredibly thankful for.Life Long Saint wrote:Yep! We're in vehement agreement! Very little to do with on-field performance...ergo...why did we need a dramatic change to our style?Teflon wrote:Isnt that the whole point?
Bomber Thompson licked his wounds, recognised he was not able to manage the many hats Cook and others at the club said he was managing - it was affetcing his coaching. So whats he do? Agrees with the Board for the footballmanager position, the club sought some outside leadership help *(which they rave about) and hiows Bomber coaching now???????........while Grant Thomas insists nup hes still the man to do the lot - dumb move Grant.
No one said the Board made their decision on game plan - you introduced that aspect to the discussion not me - its pretty clear to me the Board had numerous elements of the footy dept they wanted change with - the coach being one after he wouldnt budge.
We kicked 19 goals on the weekend - I do not believe Lyon decided to change game plan for the last 3 games...to me we had to get some defensive aspects into our game - we were killed whenm shut down so often last year......it will take time yet but IMO we will end up with a side who can both attack and score quickly and also pick its way through an opposition hell bent of flooding and a defensive game plan.
“Yeah….nah””
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 25303
- Joined: Tue 01 Feb 2005 4:25pm
- Location: Trump Tower
- Has thanked: 142 times
- Been thanked: 284 times
look, without being too negative, Freo were crap.....no ruckman, a one man forward line (Pavlova) and no idea how to slow a game down.
The moment X.Clarke ran down the guts at full speed to bang it inside 50 really showed up how different a game plan against us Freo had compared to most other sides this year.....normally THEY don't allow us space by chipping in our forward line and slowing it up.
I think against the Weagles it will be back to the grindstone again for us, with a huge struggle to score for both sides.
The moment X.Clarke ran down the guts at full speed to bang it inside 50 really showed up how different a game plan against us Freo had compared to most other sides this year.....normally THEY don't allow us space by chipping in our forward line and slowing it up.
I think against the Weagles it will be back to the grindstone again for us, with a huge struggle to score for both sides.
i am Melbourne Skies - sometimes Blue Skies, Grey Skies, even Partly Cloudy Skies.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23243
- Joined: Sat 13 Mar 2004 11:44pm
- Has thanked: 741 times
- Been thanked: 1796 times
Possibly and thats something those who bank everything on game plan underestimate - opposition have a dramatic effect on how we set up and can play.saintspremiers wrote:look, without being too negative, Freo were crap.....no ruckman, a one man forward line (Pavlova) and no idea how to slow a game down.
The moment X.Clarke ran down the guts at full speed to bang it inside 50 really showed up how different a game plan against us Freo had compared to most other sides this year.....normally THEY don't allow us space by chipping in our forward line and slowing it up.
I think against the Weagles it will be back to the grindstone again for us, with a huge struggle to score for both sides.
“Yeah….nah””
- Life Long Saint
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5518
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 12:54pm
- Has thanked: 62 times
- Been thanked: 481 times
- Contact:
As long as we continue to take risks and try to make something happen. If we go back to the chip-chip game when the pressure comes then we are done for.Teflon wrote:Possibly and thats something those who bank everything on game plan underestimate - opposition have a dramatic effect on how we set up and can play.saintspremiers wrote:look, without being too negative, Freo were crap.....no ruckman, a one man forward line (Pavlova) and no idea how to slow a game down.
The moment X.Clarke ran down the guts at full speed to bang it inside 50 really showed up how different a game plan against us Freo had compared to most other sides this year.....normally THEY don't allow us space by chipping in our forward line and slowing it up.
I think against the Weagles it will be back to the grindstone again for us, with a huge struggle to score for both sides.
- saintsRrising
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 30093
- Joined: Mon 15 Mar 2004 11:07am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 711 times
- Been thanked: 1234 times
There are two main parts to our game plan....how we play when we have the ball....and VERY importantly how we play when the opposition have it.bigcarl wrote:
looked like the 2004-2005 game plan to me.
The way we stopped Freo often when they had the ball...was NEVER part of what we did in 2004/2005.
YES..and that is exactly what RL has been saying in his press conferences...that he wanted our players to take more risks and be more direct than they were....bigcarl wrote: whatever it was it worked a treat. i agree with you Life Long Saint about our willingness to take risks.
it has been largely absent this season and has cost us bigtime
People WRONGLY assume that the poor plan was DUE to the game plan...rather than being due more to take of confidence and poor execution...and i would guess lack of familarity with the new aspects of the gameplan so that plyers where having to THINK about what tey were doing rather than just doing it instictively.
We are probably now starting to see the players becoming instinctive again...
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....
- saintsRrising
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 30093
- Joined: Mon 15 Mar 2004 11:07am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 711 times
- Been thanked: 1234 times
Re: that's more like it ... end of the flood?
If we did not flood...what was GTrain doing in the middle.....and Roo on the HBF.....etc etc..???????bigcarl wrote:... thought i'd jumped in a time machine and travelled back to 2004-2005 the way we played today.
We still flooded....
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....
- The_Dud
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 13956
- Joined: Sun 27 May 2007 9:53pm
- Location: Bendigo
- Has thanked: 1314 times
- Been thanked: 2083 times
Re: that's more like it ... end of the flood?
i thought you said a while ago we dont flood? we just play the one extra man in defence?saintsRrising wrote:If we did not flood...what was GTrain doing in the middle.....and Roo on the HBF.....etc etc..???????bigcarl wrote:... thought i'd jumped in a time machine and travelled back to 2004-2005 the way we played today.
We still flooded....
Bewaire krime, da krimson bolt is comeing to yure nayborhood to smach krime
SHUT UP KRIME!
SHUT UP KRIME!
- saintsRrising
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 30093
- Joined: Mon 15 Mar 2004 11:07am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 711 times
- Been thanked: 1234 times
Re: that's more like it ... end of the flood?
How about you actually post what I said then Dan....that way I can reply??.Dan Warna wrote:
i thought you said a while ago we dont flood? we just play the one extra man in defence?
If you are talking about the FIRST Hawks game when their coach & many in the media came out whinging.....I said that we had extra players in our backline because the Hawks just played the 4 forwards....and we held our backline structure....so in the context of discussing THAT game and the the Hawks forward line we had not flooded it. We had just maintained our 6 backs to their 4 forwards.
If you are refering to something else...then please quote what that was and the context and I will happily reply.
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....
Re: that's more like it ... end of the flood?
so do we flood or dont we flood?saintsRrising wrote:How about you actually post what I said then Dan....that way I can reply??.Dan Warna wrote:
i thought you said a while ago we dont flood? we just play the one extra man in defence?
If you are talking about the FIRST Hawks game when their coach & many in the media came out whinging.....I said that we had extra players in our backline because the Hawks just played the 4 forwards....and we held our backline structure....so in the context of discussing THAT game and the the Hawks forward line we had not flooded it. We had just maintained our 6 backs to their 4 forwards.
If you are refering to something else...then please quote what that was and the context and I will happily reply.
Bewaire krime, da krimson bolt is comeing to yure nayborhood to smach krime
SHUT UP KRIME!
SHUT UP KRIME!
- rodgerfox
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9059
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 9:10am
- Has thanked: 425 times
- Been thanked: 327 times
Have you spoken to Ross Lyon and been directly told what the game plan actually is?saintsRrising wrote:There are two main parts to our game plan....how we play when we have the ball....and VERY importantly how we play when the opposition have it.bigcarl wrote:
looked like the 2004-2005 game plan to me.
The way we stopped Freo often when they had the ball...was NEVER part of what we did in 2004/2005.
YES..and that is exactly what RL has been saying in his press conferences...that he wanted our players to take more risks and be more direct than they were....bigcarl wrote: whatever it was it worked a treat. i agree with you Life Long Saint about our willingness to take risks.
it has been largely absent this season and has cost us bigtime
People WRONGLY assume that the poor plan was DUE to the game plan...rather than being due more to take of confidence and poor execution...and i would guess lack of familarity with the new aspects of the gameplan so that plyers where having to THINK about what tey were doing rather than just doing it instictively.
We are probably now starting to see the players becoming instinctive again...
You seem very confused between your own view of the world and actual reality.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23243
- Joined: Sat 13 Mar 2004 11:44pm
- Has thanked: 741 times
- Been thanked: 1796 times
Unlike yourself Dodgy whose very clearly in a world of fantasy....rodgerfox wrote:Have you spoken to Ross Lyon and been directly told what the game plan actually is?saintsRrising wrote:There are two main parts to our game plan....how we play when we have the ball....and VERY importantly how we play when the opposition have it.bigcarl wrote:
looked like the 2004-2005 game plan to me.
The way we stopped Freo often when they had the ball...was NEVER part of what we did in 2004/2005.
YES..and that is exactly what RL has been saying in his press conferences...that he wanted our players to take more risks and be more direct than they were....bigcarl wrote: whatever it was it worked a treat. i agree with you Life Long Saint about our willingness to take risks.
it has been largely absent this season and has cost us bigtime
People WRONGLY assume that the poor plan was DUE to the game plan...rather than being due more to take of confidence and poor execution...and i would guess lack of familarity with the new aspects of the gameplan so that plyers where having to THINK about what tey were doing rather than just doing it instictively.
We are probably now starting to see the players becoming instinctive again...
You seem very confused between your own view of the world and actual reality.
“Yeah….nah””
- saintsRrising
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 30093
- Joined: Mon 15 Mar 2004 11:07am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 711 times
- Been thanked: 1234 times
Re: that's more like it ... end of the flood?
Is it not obvious Dan???...we flood at times...and we did so against Freo as we have against other teams.Dan Warna wrote:
so do we flood or dont we flood?
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....
- saintsRrising
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 30093
- Joined: Mon 15 Mar 2004 11:07am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 711 times
- Been thanked: 1234 times
No I am not at all confused.....unlike those who seem to think that the way we played against Freo was somehow how we played in 2004 when quite clearly it was not.rodgerfox wrote:
You seem very confused between your own view of the world and actual reality.
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....
- saintsRrising
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 30093
- Joined: Mon 15 Mar 2004 11:07am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 711 times
- Been thanked: 1234 times
Re: that's more like it ... end of the flood?
So Dan please sttre exactly what you think I have stated in the past so that I can answer your question?Dan Warna wrote:
[i thought you said a while ago we dont flood? we just play the one extra man in defence?
If you are stating that I have stated that we don't flood...then you are way off base.
For example I have posted pre-season that Harvey could play HF because he has the endurance to FLOOD back to support the midfield and backline.
etc
etc
etc
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....