Considered criticisms of the Thommo years

[SaintPav]

Hungry. I believe that the dispute between Grant and Rod was deeply personal (and best described as philosophical differences in life) and the whole topic should be left alone as it derives no benefit being discussed. The unfortunate element was that a personal dispute spilled over into the running of the football club. Realistically that happens at every club and within most organizations - although perhaps not as publicly as this one did. Both contributed to the club with the very best of intention and both left the club better off than they found it - so both should be thanked for their efforts.

Thomo was sacked because there was a complete stand off between the board and the coach. It was an untenable situation and at the end of the day the club is bigger than the coach and someone had to go and the last time I looked up the clubs articles of association, the coach can't sack the President.

Anyway, the whole thing was a completely unprofessional arrangement and it was a friggin disaster waiting to happen. It doesn't mean that the people involved didn't love St Kilda but there were too many conflicts of interest for my liking.

This would not happen in this day and age.

And my two cents worth, Thomo was the right man for the job at the time. Couldn't see Chris Conolly doing any better.

[gringo]

Hungry. I believe that the dispute between Grant and Rod was deeply personal (and best described as philosophical differences in life) and the whole topic should be left alone as it derives no benefit being discussed. The unfortunate element was that a personal dispute spilled over into the running of the football club. Realistically that happens at every club and within most organizations - although perhaps not as publicly as this one did. Both contributed to the club with the very best of intention and both left the club better off than they found it - so both should be thanked for their efforts.

Thomo was sacked because there was a complete stand off between the board and the coach. It was an untenable situation and at the end of the day the club is bigger than the coach and someone had to go and the last time I looked up the clubs articles of association, the coach can't sack the President.

Anyway, the whole thing was a completely unprofessional arrangement and it was a friggin disaster waiting to happen. It doesn't mean that the people involved didn't love St Kilda but there were too many conflicts of interest for my liking.

This would not happen in this day and age.

And my two cents worth, Thomo was the right man for the job at the time. Couldn't see Chris Conolly doing any better.

Agree, that was what I was trying to allude to in a diplomatic way. The infighting between Thommo and Butersss, Thommo going all lone wolf handling contracts and footy department matters and not communicating with the board. Was starting to look really bad by the end from a great start. I think Melbourne is an example of chronic conflict behind the scenes, it has a really negative effect long term. Both did their best with good intentions and left a better club than they started with though.

[thequarry]

I must say it's very interesting but awfully sad to read this thread. The GT era is now two eras ago - it doesn't seem like long ago that Roo, BJ, Kosi, Dal and Ball were starting out and it felt like we had an eternity to win a premiership. Another half-decade era has passed with so many parallels but no flag came about - I wonder how we would have viewed the GT era if Ross had delivered in '09/'10 (or the team had switched on earlier in his tenure and given '08 more of a shake).

If I start reflecting on the era as a whole I don't I'd be able to stop, but that comes with the hindsight of knowing the Riewoldt generation didn't deliver.

The sticking points for me were the lack of defensive pressure around the ground. Yes, it was a vastly different game in '04/'05 but a more disciplined defensive mindset across the ground would have seen us able to knock off Port and Brisbane in '04 (both beat us in finals that year, and during the season) and been able to handle Sydney and West Coast in '05 (Sydney obviously knocked us out in the prelim and WC during the season; Adelaide we were able to bowl over). Easy to simplify but in my mind if the midfield had issues we got beaten in that era.

What really sticks in my mind - and I'm surprised it hasn't been brought up yet (apologies if I've missed it) - but GT's comments on the 2004 Season Highlights DVD about the Qualifying Final against the Lions really are an issue.

He said we went in with the "B" game plan, because he didn't want to reveal the "A" plan to the Lions before a potential meeting in the Grand Final. Well, you have to actually make the Grand Final first and be able to think hard enough and be good enough to tackle that kind of issue if we indeed knocked off the Lions in the first week with the "A" plan, had the week off and won through to the big one. Instead, we got absolutely smacked, won well but slogged it out in the wet the week after and fell short by only a goal to Port, who'd had the week off. It was such a terrible, arrogant attitude to take into a game like that.

So many "ifs" about the Saints in the GT and Ross eras, and we could talk forever about 2002-2006 and 2007-2011. But it's sad that that's all we're stuck with now.

[Kickit]

Just joined the forum particularly for this thread.

To me at the time 2004/2005 it was really exciting seeing the Saints become contenders.
In hindsite now, it almost seems as if we were too ambitious too soon. When you look at the ages of players like BJ, Ball, Riewoldt and Kosi, wow they were green.
The trouble was that the timing was off. Gehrig, Hamill, Thompson were all past their best while the younger players were yet to peak.
It probably didnt help that the draft in 2003 , 4, and 5 was as shallow as the previous ones were deep.

At the time Thommo left I was disappointed. ( we'd just made finals ).
At the time Lyon left, I felt there were a number of things that needed to be adressed. ( And I saw the appointment of Pelchen as a positive prior to Lyon moving on ).

G, Hamill and Thomo were not passed their peak in 04/05/. That is false.

2006 and 2011 coaching changes were the right moves.

Anyway, welcome to sainsaitional.

Can't agree. I'd suggest that Hammil peaked the year before he came to StKilda. 2004 he was still good. Thompson was also the wrong side of 30 but still OK.
The thing is that players like Riewoldt , Dal Santo, Ball were only 20- 22 years old. I think they did an incredible job for guys that age, but did we really expect them to run out entire seasons.

So as the younger players hit their peake, the older ones were past theirs. Lyon replaced the 2006 Thompson, not the 2002 Thompson. Didn't replace Hammil or Gehrig.

I'm not saying I know a way it could have been managed better. Just lamenting really, that the younger guys didn't have a couple more years on them in 2004/5

[BigMart]

Injuries ..... Ultimately cost dearly

Hammill, Maguire, Kosi, Hayes, Goddard, Watts, Penny, X.Clarke, Ball, Hudghton, Brooks, Allen, Gwilt, Dempster, Reiwoldt

All suffered season ending injuries which killed..... It's not the amount, it's the importance of the players injured

Some of these players careers were rooted by injury!

[gringo]

I remember the past eras looking amazing only to fall apart just as we got going. Plugger and Winmar era fell short and all too brief. Alves looked like he was on the right track and we self imploded. Watson and Blighty both are better not spoken of. At least we got an amazing amount of enjoyment and didn't miss by much in the modern era.

[Kickit]

I remember the past eras looking amazing only to fall apart just as we got going. Plugger and Winmar era fell short and all too brief. Alves looked like he was on the right track and we self imploded. Watson and Blighty both are better not spoken of. At least we got an amazing amount of enjoyment and didn't miss by much in the modern era.

I quite like Tim Watson , but it was wrong to make him head coach without an adequate apprenticeship. ( Probably did him a favour though, he's good in the media ).
Sort of funny to watch Collingwood , Brisbane and Essendon make the same mistake.

[Dave McNamara]

I remember the past eras looking amazing only to fall apart just as we got going. Plugger and Winmar era fell short and all too brief. Alves looked like he was on the right track and we self imploded. Watson and Blighty both are better not spoken of. At least we got an amazing amount of enjoyment and didn't miss by much in the modern era.

I quite like Tim Watson , but it was wrong to make him head coach without an adequate apprenticeship. ( Probably did him a favour though, he's good in the media ).
Sort of funny to watch Collingwood , Brisbane and Essendon make the same mistake.

Alves: I always liked what Stan had to say on the radio, so I was rapt when he got the gig with us. Did a great job I thought. Where he came undone... I heard that he was often very old school and in your face at the players (think Max during the 3/4 time huddle in the final against the Swines in 1998), and that eventually lost the players, and was why he was removed. Can anyone confirm this?

Timmy: His coaching was one trick. It was a good trick... switching play to the other (and unguarded) side of the ground and taking the ball rapidly the length of the field. So we started 1999 very well. Then everyone worked out what we were doing. We never worked out a new trick...

The very naughty boy: One of the absobloodylute all-time great players! As a coach... OMG!
So was he really the evil genius just biding his time before unleashing his secret master plan for St Kilda's world domination, only to be foiled by a scared and small minded Board that just didn't 'get it'?

Thomo, please come back. Why did our board think that you'd try and talk them out of the Blight sacking? Would you have? If so, why? Did you think that he was disinterested and only there for the money, or did you think he had a grand vision, but 'the ride of our life' was a bit too hairy for some of the faint hearted??? I'd love to hear your thoughts...

Hird: Barks may have a point re Thomo's wages for an unproven rookie at senior AFL level coach. Your thoughts Grant?
But regardless, what about $1.2mil for a bloke who's only prior actual coaching experience at any level was with his son's U9's at Prahran!?!
I value every Sainta's support for the club, but at times like this... I really wish that Barks was a Bummer supporter..., coz that would be hilarious seeing him rip into the Effn'dum board...
BTW, can Jimbo actually coach...? In stark contrast to his predecessor he apparently has full-on resources back up from the Board... however, from the outside I haven't noticed any improvement over Knights...
If Knights had Hird's coaching record... oh wait...
Gee, if Effn'dum crash n' burn for a third year running... I'm really gonna enjoy that...

Voss: Thank-you, thank-you Vossy. How many years has your planning, list management and belief that you can coach set the Teddy Bears back, and at a time they can least afford it with the Sons of Beaches looming...? Thank-you, thank-you Vossy.

Buckley: Despite a few murmourings from within, despite listening to Pluggs and keeping Maxwell in the side (let alone as captain ), despite the best sabotage efforts from Micky Meltdown, despite the best sabotage efforts from Devoid Cloke... I'm amazed to say it, but he's actually doing a pretty good job. This I reckon could be in no small part due to his tackling his own FIGJAM issues... so credit where it's due! (I hope the input from his mid field coaching genius is also a significant part of all this. )

What do the other Saintsationalists think...?

[samuraisaint]

Thought Thomas did a very good job in setting us up for sustained success and instilled a higher set of expectations around the place due to our improved performances under his tutelage. Thought his best game strategically was the final in Adelaide 2005, with the draw against Sydney in 2002 another strong coaching performance.

What I have always wanted to ask him is why did he allow and encourage the players to take their foot off the accelerator in 2004 when we were absolutely flying? We dominated the whole competition for the first half of that year. The decision to take the night off and go the movies robbed us of momentum in what should have been at least as good a season as 2009 turned out to be. Losing to the Swans in Sydney and the Bullies at the G in successive weeks ( four out of the next five weeks after giving the players the night off resulted in losses) allowed Port and the Lions back in with a sniff and cost us dearly.

going to the movies had absolutely nothing to do with it..lol...I can't believe you bought that HS crap.

Well, then, what was the problem then Cause from where I was sitting we were flogging everybody we came up against until the evening the players were given the night off and the pressure was off them as a group internally.
I can't believe we went from beating top teams by eight-ten goals every week to losing to teams like Melbourne and Port by ten goals. It cost us a top two position (on percentage) and very probably the premiership. Thought it was a fair question TBH.

[SaintPav]

Thought Thomas did a very good job in setting us up for sustained success and instilled a higher set of expectations around the place due to our improved performances under his tutelage. Thought his best game strategically was the final in Adelaide 2005, with the draw against Sydney in 2002 another strong coaching performance.

What I have always wanted to ask him is why did he allow and encourage the players to take their foot off the accelerator in 2004 when we were absolutely flying? We dominated the whole competition for the first half of that year. The decision to take the night off and go the movies robbed us of momentum in what should have been at least as good a season as 2009 turned out to be. Losing to the Swans in Sydney and the Bullies at the G in successive weeks ( four out of the next five weeks after giving the players the night off resulted in losses) allowed Port and the Lions back in with a sniff and cost us dearly.

going to the movies had absolutely nothing to do with it..lol...I can't believe you bought that HS crap.

Well, then, what was the problem then Cause from where I was sitting we were flogging everybody we came up against until the evening the players were given the night off and the pressure was off them as a group internally.
I can't believe we went from beating top teams by eight-ten goals every week to losing to teams like Melbourne and Port by ten goals. It cost us a top two position (on percentage) and very probably the premiership. Thought it was a fair question TBH.

Winning the first ten was great but our form was misleading. 6 out of the 10 games we won first up were against non contenders while 2 others finished 7th and 8th. Port won the flag in 2004..Melb finished 5th.

I was challenging your assumption on causality and your empirical reality. You're assuming that going to the flicks impacted our performance when there were other factors at play perhaps. That's all.

[Kickit]

I remember the past eras looking amazing only to fall apart just as we got going. Plugger and Winmar era fell short and all too brief. Alves looked like he was on the right track and we self imploded. Watson and Blighty both are better not spoken of. At least we got an amazing amount of enjoyment and didn't miss by much in the modern era.

I quite like Tim Watson , but it was wrong to make him head coach without an adequate apprenticeship. ( Probably did him a favour though, he's good in the media ).
Sort of funny to watch Collingwood , Brisbane and Essendon make the same mistake.

Alves: I always liked what Stan had to say on the radio, so I was rapt when he got the gig with us. Did a great job I thought. Where he came undone... I heard that he was often very old school and in your face at the players (think Max during the 3/4 time huddle in the final against the Swines in 1998), and that eventually lost the players, and was why he was removed. Can anyone confirm this?

Timmy: His coaching was one trick. It was a good trick... switching play to the other (and unguarded) side of the ground and taking the ball rapidly the length of the field. So we started 1999 very well. Then everyone worked out what we were doing. We never worked out a new trick...

The very naughty boy: One of the absobloodylute all-time great players! As a coach... OMG!
So was he really the evil genius just biding his time before unleashing his secret master plan for St Kilda's world domination, only to be foiled by a scared and small minded Board that just didn't 'get it'?

Thomo, please come back. Why did our board think that you'd try and talk them out of the Blight sacking? Would you have? If so, why? Did you think that he was disinterested and only there for the money, or did you think he had a grand vision, but 'the ride of our life' was a bit too hairy for some of the faint hearted??? I'd love to hear your thoughts...

Hird: Barks may have a point re Thomo's wages for an unproven rookie at senior AFL level coach. Your thoughts Grant?
But regardless, what about $1.2mil for a bloke who's only prior actual coaching experience at any level was with his son's U9's at Prahran!?!
I value every Sainta's support for the club, but at times like this... I really wish that Barks was a Bummer supporter..., coz that would be hilarious seeing him rip into the Effn'dum board...
BTW, can Jimbo actually coach...? In stark contrast to his predecessor he apparently has full-on resources back up from the Board... however, from the outside I haven't noticed any improvement over Knights...
If Knights had Hird's coaching record... oh wait...
Gee, if Effn'dum crash n' burn for a third year running... I'm really gonna enjoy that...

Voss: Thank-you, thank-you Vossy. How many years has your planning, list management and belief that you can coach set the Teddy Bears back, and at a time they can least afford it with the Sons of Beaches looming...? Thank-you, thank-you Vossy.

Buckley: Despite a few murmourings from within, despite listening to Pluggs and keeping Maxwell in the side (let alone as captain ), despite the best sabotage efforts from Micky Meltdown, despite the best sabotage efforts from Devoid Cloke... I'm amazed to say it, but he's actually doing a pretty good job. This I reckon could be in no small part due to his tackling his own FIGJAM issues... so credit where it's due! (I hope the input from his mid field coaching genius is also a significant part of all this. )

What do the other Saintsationalists think...?

Yeah when I said I like Watson, I didnt mean his coaching. He's pretty self depreciating when it ever comes up as a topic on the radio as well ( unlike Blight - " the Ego has landed " ).

Buckley did have at least 1 year in the inner sanctum of coaching ( and probably a fair bit of exposure previously when he was injured ).

I really thought the selection process for StKilda's last two coaches was a very good one, and from the outside there seemed to be no pre-concieved ideas for who the new coach would be. No emotional involvement.
I'm also very happy that we have Laidley as an assistant for an untried new coach. He doesn't have the finals experience that Bomber Thompson has, but Watters has that, and Watters seems to be the type who will listen to what Laidley has to say. ( He'd be foolish not to ).

[Scollop]

Injuries ..... Ultimately cost dearly

Hammill, Maguire, Kosi, Hayes, Goddard, Watts, Penny, X.Clarke, Ball, Hudghton, Brooks, Allen, Gwilt, Dempster, Reiwoldt

All suffered season ending injuries which killed..... It's not the amount, it's the importance of the players injured

Some of these players careers were rooted by injury!

A fit and freshened up Michael Gardiner would've been handy in 09/10 too. Can't blame Lyon totally, but we weren't cursed with injuriies in 09/10 as much as we were in 04/05.

Who had the best opportunity - debatable...but did GT ever have the luxury of having 16 wins and zero losses after 16 rounds?

Wouldn't you think if top 2 is sown up by round 16, that it is time for the senior coach to CHANGE something and try some youngsters and see WHO is willing to put their hand up? Wouldn't you think it would be important to try and manage your list and simultaneously challenge the group and be able to ensure that there is some depth if there are injuries or poor form at the pointy end of the year? Wouldn't this also send a message to the playing list and just make them not take their spot for granted?

So many RL devotees point to 2009 as such a great year. We won 20 and lost 2 in home and away. The pointy end of the season is not the right time to be losing momentum. If Lyon came to the realisation that some of his players needed a freshen up leading in to September action, then wouldn't it make sense to start planning to rotate some blokes in the middle of the year? Does a coach have any control as to the teams momentum?? Damn right he does!! Wouldn't you think it'd be quite difficult to get continuity and momentum if you're resting/changing more than a third of the team (fact - see Rnd 18 lineup vs Rnd 19) at the pointy end? Yes one third of the team!!

The fact that Lyon and his assistants and fitness gurus rested players in round 19 of 2009 means that they acknowledged the grueling and taxing nature of modern day AFL. The commitment to Lyons defensive gameplan, in addition to a schedule of travel interstate, meant that he had no choice but to introduce more players into the list. Simple question is...why did Lyon need to get 18 wins in a row before he realised that there'd be a price to pay at some point?

The best team of the finals series usually wins the GF, and as we've seen many times before, it's not necessarily the team who wins the most games in Home and Away. Lyon gambled for the 'now' at all cost but ultimately he has to take most of the responsibility for Saints line-up falling short in finals with the best opportunity in my lifetime. The buck always stops with the senior coach.

For me ...legacy of GT vs Lyon.. GT long term benefits for all the positive 'foundations' cemented for the Saints FC as opposed to Lyon - who left the club with an empty feeling and 'net' zero legacy.

[SaintPav]

And if Germany had of won the Battle of Britain, technically, Hitler would have been our head of State.

No one at that point had ever rotated players like you are advocating Lyon should have. Pies were similarly dominant in 2011 and rotated players and they didn't get the result.

Nice go at re writing history though.

[White Winmar]

And if Germany had of won the Battle of Britain, technically, Hitler would have been our head of State.

No one at that point had ever rotated players like you are advocating Lyon should have. Pies were similarly dominant in 2011 and rotated players and they didn't get the result.

Nice go at re writing history though.

As Herman Goering was quoted saying after the Battle of Britain, "They really killed us in the air today."

[SaintPav]

And if Germany had of won the Battle of Britain, technically, Hitler would have been our head of State.

No one at that point had ever rotated players like you are advocating Lyon should have. Pies were similarly dominant in 2011 and rotated players and they didn't get the result.

Nice go at re writing history though.

As Herman Goering was quoted saying after the Battle of Britain, "They really killed us in the air today."

exactly!

[samoht]

And if Germany had of won the Battle of Britain, technically, Hitler would have been our head of State.

No one at that point had ever rotated players like you are advocating Lyon should have. Pies were similarly dominant in 2011 and rotated players and they didn't get the result.

Nice go at re writing history though.

I have to agree with scollop!!
When you know Roo, a crucial player and your potential match winner, has a chronic and degenerative knee complaint, that can and does flare up and you can afford to strategically rest him (after 14 straight wins)- then you should do exactly that. You should also start your key players on the bench a few times (post the 14 straight wins), apart from giving them a week off, why not?.
You don't risk having Roo limping into the finals(given his chronic knee) - but this is exactly what RL was prepared to risk and allowed to happen. He did not rest him at crucial stages in 2009.

If RL planned the strategy for the Battle of Britain - we'd all be speaking German today, probably.
What the Pies do - that's their business, and they have won enough flags -so they won't miss that one in 2011...
besides, the Pies lost to Geelong all year in 2011, if I recall... so Geelong had the defence to curtail them, whereas the Pies, without the bigger-bodied Brown at FB, were always going to struggle to hold the massive frame of Hawkins.

[plugger66]

And if Germany had of won the Battle of Britain, technically, Hitler would have been our head of State.

No one at that point had ever rotated players like you are advocating Lyon should have. Pies were similarly dominant in 2011 and rotated players and they didn't get the result.

Nice go at re writing history though.

I have to agree with scollop!!
When you know Roo, a crucial player and your potential match winner- has a chronic and degenerative knee complaint, that can and does flare up and you can afford to strategically rest him (after 14 straight wins)- then you should do exactly that. You can also start your key players on the bench a few times - apart from giving them a week off, why not?.
You don't risk having Roo limping into the finals(given his chronic knee) - but this is exactly what RL was prepared to risk and allowed to happen. He did not rest him at crucial stages in 2009.

What the Pies do - that's their business, and they have won enough flags -so they won't miss that one in 2011...
besides -the Pies lost to Geelong all year in 2011, if I recall... so Geelong had the defence to curtail them whereas the Pies, without the bigger-bodied Brown at FB, were always going to struggle to hold the massive frame of Hawkins .

So you are saying some people on here know more about how players are travelling than doctors, high performance people and coaches? Of course in hindsight we could have done many things better. My guess is Geelong could have as well. I also think kicking straight may have helped. Didnt we have the most inside 50 difference in our favour than any other side has had in a GF and lost. Suggests we were playing well enough and werent tired.

[samoht]

Yes!
The experts got it wrong... maybe they took lessons from it and would do things differently when (if ever) the same unique situation presents itself (14 + straight wins plus).

[cwrcyn]

Grant Thomas did a pretty good job galvanising a group of young men and instilling a professional attitude in them, as well as enormous self belief. Most coaches have their failings and none are perfect. I have not enjoyed watching St Kilda more than I did under Grant Thomas. Overall his tenure was productive and positive, with a couple of shortcomings (lack of defensive pressure and a fitness regime that ultimately played a part in his demise)

Ross Lyon picked up where Grant left off, inheriting an extremely committed and professional group of players who were close to, or in their prime. Nice time to come in as coach, wouldn't you say? His tenure was also a positive one, adding extra steal to the defensive side of the game and making us equally the hardest team to beat. Once again, there were shortcomings (list development, player development, and an inability to chase down an opponent that had a lead of more than 5 goals)


Look back over the past 35years. We've come a long way since the inept, amateurish and embarrassing 1980s, in particular. Our renaissance began with Andrew Plympton, who steadied the ship. Stan Alves was passionate and empowered the players to be daring and turned us into an exciting team to watch. Both those men deserve our thanks. As do Thomas, Rod Butterss, Jim Watts, Ross Lyon, Greg Westaway, Michael Nettlefold and a few others. This club has worked really hard in the past 20 years and deserves our respect. They've never gone cap in hand to the AFL in order to run their everyday affairs. They've toughed it out under some difficult situations, like the Etihad Stadium deals (which has equally screwed The Buldogs and Carlton).

Grant Thomas has played his part in that renaissance, and in my opinion his contribution is a worthy as Ross Lyon's.

Now, I don't know Grant Thomas or anyone else I've mentioned above. Never met any of them. All I can do is to go by their record and judge them how well the club has emerged from their tenure. For the most part, it's been a steady rise over the past two decades on the back of some really hard work, with a few blips on the way (e.g. Malcolm in the Middle). Find me one club that has done everything perfectly over the past 20 year period and find me one coach who has done everything perfectly? Running an AFL club that doesn't get preferential treatment from the AFL power brokers is a bloody hard gig.


The only real lasting disappointment (not criticism) for me has been the outcome of the Moorabbin council negotiations, and again, who is really to blame???????????







.

[Dave McNamara]

... a bloody good post.

Like plenty of other Saintsationalists, I really hope that Grant gets back on here, coz I'd like to hear his response to some of the questions (accusations?) that have been put to him by the prosecution... I suppose he's busy long lunching, and then catching a movie with Barks...

Regardless..., some really good points there Cwrcyn.

As you so correctly pointed out... whatever the strengths and weaknesses, successes and failings of the various characters you mentioned... IMHO the end result is that our club has improved... outta' sight, off the planet... c/f where we were in the '80s.

And as you also said, the one exception to that is... Moorabbin.

However, the one place I disagree with you is that I do criticise the club on not dealing with those jerks at the Kingston Clown Hall!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I don't care the means, fair or foul..., that was one case of the end justifying any means.




(Disclaimer: Like yourself Cwrcyn, I also don't know nor have met any of the above... except, by coming in late to the AGM, my ex and I go to sit next to our then brand new coach RoSSy. She was on crutches, and he and Bomba Sheldon were really, really nice in how they shifted their seats to let her in. Bomba even stashed the crutches for her.

We thanked them both, and I made a simple one phrase request to Ro$$y... "Can you fix things when the opposition flood against us please?" He did, and whatever the downsides, the upside for me was that for the first time since the very early '70s... I wasn't too worried when the opposition had the ball.

I'm back to at least being a bit nervous, though that's abating somewhat...)

[Scollop]

And if Germany had of won the Battle of Britain, technically, Hitler would have been our head of State.

No one at that point had ever rotated players like you are advocating Lyon should have. Pies were similarly dominant in 2011 and rotated players and they didn't get the result.

Nice go at re writing history though.

You have eyes but You cannot see, You have ears but You cannot hear.

You have a mind but You cannot think

Merry Christmas

[SaintPav]

And if Germany had of won the Battle of Britain, technically, Hitler would have been our head of State.

No one at that point had ever rotated players like you are advocating Lyon should have. Pies were similarly dominant in 2011 and rotated players and they didn't get the result.

Nice go at re writing history though.

You have eyes but You cannot see, You have ears but You cannot hear.

You have a mind but You cannot think

Merry Christmas

and you're a genius who wrote in 2009 after round 16 that we should begin to rotate players!

[stinger]

Injuries ..... Ultimately cost dearly

Hammill, Maguire, Kosi, Hayes, Goddard, Watts, Penny, X.Clarke, Ball, Hudghton, Brooks, Allen, Gwilt, Dempster, Reiwoldt

All suffered season ending injuries which killed..... It's not the amount, it's the importance of the players injured

Some of these players careers were rooted by injury!

A fit and freshened up Michael Gardiner would've been handy in 09/10 too. Can't blame Lyon totally, but we weren't cursed with injuriies in 09/10 as much as we were in 04/05.

Who had the best opportunity - debatable...but did GT ever have the luxury of having 16 wins and zero losses after 16 rounds?

Wouldn't you think if top 2 is sown up by round 16, that it is time for the senior coach to CHANGE something and try some youngsters and see WHO is willing to put their hand up? Wouldn't you think it would be important to try and manage your list and simultaneously challenge the group and be able to ensure that there is some depth if there are injuries or poor form at the pointy end of the year? Wouldn't this also send a message to the playing list and just make them not take their spot for granted?

So many RL devotees point to 2009 as such a great year. We won 20 and lost 2 in home and away. The pointy end of the season is not the right time to be losing momentum. If Lyon came to the realisation that some of his players needed a freshen up leading in to September action, then wouldn't it make sense to start planning to rotate some blokes in the middle of the year? Does a coach have any control as to the teams momentum?? Damn right he does!! Wouldn't you think it'd be quite difficult to get continuity and momentum if you're resting/changing more than a third of the team (fact - see Rnd 18 lineup vs Rnd 19) at the pointy end? Yes one third of the team!!

The fact that Lyon and his assistants and fitness gurus rested players in round 19 of 2009 means that they acknowledged the grueling and taxing nature of modern day AFL. The commitment to Lyons defensive gameplan, in addition to a schedule of travel interstate, meant that he had no choice but to introduce more players into the list. Simple question is...why did Lyon need to get 18 wins in a row before he realised that there'd be a price to pay at some point?

The best team of the finals series usually wins the GF, and as we've seen many times before, it's not necessarily the team who wins the most games in Home and Away. Lyon gambled for the 'now' at all cost but ultimately he has to take most of the responsibility for Saints line-up falling short in finals with the best opportunity in my lifetime. The buck always stops with the senior coach.

For me ...legacy of GT vs Lyon.. GT long term benefits for all the positive 'foundations' cemented for the Saints FC as opposed to Lyon - who left the club with an empty feeling and 'net' zero legacy.

interesting thoughtful post ..imho.....

[stinger]

Like plenty of other Saintsationalists, I really hope that Grant gets back on here, coz I'd like to hear his response to some of the questions (accusations?) that have been put to him by the prosecution... I suppose he's busy long lunching, and then catching a movie with Barks...

why would he ffs....he came on here as just another saints supporter...and a passionate one at that...and the usual clowns on here dumped on him big time.....as clowns have done from the day he got the flick.....that's when this forum split down the middle......nothing's changed, except more know it all posters have joined up to add their two bits... most of which, with a couple of notable exceptions... in mho ain't worth dog s***.....

[SaintPav]

Like plenty of other Saintsationalists, I really hope that Grant gets back on here, coz I'd like to hear his response to some of the questions (accusations?) that have been put to him by the prosecution... I suppose he's busy long lunching, and then catching a movie with Barks...

why would he ffs....he came on here as just another saints supporter...and a passionate one at that...and the usual clowns on here dumped on him big time.....as clowns have done from the day he got the flick.....that's when this forum split down the middle......nothing's changed, except more know it all posters have joined up to add their two bits... most of which, with a couple of notable exceptions... in mho ain't worth dog s***.....

So everyone should just agree with everyone else then? What a jolly place that would be Stinger.

Thomo wouldn't mind being challenged as long as it's done with some common decency.