Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
You ask "is this fact"...when I have stated "most likely"....rodgerfox wrote:Really?saintsRrising wrote:The common thread in many of the guys who have been delisted is that they were not fully committed to be successful at AFL football in 2007......
Mini was deslisted most likely in large part due to this....
Is this a fact, or an outsiders opinion?
.
But you didn't have a 'most likely' ahead of this statement...saintsRrising wrote:You ask "is this fact"...when I have stated "most likely"....rodgerfox wrote:Really?saintsRrising wrote:The common thread in many of the guys who have been delisted is that they were not fully committed to be successful at AFL football in 2007......
Mini was deslisted most likely in large part due to this....
Is this a fact, or an outsiders opinion?
.
Please consider what "most likely" can mean and then you will have the answer to your question.
Slow down.saintsRrising wrote:I have already answered your question....but understand that all you really are attempting to do is bait me and trash yet another forumites string.
Rather sad that you continue to do this....but continue on.....
names champ?? put your money where your mouth is, its easy to do the job of list management from the outside.claystreet wrote:I was surprised he was still on our list so late
he wasnt going to cut it imho
Also i believe there are also some players who can think themselfs
lucky they wern't cut also
rodgerfox wrote:
To read a comment that came across as fact that he was and others have been de-listed due to their commitment levels, is incredibly interested. And quite controversial.
Ask any player, they don't mind being bagged for their ability, but to have your commitment questioned is the ultimate insult.
.
Is that not do with the mind..?????Oh When the Saints wrote:
Mini lost confidence after being asked to play as a tagger.
All fair comments.saintsRrising wrote:rodgerfox wrote:
To read a comment that came across as fact that he was and others have been de-listed due to their commitment levels, is incredibly interested. And quite controversial.
Ask any player, they don't mind being bagged for their ability, but to have your commitment questioned is the ultimate insult.
.
Controversial???? Not sure why. You will commonly read or hear observations how some players are better trainers than others....how some players will push themleves more....how some players will go missing in a quarter.....
There is a saying to the effect that success is 99% due to perspiration.....
The very successuful sports people that I know who have represented Australia all have one thing in common...outstanding work ethic to always do more than others...that same ethic has then propelled them on to successful business careers.
How far an individual can push themselves, and them push again is a quality that varies from individual to individual....
Look at say Banger...does he have sublime skills???? Does he have perhaps the best work ethic of any AFL player ever??? Can Banger just push himself more in games and in training because his attitude to succeed is just that bit better and more focussed than others???
Is it insulting 99% of AFL players to say that in terms of attitude that Banger is better than them?
Now you cannot have just a great work ethic...you need talent. But each player has a different amount of talent.....and a different capabilty to make the most out of that talent.
Just as a player may have blistering pace......a player might have a better attitide which allows him to wring the last bit of his talent out.....or do just commit to doing a few more 1%ers per game.....to concentrate more throughout a game....
From what I have heard Mini did not do everything he could have to succeed. This does not mean that he has a "bad" attitude...just that he was not as committed as he could have been to make the most of his talent.
But perhaps when you skills and pace are just average......working as hard as most is not enough to make a difference????....both on the training track....and in the games...Oh When the Saints wrote:
A- he worked as hard as most at the club from what I saw.
More than likely he wasnt good enough. Why does it have to be a committment thing or the coaches fault? Some players just arent good enough. Maybe he can do extra work and run and run but his bodies matabilism doesnt allow him to have that big of an engine. Sometimes theres nothing you can do no matter how hard you work.saintsRrising wrote:So why in a game did he go missing?Oh When the Saints wrote:
But I wouldn't question his committment - he worked as hard as most at the club from what I saw.
It's a myth. He might have been quick at WAFL level, but in the AFL, his pace is no more than 7/10 - that's probably being generous. We have three genuinely quick, hard-running blokes: Montagna, Schneider and Fiora. They're all 8 or above. Gram could make a case to get in there, too.CURLY wrote:Why would you say Jones isnt quick he may not be a lot of things but hes defanatly quick.
evertonfc wrote:...yet RL sees a spot on the list for Clinton Jones?
Absolutely 100% agree, TefTeflon wrote:
Yet again you demonstrate the often simplistic views seen at times...
Jones is no star. Mqualter is no star. Both have the ability to be good honest players. 1 slots into a side in desperate need of some run (Jones......for your benefit) the other is 2ft 10, runs like a snail and cant kick over a jam tin (or greater than 30)....
Its called horses for courses - as Lyon told him upfront -
"there no spot for YOU in the side".....that doesnt mean Mqualter is finished at AFL level what it means is he doesnt posess the capabilities required right now at St Kilda - Jones has some of these. And yes I know Jones is not Judd but I also know early last season he gave us some good dash AND some added pressure on opposition players purely through his pace and ability to get where the ball is often enough (and his kicking is not as bad as Andrew Thompsons was IMHO...and he did allright).
Good luck to mini but its time he moved on. AND if Gwilt does little this year cya later next year for him also....along with some higher profile names for mine...its time to get real about our list...as Ross has started and has been neglected for to long.
You don't think recruiting sub-par footballers could be considered a 'quick fix'?barks4eva wrote:
Jones has pace and ball carrying ability, something we lack due to the poor list management from the previous coach and football department
Good to see Ross Lyon making the calls and trying to repair the damage from the buffoonery of the past that sent our list into decline in the first place
Teflon wrote:Yet again you demonstrate the often simplistic views seen at times...evertonfc wrote:...yet RL sees a spot on the list for Clinton Jones?
Jones is no star. Mqualter is no star. Both have the ability to be good honest players. 1 slots into a side in desperate need of some run (Jones......for your benefit) the other is 2ft 10, runs like a snail and cant kick over a jam tin (or greater than 30)....
Its called horses for courses - as Lyon told him upfront -
"there no spot for YOU in the side".....that doesnt mean Mqualter is finished at AFL level what it means is he doesnt posess the capabilities required right now at St Kilda - Jones has some of these. And yes I know Jones is not Judd but I also know early last season he gave us some good dash AND some added pressure on opposition players purely through his pace and ability to get where the ball is often enough (and his kicking is not as bad as Andrew Thompsons was IMHO...and he did allright).
Good luck to mini but its time he moved on. AND if Gwilt does little this year cya later next year for him also....along with some higher profile names for mine...its time to get real about our list...as Ross has started and has been neglected for to long.
Its a myth?evertonfc wrote:It's a myth. He might have been quick at WAFL level, but in the AFL, his pace is no more than 7/10 - that's probably being generous. We have three genuinely quick, hard-running blokes: Montagna, Schneider and Fiora. They're all 8 or above. Gram could make a case to get in there, too.CURLY wrote:Why would you say Jones isnt quick he may not be a lot of things but hes defanatly quick.
Throw in the rabbit-in-the-headlights approach he takes to the game, and that slows down his ability to move and think as quickly as other players. Ultimately, this negates his supposed 'big asset', rendering him pretty inneffectual and bordering on a liability when you think about his disposal.
I've been critical of Birss before, but at least you know Birss is a reasonable back-up who is pretty solid at the contested footy.
My only hope is that RL sees potential for Jones to get up to speed with AFL level, improve his kicking, rectify his ability to read the play and get him to stop looking so uncomfortable on the football field.
If RL can do this, hopefully by the time he turns 25 (yes, that gives him 12 months and not a moment more), then it will prove a coaching masterstroke.
Is this your opinion because if so you go against every profile ive seen published on Jones. Sure he may look like he panics at the moment but almost all footballers look rushed when they go up a standard in football until they get used to the tempo. This occurs from local footy to AFL. Hopefully Jones adjust and he can be a handy depth player either way our season isnt hinging on Jones dominating. Herein lies the key argument. At what age do you project he's going to make this improvement?CURLY wrote:Sure he may look like he panics at the moment but almost all footballers look rushed when they go up a standard in football until they get used to the tempo.
again see him pre injury his first game wasnt great but his second he got better and the signs of improvment were there after his injury he came back a little to timmid (part to the fact his injury hurt like hell) and he looked out of place , who knows if he will make it maybe he will have a break out year and prove all his knockers wrong lets just give him a chance heck we gave 5 years to brooks i think 2 for CJ is fair ?!?!evertonfc wrote:Herein lies the key argument. At what age do you project he's going to make this improvement?CURLY wrote:Sure he may look like he panics at the moment but almost all footballers look rushed when they go up a standard in football until they get used to the tempo.
If he was 18, and had, say, four years to get it right, then fair enough - he'd have ten years ahead of him of strong footy.
But at 24 - during which most players have enjoyed six years of AFL development - you should be entering your peak as the window of improvement in your game changes from a broad canvas to a sliver of faint hope for those who haven't yet established themselves.
The original gamble on Jones last year was fine. But given his age, he needed to fire quickly. We needed to make a call on him this year based on what he had shown. I think we can all agree he looked well out of place at AFL, and didn't even show signs of having the potential to make it.
It seems like a terribly low percentage play to keep him and hope that he'll iron out the sizable problems in his game at his age when his scope for improvement has diminished so much.
Putting on my rose-coloured supporter glasses, I hope I'm wrong and he goes on to have a great career with the Saints. Nothing would please me more.
However, objectively, it just seems an odd decision when that spot on the list could go to a raw 18-year old who could probably already match Jones's output (let's face it - minimal at AFL level and reasonable at VFL level) in 2008 and still have oodles of improvement left in him over the next few years.
