Tallest saints Team ever????
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
- saintsRrising
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 30089
- Joined: Mon 15 Mar 2004 11:07am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 711 times
- Been thanked: 1233 times
Tallest saints Team ever????
Tallest Saints Team ever????
If one looks at a possible Saints line up for 2008 it is evident that there is a lot of potential height that could be deployed on virtually every line…..and even in the midfield if for example BJ played there, or Dempster tagged there….
A possible team (though for discussion I have leaned a little to tallish players) could be
Dempster 192 Max 191 Gilbert 194
Gram 186 Goose 190 S Fisher 191
BJ 191 Lenny 186 Joey 178
Roo 193 Kosi 197 Schneider 179
Milne 178 GTrain 195 C Gardiner 190 (or Allen 193 or X 181)
King 201 Dal 185 Ball 186
M Gardiner 199 Harvey 181 Fiora 186
In the mix Baker 179 Birss 184 L Fisher 184 Raph 188 Blake 189 (though evidently is 191)
I have highlighted in dark blue all players 190cm and above.
Our back line could well end up being a tall unit as Max, Gilbert, Dempster and even Sam Fisher to some extent all have the capacity to play on smaller players.
So in 2008 will we see take to the field on a regular basis one of the tallest Saints teams ever????
Even if X plays say forward pocket and L Fisher say keeps Dempster out of the 22 it is still a tallish looking unit.
Your thoughts???
If one looks at a possible Saints line up for 2008 it is evident that there is a lot of potential height that could be deployed on virtually every line…..and even in the midfield if for example BJ played there, or Dempster tagged there….
A possible team (though for discussion I have leaned a little to tallish players) could be
Dempster 192 Max 191 Gilbert 194
Gram 186 Goose 190 S Fisher 191
BJ 191 Lenny 186 Joey 178
Roo 193 Kosi 197 Schneider 179
Milne 178 GTrain 195 C Gardiner 190 (or Allen 193 or X 181)
King 201 Dal 185 Ball 186
M Gardiner 199 Harvey 181 Fiora 186
In the mix Baker 179 Birss 184 L Fisher 184 Raph 188 Blake 189 (though evidently is 191)
I have highlighted in dark blue all players 190cm and above.
Our back line could well end up being a tall unit as Max, Gilbert, Dempster and even Sam Fisher to some extent all have the capacity to play on smaller players.
So in 2008 will we see take to the field on a regular basis one of the tallest Saints teams ever????
Even if X plays say forward pocket and L Fisher say keeps Dempster out of the 22 it is still a tallish looking unit.
Your thoughts???
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....
- Oh When the Saints
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5621
- Joined: Wed 29 Mar 2006 4:25pm
- Location: QLD
- Contact:
That team Thomas picked in the last round of '06 will probably be our tallest ever ...
But you do have a point, although blokes like Goddard, Dempster, Gilbert, Blake and someone like Charlie Gardiner can play "small", or smaller than their height ...
We've got a lot of flankers.
But you do have a point, although blokes like Goddard, Dempster, Gilbert, Blake and someone like Charlie Gardiner can play "small", or smaller than their height ...
We've got a lot of flankers.
They should only play AFL games now when it's raining. Slow games of footy are so much better to watch.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 338
- Joined: Tue 11 Apr 2006 12:16pm
- Location: The Office.
- saintsRrising
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 30089
- Joined: Mon 15 Mar 2004 11:07am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 711 times
- Been thanked: 1233 times
- Armoooo
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 7281
- Joined: Sun 26 Nov 2006 2:28pm
- Location: The Great South East
- Contact:
Geez, that is a huge team
I'm worried that they could be a little bit too tall, this could be what stops Dempster from getting a game, maybe even Allen aswell...
![Surprised :o](./images/smilies/icon_surprised.gif)
![Surprised :o](./images/smilies/icon_surprised.gif)
I'm worried that they could be a little bit too tall, this could be what stops Dempster from getting a game, maybe even Allen aswell...
ROBERT HARVEY A.K.A The Great Man, Banger, Harves, Ol' Man River...
384 games, 4 B&F's, 3 EJ Whitten Medals, St.Kilda Captain, 2 Time Brownlow Medalist, 8 Time All Australian, 2nd Highest Brownlow votes poller.... The greatest of ALL TIME!!
384 games, 4 B&F's, 3 EJ Whitten Medals, St.Kilda Captain, 2 Time Brownlow Medalist, 8 Time All Australian, 2nd Highest Brownlow votes poller.... The greatest of ALL TIME!!
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18579
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 1:36am
- Has thanked: 1905 times
- Been thanked: 841 times
we do have a lot of good talls ... enough to put one of the most aerially dominant teams in history on the park.
to my mind we'll be better served with a long-kicking gameplan rather than the chippalotto, which doesn't play to our strengths.
to my mind we'll be better served with a long-kicking gameplan rather than the chippalotto, which doesn't play to our strengths.
Last edited by bigcarl on Tue 08 Jan 2008 12:59pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10598
- Joined: Tue 14 Jun 2005 7:04pm
- Location: North
- Has thanked: 1011 times
- Been thanked: 1055 times
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18579
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 1:36am
- Has thanked: 1905 times
- Been thanked: 841 times
and guys like gilbert and blake can also play taller than their height, which is what makes them so valuableOh When the Saints wrote:That team Thomas picked in the last round of '06 will probably be our tallest ever ...
But you do have a point, although blokes like Goddard, Dempster, Gilbert, Blake and someone like Charlie Gardiner can play "small", or smaller than their height ...
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18579
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 1:36am
- Has thanked: 1905 times
- Been thanked: 841 times
I disagree. Footy cannot be changed to suit alot talls anymore due to the fitness level of players which means they can flood back so unless you mark you are stuffed. Use good talls but you need runners and more runners.bigcarl wrote:maybe we ought to change the way footy is played and play to our strengths.hAyES wrote:Too tall for the way footy is played these days..
to be honest i can't see a problem with "tall" so long as they can all play the game and most of ours can.
- saintsRrising
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 30089
- Joined: Mon 15 Mar 2004 11:07am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 711 times
- Been thanked: 1233 times
I think one factor is that what is "tall" is now being redefined.
Once upon a time 6ft was quite a respectful height for a footballer.....and now it is basically just a rover...LOL if we still had rovers that is.
190 odd cm used to be very tall...taller than some ruckmen...ie Jeff "Pup" Sarau was 190 cm and our first ruck.....but now we are seeing players of that height who are gifted mobile athletes and who definately not lumberers.
Take Sam Fisher for example....his best football so far has been on the flank.
Max was ahead of his time...being able to play easily na variety of heights. Lately he has been our FB but I still regard him as the best BP in the competition.
I certainly do not think that you want a team chock full of 200ish cm lumberers (ie Kosi, Gardiner etc) anda forward line with too many slow talls would make me nervous.....but I also think that the height of players is increasing and that very athletic players are now in greater proportion and that taller (ie 190 ish) athletic footballer are now more common.
The current free running nature of AFL where less one on one is played with less packs has meant that the very nimble or hard at in and under types are less required....still required yes..but not as much.
Or the other way to look at it is that playing so much in space has allowed these taller athletes to emerge as their lack of nimbleness is not the handicap it once was.
Blake for example is suited to this role as he is tallish with a huge engine so that he can run and run...if only his disposal skills were better though!!!!!
Once upon a time 6ft was quite a respectful height for a footballer.....and now it is basically just a rover...LOL if we still had rovers that is.
190 odd cm used to be very tall...taller than some ruckmen...ie Jeff "Pup" Sarau was 190 cm and our first ruck.....but now we are seeing players of that height who are gifted mobile athletes and who definately not lumberers.
Take Sam Fisher for example....his best football so far has been on the flank.
Max was ahead of his time...being able to play easily na variety of heights. Lately he has been our FB but I still regard him as the best BP in the competition.
I certainly do not think that you want a team chock full of 200ish cm lumberers (ie Kosi, Gardiner etc) anda forward line with too many slow talls would make me nervous.....but I also think that the height of players is increasing and that very athletic players are now in greater proportion and that taller (ie 190 ish) athletic footballer are now more common.
The current free running nature of AFL where less one on one is played with less packs has meant that the very nimble or hard at in and under types are less required....still required yes..but not as much.
Or the other way to look at it is that playing so much in space has allowed these taller athletes to emerge as their lack of nimbleness is not the handicap it once was.
Blake for example is suited to this role as he is tallish with a huge engine so that he can run and run...if only his disposal skills were better though!!!!!
Last edited by saintsRrising on Wed 09 Jan 2008 10:50am, edited 1 time in total.
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....
- saintsRrising
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 30089
- Joined: Mon 15 Mar 2004 11:07am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 711 times
- Been thanked: 1233 times
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18579
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 1:36am
- Has thanked: 1905 times
- Been thanked: 841 times
well we are fortunate to have good talls who can run. riewoldt, blake, gilbert, sam fisher ... even bjplugger66 wrote:I disagree. Footy cannot be changed to suit alot talls anymore due to the fitness level of players which means they can flood back so unless you mark you are stuffed. Use good talls but you need runners and more runners.bigcarl wrote:maybe we ought to change the way footy is played and play to our strengths.hAyES wrote:Too tall for the way footy is played these days..
to be honest i can't see a problem with "tall" so long as they can all play the game and most of ours can.
i'm all for going in with a tall forward line as very few teams have the tall defenders to match kosi, roo and fraser and, for example, gilbert.
move the ball in quickly to this tall forward line and it will be very difficult to stop.
simply a matter of playing to our strengths and exploiting others' weaknesses.
but i'll go with whatever works. whatever it was we were trying to achieve last season clearly didn't
- Oh When the Saints
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5621
- Joined: Wed 29 Mar 2006 4:25pm
- Location: QLD
- Contact:
It worked from Rounds 1-7 and from Rounds 12-22.bigcarl wrote: whatever it was we were trying to achieve last season clearly didn't
Quite nicely actually. We won 62% of our matches.
There was that period for four weeks where we had 24-28 players to select from, and the team fell apart.
But why would you change something that worked well for 18 rounds of the year?
They should only play AFL games now when it's raining. Slow games of footy are so much better to watch.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18579
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 1:36am
- Has thanked: 1905 times
- Been thanked: 841 times
- Oh When the Saints
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5621
- Joined: Wed 29 Mar 2006 4:25pm
- Location: QLD
- Contact:
That's disingenuous.
I was not calling 2007 successful.
You said that whatever we were trying last season didn't work.
I disagreed - IMO it did work.
The fact that it works does not equate to success - there are other factors.
But it worked.
I was not calling 2007 successful.
You said that whatever we were trying last season didn't work.
I disagreed - IMO it did work.
The fact that it works does not equate to success - there are other factors.
But it worked.
They should only play AFL games now when it's raining. Slow games of footy are so much better to watch.
Oh When the Saints wrote:It worked from Rounds 1-7 and from Rounds 12-22.bigcarl wrote: whatever it was we were trying to achieve last season clearly didn't
Quite nicely actually. We won 62% of our matches.
There was that period for four weeks where we had 24-28 players to select from, and the team fell apart.
But why would you change something that worked well for 18 rounds of the year?
Not sure 62% of matches will ever win a flag so we must improve from last year even excluding those rounds you mentioned. Will we that is the big question but going very tall in the forward line is not the answer.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18579
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 1:36am
- Has thanked: 1905 times
- Been thanked: 841 times
well that's where you and i differ. a mistake, imo, to just go back to the one dimensional forward set-up that hasn't been good enough in recent years.plugger66 wrote:Will we that is the big question but going very tall in the forward line is not the answer.
will be interesting to see what happens. Whether we'll take some chances or again be satisfied with mediocrity
- mad saint guy
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 7064
- Joined: Tue 26 Jul 2005 9:44pm
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 52 times
- Been thanked: 355 times
How does a defender play taller than 194cm?bigcarl wrote:and guys like gilbert and blake can also play taller than their height, which is what makes them so valuable
I suspect that just about every team in 2008 will be playing the tallest regular 22 in their history. Under 183cm is now small. 184-190 is medium. 191-197 is tall and over that is ruckman height.
Our tallest team to ever take the field in a single match would have been one of Thomas' last few games.
Against Brisbane we had Goddard (192), Riewoldt (193), S.Fisher (191), Brooks (198), Gehrig (195), Blake (191), Koschitzke (197), Ackland (196) and Rix (197).
9 players over 190 and 5 over 195.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18579
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 1:36am
- Has thanked: 1905 times
- Been thanked: 841 times
mad saint guy wrote:Our tallest team to ever take the field in a single match would have been one of Thomas' last few games.
Against Brisbane we had Goddard (192), Riewoldt (193), S.Fisher (191), Brooks (198), Gehrig (195), Blake (191), Koschitzke (197), Ackland (196) and Rix (197).
9 players over 190 and 5 over 195.
we won that quite comfortably as i recall. they were so focussed on riewoldt, fraser and kosi that a lesser light named barry brooks stepped in a kicked four or five.
they dropped brooks for the match the following week against melbourne because it was wet, a mistake i thought at the time.
- Oh When the Saints
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5621
- Joined: Wed 29 Mar 2006 4:25pm
- Location: QLD
- Contact:
plugger66, I agree that we need to improve from 62% of matches (roughly 14 wins per year), but IMO that's not going to come through game plan/football philosophy, but through fitness and keeping our players on the park.
Playing a smaller forwardline is not accepting mediocrity. It's merely an alternative approach.
A "one-dimensional forward set-up" is one with a host of tall players IMO.
A multi-faceted forwardline would be one that included a whole range of players with different attributes and sizes.
Disingenuous again.bigcarl wrote:well that's where you and i differ. a mistake, imo, to just go back to the one dimensional forward set-up that hasn't been good enough in recent years.plugger66 wrote:Will we that is the big question but going very tall in the forward line is not the answer.
will be interesting to see what happens. Whether we'll take some chances or again be satisfied with mediocrity
Playing a smaller forwardline is not accepting mediocrity. It's merely an alternative approach.
A "one-dimensional forward set-up" is one with a host of tall players IMO.
A multi-faceted forwardline would be one that included a whole range of players with different attributes and sizes.
They should only play AFL games now when it's raining. Slow games of footy are so much better to watch.