Thommometer

[JeffDunne]

He acknowledged at the time that if the Saints had flooded that we would have won.

"Could"

C-O-U-L-D



Seriously.

[saintsRrising]

That is an extremely long bow to draw that he 'deliberately' lost a game. His plans and tactics may have contributed to many losses, but he was trying to win with his differing tactics. .

What he said was along the lines of he wanted them to play as they needed (in his mind) to play in the finals.

He was aware that he could have flooded and won the Roos game, but chose not to due to his focus on September.

[rodgerfox]

That is an extremely long bow to draw that he 'deliberately' lost a game. .

Why?

He acknowledged at the time that if the Saints had flooded that we would have won.

He chose not to...consciously.

Choosing not to act...when you know of the option...is just as mucha decision as choosing to alter action.

He made the wrong call....

He often made the wrong call...and that is the point.

He wanted to do it the GT way....and fair enough that he backed himself...but it was the wrong way.

HAHHAAHahahahaha!!

You are a disgrace, and should ban yourself form this forum indefinately.

Outright lying again, then yet again, attempting to weasel your way out of it.

Sticking to a process in order to achieve better mid-long term results, being twisted by you into 'deliberately' losing a game!!


That's gold, even for you.

[rodgerfox]

That is an extremely long bow to draw that he 'deliberately' lost a game. His plans and tactics may have contributed to many losses, but he was trying to win with his differing tactics. .

What he said was along the lines of he wanted them to play as they needed (in his mind) to play in the finals.

He was aware that he could have flooded and won the Roos game, but chose not to due to his focus on September.

HAHAHAHAhaahahahaAHAHAHA!!!

Too rich.

[JeffDunne]

Why do you keep quoting the same post?

Maybe for once you could try and think of a considered response rather than firing off and then adding your "yeah, but" re-quotings of the same post?

Just a thought?

[SENsei]

That is an extremely long bow to draw that he 'deliberately' lost a game. .

Why?

He acknowledged at the time that if the Saints had flooded that we would have won.

He wanted to do it the GT way....and fair enough that he backed himself...but it was the wrong way.

So he was able to guarantee winning games of football now too was he? IN HIS OPINION, we would've won the game. IN HIS OPINION, he didn't believe flooding was necessary. HIS OPINION was most likely wrong.

But being wrong and being a person who deliberately loses are poles apart.

[SENsei]

SRR, And why in hell have you quoted me three times for the same thing?

And another assumption you have made....since when did I tell you I was in the media?

[SENsei]

Why do you keep quoting the same post?

Maybe for once you could try and think of a considered response rather than firing off and then adding your "yeah, but" re-quotings of the same post?

Just a thought?

Yeah, but....it makes me feel loved with all my media mateys!!

[saintsRrising]

And another assumption you have made....since when did I tell you I was in the media?

If you are not in the media I apologise.

[SENsei]

Didn't say I was, didn't say I wasn't.

Was making the point though how assumptions can lead you down the path of credibility, or lack thereof.

[saintspremiers]

In short, GT was a success as a coach: especially in his first four full seasons. His ultimate failure was to take his team to the finals in three successive seasons.

No, his ultimate failure was not delivering us a Flag.

Not sure how you define "success" in coaching, but I rate them according to winning Premierships in September (or October if you count 1990).

3 finals campaigns in a Row with jack-shyte to show for.

No flags won in that time, so I wouldn't consider it to be successful.......

St Kilda has only had one successful coach in its entire history.

I have very faith that Ross Lyon will be the man who delivers us Flag number 2.

spot on, and isn't it a shame some people on here can't see the bleetingly obvious???

I really feel sorry for some of them.

GT in his early part was a good coach for us, but failed in the ultimate objective. 2004 was a bizarre year - how could a coach allow a team to fall away so badly after such a great start? Really good coaches, together with a proper footy dept, fitness management expertise etc etc wouldn't have allowed this to happen. We would've at worst made the GF in 2004.

[rodgerfox]

In short, GT was a success as a coach: especially in his first four full seasons. His ultimate failure was to take his team to the finals in three successive seasons.

No, his ultimate failure was not delivering us a Flag.

Not sure how you define "success" in coaching, but I rate them according to winning Premierships in September (or October if you count 1990).

3 finals campaigns in a Row with jack-shyte to show for.

No flags won in that time, so I wouldn't consider it to be successful.......

St Kilda has only had one successful coach in its entire history.

I have very faith that Ross Lyon will be the man who delivers us Flag number 2.

spot on, and isn't it a shame some people on here can't see the bleetingly obvious???

I really feel sorry for some of them.

GT in his early part was a good coach for us, but failed in the ultimate objective. 2004 was a bizarre year - how could a coach allow a team to fall away so badly after such a great start? Really good coaches, together with a proper footy dept, fitness management expertise etc etc wouldn't have allowed this to happen. We would've at worst made the GF in 2004.

He's gone. Move on.

[saintsRrising]

Didn't say I was, didn't say I wasn't.

Was making the point though how assumptions can lead you down the path of credibility, or lack thereof.

I was acting off something I had read in the past...possibly by yourself....maybe my assumption was wrong, maybe not???

[SENsei]

Maybe.

[Spinner]

By the looks on this thread, the Thomometer is extremely high...with no sign of lowering.

[plugger66]

Going around in circles. Thread locked.

[saintsRrising]

He coaches for the long to medium term, and often that means missing out on the 4 points on a given day.

Often? So how many games did that equate to that we missed out on the 4 points in?

And since you posted this on April 10...perhaps the Roos game was one such???? Or is that just a co-incidence???

Now I had only put the Roos game down to GT not coaching to win when he knew a technique to win (ie flooding which he acknowleged) but ommitted to do so because he wanted to teach the team final type football.

You have stated that we often missed out on the 4 points...which games and how many?

Also why is losing game by failing to flood....any different from losing games often in the manner you describe?

He regularly gives players tasks and rarely helps them out by moving them if they are getting beaten - he leaves them there to deal with it, and to learn from it.

....and this resulted in the often losing of 4 points that you posted on????

[rodgerfox]

I can't believe you're persisting with this.

You lied. And you're wrong aswell.

Just admit it. No amount of you twisting words and backtracking will change that.

[saintsRrising]

I can't believe you're persisting with this.

You lied. And you're wrong aswell.

Just admit it. No amount of you twisting words and backtracking will change that.

No..I have provided material to back up what I said.


whereas you are obviously trying now to back track furously from what you said.


So how many games is often Rodge? how many lots of 4 points did GT blow by your April 10 theory?

[rodgerfox]

I can't believe you're persisting with this.

You lied. And you're wrong aswell.

Just admit it. No amount of you twisting words and backtracking will change that.

No..I have provided material to back up what I said.


whereas you are obviously trying now to back track furously from what you said.


So how many games is often Rodge? how many lots of 4 points did GT blow by your April 10 theory?

HAHAHAAhahahahaah!!

And people wonder why I call you a wanker.

Give up whilst you are well, well behind.

[saintsRrising]

I always know when you have lost the discussion Rodge...

At that time you typically:

*dodge any questions. Hence why many call you "dodgerfox"
*resort to various name calling from "liar" to "wanker"

[SENsei]

Going around in circles. Thread locked.

Nice try!

[rodgerfox]

I always know when you have lost the discussion Rodge...

At that time you typically:

*dodge any questions. Hence why many call you "dodgerfox"
*resort to various name calling from "liar" to "wanker"

Lost a discussion????!!!

HAAAA!!

You were asked by poster to back up a lie you wrote.

You couldn't. You lied and were called on it.

How have I lost any discussion??

Funny stuff.

[mad saint guy]

Now GT had to manage players fitness......took resposnibity for it, demaded it in fact.....and could not do it.

You don't think that any of the fitness managers we had at the club over his time did anything at all? Yes, we neglected the area and should have put more money and effort into getting our players fit, but GT never considered himself a fitness manager.

.....Remember GT is the only AFL coach that I have ever heard who admitted that he deliberately lost a H&A game. More astounding was that he thought that it was a good thing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

St Kilda defeated by North Melbourne
Round 3, Telstra Dome,
Saturday, 9th April 2005,

Source: GT's own lips post the kangaroos game....

GT being asked post game why he did not flood stated that finals (or it may have been Premiership) teams did not do that. He further went on to acknowledge that if the Saints had of flooded that the Saints could have won. He chose not to flood.

So is any team who bloods a youngster (when there is an experienced player missing out) deliberately losing the game? Did Stan Alves deliberately lose the '97 GF by leaving Shanahan on Jarman? Alves did admit that he probably should have put another player on him after the game, so he must have tanked.

That is a ridiculous conclusion to jump to over absolutely nothing.

That was the precise moment that I lost the faith in GT.

I remember your signature late in 2006 went along the lines of "We have adopted a modern game plan and have maximised our chances of success." Sounds like you were pretty happy with our coaching at that point.

[joffaboy]

I really think you are on the wrong track SrR with this line about Thomas deliberately losing a game and then saying they were following a process.

I mean I heard the St.Kilda captain say the exact same thing after the NAB Cup final.

So in effect Ross Lyon is as guilty as GT in attempting to throw games, because they were using the same philosophy.

You can say a lot of things about Grant Thomas, but to suggest he deliberately lost a game is to take his meaning totally out of context.

An argument can be, and has been made, that this philosophy and coaching tactic was wrong, and in the end it cost Thomas his job (if his style had of been successful - ie no flooding, the board would not have been able to sack him).

However to say the philosophy and style and gameplan was designed to deliberately lose a game,is, well, fanciful, in my eyes.