Another GT "Gem"... I agree 100%!

[bob__71]

on multiple levels. B4E's cut and paste functionality has returned to his computer.

[rodgerfox]

It's also amazing that men may be better performing footballers than boys isn't it.

You mean like Gehrig, Hamill, Harvey, Burke, Powell, Peckett as compared to Dawson, Eddy, Geary, Ray, McEvoy?

gotta admit.....good point....over to you rodge...

Good point??

If he's arguing in my defence it is.


When Gehrig, Hamill, Harvey, Burke, Powell and Peckett were at their peaks, our 'kids' at the time were the core of the team.

CHB: Kosi/Goose
C: Ball/Dal
CHF: Roo
HBF: BJ

If you're seriously comparing the roles they were forced to play due to the calibre and age of our 'men' back then, to the roles the 'kids' you've listed above now - you have to be kidding.

Only Dawson plays anything resembling a core role - and it's highly debatable as to whether he should even be in the team.

Infact it's highly debatable that any of the 'kids' you listed above should be in the team currently. And I'm not sure how Ray found his way into your list either.


You've supported my point entirely. We now have men playing key roles, with 'kids' playing bit parts.

Back then we had kids playing core roles, because our men weren't good enough, or were out injured, or were past their best.

[barks4eva]

critics of GT need to look at where we started and where we finished under him. It seems because he wasn't perfect and made some errors he is a muppet that cost us a premiership - in that case every single coach bar one can be placed in that category. For gawds sake look at his two predecessors - and thank god we didn't get a 'rated' coach like wallace or ayres!

The difference being that St Kilda were gifted the biggest influx of talent into one club at one time as never seen before in any sport, on any continent, on planet Earth in the Milky Way and I'd even hazard a guess as to say within any Galaxy or Solar System, but I stand to be corrected on the last two.

The fact is it didn't matter who was coaching us we were going to climb the ladder within 3-4 years regardless, after such a draft bonanza never seen before and never equalled.

Alistair Clarkson had far less talent at his disposal from Hawthorn's draft bonanza, but with some good coaching won a premiership built largely on a draft from 4 years earlier.

But it's not so much Thomas the coach that bothered me, even if he did not have a tactic, it was Thomas the dictator of the football department that cost us,

this situation is really what stifled us and eventually sent the list backwards until it was resurrected in 2007 with the first steps then taken to to get us back on track.

An unfit list, poorly conditioned leading to chronic injuries is what cost the club one or two premierships and Thomas has the gall to say " fitness and conditioning staff are overrated"

truly a clueless comment, which encapsulates and sums up his time in control of the football department, far better than anything I could add.

An unfit list in decline due to poor recruiting from 2004, with chronic injuries is what Lyon inherited and from DAY ONE he started the process of turning things around.

From day one he was a brilliant coach steering us in the right direction, which is why after one season ROBERT HARVEY rated him the best coach he'd ever had.

Too much for any laterally challenged nuffie to comprehend but I'd take Robert Harvey's opinion over dodgy fox, mebabble and any other dumbed down dingbat and goofball any day.

[meher baba]

It's also amazing that men may be better performing footballers than boys isn't it.

You mean like Gehrig, Hamill, Harvey, Burke, Powell, Peckett, Thompson as compared to Dawson, Eddy, Geary, Ray, McEvoy, McQualter, Jones?

Well, McQualter has become a man under Lyon's leadership. Jones is already older than many of our more seasoned players (eg, Dal). I think Ray is a seasoned player by any measure: as, of course, are Gardi, Schneider, King and Dempster.

But I digress.

Yes, we have lost some of our most talented senior players in recent years: although (if you read my earlier post) not as many as were lost in the 2000-02 period after which the club emerged from the mire to become a serious contender (which is what actually happened between 2002 and 2004, even if you don't want to give GT even the slightest bit of credit for it).

On the whole, , I don't go along with rodgerfox's argument on this point. I think most of our current list that was already with the club in 2004-06 were almost as good then as tney are now: exceptions are Ball, X, Kosi and Goose (who, largely through injury, are not performing quite as well these days) and Gilbert, McQualter and Raph who - as one would expect with young players who hadn't played much AFL when GT was still coach -have come on a lot.

I actually think that the side which will run out for us on Friday night is probably, all in all, slightly inferior to the one which ran out against Port in the PF in 2004. There isn't much in it, but have a look at the 2004 side and you'll see that it was a highly talented one. And that team missed beating the eventual premiers by one kick.

You would expect the 2009 Bulldogs (who we have beaten twice this year) on a neutral ground should be an easier challenge than our 2004 PF opponents (a more complete football team IMO and also a team that we simply didn't seem to be able to beat in that period). So, even though our current team is slightly inferior to our 2004 model, I still think we'll win on Friday night.

[rodgerfox]

But it's not so much Thomas the coach that bothered me, even if he did not have a tactic, it was Thomas the dictator of the football department that cost us,

You are a liar.

If you're going to lie, you need to have a good memory.

B4Eva - 0
Pioneers of truth and honesty - 1

[meher baba]

But it's not so much Thomas the coach that bothered me, even if he did not have a tactic, it was Thomas the dictator of the football department that cost us,

You are a liar.

If you're going to lie, you need to have a good memory.

B4Eva - 0
Pioneers of truth and honesty - 1

No, that's not fair.

I actually remember B4E posting towards the end of 2006 that he thought that GT was starting to develop into a reasonable coach. Oddly enough, B4E's hatred of all things GT seems to have steadily intensified to the point of becoming a crusade since the guy was sacked.

[PJ]

Pioneers of truth and honesty - 1

[SENsei]

But it's not so much Thomas the coach that bothered me, even if he did not have a tactic, it was Thomas the dictator of the football department that cost us,

You are a liar.

If you're going to lie, you need to have a good memory.

B4Eva - 0
Pioneers of truth and honesty - 1

Would you like to introduce evidence into these court proceedings, Mr Fox? Enter it as exhibit B4E.

Phil - 27

[bob__71]

I actually think that the side which will run out for us on Friday night is probably, all in all, slightly inferior to the one which ran out against Port in the PF in 2004.

Wow

[SENsei]

But it's not so much Thomas the coach that bothered me, even if he did not have a tactic, it was Thomas the dictator of the football department that cost us,

You are a liar.

If you're going to lie, you need to have a good memory.

B4Eva - 0
Pioneers of truth and honesty - 1

No, that's not fair.

I actually remember B4E posting towards the end of 2006 that he thought that GT was starting to develop into a reasonable coach. Oddly enough, B4E's hatred of all things GT seems to have steadily intensified to the point of becoming a crusade since the guy was sacked.

My recollection is that B4E's GT obsession began well prior to that. In fact, from memory, he started his crusade at the beginning of that year.

Ruck stats to advantage? Coaching box invasions? Physical verbal confrontations? Petrol tickets?

2006 had it all. But B4E had the ace in the hole, his hero in his pocket....the big guy Rodney.

[rodgerfox]

But it's not so much Thomas the coach that bothered me, even if he did not have a tactic, it was Thomas the dictator of the football department that cost us,

You are a liar.

If you're going to lie, you need to have a good memory.

B4Eva - 0
Pioneers of truth and honesty - 1

Would you like to introduce evidence into these court proceedings, Mr Fox? Enter it as exhibit B4E.

Phil - 27

Are you for real???

You don't recall the ruck stats, the non-selection of Rix, the non-selection of Ferguson, the not putting numbers behind the ball, the outrage at 'backing our players', the lack of tactics, the playing Blake in the ruck, and so on, and so on, the 'my grandmosther could coach this list to top 4', and so on....

Jesus, if he didn't have an issue with Thomas the coach, I'd hate to see the reaction to a coach he didn't rate!!

[rodgerfox]

I actually think that the side which will run out for us on Friday night is probably, all in all, slightly inferior to the one which ran out against Port in the PF in 2004.

Wow

Wow is right.

I completely and utterly disagree with that.

Flabbergasted even.

[PJ]

I actually think that the side which will run out for us on Friday night is probably, all in all, slightly inferior to the one which ran out against Port in the PF in 2004.

In order to put this up I think you need to qualify what a better side is. I think the 04 model was an interesting team in terms of grunt (Fraser) and attacking flare but the overall 09 is a more consistent, highly structured beast that is the equal of any. The level of skill required to pull off our current game plan cannot be matched in my opinion by any team on show.

[SENsei]

But it's not so much Thomas the coach that bothered me, even if he did not have a tactic, it was Thomas the dictator of the football department that cost us,

You are a liar.

If you're going to lie, you need to have a good memory.

B4Eva - 0
Pioneers of truth and honesty - 1

Would you like to introduce evidence into these court proceedings, Mr Fox? Enter it as exhibit B4E.

Phil - 27

Are you for real???

You don't recall the ruck stats, the non-selection of Rix, the non-selection of Ferguson, the not putting numbers behind the ball, the outrage at 'backing our players', the lack of tactics, the playing Blake in the ruck, and so on, and so on, the 'my grandmosther could coach this list to top 4', and so on....

Jesus, if he didn't have an issue with Thomas the coach, I'd hate to see the reaction to a coach he didn't rate!!

I wasn't having a go Mr Fox, I was suggesting you produce the evidence for all to see.

And yes I am serious. Seriously.

Phil - win

[meher baba]

I actually think that the side which will run out for us on Friday night is probably, all in all, slightly inferior to the one which ran out against Port in the PF in 2004.

Wow

Wow is right.

I completely and utterly disagree with that.

Flabbergasted even.

Well, I reckon Harvey, Hamill, Gehrig, Thommo and Penny were pretty damn good players, as was the Max of that era.

Kosi and Ball were better then than they are now.

Sure, our rucks weren't as good, but - apart from that aspect - I can't see the likes of CJ, Ray, Dawson or Raph getting a spot in the 2004 side. Gilbert would, as most likely would McQualter (ahead of Guerra, but there wouldn't be much in it).

[bob__71]

I actually think that the side which will run out for us on Friday night is probably, all in all, slightly inferior to the one which ran out against Port in the PF in 2004.

Wow

Wow is right.

I completely and utterly disagree with that.

Flabbergasted even.

Well, I reckon Harvey, Hamill, Gehrig, Thommo and Penny were pretty damn good players, as was the Max of that era.

Kosi and Ball were better then than they are now.

Sure, our rucks weren't as good, but - apart from that aspect - I can't see the likes of CJ, Ray, Dawson or Raph getting a spot in the 2004 side. Gilbert would, as most likely would McQualter (ahead of Guerra, but there wouldn't be much in it).

Who do you think would win if the two teams played?

And given everything else are you telling us RL is a better coach than GT?

[barks4eva]

But it's not so much Thomas the coach that bothered me, even if he did not have a tactic, it was Thomas the dictator of the football department that cost us,

You are a liar.

What I mean in relative terms Thomas's role in controlling the entire football department was far more harmful to the club than his position as coach.

Yes, I thought he was a clueless coach which is why I approached him personally to give him a fair dinkum clue with the 17 to 1 hitouts to advantage against with Blake in the ruck and no numbers behind the ball which was costing us games of football.

McGuane responded with " we prefer to back our own players" obviously the two of them are known to like a bet, have a punt, but it's just DUMB, to have Blake in the ruck and have no numbers behind the ball which is what I told them.

I was trying to help the guy, he obviously was out of his depth, his previous coaching job was with Warrnabool, but all of this pale's into insignificance when compared to Thomas's role with zero experience in controlling the entire football department, while at the same time being responsible for his coaching duties.


An unfit list, poorly conditioned leading to chronic injuries is what cost the club one or two premierships and Thomas has the gall to say " fitness and conditioning staff are overrated"

truly a clueless comment, which encapsulates and sums up his time in control of the football department, far better than anything I could add.

On arriving Ross Lyon read the riot act and wanted to know who was responsible for this mess, we all know who that was, don't we!


But what I really don't get is why on earth you'd want to debate all this rubbish at this time?

I still maintain that this thread is a disgrace and the mods should have locked it by at least page 8!

I also maintain that IMO you're a know nothing prick, a total d**khead, an imbecile, an arsewipe, a wanker, an idiot, a laterally challenged moron you know absolutely SFA about football, you probably still tug yourself over the 10 game streak, you molest your GT inflatable on a daily basis and you have an incredibly small penis.


Good job mods

[rodgerfox]

What's both fascinating and hilarious throughout this entire saga, and is chronically evident i nthis thread - is that the old anti-GT arguments are very different to the new anti-GT arguments.

Back then, it was that he couldn't coach. All we needed was a decent coach and the 'best list in the AFL' would win a flag. GT was holding as back as a tactician and match day coach.

That was the line. A line that completely disagreed with, and still do. Moreso now.


However now what we're seeing, is that it's morphing slowly. Slowly enough that most don't even see it.
Suddenly it's not his match day coaching or his tactics. The argument has now moved on to the fact that he's a prick of a man, and that his control over everything was the reason we hate him.
Injuries seem to be acknowledged now as the reason for our failures. But now it was GT's fault we had the injuries.

Very funny argument to see take place over the years.

It's changed significantly over time.

[rodgerfox]

But it's not so much Thomas the coach that bothered me, even if he did not have a tactic, it was Thomas the dictator of the football department that cost us,

You are a liar.

What I mean in relative terms Thomas's role in controlling the entire football department was far more harmful to the club than his position as coach.

Yes, I thought he was a clueless coach which is why I approached him personally to give him a fair dinkum clue with the 17 to 1 hitouts to advantage against with Blake in the ruck and no numbers behind the ball which was costing us games of football.

McGuane responded with " we prefer to back our own players" obviously the two of them are known to like a bet, have a punt, but it's just DUMB, to have Blake in the ruck and have no numbers behind the ball which is what I told them.

I was trying to help the guy, he obviously was out of his depth, his previous coaching job was with Warrnabool, but all of this pale's into insignificance when compared to Thomas's role with zero experience in controlling the entire football department, while at the same time being responsible for his coaching duties.


An unfit list, poorly conditioned leading to chronic injuries is what cost the club one or two premierships and Thomas has the gall to say " fitness and conditioning staff are overrated"

truly a clueless comment, which encapsulates and sums up his time in control of the football department, far better than anything I could add.

On arriving Ross Lyon read the riot act and wanted to know who was responsible for this mess, we all know who that was, don't we!


But what I really don't get is why on earth you'd want to debate all this rubbish at this time?

I still maintain that this thread is a disgrace and the mods should have locked it by at least page 8!

I also maintain that IMO you're a know nothing prick, a total d**khead, an imbecile, an arsewipe, a wanker, an idiot, a laterally challenged moron you know absolutely SFA about football, you probably still tug yourself over the 10 game streak, you molest your GT inflatable on a daily basis and you have an incredibly small penis.


Good job mods

RodgerFox - 1
B4Eva - 0

[cowboy18]

Scoring systems in play here are wrong.

Needs a degree of difficulty and a judging panel for it to really work.



Carry on.

[barks4eva]

RodgerFox - 1
B4Eva - 0

B4E 8.8"
RodgerFox 4.2"

[Milton66]

I actually think that the side which will run out for us on Friday night is probably, all in all, slightly inferior to the one which ran out against Port in the PF in 2004.

Wow

Double wow. MB has argued fairly well up until now. SENsational noted his composure and logic.

But this comment exhalts him into the cabbage Hall of Fame and life membership.

This is the same person who argues that GT was great because he got us to 2 Prelims, blah blah blah.

And when things were bad under RL, he should be sacked... GT = win loss ratio blah blah blah...

And now he argues that this side which is 20-2 with 2 losses within a kicj or so... top of the ladder, high %, stingiest defence is somehow inferior to that of 2004?

This would sure have to be the single most idiotic comment ever posted on this forum (mine included). And that's saying a lot.

Should we lose on Friday, and lose by more than we did to Port in 04, no doubt this assclown will argue that GT was better because he got us closer to a GF than RL.

OMG!

[Milton66]

What's both fascinating and hilarious throughout this entire saga, and is chronically evident i nthis thread - is that the old anti-GT arguments are very different to the new anti-GT arguments.

Back then, it was that he couldn't coach. All we needed was a decent coach and the 'best list in the AFL' would win a flag. GT was holding as back as a tactician and match day coach.

That was the line. A line that completely disagreed with, and still do. Moreso now.


However now what we're seeing, is that it's morphing slowly. Slowly enough that most don't even see it.
Suddenly it's not his match day coaching or his tactics. The argument has now moved on to the fact that he's a prick of a man, and that his control over everything was the reason we hate him.
Injuries seem to be acknowledged now as the reason for our failures. But now it was GT's fault we had the injuries.

Very funny argument to see take place over the years.

It's changed significantly over time.

Perhaps for some it has. I haven't been around long enough to agree or disagree.

In fairness, the replies have been to the isuses raised on this thread, so the full spectrum of views have not been discussed.

And it does not mean in any way whatsoever, that just because some GT supporters have stuck to their views... makes them correct.

[meher baba]

Well, I reckon Harvey, Hamill, Gehrig, Thommo and Penny were pretty damn good players, as was the Max of that era.

Kosi and Ball were better then than they are now.

Sure, our rucks weren't as good, but - apart from that aspect - I can't see the likes of CJ, Ray, Dawson or Raph getting a spot in the 2004 side. Gilbert would, as most likely would McQualter (ahead of Guerra, but there wouldn't be much in it).[/quote]

Who do you think would win if the two teams played?

And given everything else are you telling us RL is a better coach than GT?[/quote]

It'd be a very close game. The 2004 team would be a real handfull at a big ground like the MCG.

And, yes, I think Lyon is a better coach. I've been saying this for a while. He hasn't achived more than GT has yet, but we all hope that that is about to be fixed

[Milton66]

If you could clone cross-over players and have them playing at the same level as they were in both eras respectively... I reckon that 2009 would win.

09 Roo would dominate 04 Roo
09 Kosie - same

Delivery to G would be crap due the pressure and zone set up.

09 Milne - better than 04 Milne

09 Rucks better also.