As bad a decision as Luke Ball GF !

[perfectionist]

Fancy having to submit paperwork to make a sub during a football game...and then not being able to reverse that decision, or its timing! Is that for real? What a completely unecessary, beaurecratic and intrusive move by the AFL into a club's strategy if it is.

If we must have a sub at all, why not just make it simple: One guy comes off and puts on a red vest while his teammate takes off the green and runs onto the ground...when the coach wants him to...after x number of changes of mind etc.

Well said. I had no idea that subbing was any different to interchange, except that a green vest was taken off and a red vest was put on. Perhaps this stupid incident might wake up the "paperwork" freaks that this is stupidity. For instance, what happens if a player had been severely injured in those crucial two minutes. You still have to sub a fit player and not the injured player? That would work well in a GF.

[PJ]

Not a good call taking Wilkes off he was the only one taking marks up forward and kicking relatively straight....the sub should have come from somewhere else. Having said that I felt it was a gutsy final term - workman like.

[Wrote for Luck]

pretty ordinary night from Milne,would have taken him off myself! hilariously his 500th goal, for a number of seconds, was actually a point. the goal umpire signalled it!

definitely bad decision to take Wilkes off who was taking marks and kicking goals. wattershame. but think the initial game plan was wrong anyway. you've got to win those games mongrel styley. like what we eventually went too, and beat them at their own game.

re Wilkes reckon Watters got caught out with a white lie here (which is what is irking me). and 'paperwork' I presume is a substitute card or something?

[saintbrat]

interestingly Melbourne made a similair sub- Dunn Kicks a goal and red vested.

[OneEyedSainter77]

OKay, I waqnt someone from the media to get off their arse and address this issue because like so many, I belive submitting "paperwork" to make a substitution is ridiculous.

I want someone to interview our interchange steward, Scott Watters, Beau Wilkes and perhaps a few other people and get to the bottom of it because its something I have always taken for granted (how the substitutions work) and something I all of a sudden would like to know a lot more about.

[Solar]

OKay, I waqnt someone from the media to get off their arse and address this issue because like so many, I belive submitting "paperwork" to make a substitution is ridiculous.

I want someone to interview our interchange steward, Scott Watters, Beau Wilkes and perhaps a few other people and get to the bottom of it because its something I have always taken for granted (how the substitutions work) and something I all of a sudden would like to know a lot more about.

this, what a stupid comp we have

[markp]

So what happens if this 'paperwork' is filled out and submitted (in triplicate, no doubt), the players are yet to be subbed on/off, and someone gets injured?

Surely it's not that farcical?

[magnifisaint]

Both Anderson and Geishen need to go now!

These idiots are screwing the game!!!!

[The Fireman]

what a load of tripe.
The boys came in thinking it was a walk over, but in shitty conditions and against an opponent who have been bagged for weeks and were always going to come out swinging, we were shown up.
All our top players struggled , subbing wilkes is stuff all in the scheme of things, the whole side needs a mental refresh.

[8856brother]

what a load of tripe.
The boys came in thinking it was a walk over, but in shitty conditions and against an opponent who have been bagged for weeks and were always going to come out swinging, we were shown up.
All our top players struggled , subbing wilkes is stuff all in the scheme of things, the whole side needs a mental refresh.

Thought Dal and Lenny were pretty good in tough conditions. Not sure ALL our top players struggled.

[The Fireman]

what a load of tripe.
The boys came in thinking it was a walk over, but in shitty conditions and against an opponent who have been bagged for weeks and were always going to come out swinging, we were shown up.
All our top players struggled , subbing wilkes is stuff all in the scheme of things, the whole side needs a mental refresh.

Thought Dal and Lenny were pretty good in tough conditions. Not sure ALL our top players struggled.

I'll give you Dal.

[8856brother]

what a load of tripe.
The boys came in thinking it was a walk over, but in shitty conditions and against an opponent who have been bagged for weeks and were always going to come out swinging, we were shown up.
All our top players struggled , subbing wilkes is stuff all in the scheme of things, the whole side needs a mental refresh.

Thought Dal and Lenny were pretty good in tough conditions. Not sure ALL our top players struggled.

I'll give you Dal.

You think Lenny struggled?

[Quixote]

Wow-wee!

Imagine if we had LOST!!!

[The Fireman]

You think Lenny struggled?

I think you get the gist of what I was saying, if not , oh well.

[The Fireman]

Wow-wee!

Imagine if we had LOST!!!

exactly.

[matrix]

Oh for goodness sake guys.

It was actually the perfect decision.

The last quarter was always going to be full of stoppages, holding on for dear life, contested footy....Polo was just what was needed.

Did you honestly think it was going to pretty?

Well said, the usual footy experts showing their usual football knowledge.

Polo was very good in close and at the contests all through the last quarter.

tell me you armchair hero's how many points did Melbourne score in the last quarter?

What was that?

Sorry cant hear you.

How many was it again?

yes well said
have no prob with polo coming on...but not for a guy who had kicked 3.1, looked the most damaging up forward, who had numerous second efforts in the forward 50
pre planned or not
change the plan
still baffled why you would take him off
wasnt injuried (didnt seem to be)
seemed to be moving ok
didnt seem blown out

but im sitting on a couch falling asleep and having to watch the second half the next morning
the coach is 40 meters away from the play

[8856brother]

You think Lenny struggled?

I think you get the gist of what I was saying, if not , oh well.

No I don't get the gist. You stated "All our top players struggled". I disagree, and asked a simple question. I can only assume by your answers that you think Lenny strugged.

[Richter]

9 touches eh....

All would have been silk too..... So he came on fresh half way through the third, when there were a lot of tired bodies and got 9 touches in 45 minutes....

There only real score came from a Polo error when he failed to clear or kill the ball on the boundary and Bartrem kicked a nice goal.

Two mistakes were made

1 - making a run with GOP the sub
2 - subbing off the most likely looking key fwd on the ground, Wilkes presence was critical

Would have subbed off
Goddard, cripps, Gilbert, Blake or Gram..... For ledger, Siposs, Newnes or Ross..... Who should be the subs

Poor Call

Has coached poorly last two games

Don't agree Marto. On a wet night it seems to me a smart move to have a hard bodied experienced contested ball player as the sub. The move was made for structural reasons. I agree in retrospect that another player could have been taken off. But it is hard to argue it was poor matchday coaching when the opposition fail to score in the final term.

[matrix]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/ ... fault.aspx

Watters admits sub blunder

SCOTT Watters says St Kilda tried to reverse the decision to substitute Beau Wilkes after he entered a purple patch in Saturday night's 18-point win over Melbourne but couldn't retract the paperwork.

Wilkes kicked his third goal at the 14-minute mark of the third quarter, and just over a minute later, took a big leap over Jared Rivers and was paid a mark.

He went back and took the set shot but managed only a point. He was subbed off moments later.

Watters said the Saints had filed the paperwork to replace the former West Coast utility - who was appearing in his first AFL game since round 14, 2010 - before that two-minute period.

"We made the decision to get him off [because] we thought we needed to go a little bit smaller," Watters said.

"It was Beau's first hit-out back at this level too so that's pretty taxing.

"He then takes a mark 55m out … slots a great goal. We tried to reverse the call at that point.

"Unfortunately the paperwork had gone in and it was one of those ones that once the call had been made … we couldn't reverse it at that point."



but feel free to stick it into all the arm chair experts

[gringo]

Polo was a great sub in weather that could go bad at any point, he is a true utility and counteracted the going tall strategy. He went hard and even when not in the play was playing hard off the ball. On Wilkes he was also really good chasing, shepherding and decoy leading away from Roo and Stanley. Very impressed.

[The Fireman]

You think Lenny struggled?

I think you get the gist of what I was saying, if not , oh well.

No I don't get the gist. You stated "All our top players struggled". I disagree, and asked a simple question. I can only assume by your answers that you think Lenny strugged.

If I had said the majority? pedantic. The gist involves the entire post which you didn't get, thats ok I'm sure most did.

[stkildathunda]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/ ... fault.aspx

AFL OPERATIONS manager Adrian Anderson says clubs can alter the paperwork required to activate their substitute, even after forms have been lodged.

St Kilda coach Scott Watters admitted he made a mistake when subbing in-form forward Beau Wilkes out of the game on Saturday night.

To Watters' knowledge, once the paperwork was handed to the AFL official on interchange duties the decision to sub a certain player out of the game could not be reversed.

But Anderson revealed that was not the case and new paperwork could be lodged even if the other forms had been locked away.

"You can change your substitute even after the paperwork has been lodged and that has happened on quite a few occasions," he told 3AW on Sunday.

[Teflon]

Whats concerning me is that Wilkes is our best marking option............WTF is Riewoldts go? does not look like taking a mark ........against a Melb side minus a key back...........gonna be up against it with Hawks next week on that effort.

Wilkes took 4 marks, Stanley 6, 4 of which were in the first Q when the game was ripe for tall forwards. Fact is Teffers, Rooey is not the Elite player he used to be. And he isn't about to turn back in to one. But as long as the forwards as a unit operate then I for one care little.

For mine, the big question mark is over Milne. I thought he had a pig of a game today. Hit a post that he would previously have slotted in the first 5 mins, selfish in the 3rd when had Stanley and Rooey in support, and was dreadful in the last. I would drop him for Siposs now, though I doubt that Watters will do this, but when Schneider comes back then for mine he certainly is the first small attacking player off the rank.

Agree re Milne big time - I thought if I was honest he was average and totally agree regarding selfish.......am starting t see that creep back into his game....Lyon stamped that out.....He needs to forget the impossible at times and play his role BUT he just drifted out of the game for so long, sagged off his opponent late trying to get cheap easy kicks out the back. IF Saad was doing something in two's Milne would be close to a spell for me.

BTW Wilkes had 53% TOG
Stanley 87%

I still think Wilkes looked far more dangerous (Stanley was good too) and his kicking for goal was refreshing.

[The Fireman]

a bit rough on Milne, poor conditions and I don't think he is being that greedy. If he was dropped i'm sure the club rooms would be burnt down atm.

[Quixote]

FWIW, I thought Polo was a good sub. Yes, his kicking is not flash but he's a utility and these days a genuine hard-nosed player. I think people over look that with him and also the value of that to a side. He's a tough nasty little cookie!