Ball on Malthouse - Fox Sports News

[maverick]

I'm not sure that anyone questioned Luke's attitude when he was with us.

His problem was that he couldn't run or kick.

I don't think that was his problem either.

Whose was it then, Roos?

I think the coach has been sucked in to thinking we're better than we are and can afford to unload very good players.

We can't.

We've been relying on players, not game plans or structures, for 3 years now.

Unload good players, and you're going to find yourself in trouble.


To arrogantly outcast a player of that caliber and get nothing in return is just ridiculous.

No wonder you confuse yourself.
How it was arrogant to demand something better than a very speculative pick for a good player as you put it has me stumped.

It's not that RL has relied on strutures to win games, the structure as you call it, has made most of the team better players.

Our depth is better now than it has ever was when the fat man was coaching us.

[rodgerfox]

Our depth is better now than it has ever was when the fat man was coaching us.

Two things...

Our depth right now is bordering on pathetic. We have 2 guys missing from last year and don't have a single player in the 2s banging the door down to get a game.

Secondly, if it was better than when 'the fat man', Stan Alves or even Tim Watson was coaching - so what?? I want it to be good - not better than it was before.

Currently, it's not good at all.

[maverick]

Our depth is better now than it has ever was when the fat man was coaching us.

Two things...

Our depth right now is bordering on pathetic. We have 2 guys missing from last year and don't have a single player in the 2s banging the door down to get a game.

Secondly, if it was better than when 'the fat man', Stan Alves or even Tim Watson was coaching - so what?? I want it to be good - not better than it was before.

Currently, it's not good at all.

Don't agree.

[degruch]

Our depth is better now than it has ever was when the fat man was coaching us.

Two things...

Our depth right now is bordering on pathetic. We have 2 guys missing from last year and don't have a single player in the 2s banging the door down to get a game.

Secondly, if it was better than when 'the fat man', Stan Alves or even Tim Watson was coaching - so what?? I want it to be good - not better than it was before.

Currently, it's not good at all.

Don't agree.

+1. Was amazed with what a well balanced list we have, considering we have lost guys like Attard and Allen in recent years, just as they were starting to look the goods. Of course, Lovett cost us this year too. We look to have done very well from limited opportunities.

[rodgerfox]

Our depth is better now than it has ever was when the fat man was coaching us.

Two things...

Our depth right now is bordering on pathetic. We have 2 guys missing from last year and don't have a single player in the 2s banging the door down to get a game.

Secondly, if it was better than when 'the fat man', Stan Alves or even Tim Watson was coaching - so what?? I want it to be good - not better than it was before.

Currently, it's not good at all.

Don't agree.

+1. Was amazed with what a well balanced list we have, considering we have lost guys like Attard and Allen in recent years, just as they were starting to look the goods. Of course, Lovett cost us this year too. We look to have done very well from limited opportunities.

Limited opportunities?

We lost Goose, X Clarke and Luke Ball for nothing.

Plus we've had a no. 5 draft picks and a no. 16 pick.

That's at least 5 decent players we should have been able to get.


But all we have a to show for it is a ruckman who can't get a game in the ruck division which is 9th in the comp for Hitouts.

[maverick]

Our depth is better now than it has ever was when the fat man was coaching us.

Two things...

Our depth right now is bordering on pathetic. We have 2 guys missing from last year and don't have a single player in the 2s banging the door down to get a game.

Secondly, if it was better than when 'the fat man', Stan Alves or even Tim Watson was coaching - so what?? I want it to be good - not better than it was before.

Currently, it's not good at all.

Don't agree.

+1. Was amazed with what a well balanced list we have, considering we have lost guys like Attard and Allen in recent years, just as they were starting to look the goods. Of course, Lovett cost us this year too. We look to have done very well from limited opportunities.

Limited opportunities?

We lost Goose, X Clarke and Luke Ball for nothing.

Plus we've had a no. 5 draft picks and a no. 16 pick.

That's at least 5 decent players we should have been able to get.


But all we have a to show for it is a ruckman who can't get a game in the ruck division which is 9th in the comp for Hitouts.

Who was the no.5 draft pick?

We also gained King, Gardiner and Ray for nothing also, I think we are better off.

[Finna]

Its too early to judge our depth yet. The depth players have not really had a chance to get enough game time to pass that judgement.

We are 5-2 - we are in a nice position.

The next month will tell us a lot.

These guys now get a chance to show us the truth of our depth. If they can perform in the next 6 weeks we could easily unleash a whole new batch of gun players.

Teams like Carlton and Melbourne have had no choice but to play their youngsters so they are more experienced at AFL level. Our guys need time to develop they are a little behind.

It the consequence of being a good team.

I am not convinced either way - they may be good or they may be average - but one thing is for sure that the strength and success of out team last year will have shown them a lot.

[rodgerfox]

Our depth is better now than it has ever was when the fat man was coaching us.

Two things...

Our depth right now is bordering on pathetic. We have 2 guys missing from last year and don't have a single player in the 2s banging the door down to get a game.

Secondly, if it was better than when 'the fat man', Stan Alves or even Tim Watson was coaching - so what?? I want it to be good - not better than it was before.

Currently, it's not good at all.

Don't agree.

+1. Was amazed with what a well balanced list we have, considering we have lost guys like Attard and Allen in recent years, just as they were starting to look the goods. Of course, Lovett cost us this year too. We look to have done very well from limited opportunities.

Limited opportunities?

We lost Goose, X Clarke and Luke Ball for nothing.

Plus we've had a no. 5 draft picks and a no. 16 pick.

That's at least 5 decent players we should have been able to get.


But all we have a to show for it is a ruckman who can't get a game in the ruck division which is 9th in the comp for Hitouts.

Who was the no.5 draft pick?

We also gained King, Gardiner and Ray for nothing also, I think we are better off.

Sorry, typo. No. 9 draft pick - McEvoy.


Without going over too much old ground....

When we took on a new coach, I said we wouldn't be a contender until 2010-2011.

I was wrong.

The reason I said this, was because I made an assumption that a new coach would come in and have a crack at the list.

I assumed guys like Goose, Kosi, Milne etc. would be traded for Draft picks. I kind of figured that a new coach would have to come in and do something with the list - bring in youth which would set us back 2 years but with the brilliant talent we kept would make us a genuine contender in 2010-2011.

Supposedly the list was in such bad shape and going backwards at such a rate, something had to be done!


I was amazed when Lyon did nothing with the core of the list. We just cut dudes that were most likely going to be cut anyway, and naturally didn't get anything to really boost the list long term.

We just topped up the discarded 'fringe' players with discarded 'fringe' players form other clubs.

Schneider even with all of his flaws, is the exception. We haven't been improved at all apart from him.


Now, we see that not rolling the dice and getting some kids in 3 years ago has left us a bit stagnant. The short term fixes have almost passed that used-by date already and our kids are sub-standard.

And....we're relying on the same stars that have been on the list for 6-8 years.


Recruitment is one area that I'm very disappointed in.


Now granted, had we won the flag last year (like we should have) then clearly history would have shown it to be a great play - but we didn't. And one year in footy is a long time.

[rexy]

Rog, I think you are getting confused with what some on our site thought of our list when RL took over and what RL actually thought.

RL has never said that it was a poor list on the decline when he took over, some on the web site who beleive themselves mind readers have sprouted this theory to the point that many see it as gospel.

I to am disappointed in some of our recruiting decisions but I am not disappointed with the club for making these decisions. I am disappointed that we had to top up with mature age players to have a crack at the flag but I beleive this is a reality, the recruitment of Ray Schneider King and Gardiner in particular were necessities to get us to this point, from this point, as a grandfinalist it comes down to winning one game on one day, anything can happen in this circumstance, see Hawks in 08.

The decision to take Lovett and Peake last year over draft picks is IMO regrettable as I feel we should have backed last years team + or - the likes of Geary Steven Armitage and looked to secure the medium term future, had we won a GF with Lovett starring then I never would have thought about it again, what actually happened was a disaster.

[saintsRrising]

The reason I said this, was because I made an assumption that a new coach would come in and have a crack at the list.

I assumed guys like Goose, Kosi, Milne etc. would be traded for Draft picks. I kind of figured that a new coach would have to come in and do something with the list - bring in youth which would set us back 2 years but with the brilliant talent we kept would make us a genuine contender in 2010-2011.

.

So RF re-writes history yet again... where were your posts on this back in 2006?????

I think just about everyone bar the 2010 re-ivented RF knows that the RB Board sacked GT and searched for a coach to take the Saints the next level in the immediate future.

ie that they were not there, but coud be with some work.

Lyon too flad his immediate needs in ruckman, run through the middle and more forward pressure.

No way was there an hint of a brief for a coach to clear the decks dramatically ..

Glad though that RF is now acknowledging that Lyon did not take over a perfect list though.

[plugger66]

Our depth is better now than it has ever was when the fat man was coaching us.

Two things...

Our depth right now is bordering on pathetic. We have 2 guys missing from last year and don't have a single player in the 2s banging the door down to get a game.

Secondly, if it was better than when 'the fat man', Stan Alves or even Tim Watson was coaching - so what?? I want it to be good - not better than it was before.

Currently, it's not good at all.

Don't agree.

+1. Was amazed with what a well balanced list we have, considering we have lost guys like Attard and Allen in recent years, just as they were starting to look the goods. Of course, Lovett cost us this year too. We look to have done very well from limited opportunities.

Limited opportunities?

We lost Goose, X Clarke and Luke Ball for nothing.

Plus we've had a no. 5 draft picks and a no. 16 pick.

That's at least 5 decent players we should have been able to get.


But all we have a to show for it is a ruckman who can't get a game in the ruck division which is 9th in the comp for Hitouts.

Who was the no.5 draft pick?

We also gained King, Gardiner and Ray for nothing also, I think we are better off.

Sorry, typo. No. 9 draft pick - McEvoy.


Without going over too much old ground....

When we took on a new coach, I said we wouldn't be a contender until 2010-2011.

I was wrong.

The reason I said this, was because I made an assumption that a new coach would come in and have a crack at the list.

I assumed guys like Goose, Kosi, Milne etc. would be traded for Draft picks. I kind of figured that a new coach would have to come in and do something with the list - bring in youth which would set us back 2 years but with the brilliant talent we kept would make us a genuine contender in 2010-2011.

Supposedly the list was in such bad shape and going backwards at such a rate, something had to be done!


I was amazed when Lyon did nothing with the core of the list. We just cut dudes that were most likely going to be cut anyway, and naturally didn't get anything to really boost the list long term.

We just topped up the discarded 'fringe' players with discarded 'fringe' players form other clubs.

Schneider even with all of his flaws, is the exception. We haven't been improved at all apart from him.


Now, we see that not rolling the dice and getting some kids in 3 years ago has left us a bit stagnant. The short term fixes have almost passed that used-by date already and our kids are sub-standard.

And....we're relying on the same stars that have been on the list for 6-8 years.


Recruitment is one area that I'm very disappointed in.


Now granted, had we won the flag last year (like we should have) then clearly history would have shown it to be a great play - but we didn't. And one year in footy is a long time.

Got anything positive to say RF or will you continue to ignore me because you actually have no idea about footy structures. Pretty embarrassing really.

[rodgerfox]

I to am disappointed in some of our recruiting decisions but I am not disappointed with the club for making these decisions. I am disappointed that we had to top up with mature age players to have a crack at the flag but I beleive this is a reality, .....

I understand your point - but don't agree with it.


I think that when you change coach you categorically aren't going to win the flag for 2 years.

It just doesn't happen. If it does, it's a freakish.


So when you change coach, and aren't going to contend for at least 2 years - you should roll the dice and have a crack at the list to ensure that by the time you've adjusted to the new game plan your list is well balanced with youth and experience and players at the prime age.

For some reason, our new coach didn't do this.


And I really hope I'm wrong, but I think it will hurt for some time.

[rodgerfox]

where were your posts on this back in 2006?????

I sincerely hope you're joking.


I really, really do.

[plugger66]

I to am disappointed in some of our recruiting decisions but I am not disappointed with the club for making these decisions. I am disappointed that we had to top up with mature age players to have a crack at the flag but I beleive this is a reality, .....

I understand your point - but don't agree with it.


I think that when you change coach you categorically aren't going to win the flag for 2 years.

It just doesn't happen. If it does, it's a freakish.


So when you change coach, and aren't going to contend for at least 2 years - you should roll the dice and have a crack at the list to ensure that by the time you've adjusted to the new game plan your list is well balanced with youth and experience and players at the prime age.

For some reason, our new coach didn't do this.


And I really hope I'm wrong, but I think it will hurt for some time.

Ive come to conclusion that you wouldnt have a clue. It is quite obvious. You must be embarrassed really.

[rexy]

I to am disappointed in some of our recruiting decisions but I am not disappointed with the club for making these decisions. I am disappointed that we had to top up with mature age players to have a crack at the flag but I beleive this is a reality, .....

I understand your point - but don't agree with it.


I think that when you change coach you categorically aren't going to win the flag for 2 years.

It just doesn't happen. If it does, it's a freakish.


So when you change coach, and aren't going to contend for at least 2 years - you should roll the dice and have a crack at the list to ensure that by the time you've adjusted to the new game plan your list is well balanced with youth and experience and players at the prime age.

For some reason, our new coach didn't do this.


And I really hope I'm wrong, but I think it will hurt for some time.

See L Matthews 2001.

[rodgerfox]

I to am disappointed in some of our recruiting decisions but I am not disappointed with the club for making these decisions. I am disappointed that we had to top up with mature age players to have a crack at the flag but I beleive this is a reality, .....

I understand your point - but don't agree with it.


I think that when you change coach you categorically aren't going to win the flag for 2 years.

It just doesn't happen. If it does, it's a freakish.


So when you change coach, and aren't going to contend for at least 2 years - you should roll the dice and have a crack at the list to ensure that by the time you've adjusted to the new game plan your list is well balanced with youth and experience and players at the prime age.

For some reason, our new coach didn't do this.


And I really hope I'm wrong, but I think it will hurt for some time.

See L Matthews 2001.

We don't have an extra $100k in our salary cap though - otherwise we'd still probably have Luke Ball and would have landed at least one decent recruit.

The Brisbane three-peat certainly fits into the 'freakish' category I mentioned above.

Ross Lyon is no Leigh Matthews either.

[saintsRrising]

Rog, I think you are getting confused with what some on our site thought of our list when RL took over and what RL actually thought.

RL has never said that it was a poor list on the decline when he took over, some on the web site who beleive themselves mind readers have sprouted this theory to the point that many see it as gospel.

.

Rexy you have a critical word there....which is poor.

Overall it was quite a good list...but with some significant and major flaws.

No real rucks.

A midfield not deep enough and witha bevy of older players all about to retire (Harvey, Thommo, Powell, Pecket!!!!)

Hamill was a huge loss. A great offensive player whose defensive side up forward had some describing that aspect of his game as the best in the AFL.

So IMO while it was still quite a good list, it was in decline. That does not make it poor.

Lyon stated in his first few days that we needed rucks, more run through the middle and more forward pressure.

[saintsRrising]

where were your posts on this back in 2006?????

I sincerely hope you're joking.


I really, really do.

No.

Where were your posts on trading off a big chunk of our senior players for draft picks?

You know this latest theory that you are saying you had all along but never posted back when Lyon started.

Next thing you will be saying that you wanted all kids and that getting Gardi was a waste of space,,,

[rexy]

Rog, I think you are getting confused with what some on our site thought of our list when RL took over and what RL actually thought.

RL has never said that it was a poor list on the decline when he took over, some on the web site who beleive themselves mind readers have sprouted this theory to the point that many see it as gospel.

.

Rexy you have a critical word there....which is poor.

Overall it was quite a good list...but with some significant and major flaws.

No real rucks.

A midfield not deep enough and witha bevy of older players all about to retire (Harvey, Thommo, Powell, Pecket!!!!)

Hamill was a huge loss. A great offensive player whose defensive side up forward had some describing that aspect of his game as the best in the AFL.

So IMO while it was still quite a good list, it was in decline. That does not make it poor.

Lyon stated in his first few days that we needed rucks, more run through the middle and more forward pressure.

Musnt have been talking about you then. If you didnt think the list was poor. Me personally I didnt think it was as poor or flawed as many did at that time, and I dont think it is as a poor or flawed as RF thinks it is now.

I do think that as a supporter group overall we have become spoiled, we have had a really competitive list together for about 7 years now, first time in my life this has happened, I like everyone else am desperate to see a premiership, at the end of the day the stars must allign for that to happen, we also must be smart in our recruiting and blooding of youngsters to ensure sustained competitiveness. The balance between recruiting for now and for the future is a fine one, as is the way we grade our 2nd tier players. For example, Tom Hawkins would be a disappointment if Geelong hadnt played in the last 3 grannies and won 2 of them, doesnt get much airplay though because his slow progression seems irrelevant. Meanwhile guys like Gumbleton, J Reiwoldt, J Watts are much maligned as their teams performance is much worse.

What I am getting at is, pound for pound I think our list is as good as anyones, Geelong included. Whether or not we can get it to perform at its full potential or not is the big issue, If we can some players will look better or be more important than there talent would have suggested, Ie Harry Taylor, Matthew Stokes, Cameron Mooney. If we dont then reasonably good players will find their careers in tatters early, remember Tony Brown, Matthew Young, Jason Heatley and a few others who looked great in 97 but didnt have a gig by 2000 despite being still in their 20s.

[PJ]

Pretty sure he put in plenty of effort last year.

Not sure you can actually say that unless you know Luke personally even then it's subjective. One thing's for sure, when your primary focus is yourself and there's money to be made you usually do put in the effort - anybody would, it's the balance between commitment to yourself and the commitment to the team that needs to be struck. Who won the battle the hurt ego or the selfless attitude?

[na exa]

from a team sport/s participant experience ... when theres no confidence given (for whatever reason) , its makes a tough gig almost unbearable...

'the' environment becomes the focus , not the game.
(ie .. (for whatever reason) your headspace gets done over)

been there ! ....in the end , theres only one move to make , and thats outa the joint.

it was even a smart choice what number they've got him running around in.

[Saintsfan]

Essentially we have lost two best 22 players in Ball and Lovett. Not too many of our youngsters are really looking much chop at the moment.

With this in mind our team has been fairly settled over the past 18 months albiet a few players are being found out as passengers. A few spots may/may not open depending on how these passengers go however.

This is not ideal in a year we are meant to be challenging.

[Moods]

THese kids we were going to recruit Rodg - who cares whether they are any good, just bring em on?

Tell me what early draft picks we've had so that we could recruit these decent kids? A dud is a dud whether they are 18yrs old or 25. Just ask the tiges.

WE stuffed up with Lovett I agree.

You state that we were good enough to win the flag last year and should have won it, but now 6mths on have a go at our recruiting Can't have it both ways. OUr recruiting was good enough to put us in a position to win a flag, and it still may be the case, but now all of a sudden we've wasted the last 3 and 1/2 years with who we've recruited? Doesn't make sense to me.

[na exa]

This is not ideal in a year we are meant to be challenging.

challenging !!! ?... my hairy pink one.

[Saintsfan]

This is not ideal in a year we are meant to be challenging.

challenging !!! ?... my hairy pink one.

for a flag