Terrible decisions at the selection table this week

[Bluthy]

We went into a game at the grand finalist's big home ground with numerous powerful goal kicking talls in the prime of their career with just Dempster as a regular key defender. Yes, just Dempster, a 190cm guy who only transitioned into defence in the second half of his career. W......T......F?

How could the match committee think anything other than what happened today, would happen. Jesus even many of us slobs here saw straight away the danger with that. Will they put up their hand and say "we screwed up at selection"? Because by golly they should in the spirit of honesty and accountability they want for this team and club. It was a huge error that has set back the teams momentum and confidence a lot.

Roberton and Gilbert were thrown under the bus. Both Roberton (coming back) from a layoff and Gilbo is not a Key defender. He can do a job in an emergency if someone is getting towelled up, or provide extra cover, but he should not be the first choice on one of the best big forwards in the comp. It obviously destroyed his confidence (he shouldn't have dropped the bundle the way he did though)

I think the selectors and Richo got ahead of themselves and got too cocky and too cute, thinking they could use selection trickery to take on the grand finalists. But it backfired spectacularly and has seriously dented the players and supporters confidence this season. Lessons to learn there. Lets hope they do.

[SainterK]

Wasn't a confidence building exercise, clearly established that...

Bit thrown to the wolves this week, selections felt a bit cocky but what do I know

[chook23]

Whilst selection may have had some impact................it was lack of INTENSITY/NOT BEING APPARENTLY READY FOR THE RESPONSE FROM WC/

[saintsRrising]

Whilst selection may have had some impact................it was lack of INTENSITY/NOT BEING APPARENTLY READY FOR THE RESPONSE FROM WC/

Agree. This was the biggest reason for how badly we played today.

Mentally the team was switched off in the WC, Dogs and Giants games.

Poor selection does not suddenly cause everyone to have poor disposal, but that is what we saw today. Even Roo wasted most of his kicks.

Congrats to Ross and Demspter though...they must have missed the team menu.

[Bluthy]

Wasn't a confidence building exercise, clearly established that...

Bit thrown to the wolves this week, selections felt a bit cocky but what do I know

You know plenty. We've played smaller and smaller defences all year and reached a ridiculous conclusion today. We have relied a lot on the midfield doing a huge defensive effort. Today when the midfield failed badly we were shockingly exposed down back. You have to have a plan B if you are beaten in the midfield which is that your backline is both strong and attacking. Hawks, Geelong, Dogs, GWS love the ball in the back because they can launch blistering attacks from back there with the oppo out of position.

[Hemi Baxter]

Whilst selection may have had some impact................it was lack of INTENSITY/NOT BEING APPARENTLY READY FOR THE RESPONSE FROM WC/

that's true of course and fair enough but we compounded the effort with our inability to match up down back. Disappointing and I think most supporters would agree with the OP that a little humility from the coach/selectors in this respect would go a long way. I'm all for playing one ruckman and trying to play fast flexible modern footy but we missed a simple beat here. The other important factor is giving the tall defenders toiling in the ressies a sniff when there's a vacancy.

[Junction Oval]

Right from selection, the pundits were calling it - we were too small in our defence.

Why is it that the Saints selectors could not see the same situation. Lee, Goddard, Delaney would have added a lot of size to compete with the Eagles flyers. None of these guys were selected.

Dempster, Gilbert and Roberton never had a chance against the delivery that West Coast produced.

[Impatient Sainter]

Great post Bluthy....

[Bluthy]

In his presser Richo blames the players intensity. When asked about the lack of tall backs he deflects it saying it wouldn't have mattered with the way the ball came in. So next week we will play the same back line set up? Of course not. Be nice if he put his hand up that they got it wrong.

[chook23]

In his presser Richo blames the players intensity. When asked about the lack of tall backs he deflects it saying it wouldn't have mattered with the way the ball came in. So next week we will play the same back line set up? Of course not. Be nice if he put his hand up that they got it wrong.

The lack of INTENSITY from players had a far greater impact than selection.

Do people really think LEE or Delaney or Goddard would have made a difference.

[Bluthy]

In his presser Richo blames the players intensity. When asked about the lack of tall backs he deflects it saying it wouldn't have mattered with the way the ball came in. So next week we will play the same back line set up? Of course not. Be nice if he put his hand up that they got it wrong.

The lack of INTENSITY from players had a far greater impact than selection.

Do people really think LEE or Delaney or Goddard would have made a difference.

So player selection doesn't make a difference? Why not just throw darts to decide who's in. Its also about the future and trying guys out and them getting experience and getting some chemistry. And Tommy Lee would have known the best Perth nightclubs to get shitfaced tonight.

[Con Gorozidis]

We went in under-sized last week and then maybe were flattered/over-confident with the result from last week. After Norf's second half showing against the Bombers maybe we werent so great after all last week. Either way we got smashed in the midfield but a backline full of midgets certainly didnt help us. It is obvious their coach told the Eagles players - just get it in long, high and quick to the fwd line. We certainly gave them a sense of confidence and certainty about their game plan before the game even started.

[Con Gorozidis]

We were kind of beaten after ten minutes. If we hadnt have let their tall fwds dominate so early maybe our mids wouldnt have dropped their bundles so early.

Anyway we were never going to win this game over there.

Our true test is the next four weeks. We must win two and should win 3 of the next 4.

[Hemi Baxter]

In his presser Richo blames the players intensity. When asked about the lack of tall backs he deflects it saying it wouldn't have mattered with the way the ball came in. So next week we will play the same back line set up? Of course not. Be nice if he put his hand up that they got it wrong.

The lack of INTENSITY from players had a far greater impact than selection.

Do people really think LEE or Delaney or Goddard would have made a difference.

You are right but the point is one of them should have been given a chance to make a difference. We lacked a focal point there. We were too short. Gilbert starting on Kennedy was, to put it mildly, an error and a mismatch. We had only one ruckman so couldn't play a tall in front of their big forwards when it started raining goals. Yes we put a player back but they simply kicked over the top.

[Bluthy]

We were kind of beaten after ten minutes. If we hadnt have let their tall fwds dominate so early maybe our mids wouldnt have dropped their bundles so early.

Anyway we were never going to win this game over there.

Our true test is the next four weeks. We must win two and should win 3 of the next 4.

The thing is too simplistic to say "oh we got beaten in the midfield therefore that ball came in too much - nuttin can be done - leave the backs alone!!!!". The best coaches don't rely on the winning the midfield battle every game. They know sometimes that doesn't happen as every team in the comp is trying to win the midfield battle. They have their back line set up to defend well and then attack back.

Today we had so little attack from the backline it was ridiculous. We've got to try and build a more aggressive backline or else we will get trapped in our back half every time our midfield is less than stellar. Maybe you give McKenzie a game to see what he can deliver or even try Murdoch. Goddard or Lee come in to give some good kicking and intercepting marking and the strength to stand up to the big forwards.

It's time Alan. It's time. Look to the future Alan. The future is now.

[BigMart]

Horrible planning

No +1
With an undersized key defender

An offensive set up at centre bounce vs Natinui

Bashed the ball out of 50 against a notorious zone team

Too many small fwds
Gresham, Lonie, Sinclair
1 required

Only Roberton or Gilbert needed as the +1
Goddard or Lee with plus 1 as 3rd up for Kennedy I would never have left him 1 out.

One of the small fwds out
In
Another Ruckman!

Start Hickey fwd Bruce Higher, Roo Defensive Wing.
Hickey ruck the front half.... Longer across HB... Play in front of
When Hickey goes in, Longer rest, Bruce Deep

Reason
Longer to bash his big body into Nat twice a quarter for 8 mins so he can't give his mids an easy ride... Then Hickey take advantage after him, either against inferior ruckman or tired Nat.

Armo Weller Dunstan Rotation. Mid/Fwd/Int
Ross Acres Billings
Steven Sinclair Gresham

That is a much more defensive set up....
Required interstate vs a better team... At least we stay in the game

A shoot out

Who the f*** did Alan think he was kidding

[Jacks Back]

In his presser Richo blames the players intensity. When asked about the lack of tall backs he deflects it saying it wouldn't have mattered with the way the ball came in. So next week we will play the same back line set up? Of course not. Be nice if he put his hand up that they got it wrong.

The lack of INTENSITY from players had a far greater impact than selection.

Do people really think LEE or Delaney or Goddard would have made a difference.

When a player is taller than 190cm and therefore has more reach and can maybe punch the ball then, sure, it makes a difference.

Going in with a short arse back line was not the answer to the land of the giants (eagles) forward line no matter which way anyone tries to sugarcoat it.

[Con Gorozidis]

We were kind of beaten after ten minutes. If we hadnt have let their tall fwds dominate so early maybe our mids wouldnt have dropped their bundles so early.

Anyway we were never going to win this game over there.

Our true test is the next four weeks. We must win two and should win 3 of the next 4.

The thing is too simplistic to say "oh we got beaten in the midfield therefore that ball came in too much - nuttin can be done - leave the backs alone!!!!". The best coaches don't rely on the winning the midfield battle every game. They know sometimes that doesn't happen as every team in the comp is trying to win the midfield battle. They have their back line set up to defend well and then attack back.

Today we had so little attack from the backline it was ridiculous. We've got to try and build a more aggressive backline or else we will get trapped in our back half every time our midfield is less than stellar. Maybe you give McKenzie a game to see what he can deliver or even try Murdoch. Goddard or Lee come in to give some good kicking and intercepting marking and the strength to stand up to the big forwards.

It's time Alan. It's time. Look to the future Alan. The future is now.

This is true. Teams often lose the midfield battle but still manage to win the game by attacking from the back line.

[Con Gorozidis]

Horrible planning

No +1
With an undersized key defender

An offensive set up at centre bounce vs Natinui

Bashed the ball out of 50 against a notorious zone team

Too many small fwds
Gresham, Lonie, Sinclair
1 required

Only Roberton or Gilbert needed as the +1
Goddard or Lee with plus 1 as 3rd up for Kennedy I would never have left him 1 out.

One of the small fwds out
In
Another Ruckman!

Start Hickey fwd Bruce Higher, Roo Defensive Wing.
Hickey ruck the front half.... Longer across HB... Play in front of
When Hickey goes in, Longer rest, Bruce Deep

Reason
Longer to bash his big body into Nat twice a quarter for 8 mins so he can't give his mids an easy ride... Then Hickey take advantage after him, either against inferior ruckman or tired Nat.

Armo Weller Dunstan Rotation. Mid/Fwd/Int
Ross Acres Billings
Steven Sinclair Gresham

That is a much more defensive set up....
Required interstate vs a better team... At least we stay in the game

A shoot out

Who the f*** did Alan think he was kidding

Makes a lot of sense.

[Bluthy]

Horrible planning

No +1
With an undersized key defender

An offensive set up at centre bounce vs Natinui

Bashed the ball out of 50 against a notorious zone team

Too many small fwds
Gresham, Lonie, Sinclair
1 required

Only Roberton or Gilbert needed as the +1
Goddard or Lee with plus 1 as 3rd up for Kennedy I would never have left him 1 out.

One of the small fwds out
In
Another Ruckman!

Start Hickey fwd Bruce Higher, Roo Defensive Wing.
Hickey ruck the front half.... Longer across HB... Play in front of
When Hickey goes in, Longer rest, Bruce Deep

Reason
Longer to bash his big body into Nat twice a quarter for 8 mins so he can't give his mids an easy ride... Then Hickey take advantage after him, either against inferior ruckman or tired Nat.

Armo Weller Dunstan Rotation. Mid/Fwd/Int
Ross Acres Billings
Steven Sinclair Gresham

That is a much more defensive set up....
Required interstate vs a better team... At least we stay in the game

A shoot out

Who the f*** did Alan think he was kidding

Makes a lot of sense.

It does actually. BM can be quite analytical when he puts his mind to it.

[Hemi Baxter]

Spot on. We're trying to play the same sort of game the Dogs do but we're miles short of them in terms of kicking ability and pace (and talent spotting for these, essential to the modern game, skills at the draft, have a look at the 2014 draft). We can carry on down this path, fine, but it would be good to have the flexibility to play taller against the teams with two or more big forward options.
Looking forward to Daniher next week.

[Jacks Back]

Spot on. We're trying to play the same sort of game the Dogs do but we're miles short of them in terms of kicking ability and pace (and talent spotting for these, essential to the modern game, skills at the draft, have a look at the 2014 draft). We can carry on down this path, fine, but it would be good to have the flexibility to play taller against the teams with two or more big forward options.
Looking forward to Daniher next week.

That's okay, we can bring Minch in to pick him up and provide 'run'.

[BigMart]

That's not patronising Bluthy... i don't think you have much idea of my background.

It's a ballistic game that works at Etihad

Not outside in wet/slippery/windy/heavy conditions

It's why Roos says he needs to think about the MCG team he selects at Etihad

[To the top]

As I offered elsewhere before the game, even absent our defensive General in Fisher, we still had a VERY experienced defence in Montagna, Dempster, Gilbert and Geary who are each well over 100 AFL games each then Savage and Roberton approaching 100 games each - then Webster.

Out taller options therefore were Gilbert and Roberton at 194cm each and Dempster at 191cm but none of them have given a reason to conclude that they have the bodies to do what the 191cm Fisher does.

It is interesting that the real beneficiary of WCE having the F50 entries they did after narrowly winning the disposals and easily winning the Free Kicks was Le Cras, who finished with 6.

A very clever, experienced and dangerous mid sized player who can mark and can win the ball on the ground - and where you would assign Gilbert all things being equal.

So given the requirements on Gilbert elsewhere, who was given the run around by Le Cras?

Montagna, Geary, Savage or Webster?

A loaded question?

Well, given my readings on Geary, Savage and Webster as not being the future of St Kilda you can summise that it is a loaded question.

And it goes to the immediate future of St Kilda and where we should be asking the questions in regards to who will deliver not only this year but in future years - including in regards structure because weakness will be identified by all opposition sides and exploited.

[Hemi Baxter]

Horrible planning

No +1
With an undersized key defender

An offensive set up at centre bounce vs Natinui

Bashed the ball out of 50 against a notorious zone team

Too many small fwds
Gresham, Lonie, Sinclair
1 required

Only Roberton or Gilbert needed as the +1
Goddard or Lee with plus 1 as 3rd up for Kennedy I would never have left him 1 out.

One of the small fwds out
In
Another Ruckman!

Start Hickey fwd Bruce Higher, Roo Defensive Wing.
Hickey ruck the front half.... Longer across HB... Play in front of
When Hickey goes in, Longer rest, Bruce Deep

Reason
Longer to bash his big body into Nat twice a quarter for 8 mins so he can't give his mids an easy ride... Then Hickey take advantage after him, either against inferior ruckman or tired Nat.

Armo Weller Dunstan Rotation. Mid/Fwd/Int
Ross Acres Billings
Steven Sinclair Gresham

That is a much more defensive set up....
Required interstate vs a better team... At least we stay in the game

A shoot out

Who the f*** did Alan think he was kidding

Missed this earlier. Great stuff. V well directed analysis, particularly re the second ruck for this game. After all we kept Tom Hickey in the 2's all last year just to make sure he was far and away our best ruck and could take a mark in the forward line and screen off down back. We also have had 4 ruck men on our list for some time, including one of the highest 'leapers' in the game.