VFL Rd 15 Sandy vs Bullants - ABC tv( vic)- teams/ Reports

saintjake · Post: # 1101874Post **saintjake** » Sat 09 Jul 2011 4:33pm

Solar wrote:
saintjake wrote:On a side note grant thomas' boy Tyson has kicked 4 and has 20 odd touches
would have to get at least rookie listed next year. Would be a good replacement for milne

How many games did GT play?

St Chris · Post: # 1101876Post **St Chris** » Sat 09 Jul 2011 4:38pm

Curren is doing ok for an 18 year old rookie. Is often at the bottom of the pack. He could be a reasonable find.

Simpkin and Walsh have been Sandy's best by a country mile.

GrumpyOne · Post: # 1101877Post **GrumpyOne** » Sat 09 Jul 2011 4:44pm

saintjake wrote:
Solar wrote:
saintjake wrote:On a side note grant thomas' boy Tyson has kicked 4 and has 20 odd touches
would have to get at least rookie listed next year. Would be a good replacement for milne
How many games did GT play?

Don't think enough for father/son.

GrumpyOne · Post: # 1101881Post **GrumpyOne** » Sat 09 Jul 2011 4:50pm

Walsh has got to get a run soon.... stood at at VFL level. Not many others did.

sainterinsydney · Sat 09 Jul 2011 4:55pm

Tommy is the only Sandy player I've been wanting in the team--except maybe Johnson. Get this guy in the team, Lyon!

defacto · Post: # 1101889Post **defacto** » Sat 09 Jul 2011 5:07pm

it worries me that we have a lost generation of draftees (our first year players look good when theyre not injured).

johnson, walsh, simpkin, geary are the only ones you'd back in to stay.

winmar, stanley, lynch, smith, archer show glimpses

beyond that its frustrating that the following players look like to be delisted either at the end of the year or later on
- heyne
- cahill

we need to make a call on the following players who have been in the system for sometime:
- mcqualter
- eddy

atleast the following players have stepped up:
- steven
- armitage

borderbarry · Sat 09 Jul 2011 5:10pm

What number was Curran, 19?
Very disappointing effort by Sandringham.

borderbarry · Sat 09 Jul 2011 5:21pm

Another thing, why were none of the three emergencies out there?

ausfatcat · Post: # 1101896Post **ausfatcat** » Sat 09 Jul 2011 5:33pm

borderbarry wrote:Another thing, why were none of the three emergencies out there?

because they travelled to adelaide as emergencies

InkerSaint · Sat 09 Jul 2011 5:37pm

defacto wrote:it worries me that we have a lost generation of draftees (our first year players look good when theyre not injured).

Disappointing result, not least for the effort displayed.

It's the class of '08 that looks doubtful: Stanley, Heyne, Smith, Cahill.

But with a shallow draft being reported, and the likely retirements of Gardiner, Baker and Blake, also a player short with Gaertner quitting after the cut-off, I wonder if the cleanout will be rather less than some are anticipating.

atleast the following players have stepped up:
- steven
- armitage

- McEvoy
- Lynch.

saintjake · Post: # 1101898Post **saintjake** » Sat 09 Jul 2011 5:38pm

ausfatcat wrote:
borderbarry wrote:Another thing, why were none of the three emergencies out there?

because they travelled to adelaide as emergencies

Siposs was reported to be at the ground but not playing

InkerSaint · Sat 09 Jul 2011 5:41pm

saintjake wrote:
ausfatcat wrote:
borderbarry wrote:Another thing, why were none of the three emergencies out there?

because they travelled to adelaide as emergencies
Siposs was reported to be at the ground but not playing

They said only two emergencies would travel. I wouldn't read anything into it.

http://www.saints.com.au/news/newsartic ... fault.aspx

matrix · Post: # 1101902Post **matrix** » Sat 09 Jul 2011 5:46pm

thanks for reports guys

Jacks Back · Sat 09 Jul 2011 6:15pm

InkerSaint wrote:
saintjake wrote:
ausfatcat wrote:
borderbarry wrote:Another thing, why were none of the three emergencies out there?

because they travelled to adelaide as emergencies
Siposs was reported to be at the ground but not playing
They said only two emergencies would travel. I wouldn't read anything into it.

http://www.saints.com.au/news/newsartic ... fault.aspx

Then why didn't the one who didn't travel (Siposs) play today?

What's the point in missing out on travelling and also not playing back at Sandy?

mad saint guy · Sat 09 Jul 2011 6:40pm

Shocking performance from Sandy. They were second to the ball all day and turned it over whenever it fell into their hands.

Walsh was the standout performer. Needs to get a run very soon. Johnson and Archer try their guts out but nothing went their way. Johnson got horrible delivery up forward.

Heyne got a bit of the footy but just butchers the ball constantly. I didn't notice much of Smith. Winmar looks a bit more comfortable but has no defensive game. Stanley was pretty ordinary before his injury. Blake and Baker both played solid games as expected. Simpkin is a solid VFL defender, not sure if he's anything more. I hardly noticed Curren. Gards won plenty of hitouts in the first half but constantly looks like he's about to break down. They obviously missed a couple of genuine midfielders like McQualter and Polo, but it would have taken more than that to get Sandy into the game.

It seems very strange that all three emergencies missed, and even stranger if Siposs was at the game but didn't play. Geary as well is one who surely needs to get games under his belt.

ando051 · Post: # 1101929Post **ando051** » Sat 09 Jul 2011 6:42pm

Jacks Back wrote:
InkerSaint wrote:
saintjake wrote:
ausfatcat wrote:
borderbarry wrote:Another thing, why were none of the three emergencies out there?

because they travelled to adelaide as emergencies
Siposs was reported to be at the ground but not playing
They said only two emergencies would travel. I wouldn't read anything into it.

http://www.saints.com.au/news/newsartic ... fault.aspx
Then why didn't the one who didn't travel (Siposs) play today?

What's the point in missing out on travelling and also not playing back at Sandy?

Maybe injuried?

I have been banging on all year about Tommy Walsh not getting a game. The games i have seen him play at Sandy this year would of put him into our best 22. This weekend would be a perfect opportunity for him to play, but the match committee have stuffed up again.

borderbarry · Sat 09 Jul 2011 6:46pm

I dont think Tommy Walsh would be learning very much playing in that team. He needs to be in the Seniors.

St Chris · Post: # 1101933Post **St Chris** » Sat 09 Jul 2011 6:51pm

borderbarry wrote:What number was Curran, 19?
Very disappointing effort by Sandringham.

I think he was 62?? Not sure who 19 was.

dcstkfc · Post: # 1101941Post **dcstkfc** » Sat 09 Jul 2011 7:02pm

St Chris wrote:
borderbarry wrote:What number was Curran, 19?
Very disappointing effort by Sandringham.
I think he was 62?? Not sure who 19 was.

He was 63. Barely touched it from the half of footy I saw.

I went down and caught the last quarter.

Absolutely awful from Sandy. Walsh the only shining light- I'm tipping he'll play against West Coast with their abundance of tall forwards.

Spinner · Post: # 1101943Post **Spinner** » Sat 09 Jul 2011 7:05pm

Saw Siposs in the stands during the game, was sitting next to Gardnier, Crocker and later Stanley while the game was in the last quarter.

If Gardnier had become injured, would he have been in the stands as opposed to icing, recovery etc?

saintjake · Post: # 1101946Post **saintjake** » Sat 09 Jul 2011 7:13pm

dcstkfc wrote:
St Chris wrote:
borderbarry wrote:What number was Curran, 19?
Very disappointing effort by Sandringham.
I think he was 62?? Not sure who 19 was.
He was 63. Barely touched it from the half of footy I saw.

I went down and caught the last quarter.

Absolutely awful from Sandy. Walsh the only shining light- I'm tipping he'll play against West Coast with their abundance of tall forwards.

I hate the Idea of playing him back.
We NEED a forward.
HE could be that forward.
He only started back to learn the game.
If Ross uses him as a back ill be furious

dcstkfc · Post: # 1101951Post **dcstkfc** » Sat 09 Jul 2011 7:22pm

saintjake wrote:
dcstkfc wrote:
St Chris wrote:
borderbarry wrote:What number was Curran, 19?
Very disappointing effort by Sandringham.
I think he was 62?? Not sure who 19 was.
He was 63. Barely touched it from the half of footy I saw.

I went down and caught the last quarter.

Absolutely awful from Sandy. Walsh the only shining light- I'm tipping he'll play against West Coast with their abundance of tall forwards.
I hate the Idea of playing him back.
We NEED a forward.
HE could be that forward.
He only started back to learn the game.
If Ross uses him as a back ill be furious

Well we wait to see how Vegas plays tomorrow?

saintjake · Post: # 1101953Post **saintjake** » Sat 09 Jul 2011 7:24pm

dcstkfc wrote:
saintjake wrote:
dcstkfc wrote:
St Chris wrote:
borderbarry wrote:What number was Curran, 19?
Very disappointing effort by Sandringham.
I think he was 62?? Not sure who 19 was.
He was 63. Barely touched it from the half of footy I saw.

I went down and caught the last quarter.

Absolutely awful from Sandy. Walsh the only shining light- I'm tipping he'll play against West Coast with their abundance of tall forwards.
I hate the Idea of playing him back.
We NEED a forward.
HE could be that forward.
He only started back to learn the game.
If Ross uses him as a back ill be furious
Well we wait to see how Vegas plays tomorrow?

good point, but is Vegas really a Full Forward?

SainterK · Post: # 1101957Post **SainterK** » Sat 09 Jul 2011 7:46pm

Says a bit about the quality of the first year players, also could say a bit about Mini's leadership?

Con Gorozidis · Sat 09 Jul 2011 8:14pm

Vegas not up to AFL standard. Too small to play KPP. Not agile and strong enough to play anywhere else.

We need to just start persisting with Walsh at senior level and play him week in week out. Hes earnt his stripes now. He will develop faster playing AFL now.