GT on Sen

[rodgerfox]

I don't mind him commenting on the status quo, but it would be nice to hear him admit that he screwed up in certain areas.

Why?

[bigcarl]

I don't mind him commenting on the status quo, but it would be nice to hear him admit that he screwed up in certain areas.

he sort of has.

he praised the king/gardiner ruck duo and said it's not something he would have persevered with.

all coaches have blind spots and one of gt's was over the importance of winning the rucks.

ross has blind spots, too, but if saturday was an indication of how the season is going to pan out, he seems to be addressing them,

[Shaggy]

I honestly don't believe he wants us to do well... I honestly believe he would've rather stayed 'in charge' and let us fail than stepped aside and seen us succeed, if that's what was required.

If he has changed in a single round from seeing us finishing 8th and is now building us up and comparing us to Geelong and the Hawks, I think it's so he can deride us if we fall short.

nah.... in his heart, he really loves the saints......

How many ex-wives honestly love the blokes they make it their business and mission to ruin?

Sounds like you need some counseling

[TheOptimist]

I don't mind him commenting on the status quo, but it would be nice to hear him admit that he screwed up in certain areas.

he sort of has.

he praised the king/gardiner ruck duo and said it's not something he would have persevered with.

all coaches have blind spots and one of gt's was over the importance of winning the rucks.

ross has blind spots, too, but if saturday was an indication of how the season is going to pan out, he seems to be addressing them,

I'll try and answer both replies...

In my opinion, I do no tthink that he is in a position to be objective enough in his views.

Af far as the ucks go, he has to admit he was wrong because they are performing. Had they not, I reckon he would have stuck by his original views.

His comments the other week about training services being over rated also shows that he doesn't get it. Injuries cost him a flag. Yet he makes comments like this.

Like any coach, BC, you are correct. but I am yet to see him take responsibility for the way the team was heading towards the end of his tenure... in particular the game plan modelled on Brisbane.

2006 was probably the last year we could have got away with it, but the game evolved quickly, and I'd say we were caught short, and it has taken a few years to reinvent the players in this regard.

I dunno, but his whole tone reeks of him believing that he was the man, and that he now sits in judgement as to whether or not Ross is coaching to Gin and Tonic's expectations.

I will note that ex coaches such as Alves and Watson have openly admitted where they went wrong, whereas G&T does not appear to have the same belief.

But, that's just my view.

[InkerSaint]

Yes, yes, and yes.

The more the man opens his mouth, the more he shows the world what kind of character he is.

It's not pretty.

[bigcarl]

As far as the rucks go, he has to admit he was wrong because they are performing. Had they not, I reckon he would have stuck by his original views.

like the rest of us on here imo he's a passionate sainter and will never be critical of something that is bringing us/will bring us success.

he's smart enough to go with what is working.

[TheOptimist]

ook, in fairness to the guy, he's now a media performer; and has to say the type of things he despised about the media when he was coach.

For me, he should now be judged in the exact same way that all other journo's are judged.

An interesting point is that Eade said that everyone went quiet whenever Lethal spoke at the coach's meetings. I doubt the same would have happened under G&T.

I notice that Alves or Watson don't get the same attention around here every time they comment. If anything, they've had more involment in footy over the years as players, coach and media commentators.

[TheOptimist]

As far as the rucks go, he has to admit he was wrong because they are performing. Had they not, I reckon he would have stuck by his original views.

like the rest of us on here imo he's a passionate sainter and will never be critical of something that is bringing us/will bring us success.

he's smart enough to go with what is working.

agree. And that's my point.

Perhaps he should also admit that he got it wrong about Milne?

You see, it's easy to admit you got it wrong when it's blatantly obvious, and you have to possible way of defending your argument.

It takes courage to openly admit your own short comings.

[rodgerfox]

Perhaps he should also admit that he got it wrong about Milne?

You see, it's easy to admit you got it wrong when it's blatantly obvious, and you have to possible way of defending your argument.

It takes courage to openly admit your own short comings.

Why, as a footy commentator should Thomas admit anything about himself?

Surely he's there to comment, and give opinion on what's happening now as he sees it?

Why would he be employed to go on air and talk about his coaching career and what he did wrong?


I'd say as a footy commentator, he's brilliant. He's doing precisely what SEN and Ch9 employ him for - to give opinions which ruffle feathers and get people talking.

[meher baba]

I will note that ex coaches such as Alves and Watson have openly admitted where they went wrong, whereas G&T does not appear to have the same belief.

As far as I recall, Alves has only ever admitted that he got the "politics" wrong. I don't think I have ever heard him say something along the lines of "GT and Ross Lyon are far better at the technical aspects of coaching than I am" (and why should he, I'm far from sure that it is the case?)

As for Watson, well he bloody well should admit where he went wrong, because he was crap......

When we come to GT, what is he supposed to be apologising for exactly? He has always made it clear that he doesn't want to play two (or, ideally, even one) specialist ruckmen who can't contribute anything else on a football field. He is not alone in this opinion: his co-panellist Gary Lyon has a similar view.

What I think GT was saying in his article was that "I didn't think King and Gardiner would be mobile and productive enough outside of their ruckwork to justify holding down two spots out of 22, but I seem to have been wrong so far this season". Fair enough.

In terms of GT admitting his other alleged wrongs as a coach, I think you'd first of all have to convince him that he was wrong. Fact is, he took us within a hairs' breadth of achieving a top 4 finish in three successive years. In his last season, he achieved this despite St Kilda having suffered what was perhaps the most difficult draw that any club has experienced in recent years: certainly no team has had as few 7 day breaks between games.

Has Lyon achieved this record of performance just yet? No. So what has GT got to apologise for exactly?

[TheOptimist]

I will note that ex coaches such as Alves and Watson have openly admitted where they went wrong, whereas G&T does not appear to have the same belief.

As far as I recall, Alves has only ever admitted that he got the "politics" wrong. I don't think I have ever heard him say something along the lines of "GT and Ross Lyon are far better at the technical aspects of coaching than I am" (and why should he, I'm far from sure that it is the case?)

As for Watson, well he bloody well should admit where he went wrong, because he was crap......

When we come to GT, what is he supposed to be apologising for exactly? He has always made it clear that he doesn't want to play two (or, ideally, even one) specialist ruckmen who can't contribute anything else on a football field. He is not alone in this opinion: his co-panellist Gary Lyon has a similar view.

What I think GT was saying in his article was that "I didn't think King and Gardiner would be mobile and productive enough outside of their ruckwork to justify holding down two spots out of 22, but I seem to have been wrong so far this season". Fair enough.

In terms of GT admitting his other alleged wrongs as a coach, I think you'd first of all have to convince him that he was wrong. Fact is, he took us within a hairs' breadth of achieving a top 4 finish in three successive years. In his last season, he achieved this despite St Kilda having suffered what was perhaps the most difficult draw that any club has experienced in recent years: certainly no team has had as few 7 day breaks between games.

Has Lyon achieved this record of performance just yet? No. So what has GT got to apologise for exactly?

My, my. What a reaction. Did I touch a nerve or something? From my observations on this forum you seem to have an obsession with defending G&T at every opportunity. are you still bitter about his sacking?

so by what you're aying, G&T was the pefect coach. Much like the great man himself, you obviously cannot be objective enough in your views.

G&T, despite his on field record was flawed in many areas such as his pig-headedness and the subsequent breakdown in relationships that occured. His biggest undoing was in the fitness are, whom he rates as being "over rated" which ultimately cost him the shot at a flag.

[pluggerisbest]

I will note that ex coaches such as Alves and Watson have openly admitted where they went wrong, whereas G&T does not appear to have the same belief.

As far as I recall, Alves has only ever admitted that he got the "politics" wrong. I don't think I have ever heard him say something along the lines of "GT and Ross Lyon are far better at the technical aspects of coaching than I am" (and why should he, I'm far from sure that it is the case?)

As for Watson, well he bloody well should admit where he went wrong, because he was crap......

When we come to GT, what is he supposed to be apologising for exactly? He has always made it clear that he doesn't want to play two (or, ideally, even one) specialist ruckmen who can't contribute anything else on a football field. He is not alone in this opinion: his co-panellist Gary Lyon has a similar view.

What I think GT was saying in his article was that "I didn't think King and Gardiner would be mobile and productive enough outside of their ruckwork to justify holding down two spots out of 22, but I seem to have been wrong so far this season". Fair enough.

In terms of GT admitting his other alleged wrongs as a coach, I think you'd first of all have to convince him that he was wrong. Fact is, he took us within a hairs' breadth of achieving a top 4 finish in three successive years. In his last season, he achieved this despite St Kilda having suffered what was perhaps the most difficult draw that any club has experienced in recent years: certainly no team has had as few 7 day breaks between games.

Has Lyon achieved this record of performance just yet? No. So what has GT got to apologise for exactly?

My, my. What a reaction. Did I touch a nerve or something? From my observations on this forum you seem to have an obsession with defending G&T at every opportunity. are you still bitter about his sacking?

so by what you're aying, G&T was the pefect coach. Much like the great man himself, you obviously cannot be objective enough in your views.

G&T, despite his on field record was flawed in many areas such as his pig-headedness and the subsequent breakdown in relationships that occured. His biggest undoing was in the fitness are, whom he rates as being "over rated" which ultimately cost him the shot at a flag.

I dont recall him ever saying that fitness was overated but if it helps the arguement please make it up. GT had flaws as did Matthews and he won 4 flags. Some defend GT because they think he was unfairly sacked. Nothing wrong with that but I dont think anyone is saying they want him back. The one thing he is entilted to is an opinion and just because you might or might not agree with it doesnt make it either right or wrong.

[TheOptimist]

I will note that ex coaches such as Alves and Watson have openly admitted where they went wrong, whereas G&T does not appear to have the same belief.

As far as I recall, Alves has only ever admitted that he got the "politics" wrong. I don't think I have ever heard him say something along the lines of "GT and Ross Lyon are far better at the technical aspects of coaching than I am" (and why should he, I'm far from sure that it is the case?)

As for Watson, well he bloody well should admit where he went wrong, because he was crap......

When we come to GT, what is he supposed to be apologising for exactly? He has always made it clear that he doesn't want to play two (or, ideally, even one) specialist ruckmen who can't contribute anything else on a football field. He is not alone in this opinion: his co-panellist Gary Lyon has a similar view.

What I think GT was saying in his article was that "I didn't think King and Gardiner would be mobile and productive enough outside of their ruckwork to justify holding down two spots out of 22, but I seem to have been wrong so far this season". Fair enough.

In terms of GT admitting his other alleged wrongs as a coach, I think you'd first of all have to convince him that he was wrong. Fact is, he took us within a hairs' breadth of achieving a top 4 finish in three successive years. In his last season, he achieved this despite St Kilda having suffered what was perhaps the most difficult draw that any club has experienced in recent years: certainly no team has had as few 7 day breaks between games.

Has Lyon achieved this record of performance just yet? No. So what has GT got to apologise for exactly?

My, my. What a reaction. Did I touch a nerve or something? From my observations on this forum you seem to have an obsession with defending G&T at every opportunity. are you still bitter about his sacking?

so by what you're aying, G&T was the pefect coach. Much like the great man himself, you obviously cannot be objective enough in your views.

G&T, despite his on field record was flawed in many areas such as his pig-headedness and the subsequent breakdown in relationships that occured. His biggest undoing was in the fitness are, whom he rates as being "over rated" which ultimately cost him the shot at a flag.

I dont recall him ever saying that fitness was overated but if it helps the arguement please make it up. GT had flaws as did Matthews and he won 4 flags. Some defend GT because they think he was unfairly sacked. Nothing wrong with that but I dont think anyone is saying they want him back. The one thing he is entilted to is an opinion and just because you might or might not agree with it doesnt make it either right or wrong.

He stated on FC a week or so ago that the role of fitness staff was one of the most overated aspects of a club. Fact.

No one is saying that he is right or wrong. But if he put s an opinion out there, he is entitled to be agreed or disagreed with.

But anyway, thx for the personal attack.

To compare him with Matthews is laughable. Even Matthews had the intelligence to know his time was up, and that it was time to move on.

BTW, just as I can hilite G%T's flaws, I am also objective enough to hilite RL's flaws. Other, it appears cannot do the same.

Cheerio.

[rodgerfox]

He stated on FC a week or so ago that the role of fitness staff was one of the most overated aspects of a club. Fact.

What did he say?

So far you've said this...

"His biggest undoing was in the fitness are, whom he rates as being "over rated" which ultimately cost him the shot at a flag."


Which you then changed to this....

"He stated on FC a week or so ago that the role of fitness staff was one of the most overated aspects of a club"

[markp]

Is pluggerisbest =plugger66, and TheOptimist =WayneJudson?

[ctqs]

How did this turn into a pro/anti Thomas thread?
Now that it has, though ...
Look, he took over the job when we were in a very precarious position. Does anyone actually remember the state of play the day Blight was sacked?
Easter Monday 2003, we lost to Richmond. He came out and said after the game that we're the better team and copped heaps for it. Look at what the repsective clubs have done since. We're a powerhouse. The other is treading water.
He took us to finals three years running. Had it not been for injuries we not only could've won one flag, but multiple.
Yeah, he probably got us as far as he was going to and I think Lyon is a better coach. But things ended sourly when he was sacked because he fell out with the president, not because he was a dud. Keep it in context.

[InkerSaint]

What did he say?

So far you've said this...

"His biggest undoing was in the fitness are, whom he rates as being "over rated" which ultimately cost him the shot at a flag."


Which you then changed to this....

"He stated on FC a week or so ago that the role of fitness staff was one of the most overated aspects of a club"

You're being obtuse. He didn't "change" anything - he added to it. And as far as the "shot at a flag" claim goes, I think you'll find even Rod Butterss is behind him on that one.

[rodgerfox]

You're being obtuse. He didn't "change" anything - he added to it. And as far as the "shot at a flag" claim goes, I think you'll find even Rod Butterss is behind him on that one.

Obtuse??

When quoting someone, or basing an argument on something that they said, you need to get it right. It needs to be specific, and accruate, and in context.

That's not obtuse. That's common sense.

Otherwise you'll end up with myths that Thomas didn't rate ruckmen, or myths that he wanted to sack Harvey.

[joffaboy]

Why is everything that GT says have to be turned into a critisism of his past coaching?

The prevailing theme on this thead is that Gt has to somehow apologise for his coaching.

I mean WTF???

I have been critical of some of Thomases coaching - especially the ruck where I think he was not proficient.

Interestingly enough he actually came out and praised the King/Gardiner combo as one of all credit to the current coach and stated he wouldn't have gone down that path.

So there you go - he admits that his opinion was not the correct one in this case.

And all power to the guy.

FFS he is paid to opinionate. He stated that Harvey wass not a good head coach and said he thought the same of Lyon because of his personality characteristics. Again he basically said he was wrong there as well.

Why dissect every single utterance of GT with a view that he has an ulterior motive?

Anybody hear his robust disagreement with that umpire muppett Humphrey-Bear? Some of the best sports radio I have heard for years.

The guy has a crack as a commentator and unlike many actually has a clue.

Get of the guys back.

[saintly]

Perhaps he should also admit that he got it wrong about Milne?

You see, it's easy to admit you got it wrong when it's blatantly obvious, and you have to possible way of defending your argument.

It takes courage to openly admit your own short comings.

Why, as a footy commentator should Thomas admit anything about himself?

Surely he's there to comment, and give opinion on what's happening now as he sees it?
Why would he be employed to go on air and talk about his coaching career and what he did wrong?


I'd say as a footy commentator, he's brilliant. He's doing precisely what SEN and Ch9 employ him for - to give opinions which ruffle feathers and get people talking.

he should admit things went wrong, becuase he keeps going on about it. if he didn't comment on what ahppened before then fair enough. but he does.

[InkerSaint]

Obtuse??

When quoting someone, or basing an argument on something that they said, you need to get it right. It needs to be specific, and accruate, and in context.

That's not obtuse. That's common sense.

Otherwise you'll end up with myths that Thomas didn't rate ruckmen, or myths that he wanted to sack Harvey.

Yes, obtuse. If you're challenging his claim that GT said the role of fitness staff was overrated then say it. Are you calling him a liar or not?

Which he placed "in context" below the quoted discussion.

Having trouble following the argument? I rate you higher than that.

[yipper]

Anybody hear his robust disagreement with that umpire muppett Humphrey-Bear? Some of the best sports radio I have heard for years.

The guy has a crack as a commentator and unlike many actually has a clue.

Get of the guys back.

Yeah, that was great listening. Really had Humphrey bear looking for a way out!!

[rodgerfox]

he should admit things went wrong, becuase he keeps going on about it. if he didn't comment on what ahppened before then fair enough. but he does.

Do you think ex-players should also talk about what they did wrong throughout their careers when commentating?

I'm amazed that for once there is a footy commentator prepared to call it as they see it, and everyone is having a sook!

I think it's great.

[rodgerfox]

Yes, obtuse. If you're challenging his claim that GT said the role of fitness staff was overrated then say it. Are you calling him a liar or not?

Which he placed "in context" below the quoted discussion.

Having trouble following the argument? I rate you higher than that.

Believe me, if I think someone is lying then I generally say so.

If you're going to quote someone, or use what they said in a discussion or argument - you need to be accurate.
You can't simply take a sentence twist it and change it anyway you want.

[bergsone]

IMO what i have seen ,heard of GT in the media,seems far,balanced and forthright in HIS oppinions on all subjects.Soft spot for the saints sure,same as Watson-Ess Walls- Carlton etc.If he didnt keep getting asked on things Stkilda PAST and present ALL the time ,he wouldnt be commenting on it all the time


Sure he got certain things wrong when coach,but got many right too,no coach has ever been 100% right so be it.

Thought he was the man for the job,rather coach thinking that way than having self doubts,Imo RL seemed to suffer from this early on