Coaches Votes Round 9 v Kitty Cats

[perfectionist]

10 Paddy Ryder (STK)
5 Zach Tuohy (GEEL)
5 Brad Crouch (STK)
4 Jade Gresham (STK)
3 Jack Sinclair (STK)
2 Zak Jones (STK)
1 Isaac Smith (GEEL)

[Sainter_Dad]

Easy one this week

Ratts:
5 Ryder
4 Gresham
3 Sinclair
2 Crouch
1 Tuohy

Scott:
5 Ryder
4 Tuohy
3 Crouch
2 Jones
1 Smith

[Scollop]

Lazy votes from Scott…if it is actually the senior coach who gave the votes

Sinclair and Gresham had a much greater impact on the game than Zak Jones. DMac was still running and still putting his head over the footy until the dying seconds…Seb Ross had a massive 3rd quarter.

Zak kicked a great goal to spark us in that 3rd quarter, but you could equally say it was a great bit of ruck work from Marshall that set it up.

[WellardSaint]

I'd have Ross in the top 3.
I wouldn't have Jones in at all.

[bangaulegend]

Interesting how people see the game differently & back men hardly ever get a coaches vote . IMO Crouch was pivotal especially in the first half when we were struggling & Wilkie was bloody good all day . I thought Jones was handy but I didn't give him a vote on the Saintsational voting but as I said everyone see's it differently

[WellardSaint]

I think that Jones goal which started our run, has inflated his value in coaches' eyes.

Ross was awesome for the whole game and deserves to be top 3.
Jones was ok, but not voteworthy.

[Scollop]

I think that Jones goal which started our run, has inflated his value in coaches' eyes.

Ross was awesome for the whole game and deserves to be top 3.
Jones was ok, but not voteworthy.

Fancy Scott not giving any votes to Jack Sinclair. What game was the cockhead watching?

I’ll tell what happened…

They probably just thought they’d play ‘their’ way and ‘their’ strengths would be enough to overcome us.

Geelong are fkn arrogant pricks and they pencilled in Round 9 as a win.

How much work do you reckon they put into their analysis of our strengths? How much time do you reckon Scott and his strategy coaches thought about Gresham and Sinclair?

Obviously zero if they didn’t even notice them on the park on Saturday

[ace]

Easy one this week

Ratts:
5 Ryder
4 Gresham
3 Sinclair
2 Crouch
1 Tuohy

Scott:
5 Ryder
4 Tuohy
3 Crouch
2 Jones
1 Smith

Ryder 5 + 5
Smith 1 + 0
Jones 2 + 0

1, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4 remaining
The two 4s must go to two of Tuohy, Crouch and Gresham but to have the 2 players on 5, one must be 4 +1 and the other 3 + 2 as the other 1 is already gone
That means Gresham 4 + 0
and Sinclair 3 + 0

So
Ryder 5 + 5
Crouch & Tuohy one on 4 +1, and the other 3 + 2
Gresham 4 + 0
Sinclair 3 + 0
Jones 2 + 0
Smith 1 + 0

Chris Scott is such a jerk he obviously will have given maximum to his team so with Ratten's votes first
Ryder 5 + 5
Touhy 1 + 4
Crouch 3 + 2
Gresham 4 + 0
Sinclair 0 + 3
Jones 2 + 0
Smith 0 + 1

So I think
Ratten gave
Ryder 5
Gresham 4
Crouch 3
Jones 2
Touhy 1

& Scott gave 1
Ryder 5
Touhy 4
Sinclair 3
Crouch 2
Smith 1

[Otiman]

Thanks for the Coaches Vote Sudoku, ace!

[Scollop]

So I think
Ratten gave
Ryder 5
Gresham 4
Crouch 3
Jones 2
Touhy 1

& Scott gave 1
Ryder 5
Touhy 4
Sinclair 3
Crouch 2
Smith 1

So you reckon Ratten (or whoever does the votes for this award) had perhaps confused Zac Jones with Jack Sinclair

I can understand how that can happen…one is bald and the other has a stand out mullet