Billy has a Tagger

[stonecold]

The whole “but he played and we won” argument is lazy and flawed.

Tom Hawkins had a higher winning percentage than both Plugger and Roo. Are those same posters prepared to say Hawkins is a better player than the other 2?

Lazy and flawed?????

When Hickledik plays, we don't win, is that lazy and flawed as well?????

Our mids prefer Billy playing, simple as that, its irrelevant what any of us think, have a ll the theories you like, it's what's best for our players and structures, not some clowns on a fan forum!!!!!

Footy clubs are judged by Wins and losses, one of our rucks plays in wins, the other has hardly played in a win for nearly two seasons!!!!!


Say what you like, until that changes, I'm sticking with Longer!!!!!

As I have said on many occasions, neither are great, but only one is 'soft', so as an experienced footballer, I know which one I'd rather go into battle with!!!!!

Is it 8 or 9 games for Hickledik this season for zero wins?????

Hickey didn’t play last season due to injury, so please stop saying “nearly 2 seasons”. How many wins did Longer play in in 2016?

And the 3 wins he’s played in this year, 2 have been against teams currently 16th and 17th on the ladder, and last week he was smashed in every measure you can think of, with his direct opponent nearly single handedly dragging his team across the line.

We won in spite of Longer. 2 of the games his direct opponent smashed him, and the third he was outplayed by Witts.

Billy is a liability, and is not up to AFL standard in anything outside of a ruck contest, where he is still only average.

Seems to be playing AFL at the minute, how many games did you play Champion?????

Not up to AFL standard, well, that just doesn't get you on an AFL list, does it!!!!!

Let alone playing AFL games, go away, your an arm chair expert!!!!!

I think my football experience is about as relevant as yours at this point Stoney!

Wrong again!!!!!

[stonecold]

A mate of mine is a friend of Stan Alves. Alves told him an anecdote about his days at St Kilda which I don't think he's ever publicly shared, at least as far as I know.

Don't know which year this occurred, could've been 1997, but I'm not sure. Stan asked the players to write down the team mate they most respected. The resounding winner shocked Stan. It wasn't a matter of Stan not rating the player, but he was surprised, because it wasn't Harvey or Burke.

He thought they might be taking the mickey, so he went back to them and asked WTF? Were they taking the Mickey? They assured him they were completely serious and were eager to explain why.

I'll give fellow Forumites a while to see if they can work out who that player was.

#9!!!!!

[samuraisaint]

Big Lazar! Had to respect him. He even refused match payments if he felt that he hadn't played well enough. That is what I call integrity.
I remember him saying in a supporter fanzine, Marching In, that if St. Kilda got into the Grand Final, if he was playing in it they would introduce a 'sin bin' the next year. Still devastated he broke his leg against Port on the eve of the finals in 1997. He would've been the Cowboy Neale type we needed in the Grannie that year.
And if he felt his mates on the field were in danger, well...

[Joffa Burns]

A mate of mine is a friend of Stan Alves. Alves told him an anecdote about his days at St Kilda which I don't think he's ever publicly shared, at least as far as I know.

Don't know which year this occurred, could've been 1997, but I'm not sure. Stan asked the players to write down the team mate they most respected. The resounding winner shocked Stan. It wasn't a matter of Stan not rating the player, but he was surprised, because it wasn't Harvey or Burke.

He thought they might be taking the mickey, so he went back to them and asked WTF? Were they taking the Mickey? They assured him they were completely serious and were eager to explain why.

I'll give fellow Forumites a while to see if they can work out who that player was.

#9!!!!!

Would you buy a used car from him?

[Linton Lodger]

Indeed Stoney and Samurai. It was Lazar Vidovic. Not saying Billy is anywhere near as good as Lazar was, but is a similar ruckman.

However, the reason the players gave when Stan asked, was that he stood over the opposition, looked after them (the mids were unanimous in their praise), protected them and made them walk tall.

I cannot believe the view that Billy was flogged by Gawn. Gawn played well as a winger, Billy didn't go with him half the time (was probably not expected to). Gawn got a sh*tload of the ball against Collingwood 2 weeks ago, fat lot of good it did his team.

The bottom line is that our midfield group, Longer, Steele, Armitage and Steven monstered their midfield group (except for a few minutes when Viney went ballastic) and it all started there.

Billy's influence was the sort of influence Big Lazar was regarded for.

[asiu]

[takeaway]

Indeed Stoney and Samurai. It was Lazar Vidovic. Not saying Billy is anywhere near as good as Lazar was, but is a similar ruckman.

However, the reason the players gave when Stan asked, was that he stood over the opposition, looked after them (the mids were unanimous in their praise), protected them and made them walk tall.

I cannot believe the view that Billy was flogged by Gawn. Gawn played well as a winger, Billy didn't go with him half the time (was probably not expected to). Gawn got a sh*tload of the ball against Collingwood 2 weeks ago, fat lot of good it did his team.

The bottom line is that our midfield group, Longer, Steele, Armitage and Steven monstered their midfield group (except for a few minutes when Viney went ballastic) and it all started there.

Billy's influence was the sort of influence Big Lazar was regarded for.

I have been trying to get that across re Billy in other threads but you have put it much better. He needs to improve but the mids seem to stand taller with Billy.
Hope that continues.

[stonecold]

Easy question for me LL, didn't even have to think about the answer!!!!!

[rodgerfox]

Indeed Stoney and Samurai. It was Lazar Vidovic. Not saying Billy is anywhere near as good as Lazar was, but is a similar ruckman.

However, the reason the players gave when Stan asked, was that he stood over the opposition, looked after them (the mids were unanimous in their praise), protected them and made them walk tall.

I cannot believe the view that Billy was flogged by Gawn. Gawn played well as a winger, Billy didn't go with him half the time (was probably not expected to). Gawn got a sh*tload of the ball against Collingwood 2 weeks ago, fat lot of good it did his team.

The bottom line is that our midfield group, Longer, Steele, Armitage and Steven monstered their midfield group (except for a few minutes when Viney went ballastic) and it all started there.

Billy's influence was the sort of influence Big Lazar was regarded for.

Longer was being bullied by Viney and Oliver! They were shoving him around like big rag doll.

I'm actually offended hearing his name mentioned in the same breath as Vidovic.

[stonecold]

Indeed Stoney and Samurai. It was Lazar Vidovic. Not saying Billy is anywhere near as good as Lazar was, but is a similar ruckman.

However, the reason the players gave when Stan asked, was that he stood over the opposition, looked after them (the mids were unanimous in their praise), protected them and made them walk tall.

I cannot believe the view that Billy was flogged by Gawn. Gawn played well as a winger, Billy didn't go with him half the time (was probably not expected to). Gawn got a sh*tload of the ball against Collingwood 2 weeks ago, fat lot of good it did his team.

The bottom line is that our midfield group, Longer, Steele, Armitage and Steven monstered their midfield group (except for a few minutes when Viney went ballastic) and it all started there.

Billy's influence was the sort of influence Big Lazar was regarded for.

Longer was being bullied by Viney and Oliver! They were shoving him around like big rag doll.

I'm actually offended hearing his name mentioned in the same breath as Vidovic.

Rubbish and I'm not!!!!!

[rodgerfox]

Indeed Stoney and Samurai. It was Lazar Vidovic. Not saying Billy is anywhere near as good as Lazar was, but is a similar ruckman.

However, the reason the players gave when Stan asked, was that he stood over the opposition, looked after them (the mids were unanimous in their praise), protected them and made them walk tall.

I cannot believe the view that Billy was flogged by Gawn. Gawn played well as a winger, Billy didn't go with him half the time (was probably not expected to). Gawn got a sh*tload of the ball against Collingwood 2 weeks ago, fat lot of good it did his team.

The bottom line is that our midfield group, Longer, Steele, Armitage and Steven monstered their midfield group (except for a few minutes when Viney went ballastic) and it all started there.

Billy's influence was the sort of influence Big Lazar was regarded for.

Longer was being bullied by Viney and Oliver! They were shoving him around like big rag doll.

I'm actually offended hearing his name mentioned in the same breath as Vidovic.

Rubbish and I'm not!!!!!

I was watching it.

Viney, Oliver and the other mids were bumping, shoving and getting stuck into him every time Gawn got the pill (which was a lot).

If anyone thinks Longer strikes fear into the opposition, they are very, very mistaken.

[Devilhead]

A mate of mine is a friend of Stan Alves. Alves told him an anecdote about his days at St Kilda which I don't think he's ever publicly shared, at least as far as I know.

Don't know which year this occurred, could've been 1997, but I'm not sure. Stan asked the players to write down the team mate they most respected. The resounding winner shocked Stan. It wasn't a matter of Stan not rating the player, but he was surprised, because it wasn't Harvey or Burke.

He thought they might be taking the mickey, so he went back to them and asked WTF? Were they taking the Mickey? They assured him they were completely serious and were eager to explain why.

I'll give fellow Forumites a while to see if they can work out who that player was.

Glen Coghlan

[Zed]

We got pick 21 for Stanley, and pick 18,Savage and a pick upgrade for Big Ben.
Ruckman have proven valuable at the trade table.
If someone offers up a first rounder or very early second for either Billy or Tom we’d be crazy not to look at it.

[takeaway]

Indeed Stoney and Samurai. It was Lazar Vidovic. Not saying Billy is anywhere near as good as Lazar was, but is a similar ruckman.

However, the reason the players gave when Stan asked, was that he stood over the opposition, looked after them (the mids were unanimous in their praise), protected them and made them walk tall.

I cannot believe the view that Billy was flogged by Gawn. Gawn played well as a winger, Billy didn't go with him half the time (was probably not expected to). Gawn got a sh*tload of the ball against Collingwood 2 weeks ago, fat lot of good it did his team.

The bottom line is that our midfield group, Longer, Steele, Armitage and Steven monstered their midfield group (except for a few minutes when Viney went ballastic) and it all started there.

Billy's influence was the sort of influence Big Lazar was regarded for.

Longer was being bullied by Viney and Oliver! They were shoving him around like big rag doll.

I'm actually offended hearing his name mentioned in the same breath as Vidovic.

Rubbish and I'm not!!!!!

I was watching it.

Viney, Oliver and the other mids were bumping, shoving and getting stuck into him every time Gawn got the pill (which was a lot).

If anyone thinks Longer strikes fear into the opposition, they are very, very mistaken.

Of course they were. Done by all players in the AFL. When someone misses a goal, gets pinged, etc. Means nothing. Players just ride the shoves because they can't retaliate - free kick, 50m, or weeks off. Was not the case a few years ago.

I don't know who said "Longer strikes fear into the opposition" because does not happen nowadays. Billy is strong in the contest, impacts the packs and tries to clear a space for the mids. Similar (but not as good as yet) as Lazar. You have the wrong end of the stick Rodge

[stonecold]

Indeed Stoney and Samurai. It was Lazar Vidovic. Not saying Billy is anywhere near as good as Lazar was, but is a similar ruckman.

However, the reason the players gave when Stan asked, was that he stood over the opposition, looked after them (the mids were unanimous in their praise), protected them and made them walk tall.

I cannot believe the view that Billy was flogged by Gawn. Gawn played well as a winger, Billy didn't go with him half the time (was probably not expected to). Gawn got a sh*tload of the ball against Collingwood 2 weeks ago, fat lot of good it did his team.

The bottom line is that our midfield group, Longer, Steele, Armitage and Steven monstered their midfield group (except for a few minutes when Viney went ballastic) and it all started there.

Billy's influence was the sort of influence Big Lazar was regarded for.

Longer was being bullied by Viney and Oliver! They were shoving him around like big rag doll.

I'm actually offended hearing his name mentioned in the same breath as Vidovic.

Rubbish and I'm not!!!!!

I was watching it.

Viney, Oliver and the other mids were bumping, shoving and getting stuck into him every time Gawn got the pill (which was a lot).

If anyone thinks Longer strikes fear into the opposition, they are very, very mistaken.

Gee, you've toned that done a bit, was bully before!!!!! haha

That's what all players do to blokes who are a threat to their team mate!!!!!

Backhanded compliment!!!!!

Again a real lack of football nous!!!!!

[Moods]

Billy has that immeasurable quality we all over look. 'Presence.'

Stonecold sees it though

[parkeysainter]

Are you Billy's player agent Stonecold?

[SydneySainter]

Billy has that immeasurable quality we all over look. 'Presence.'

Stonecold sees it though

Never mind if your opponent runs rings around you. You have “presence...”

[rodgerfox]

Gee, you've toned that done a bit, was bully before!!!!! haha

That's what all players do to blokes who are a threat to their team mate!!!!!

Backhanded compliment!!!!!

Again a real lack of football nous!!!!!

I haven't toned it down at all.

Seeing two or three little guys pushing and shoving a dude twice their size around and him doing nothing about as he didn't have the physical strength to protect himself -is perfectly described as bullying.

[rodgerfox]

Billy is strong in the contest, impacts the packs and tries to clear a space for the mids. Similar (but not as good as yet) as Lazar. You have the wrong end of the stick Rodge

That's just simply not true.


His biggest issue is that he is utterly feeble in contests. Brayshaw's second goal was from a one on one marking contest with Longer, in which Longer was outbodied by a little, skinny onballer and went to the ground (somehow?) whilst Brayshaw kept his feet and won the ball.

The one thing that he does bring to the table, is that he throws his body into centre ruck contests. He's brave and tough in that sense. He certainly tries.

But he loses hitouts, and aside from the Gold Coast game, we lose centre clearances when he plays.

The only stat that we significantly do better in when he plays, is our F50 entries per goal efficiency. And I can't see how that can be attributed to him?

[stonecold]

Are you Billy's player agent Stonecold?

No, not quite!!!!!

[takeaway]

Billy is strong in the contest, impacts the packs and tries to clear a space for the mids. Similar (but not as good as yet) as Lazar. You have the wrong end of the stick Rodge

That's just simply not true.


His biggest issue is that he is utterly feeble in contests. Brayshaw's second goal was from a one on one marking contest with Longer, in which Longer was outbodied by a little, skinny onballer and went to the ground (somehow?) whilst Brayshaw kept his feet and won the ball.

The one thing that he does bring to the table, is that he throws his body into centre ruck contests. He's brave and tough in that sense. He certainly tries.

But he loses hitouts, and aside from the Gold Coast game, we lose centre clearances when he plays.

The only stat that we significantly do better in when he plays, is our F50 entries per goal efficiency. And I can't see how that can be attributed to him?

I was talking about Longer, not Hickey.

[stonecold]

Billy is strong in the contest, impacts the packs and tries to clear a space for the mids. Similar (but not as good as yet) as Lazar. You have the wrong end of the stick Rodge

That's just simply not true.


His biggest issue is that he is utterly feeble in contests. Brayshaw's second goal was from a one on one marking contest with Longer, in which Longer was outbodied by a little, skinny onballer and went to the ground (somehow?) whilst Brayshaw kept his feet and won the ball.

The one thing that he does bring to the table, is that he throws his body into centre ruck contests. He's brave and tough in that sense. He certainly tries.

But he loses hitouts, and aside from the Gold Coast game, we lose centre clearances when he plays.

The only stat that we significantly do better in when he plays, is our F50 entries per goal efficiency. And I can't see how that can be attributed to him?

I was talking about Longer, not Hickey.

Yeap, Hickledik is utterly feeble at the contest, that's for sure, makes Billy look like Lazar!!!!!

[Yorkeys]

Another big test coming up. Ryder in Adelaide is a high benchmark. Tough gig playing ruck, Gawn then Ryder= sleepless nights and gashed thighs? Last 2 games I thought he looked like he was trying really hard and positioned reasonably well, if he was told not to follow Gawn into our fwd line. Billy took a mark or two and spoilt a couple of Melbourne packs. Just can't bring myself to criticise him too much, just wish he were more agile at times*. And he is our Billy, so all strength to his large arms and scarred legs.

* wish the same for myself actually.

[rodgerfox]

Billy is strong in the contest, impacts the packs and tries to clear a space for the mids. Similar (but not as good as yet) as Lazar. You have the wrong end of the stick Rodge

That's just simply not true.


His biggest issue is that he is utterly feeble in contests. Brayshaw's second goal was from a one on one marking contest with Longer, in which Longer was outbodied by a little, skinny onballer and went to the ground (somehow?) whilst Brayshaw kept his feet and won the ball.

The one thing that he does bring to the table, is that he throws his body into centre ruck contests. He's brave and tough in that sense. He certainly tries.

But he loses hitouts, and aside from the Gold Coast game, we lose centre clearances when he plays.

The only stat that we significantly do better in when he plays, is our F50 entries per goal efficiency. And I can't see how that can be attributed to him?

I was talking about Longer, not Hickey.

Hickey is very ordinary - but unfortunately what Hickey lacks, Longer doesn't really deliver on either.

FWIW....

Ruckman	Wins	Inside 50s	Disposals	Points For	Points Against	Clearances	Hitouts
Marshall	0%	3	-20	55	104	-3	-20
Longer	75%	-2.5	36.3	87.3	93	1.75	-18.75
Hickey	0%	-3.9	-1.4	66.8	99.1	0	11

So when Longer plays, basically we're a 1 goal better team defensively, and just over 3 goals better offensively. We get 1 more Inside 50, but lose nearly 2 more Clearances - and get walloped badly in the Hitouts. We get our hands on the ball about 37 more times.

However one of those games includes Gold Coast, where we has a massive 32 more Clearances and 17 more Inside 50s than them! So that skews the stats a bit.


For mine, if you're looking for a barometer, I'd look at Armitage. In the games that Longer's played in, he's been healthy and has averaged 5 Inside 50s, 4 Clearances and 25 Disposals himself! Rather than trying to find a link between Longer and the team's success that just doesn't seem to add up - Armitage being healthy is one that not only passes the 'gut feel' test, but also has the numbers to back it up.