Ross Lyon could appease the masses by...

[skeptic]

Telling us what the deal with Andrew McQualter is.

I don't mean to bash the kid anymore than what has already been stated on this forum but I think a large part of the frustration directed at the Saints coaching department this off season comes from people's difficulty in understanding the way he's been used.

I think it's fair to say that in 2009, despite a disappointing grandfinal, he established himself in the starting 22. He played as a defensive midfielder that kicked at least a goal most games and a few bags of 2s and 3s (I think).
He was capable of getting his own ball and on occassion finding space which meant that he would punish opponents that did not pay him respect. He did have a few games of around 20 odd possessions.

This year, my impression of Andrew is that he's averaged 10-12 possessions a game, rarely kicked goals, generally his opponents have hurt us a bit more, disposal has been poor, has generally been ineffective in games.
His most redeeming feature has been that in a few games, his tackle count has been high.

Despite what IMO has been a lacklustre performance, if I'm not mistaken he was only dropped once this year.

The main reasons given for his retention in the team (mostly from fans) are:

* He has a role as a pressuring/defensive forward (or something) and he's completing

* Nobody has pressed for selection in the 2s to take his place and we should not reward mediocre reserve performances

From my own perspective, these are the things that have really bothered me:

Mediocre performance
I don't know what his role in the team is/was and it has frustrated me watching us slug out close games, lose close games or big games with a passenger in the team.
A forward that doesn't kick goals, or get the ball but simply tackles.


Selection policy
Dropping Andrew McQualter would have forced him to have to worrk harder to get his spot back. It also would have helped him build his confidence playing at a lower level. In the finals, he was almost afraid to kick it long and often passed it off to someone else to dispose of the ball for him.

Robbing opportunities from other players
Even if players like Steven, Geary, Armitage, Miles etc weren't tearing it up at Sandy, I think we would have benefited from giving them an opportunity and challenging them to take it.
James Gwilt certainly isn't known as a player that consistently tore up the VFL when he played there but getting games into him really helped his development

David Armitage
Seemed to perform better in the games he did play then Mini yet was dropped with very low tolerance. His fitness has been questioned for a longtime, IMO a spot on a HFF may have suited him this year.
Him in the team ahead of Mini in GF1 could have gotten us over the line.

Robert Eddy
IMO the most maligned young player in football. He tackled really really well too and had a few good games this year. He could actually get his hands on the ball. I prefer his poor disposal to Andrew no disposal.
I cannot for the life of me fathom why anyone could one Andrew on the list ahead of Robert. What quality does Andrew have that makes him a better prospect?

Luke Miles
Had pace, good defensive skills and was ok by foot. IMO was worth a go trying him on a HFF as a medium defensive forward. Considering we got nothing from Andrew, what would have been the lost?

Steven, Heyne, Smith, Simpkin and Geary
Even if they don't fill the same role, they would have contributed more on the ground and the coaches would have been a bit more creative with the line up which would have made us more unpredictable.

I just don't get it.

What was role and why the consistent faith in him?

What do other people think?

[falka]

I think the modern game of high structure and strategy makes it difficult for the supporter in the crowd. Understanding what the coach wants and what we want as spectators is often quite different.

I remember watching a game a few years back and watching Gwilt up forward and thought he played a pretty nothing game. However I later heard that the club thought he was top 5 on the night as he drew Lake from WB out of his area and created opportunity.

The point being, what you see on stats sheet aint always a clear picture.

Moving on to McQualter and a few others from this year, statistically he was down in key areas. But how do we know that was his fault?

I think there were 2 issues at play. One, was the fact we lost 2009 GF in a pretty painful way and I think Ross kept faith that the same guys would lift in September and get us home, even though during H+A it looked unlikely. He stuck by them and gee it nearly worked didn't it.

The other thing to consider in all of this is the structure and its role in making players look good and bad. Every Saint supporter would admt that our pressure and intensity was way off compared to 2009. Look at tackling statistics and clearances, hard ball stats etc as evidence. Now if you are playing structure football and 17 others on the field you are playing with are off 10%, then you will not get the statistics that you would if everyone is on song.

Example. Player X does not push up hard to stand mark, which allows defender time to switch up a target. That target gets free as player y was not pushing hard into his zonal space. Player z (say McQualter) is then ineffective in his space as the others were out of position. The whole thing breaks down. Now if player x and y and faatical, in creates a panic kick to where player z knows the ball will come. Its a chain reaction.

Now is this what happened with McQualter this year, I don't know, but just a theory I have from 2010. We were down 10% which means some players look a lot worse and conversely in 2009 we were so intense it made players look better.

We need to get back to the fanatical frontal pressure of 2009 that kept Collingwood to 40 points and kept sides to around 40 inside 50's. But we will need everyone playing their role to make everyone look better.

Bring on 2011

[Teflon]

I too am puzzled by McQualter I must say - nothing against the bloke his 09 was good but if you were gonna flick Eddy in a list clogger clean out....surely McQualter too fits that category Im afraid...

[saintsRrising]

What was role ?

Well that much is easy. It was the same as in 2009.

His total disposals were only down a little.

However there were two big issues in 2010.

1/ Mini's own form slipped and particularly in his offensive game. In 2009 he was the most reliable and accurate kick on goal. In 2010 he got the yips.

2/ While Mini's role was the same, the game changed around him. Our forward line was often drawn out and Mini's lack of pace meant that he simply could just not get into position often enough.

So while he still won ball, it was not in as a dangerous position, or finished off as well.

[Con Gorozidis]

its a good post. i think the coach tends to place ideology (his strong self image as a vanilla working class coach who grew up tough from the wrong side of the tracks) over actual facts.

sometimes u just have to ask yourself straight facts. is this bloke getting a kick? is he hurting the opposition at all? is he a chance to score a goal?

so yes factually u are correct. people will probably malign ur post with flowery ideology and talk of roles and all sorts of high falutin ideas dressed down as vanilla working class ideas.

but i just want facts. facts gradgrind.

and facts are - he played shite footy. so did eddy. fact is armo is a better player then both of them despite his so called theoretic short falls.

all this talk of structure is way over rated by a football community desperate to be taken seriously. when its in your area u have to win it or ur a defender stop ur opponent winning it. then if u can create attack or better score after a contest even better. sure u have to have belief. and ross created a philosophy players could believe in a good thing. to an extent. but he started believing his own bs too much. its great to have a philosophy. but dont kid urself the philosophy is something more than it is and start placing philosophy ahead of facts when they smack u in the face.
its like religious/creationist fanaticsm. hey what about the fossil record guys?


mini wasnt winning his own ball or stopping the opposition or creating or scoring.

nick maxwell had a picnic and i can guarantee he wasnt worried about the "theoretical structures and roles" played by saints fwds. he was thinking - see ball . read it. win it. kick back to my fwds. simple boys.

and im not surprised our assistants all left. they were probably pointing out glaring facts all year and being told to shut up - forget facts - i dont want to hear facts - i just want to talk about the philisophical system!

[plugger66]

RL doesnt have to tell us anything. Do we really think the coach should put out a letter to the public explaining players roles. Are people serious? Dont like his coaching then it is easily fixed. Vote the current board out and get a new one that will appoint a new coach or if that is to hard stop following them otherwise let our coach coach and supporters support.

[skeptic]

RL doesnt have to tell us anything. Do we really think the coach should put out a letter to the public explaining players roles. Are people serious? Dont like his coaching then it is easily fixed. Vote the current board out and get a new one that will appoint a new coach or if that is to hard stop following them otherwise let our coach coach and supporters support.

Are you serious plugger?

Do you really think the point of this post is to ask RL to post SS or call a media conference to answer the question.

I don't want to get side tracked off this post but all I'm saying is that externally there's a little bit of pressure on RL's ability as coach. Assistants have left, questions are raised RE list management and his coaching style is being questioned too.

1 reason for that is that there are certain decision are difficult to understand. I'm just trying to start a discussion RE an issue that has really bugged me.
Please mate, no cloak and dagger stuff

[Sainterman]

Certainly Mini was down but I think it is a little much to expect RL to outline why it was he kept the faith in him, and I think he played more of a role than some of us might notice.

In terms of RL I know for a fact that the club are thrilled with him. Gee, had THAT ball bounced differently in GF1 we would be calling him the messiah! I think that losing Lovett did upset his plans early on in the year and it forced some change to his original plans for 2010.

I expect today we will draft some quicker players, RL knows all too well we need to inject pace...hence Peake and Lovett last year. Unfortunately he did not get what he wanted.

I understand people being a little disillusioned with minis selection but I think RL should be somewhat exempt from criticism with the job he has done. We have 6 or 7 top liners but our list compared with others is not best going around and RL has done well with what he has at his disposal.

Mini obviously does a lot around the club, and perhaps some of his role is on field leadership, correct me if I am wrong but he was in our 2010 leadership group wasn't he? It takes many types to make up afooty club and I think RL has been trying to use mini in a specific way...that may change next year and I think he deserves another shot to prove himself.

[Dr Spaceman]

Certainly Mini was down but I think it is a little much to expect RL to outline why it was he kept the faith in him, and I think he played more of a role than some of us might notice.

In terms of RL I know for a fact that the club are thrilled with him. Gee, had THAT ball bounced differently in GF1 we would be calling him the messiah! I think that losing Lovett did upset his plans early on in the year and it forced some change to his original plans for 2010.

I expect today we will draft some quicker players, RL knows all too well we need to inject pace...hence Peake and Lovett last year. Unfortunately he did not get what he wanted.

I understand people being a little disillusioned with minis selection but I think RL should be somewhat exempt from criticism with the job he has done. We have 6 or 7 top liners but our list compared with others is not best going around and RL has done well with what he has at his disposal.

Mini obviously does a lot around the club, and perhaps some of his role is on field leadership, correct me if I am wrong but he was in our 2010 leadership group wasn't he? It takes many types to make up afooty club and I think RL has been trying to use mini in a specific way...that may change next year and I think he deserves another shot to prove himself.

Personally I'm not a real big fan of Mini and I'm hoping he'll be forced out of the 22 in 2011 by someone else really putting up their hand.

Having said that, your post is spot on Sainterman (insert emoticon with big thumbs up - oops, there isn't one )

[Sainterman]

Certainly Mini was down but I think it is a little much to expect RL to outline why it was he kept the faith in him, and I think he played more of a role than some of us might notice.

In terms of RL I know for a fact that the club are thrilled with him. Gee, had THAT ball bounced differently in GF1 we would be calling him the messiah! I think that losing Lovett did upset his plans early on in the year and it forced some change to his original plans for 2010.

I expect today we will draft some quicker players, RL knows all too well we need to inject pace...hence Peake and Lovett last year. Unfortunately he did not get what he wanted.

I understand people being a little disillusioned with minis selection but I think RL should be somewhat exempt from criticism with the job he has done. We have 6 or 7 top liners but our list compared with others is not best going around and RL has done well with what he has at his disposal.

Mini obviously does a lot around the club, and perhaps some of his role is on field leadership, correct me if I am wrong but he was in our 2010 leadership group wasn't he? It takes many types to make up afooty club and I think RL has been trying to use mini in a specific way...that may change next year and I think he deserves another shot to prove himself.

Personally I'm not a real big fan of Mini and I'm hoping he'll be forced out of the 22 in 2011 by someone else really putting up their hand.

Having said that, your post is spot on Sainterman (insert emoticon with big thumbs up - oops, there isn't one )

Thanks Leo!

Oh, and I am not the biggest fan either, but I certainly didn't mind him in 2009 when it was all going well.

I wonder whether those terrible misses in the 09 GF had some negative effect on his overall confidence. I am sure there would be a few carrying around some "what ifs".

[DWOODROW]

I said Mini was ordinary all year and was told I was an idiot because he was playing an important part in the teams structure.

Personally I think Steven would be a better inclusion than Mini is and even then I don't think Steven has done too much yet to warrant automatic selection.

ALL team memebrs need to step up next year and have a fair crack. The window is closing and those that arn't performing regardless of what the role, structure or who they are should be made accountable. Having one bad game shouldn't mean you are automatically dropped. A number of games in succesion that are bad should.

I hope this clears a few things up.

[skeptic]

I wonder whether those terrible misses in the 09 GF had some negative effect on his overall confidence. I am sure there would be a few carrying around some "what ifs".

I've often wondered that myself

He seemed less inclind to have a shot at goal this season as opposed to 09

[Dr Spaceman]

I said Mini was ordinary all year and was told I was an idiot because he was playing an important part in the teams structure.

Personally I think Steven would be a better inclusion than Mini is and even then I don't think Steven has done too much yet to warrant automatic selection.

ALL team memebrs need to step up next year and have a fair crack. The window is closing and those that arn't performing regardless of what the role, structure or who they are should be made accountable. Having one bad game shouldn't mean you are automatically dropped. A number of games in succesion that are bad should.

I hope this clears a few things up.

I hear ya brother

[Dr Spaceman]

I hope this clears a few things up.

I hear ya brother

On a more serious note, I know you have been, and will continue to be, accused of bias but I do appreciate where you're coming from.

[spert]

Obviously a lot of players are doing the roles that RL requires, and the proof of that is that we have appeared in GFs for two consecutive years, while other clubs haven't (apart from Geelong and Collingwood). It could be that McQ had an off year on 2010 after a very good 2009. A lot of young players can go through that. I think he will come back better next year. Probably RL has done as much with the talent he has, and we need a bit of icing on the cake from recruiting more than anything else.

[Moods]

Yes HUGE question marks over Lyons' coaching ability I agree. Taken us to the last 2 grand finals and the previous years prelim - all in 4 years of coaching.

YOU can't be serious Skeptic rather than plugger66. There are always questions that us as supporters wonder about, but I don't reckon Lyon needs to appease the masses on anything.

The only thing I wonder about is the delisting of Miles. I also wonder about why supporters are soo concerned about Eddy's delisting. He seems like a terrific young kid who will never amount to anything more than a Sean Dempster equivalent. That's fine, not everyone is destined for superstardom and all teams need their 'role' players.

[Dr Spaceman]

Yes HUGE question marks over Lyons' coaching ability I agree. Taken us to the last 2 grand finals and the previous years prelim - all in 4 years of coaching.

YOU can't be serious Skeptic rather than plugger66. There are always questions that us as supporters wonder about, but I don't reckon Lyon needs to appease the masses on anything.

The only thing I wonder about is the delisting of Miles. I also wonder about why supporters are soo concerned about Eddy's delisting. He seems like a terrific young kid who will never amount to anything more than a Sean Dempster equivalent. That's fine, not everyone is destined for superstardom and all teams need their 'role' players.

A lot of criticism that’s levelled at Lyon centres around his apparent inflexibility, his apparent love of certain players, his apparent defensive approach etc etc

In one swift move, the delisting of Eddy, he has acted to destroy all of that mythology.

Yeah, no one saw it coming and a lot of supporters like Eddy.

But RL’s message is loud and clear and should please a lot of those supporters who are looking for a bit of change, and hopefully, a bit of spark.

[skeptic]

Yes HUGE question marks over Lyons' coaching ability I agree. Taken us to the last 2 grand finals and the previous years prelim - all in 4 years of coaching.

YOU can't be serious Skeptic rather than plugger66. There are always questions that us as supporters wonder about, but I don't reckon Lyon needs to appease the masses on anything.

The only thing I wonder about is the delisting of Miles. I also wonder about why supporters are soo concerned about Eddy's delisting. He seems like a terrific young kid who will never amount to anything more than a Sean Dempster equivalent. That's fine, not everyone is destined for superstardom and all teams need their 'role' players.

I never said he NEEDED to appease the masses

And there are people questioning his coaching ability in some capacity.
His list management is being questioned
His style is being questioned as too defensive
Whether or not he's easy to work with has been questioned
Whether or not he plays favorites is being questioned

The view point is forming in some quarters that rather than get the best out of the list, his short comings and stubborness have cost us 2 flags we should have won.

Now i'm not saying he's a bad coach or that I agree with any of the above comments.

I am however saying that his use of Andrew McQualter this season is something that has left me scratching my head. I can't for the life of me figure out why he would have kept a player playing mediocre football in the team all year and left players that would/could contribute more out.

My comment directed at Plugger was simply pointing out that he like you missed the point of the original post (although in Plugger's case he may not have missed it as he's quite a switched on person that likes to use the smoke and mirrows method to start arguments).

That is not that he needs to justify himself but quite frankly I'd have a bit more confidence in him if I could just get my head around the why of the logic with Mini.
To me right now the most logical reason is stubbornance and denial which if correct are really concerning.
Now I doubt that's really the reason he persisted with Mini but I can't see a better reason.

This elusive "Role" that he plays in the team with no effect doesn't cut it for me.

In this forum, my objective was to start a discussion on what other people think. i regret title of the thread as it's been somewhat of a diversion but I think there are at least several other forumites that are miffed

[InkerSaint]

We need to get back to the fanatical frontal pressure of 2009 that kept Collingwood to 40 points and kept sides to around 40 inside 50's. But we will need everyone playing their role to make everyone look better.

Agree with your comments about application, but like you said - the stats don't tell the whole story.

Case in point is Opponent Inside 50's. Yes the Saints slid from 1st last year to 3rd this year, behind Collingwood and Adelaide. Saints still had the lowest points-against in the league - same as last year.

It's about what happens once the ball is inside 50, and I'm not sure there is a common theme there. For instance we got spanked by the Bombers twice (grrr ) despite being up on them 57-43 and 53-45 for inside 50s. They were the only games the Saints lost despite winning the I50 count. Collingwood scored 100 points from 42 entries in round 16, and 68 from 66 in the drawn Grand Final.

What is (or should be) beyond dispute is the Saints have to improve their own inside 50 entries. Quality of entry is at par for the comp but quantity is down (we're 11th).

[SainterK]

I guess you need to highlight the players you believe Mini was keeping out of the side, and then work out if in fact they were available for selection when he was a little down.

I thought Mini improved and was playing good footy mid season, especially around the point of the Geelong game.

However when I noticed him well down on his normal numbers, for example late in the season when he was often amongst our lowest disposals getters, I am not reallly sure any of Armo, Geary or Steven were available at that time were they?

Geary was out with general soreness and only returned Rd 22 didn't he? Steven was battling OP (as has been mentioned on here) and Armo was doing his best to recover from his second knee injury before also returning late against Adelaide.

I do think his lack of preseason and groin operation may have impacted him in regards to his confidence kicking for goal though.

[InkerSaint]

Skeptic, you're after people's opinions, I'll tell you what I think.

I think Lyon is a follower of the Billy Beane method of player management, and he's not alone there - Roos is almost certainly of the same mindset, and others are jumping on board.

It goes like this: What are the qualities and indicators in each phase/aspect of the game that accompany a win in AFL football? X amount of quality A, X amount of quality B, X amount of quality C, and so on. Next is to assemble a team that has the highest aggregate in each category. Some players are good in several aspects and it is easy to see why they get picked every week. Others have glaring holes but otherwise address a collective deficiency. Hence Sam Gilbert with his hospital disposals gets picked because of his awesome marking in defence.

I have no doubt that Andrew McQualter plugs a hole in a team deficiency, and that of the available players he has the best figures in that category. It sure is frustrating watching the other aspects of his game, and I sincerely hope he either improves or gets overtaken... but then, that could be said of half the team.

Say what you like about "philosophies" and "high falutin ideas"... you want facts? Ross Lyon has the best win/loss percentage of any currently employed AFL coach. That's a fact.

What can be aired for dispute is, does he have the formulas right? It's a tough debate to have when you only have a vague idea of what they are.

Robert Eddy
IMO the most maligned young player in football. He tackled really really well too and had a few good games this year. He could actually get his hands on the ball. I prefer his poor disposal to Andrew no disposal.
I cannot for the life of me fathom why anyone could one Andrew on the list ahead of Robert. What quality does Andrew have that makes him a better prospect?

I posted this in the "Eddy Gone?" thread but I'll happily regurgitate it for your benefit:

Champion Data's "pressure" ratings for the drawn GF featured this at the top:

Lenny Hayes: 76.5
Andrew McQualter: 71.1
Scott Pendlebury: 68.8
Leigh Montagna: 67.2

...and this at the bottom:

Robert Eddy: 11.1
Ben Reid: 9.3
Nathan Brown: 9.1
Michael Gardiner: 7.3

[skeptic]

[I posted this in the "Eddy Gone?" thread but I'll happily regurgitate it for your benefit:

Champion Data's "pressure" ratings for the drawn GF featured this at the top:

Lenny Hayes: 76.5
Andrew McQualter: 71.1
Scott Pendlebury: 68.8
Leigh Montagna: 67.2

...and this at the bottom:

Robert Eddy: 11.1
Ben Reid: 9.3
Nathan Brown: 9.1
Michael Gardiner: 7.3

All I'll add to that is that even though I wish he had been dropped for GF1 and GF2 you certainly couldn't drop him based on his performance in the prelim and 1st GF

They were two of his better games. Don't dispute that at all.

Over the course of the season, I just don't think he had much positive impact on the team overall and I think the players that I mentioned in my first post could have contributed more with the same level of persistance over the year

[ace]

This

Nobody has pressed for selection in the 2s to take his place and we should not reward mediocre reserve performances.

[InkerSaint]

Over the course of the season, I just don't think he had much positive impact on the team overall and I think the players that I mentioned in my first post could have contributed more with the same level of persistance over the year

If we were to assume that tackling is one of the main contributions of the (non-tall) forward line, the figures for 2010 are:

David Armitage 5.56
Andrew McQualter 4.16
Jack Steven 3.88
Robert Eddy 3.3
Jarryn Geary 3.26
Nicholas Heyne 3.0
Jack Steven 1.88

Of course there are probably other factors, but let's say for the moment that there weren't, and that this is the criteria for an available spot in the 22.

You'd have to assume that Armo was unavailable due to injury and that Steven was stiff not to get a game over Eddy (OP?). But neither of their inclusions would force McQualter out.

[InkerSaint]

While we're at it, why don't we also assume that Lyon understood there was a deficiency with inside 50 entries that he couldn't fix with the personnel available, and that he wanted as much forward pressure as possible to help keep the ball in there to create opportunities for conversion?

No point having more goalkickers if there is no supply!!!

And finally - to make a point about McQualter's game in GF1 - if he had not played we would not have had a second crack at it at all!