Ball and Hayes
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
Ball and Hayes
We need both of these guys come finals
it showed today with how often we were beaten in the middle and contested posessions....
Armo earnt his spot today, 14 tackles, i would love to see how hard we can look with Ball, Armo, Joey and Hayes in the middle
Hayes is super important, but Ball's tackles and in and under style give us first use. He must come back next week
it showed today with how often we were beaten in the middle and contested posessions....
Armo earnt his spot today, 14 tackles, i would love to see how hard we can look with Ball, Armo, Joey and Hayes in the middle
Hayes is super important, but Ball's tackles and in and under style give us first use. He must come back next week
- The Fireman
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 13289
- Joined: Mon 08 Mar 2004 11:54pm
- Has thanked: 662 times
- Been thanked: 1951 times
Dawson, we're only playing Melbourne, keep the ball in the middleBeekay wrote:With Armo playing a solid game, who would make way ?
But who would we take out? we lost, there are few players that could make way....
Baker didnt do much, Dawson, Gwilt should all be considered a chance to be dropped
I dont think Milne will be even though he didnt do much, as he was still running
- Ghost Like
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6562
- Joined: Wed 19 Sep 2007 10:04pm
- Has thanked: 5788 times
- Been thanked: 1909 times
We will not win a final without Hayes & Ball in the middle.
They offer too much, clearances, tackles, leadership, heart, pressure...something sadly lacking in today's match.
BJ is not a midfielder, can be used there sparingly to provide relief or break a tag but he's better off as our 'quarterback' off half back or playing as the 3rd forward with licence to head up on the wings and set up across half back when the run of play is with the opposition.
Zac may have given his spot back to Max (if fit)
Gwilt does not offer enough IMO to own a spot in our 22
Geary would be eyeing a spot & IMO Bakes would not be a touch nervous on today's performance
Armo tackled well but the things Ball has supposedly been dropped for were not evident in Armo's game
Jack Steven should be given another game as with his pace, he takes some pressure off Joey and adds an unknown quantity
King, last quarter aside, would be disappointed in his game and Ben McEvoy could have offered more
Very disappointing today but it confirms to me that Hayes and Ball are our keys...besides Roo of course
They offer too much, clearances, tackles, leadership, heart, pressure...something sadly lacking in today's match.
BJ is not a midfielder, can be used there sparingly to provide relief or break a tag but he's better off as our 'quarterback' off half back or playing as the 3rd forward with licence to head up on the wings and set up across half back when the run of play is with the opposition.
Zac may have given his spot back to Max (if fit)
Gwilt does not offer enough IMO to own a spot in our 22
Geary would be eyeing a spot & IMO Bakes would not be a touch nervous on today's performance
Armo tackled well but the things Ball has supposedly been dropped for were not evident in Armo's game
Jack Steven should be given another game as with his pace, he takes some pressure off Joey and adds an unknown quantity
King, last quarter aside, would be disappointed in his game and Ben McEvoy could have offered more
Very disappointing today but it confirms to me that Hayes and Ball are our keys...besides Roo of course
- SaintWodonga
- Club Player
- Posts: 1868
- Joined: Wed 04 Jul 2007 12:01am
- Location: Wodonga
- Contact:
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 310
- Joined: Thu 06 Apr 2006 6:38pm
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 7 times
- borderbarry
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6676
- Joined: Mon 19 Apr 2004 11:22pm
- Location: Wodonga
- BaysideSaint
- Club Player
- Posts: 520
- Joined: Thu 20 Aug 2009 7:06pm
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6043
- Joined: Mon 21 May 2007 5:31pm
- Location: Currumbin, Quoinslairnd
To be honest I'm not sure what aker's role is at the moment. I'd be inclined to replace him with a runnerBatnoe wrote:Dawson, we're only playing Melbourne, keep the ball in the middleBeekay wrote:With Armo playing a solid game, who would make way ?
But who would we take out? we lost, there are few players that could make way....
Baker didnt do much, Dawson, Gwilt should all be considered a chance to be dropped
I dont think Milne will be even though he didnt do much, as he was still running
"The inches we need are everywhere around us. They're in every break in the game. Every minute, every second. On this team we fight for that inch. On this team we tear ourselves and everyone around us to pieces for that inch. We claw with our fingernails for that inch. Because we know when we add up all those inches that's gonna make the f***in' difference between winning and losing! Between living and dying!'
you are closer than you realise in understanding why max was dropped.borderbarry wrote:The folly of dropping Max is now apparent. Fancy keeping Dawson at Max's expense. Dawson looked like a big kid out there today, with no idea.
not is all as it seems. more was being tried today than people on the forum either understand or are understanding in their analysis.
philip
Just looking forward to us having a real crack each week, and appreciating the younger talent coming through.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1404
- Joined: Fri 26 May 2006 4:29pm
- Has thanked: 31 times
- Been thanked: 132 times
This year Lloyd, Richardson, Fev and Buddy have all put Max in the top two backs they have played on. Thats a serious compliment even if the experts have never made him AA .borderbarry wrote:The folly of dropping Max is now apparent. Fancy keeping Dawson at Max's expense. Dawson looked like a big kid out there today, with no idea.
Zac has been average with Geelong, Essendon and now North. He may well be getting tired because of his frame and maturity. Geary really fell away end of last year. It happens.
Zac has been great for us most of the year. He will be our next Max but I don't think he is there yet.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1900
- Joined: Mon 04 Aug 2008 11:35am
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 56 times
Sounds a bit mysterious mate, you have some inside knowledge?philip wrote:you are closer than you realise in understanding why max was dropped.borderbarry wrote:The folly of dropping Max is now apparent. Fancy keeping Dawson at Max's expense. Dawson looked like a big kid out there today, with no idea.
not is all as it seems. more was being tried today than people on the forum either understand or are understanding in their analysis.
philip
I certainly think that over the last 2 weeks, Dawson has been positioned in the maximum pressure positions, and he hasn't performed his best. Is he being tested a bit more by the coaching staff who only want 1 of him or Max in the side come finals?
- Mr Magic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 12789
- Joined: Fri 04 May 2007 9:38am
- Has thanked: 801 times
- Been thanked: 428 times
That seems plausable.Legendary wrote:Sounds a bit mysterious mate, you have some inside knowledge?philip wrote:you are closer than you realise in understanding why max was dropped.borderbarry wrote:The folly of dropping Max is now apparent. Fancy keeping Dawson at Max's expense. Dawson looked like a big kid out there today, with no idea.
not is all as it seems. more was being tried today than people on the forum either understand or are understanding in their analysis.
philip
I certainly think that over the last 2 weeks, Dawson has been positioned in the maximum pressure positions, and he hasn't performed his best. Is he being tested a bit more by the coaching staff who only want 1 of him or Max in the side come finals?
ALso just think about the following.
Our 2 best 'inside mids all season have been Hayes and Ball. Normally they don't play together on teh fiedl but in rotation.
The selectors would have known that Hayes was going to miss when they selected the team on Thursday.
Why would they not keep Ball in the team knowing that Hayes was going to miss?
Maybe, just maybe, they were 'auditioning' others in that role today?
if we were playing bingo, you would have just won, well done!Legendary wrote:Sounds a bit mysterious mate, you have some inside knowledge?philip wrote:you are closer than you realise in understanding why max was dropped.borderbarry wrote:The folly of dropping Max is now apparent. Fancy keeping Dawson at Max's expense. Dawson looked like a big kid out there today, with no idea.
not is all as it seems. more was being tried today than people on the forum either understand or are understanding in their analysis.
philip
I certainly think that over the last 2 weeks, Dawson has been positioned in the maximum pressure positions, and he hasn't performed his best. Is he being tested a bit more by the coaching staff who only want 1 of him or Max in the side come finals?
other than just that, people on the forum need to look back on the last two weeks and ask themselves, did the boys do things differently to normal, did they play a different style even if a nuance. has there been more one on one play as opposed to zone. have players been leaving their own man to cover or been told not to so better assessments of individuals can be made leading up to the finals, ala, Zac.
all teams try to do what we have been, but not all teams have the luxury of knowing their positions are stitched up. geelong is slightly different as their changes have been largely due to bad luck with injury.
philip
Just looking forward to us having a real crack each week, and appreciating the younger talent coming through.
- QuestionOfAccuracy
- Club Player
- Posts: 610
- Joined: Wed 11 Jul 2007 3:00pm
- Contact:
Definitely need both Bally and Lenny back for the finals.
On todays performance I think Gwilt, Zac, Armo and King will all be considered to be ommitted for next week.
Armo tried hard but I think his decision making and disposal are still off the mark.
Gwilt has had some good games this year but today was quite error-prone. Zac has had two shockers in a row as he has been exposed when having to play one-on-one.
King was beaten especially in the centre square hitouts and offers very little around the ground, although I think they will be reluctant to lose his experience come finals.
On todays performance I think Gwilt, Zac, Armo and King will all be considered to be ommitted for next week.
Armo tried hard but I think his decision making and disposal are still off the mark.
Gwilt has had some good games this year but today was quite error-prone. Zac has had two shockers in a row as he has been exposed when having to play one-on-one.
King was beaten especially in the centre square hitouts and offers very little around the ground, although I think they will be reluctant to lose his experience come finals.
- matrix
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 21475
- Joined: Mon 21 May 2007 1:55pm
- Has thanked: 4 times
- Been thanked: 4 times
dont agree with king
didnt have a disposal for a fair while there
but
the taps in the second half actually got us winning clearances.
armo read a couple of beauties over the back
as soon as king look like he was going to get the tap, armo just knew it was going over the back and read the play fantastic
he is a bit slow in other areas
but with a full strength midfield this guys tap work is needed
didnt have a disposal for a fair while there
but
the taps in the second half actually got us winning clearances.
armo read a couple of beauties over the back
as soon as king look like he was going to get the tap, armo just knew it was going over the back and read the play fantastic
he is a bit slow in other areas
but with a full strength midfield this guys tap work is needed
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23243
- Joined: Sat 13 Mar 2004 11:44pm
- Has thanked: 741 times
- Been thanked: 1796 times
Phil you got that on any authority? or you got one of those fortune telling black 8 pool balls?philip wrote:if we were playing bingo, you would have just won, well done!Legendary wrote:Sounds a bit mysterious mate, you have some inside knowledge?philip wrote:you are closer than you realise in understanding why max was dropped.borderbarry wrote:The folly of dropping Max is now apparent. Fancy keeping Dawson at Max's expense. Dawson looked like a big kid out there today, with no idea.
not is all as it seems. more was being tried today than people on the forum either understand or are understanding in their analysis.
philip
I certainly think that over the last 2 weeks, Dawson has been positioned in the maximum pressure positions, and he hasn't performed his best. Is he being tested a bit more by the coaching staff who only want 1 of him or Max in the side come finals?
other than just that, people on the forum need to look back on the last two weeks and ask themselves, did the boys do things differently to normal, did they play a different style even if a nuance. has there been more one on one play as opposed to zone. have players been leaving their own man to cover or been told not to so better assessments of individuals can be made leading up to the finals, ala, Zac.
all teams try to do what we have been, but not all teams have the luxury of knowing their positions are stitched up. geelong is slightly different as their changes have been largely due to bad luck with injury.
philip
“Yeah….nah””
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6043
- Joined: Mon 21 May 2007 5:31pm
- Location: Currumbin, Quoinslairnd
Wrong. King's tap work in the second half was a clinic in cleanliness even though it didn't translate to contested ball winning at ground level. But his work rate away from the ruck was really bad.QuestionOfAccuracy wrote:Definitely need both Bally and Lenny back for the finals.
On todays performance I think Gwilt, Zac, Armo and King will all be considered to be ommitted for next week.
Armo tried hard but I think his decision making and disposal are still off the mark.
Gwilt has had some good games this year but today was quite error-prone. Zac has had two shockers in a row as he has been exposed when having to play one-on-one.
King was beaten especially in the centre square hitouts and offers very little around the ground, although I think they will be reluctant to lose his experience come finals.
Ergo...
When contested ball success doesn't seem to stem from ruck taps are we better off with a mobile round the ground trier in McEvoy?
I'm definitely warming to the idea.
"The inches we need are everywhere around us. They're in every break in the game. Every minute, every second. On this team we fight for that inch. On this team we tear ourselves and everyone around us to pieces for that inch. We claw with our fingernails for that inch. Because we know when we add up all those inches that's gonna make the f***in' difference between winning and losing! Between living and dying!'
- rodgerfox
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9059
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 9:10am
- Has thanked: 425 times
- Been thanked: 327 times
We've played without Lenny, and with a crippled Luke Ball though.ThePunter wrote:The last time St Kilda played without both Luke Ball and Lenny Hayes befor today?
Round 13, 2002.
Did Ok (missed top 4 by %) but never really a serious threat without them.
Far better than what we look like now without them however.
Where's the depth when you need it?