Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
sainter2631 wrote:Same old debate but after the way Gwilt performed tonight I think Goose should definately come in.
i've bagged gwilt all over the forum, but i though he was pretty good last night, especially near the start when we were going well. three goal assists out of four score assists if i was counting right.
he's still not tearing the world apart, but if he plays like he did last night every week at least he'll be solidly holding his spot in the side.
I'm with you (except for the bagging bit) I thought his efforts in the first quarter were exceptional. 3 goal assists is a great return.
I haven't seen any footage of Goose so I can't really comment, but still my opinion is why change a winning lineup?
If we want to havea dig at someone, try Grammy. I thought he was poor last night. Much worse than Gwilt.
it has been around this time that "Kosi" will headbutt a fence, rip a hamstring or belt someone.
mbogo wrote:Didn't Gwilt make the play of the day when he broke two tackles and made the pass for a goal? Quality at times when needed! Keep him in.
I saw that also.
Gwilts been on-song lately. I don't think it's an easy choice at all. I reckon he stays. How good has Goose been in the reserves? Is it worth risking him yet?? Surely not.
When they created LENNY HAYES (in the shadow of Harvs) they forgot to break the mold (again)- hence the Supremely Incredible Jack Steven!!
In regards Milne, was he not one of those dropped last year?
There was a reason, and you did not have to look too far to find it.
Milne is the type of player who will always be judged by the reasons for which he was dropped.
Namely, what he contributes to team performance.
In regards Gwilt, and the assessment that a player is a "super star" and beyond reproach because he kicks 2 goals a game, Gwilt kicked one (except Milne grabbed it right on the goal line to put his name on the scorer's list) and he hit the post with another.
Then Gwilt made a few goals - and he did not get pinged holding the ball by baulking instead of going, giving the turnover - and we were expolited badly from those turnovers - turnovers caused by also missing targets by kicking around corners when there was no need to do so and others like McQualter just missing targets (but McQualter could have had 2 goals as well if he had kicked straight, missing his second from a set shot) and dinky, too smart by half handballs.
There is plenty to work on from Sunday - including by Gwilt BUT Gwilt performed. And he went when confronted and ran thru succesive attempts to tackle him before off-loading for a goal. He did not baulk and try to get the impossible shot on goal - he did the team thing.
Ball started by chasing a ball to the flank, showing good pace but slowed as the game wore on - and was caught a few times which, again, were costly.
No doubt, in the asence of X. Clarke, Raph Clarke and Hudgden are automatic selections as soon as opportunity presents - and we may very well want to have Max on Bradshaw this week to give a range of options on Brown.
Goose is progressing better than expected - but he will not play forward at AFL level. An AFL forward he is not. We have Kosi & Roo as our marking options and they are rotating up forward pretty well. Plus we can throw Gardiner up there whilst King is rucking.
Maguire needs a break out game at CHB at VFL level to really press. And when he does that opportunity will come. Of that there is no doubt.
Many on here are seduced by the goals a player kicks, not noting the team effort that presents scoring opportunities - like Gardiner saying to Montagna and Hayes "raffle the shot on goal boys" with a brilliant tap into the path of both of them running thru. Hayes kicked it, but Gardiner made it.
Or Goddard putting everything on a kick to hit Kosi's chest. Brilliant kick.
I am not one who pays any great attention to who kicks the goals, I look at the work which presents the opportunity - including by such acts as harrassing and locking the ball in our goal scoring zone.
And I am always concerned when the ball exits our F50 and goes the length of the ground producing the type of goals Essendon got on a couple of occasions on Sunday because someone has been deficient and the furious, leg pumping chase, which is why Jones is so important, was missing.
Why?
Those types of goals give confidence to the opposition - and you can not allow confidence to be won that way.
To the top wrote:
Maguire needs a break out game at CHB at VFL level to really press. And when he does that opportunity will come. Of that there is no doubt.
That'll be tough while Ross is successfully trialling him as a forward. And it seems Ross likes the fact that he's now "taking the game on"- so don't expect him to go back to CHB at VFL level for awhile.
I think it was more a case of Sautner missing, so Maguire went forward (and rucked to get him involved). Kicked 5 so they kept him up forward with Sautner, who kicked 7 and missed just as many - so should we draft Sautner?
Not really, but do not get too carried way with goals in a VFL match - unless a Hudgden is your opponent!
It is more the quality of the possessions (including the obtaining of the possessions) and the movement around the ground that we are interested in.
Nick Riewoldt wrote:I think Jimmy Gwilt’s role as well can’t be underestimated. He has been made to really earn his place in the team and I think in the role he is playing for us, he has been really valuable.
I had Jimbob down for a vote last night until I remembered Zac and he was bumped out.
To the top wrote:I think it was more a case of Sautner missing, so Maguire went forward (and rucked to get him involved). Kicked 5 so they kept him up forward with Sautner, who kicked 7 and missed just as many - so should we draft Sautner?
Not really, but do not get too carried way with goals in a VFL match - unless a Hudgden is your opponent!
It is more the quality of the possessions (including the obtaining of the possessions) and the movement around the ground that we are interested in.
on OTC Lyon indicating that they are trying him up forward and that Lyon also saw Goose as a second ruck.
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....
To the top wrote:And I am always concerned when the ball exits our F50 and goes the length of the ground producing the type of goals Essendon got on a couple of occasions on Sunday because someone has been deficient and the furious, leg pumping chase, which is why Jones is so important, was missing.
Why?
Those types of goals give confidence to the opposition - and you can not allow confidence to be won that way.
Well said. That's something I can't recall seeing in any other game this year. Shouldn't have happened once let alone twice. Or key forwards marking sitters uncontested 30m in front of our goal. I couldn't help being disappointed by that considering how we've defended this year.
Lloyd went to the interchange, with the ball in St Kilda's possession on the other flank. Dawson commenced to follow him.
There was a turnover and Dawson moved to the non-interchange flank (including because of some arm waving at him by St Kilda players).
Essendon came in thru that flank (wrongly because the 2 players were already totally un-marked in their F50 on the inter-change bench side), to be repulsed by numbers but again we turned it over (stupidly - a dinky kick out on the full?) and Essendon still had 2 players free inside the F50, one of who had come off the inter-change and not been picked up because Dawson could not get back quickly enough.
A break down in communication and a break down in accountability.
No doubt they will be told!
I said at the time "if we lose this, goal to them because look at these 2 totally unmarked".
They will be the unfortunate ones to weigh up the game time requirements for goose & max coming into the important part of the season.
They are quality players who need quality game time.
They could be the difference b/w a flag/not if played/not played.
My gut feeling is to ease into play Maguire now on the forward line with a rotation of Gwilt on the bench. After 2 weeks make final decision of who is the best team contributor.
Give Max another 2 weeks with Sandy in the meantime & once the Maguire/Gwilt experiment has been satisfied do the same interchange rotation with Max/Zac
Isn't this a great problem???
I once spent a year in Adelaide, I think it was on a Sunday.
They will be the unfortunate ones to weigh up the game time requirements for goose & max coming into the important part of the season.
They are quality players who need quality game time.
They could be the difference b/w a flag/not if played/not played.
My gut feeling is to ease into play Maguire now on the forward line with a rotation of Gwilt on the bench. After 2 weeks make final decision of who is the best team contributor.
Give Max another 2 weeks with Sandy in the meantime & once the Maguire/Gwilt experiment has been satisfied do the same interchange rotation with Max/Zac
Isn't this a great problem???
A beautiful set of numbers, to paraphrase...
I wrote on another thread that given how well we went with Penny / Max, I see no reason why u can't have both.
Hotel De Los Muertos: Your room is ready... Care to step inside?
Gwilt's in one of those roles where it's easy to spin it any way you want.
Personally, I thought that a good 4th made up for a by and large disappointing first 3 (spectacular assist where he had to break 2 tackles before convincing himself he would use his right boot after all excepted)... my bro disagreed with me on his contested work, I can see his point.
We were both watching him more than usual given that his spot would seemingly be at risk to a rampaging Goose - however, it ought be pointed out that apart from the quality of the opposition defenders, Goose doesn't currently have to compete with the likes of Reiwoldt and Koschitzke as a forward target either, which can dry up the supply for a 3rd tall fast...
or a medium forward for that matter. It can be a very tough role for anyone less than an out and out gun to look good in, but can be a valuable team role - and isn't one I think Goose would be suited to (which isn't to say there aren't many of the aspects Gwilt does fulfill he couldn't necessarily take over...)
"Everything comes to he who hustles while he waits"
- Henry Ford
Given Brisbane's depleted backline, it would be interesting to see how they'd handle having to deal with Goose as well as Roo and Kosi. If you were really worried about going in too tall, you could probably get away with resting a ruck in favour of a runner.
I doubt it'll happen, but it would be interesting to see.
BAM! (shhhh) wrote:We were both watching him more than usual given that his spot would seemingly be at risk to a rampaging Goose - however, it ought be pointed out that apart from the quality of the opposition defenders, Goose doesn't currently have to compete with the likes of Reiwoldt and Koschitzke as a forward target either, which can dry up the supply for a 3rd tall fast...
Nick Sautner kicked 7 goals this week (and apparently missed almost as many) and Maguire still kicked 5. Competing with a pretty good (VFL) player there.
I find this debate a bit surprising. Gwilt easily had his best game of the year. He worked well inside the forward 50, setting up three goals and doing decoy work for a couple more. Both his kicking skills and his strength were in evidence throughout the game.
I have now watched the game twice. I can't really see that McPhee's improved output as the game went on was particularly Gwilt's problem. Many of McPhee's possessions were forward of the centre square, and I don't know enough about Lyon's tactics to be certain that Gwilt was required to run that far back with McPhee. There were also a couple of key possessions by McPhee (leading to goals or goal assists) when Gwilt was sitting on the bench.
If I have any criticism of Gwilt, it is that he showed an enormous heart in trying endlessly (and, with a few exceptions, unsuccesfully) to block or tackle the likes of Dempsey, Davey and Lovett when they were making some of their amazing, weaving runs out of defence. However, most clubs don't have as many players as elusive as these three, and I don't think any of Goose, Eddy or Raph would have the speed or reflexes to do any better than Gwilt had done.
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."
- Jonathan Swift
Gwilt is currently a liability IMHO, lacks intensity, looks far too laconic without really impacting in any meaningful way when players such as McEvoy, Maguire and Armitage need more game time in the best 22!
The players I mentioned are potentially very pivotal to us in raising the bar that little bit extra we need if we're to really take it up to Geelong and really should be getting more game time!
It is hard to find a place for all of them at once but at the very least either McEvoy or Maguire should come in for Gwilt, without further delay!
meher baba wrote:I find this debate a bit surprising. Gwilt easily had his best game of the year. He worked well inside the forward 50, setting up three goals and doing decoy work for a couple more. Both his kicking skills and his strength were in evidence throughout the game.
If I wasn't convinced already, now beyond any question of doubt, Gwilt should make way for McEvoy or Maguire!
stinger wrote:
anybody who questions milne's value to the team knows f*** all about footy.....
Thomas was going to trade Milne, thank god Butterss sacked him before he got the chance, because going by your logic, Thomas knows f*** all about footy.......... finally we agree on something afterall
BAM! (shhhh) wrote:We were both watching him more than usual given that his spot would seemingly be at risk to a rampaging Goose - however, it ought be pointed out that apart from the quality of the opposition defenders, Goose doesn't currently have to compete with the likes of Reiwoldt and Koschitzke as a forward target either, which can dry up the supply for a 3rd tall fast...
Nick Sautner kicked 7 goals this week (and apparently missed almost as many) and Maguire still kicked 5. Competing with a pretty good (VFL) player there.
Which is an excellent beginning. It still doesn't match up with having 2 habitual targets to compete with, but I take as a much more meaningful performance than the first one.
I'm not saying that we shouldn't try it (I think we should), especially given we've got a couple of the leagues lesser lights to experiment with coming up between Brisbane and Carlton... but I'd view it as an experiement rather than a substitution for role or form.
"Everything comes to he who hustles while he waits"
- Henry Ford
barks4eva wrote:Gwilt is currently a liability IMHO, lacks intensity, looks far too laconic without really impacting in any meaningful way when players such as McEvoy, Maguire and Armitage need more game time in the best 22!
The players I mentioned are potentially very pivotal to us in raising the bar that little bit extra we need if we're to really take it up to Geelong and really should be getting more game time!
It is hard to find a place for all of them at once but at the very least either McEvoy or Maguire should come in for Gwilt, without further delay!
Yep McEvoy for gwilt. Good team balance and you basically have a go at another poster about not knowing anything about footy.
barks4eva wrote:Gwilt is currently a liability IMHO, lacks intensity, looks far too laconic without really impacting in any meaningful way when players such as McEvoy, Maguire and Armitage need more game time in the best 22!
The players I mentioned are potentially very pivotal to us in raising the bar that little bit extra we need if we're to really take it up to Geelong and really should be getting more game time!
It is hard to find a place for all of them at once but at the very least either McEvoy or Maguire should come in for Gwilt, without further delay!
Yep McEvoy for gwilt. Good team balance and you basically have a go at another poster about not knowing anything about footy.
barks4eva wrote:Gwilt is currently a liability IMHO, lacks intensity, looks far too laconic without really impacting in any meaningful way when players such as McEvoy, Maguire and Armitage need more game time in the best 22!
The players I mentioned are potentially very pivotal to us in raising the bar that little bit extra we need if we're to really take it up to Geelong and really should be getting more game time!
It is hard to find a place for all of them at once but at the very least either McEvoy or Maguire should come in for Gwilt, without further delay!
Yep McEvoy for gwilt. Good team balance and you basically have a go at another poster about not knowing anything about footy.
Your irrelevant point is?
My point is you want another ruckman in for a HFF. Where is the logic. Sorry there isnt any logis it is B4E.
