Match Thread Saints v Blues Round 5 2020

[perfectionist]

Gone

...for a Tosca.

[saintbob]

Coffield, Marshall, Billings, Long, Steele and Wilkie were all very good tonight.

Good win although I still don’t trust them when they get a lead, they need to really bury a side.

[Jacks Back]

Coffield, Marshall, Billings, Long, Steele and Wilkie were all very good tonight.

Good win although I still don’t trust them when they get a lead, they need to really bury a side.

I'll go the reverse. Hill only 8 possessions, Clarke 10, Carlisle 9 with 5 dinky little kicks only, Marsh 10, Battle 12, Lonie didn't do much, Hannebery doesn't do enough for an experienced player, King faded in the second half but a great first half, Membrey didn't do much.

A good effort to win considering some performances.

[Ghost Like]

Ryder has to play in my opinion. Let Marshall run himself into the ground, then release Paddy to negate any chance of a resurgence. Who misses out??? This depends on the opposition structure.

[skeptic]

Coffield, Marshall, Billings, Long, Steele and Wilkie were all very good tonight.

Good win although I still don’t trust them when they get a lead, they need to really bury a side.

I'll go the reverse. Hill only 8 possessions, Clarke 10, Carlisle 9 with 5 dinky little kicks only, Marsh 10, Battle 12, Lonie didn't do much, Hannebery doesn't do enough for an experienced player, King faded in the second half but a great first half, Membrey didn't do much.

A good effort to win considering some performances.

Feel like it’s a pretty harsh take overall
Carlisle I thought was good defensively all night
Clarke was prominent but down
King IMO was better than credited here
Battle would have had a great night if he kicked straight
Marsh was lively

No argument RE Hill or Membrey

Lonie looks a bit low on confidence. Felt he’s been out of sorts all season albeit not terrible but not particularly good either. He’s pbly the one under most pressure IMO

[BarryGrogan]

Coffield, Marshall, Billings, Long, Steele and Wilkie were all very good tonight.

Good win although I still don’t trust them when they get a lead, they need to really bury a side.

I'll go the reverse. Hill only 8 possessions, Clarke 10, Carlisle 9 with 5 dinky little kicks only, Marsh 10, Battle 12, Lonie didn't do much, Hannebery doesn't do enough for an experienced player, King faded in the second half but a great first half, Membrey didn't do much.

A good effort to win considering some performances.

Feel like it’s a pretty harsh take overall
Carlisle I thought was good defensively all night
Clarke was prominent but down
King IMO was better than credited here
Battle would have had a great night if he kicked straight
Marsh was lively

No argument RE Hill or Membrey

Lonie looks a bit low on confidence. Felt he’s been out of sorts all season albeit not terrible but not particularly good either. He’s pbly the one under most pressure IMO

Some of Hill's defensive running was outrageously good. There were a couple of efforts that were super human.

He's still carrying an ankle too.

[StPeter]

Betts, Casboult, McKay and McGovern, the Blues four main scorers, kicked a total of one goal and zero behinds between them.

[SuperDuper]

Betts, Casboult, McKay and McGovern, the Blues three main scorers, kicked a total of one goal and zero behinds between them.

Yes, Paton had no trouble dealing with an aging Betts, Carlisle kept Casboult out of the game. Carlisle is a step up in class. Howard kept McKay out of it.. And Wilkie took a bunch of early marks that set the tone and thrashed McGovern all day.. sometimes you dont get what you pay for.

[kosifantutti]

Betts, Casboult, McKay and McGovern, the Blues three main scorers, kicked a total of one goal and zero behinds between them.

I reckon that’s their four main scorers!

I was concerned when Casboult took that mark on the lead in the first quarter. I can’t remember what happened with the kick but he wasn’t a threat for the rest of the game.

[Sainter_Dad]

Ryder has to play in my opinion. Let Marshall run himself into the ground, then release Paddy to negate any chance of a resurgence. Who misses out??? This depends on the opposition structure.

Does Ryder fill the same role as Jono Marsh? If so, wouldn't he be a pretty decent swap (although a little slower) with a chop out in the ruck?

[Sainter_Dad]

Betts, Casboult, McKay and McGovern, the Blues three main scorers, kicked a total of one goal and zero behinds between them.

I reckon that’s their four main scorers!

I was concerned when Casboult took that mark on the lead in the first quarter. I can’t remember what happened with the kick but he wasn’t a threat for the rest of the game.

Out of Bounds on the Full - confidence was shot for the rest of the game

[Joffa Burns]

Betts, Casboult, McKay and McGovern, the Blues three main scorers, kicked a total of one goal and zero behinds between them.

I reckon that’s their four main scorers!

I was concerned when Casboult took that mark on the lead in the first quarter. I can’t remember what happened with the kick but he wasn’t a threat for the rest of the game.

The match ups though they rotate to me from TV appeared to be:

Howard - McKay
Carslile - Casboult
Wilkie - McGovern
Paton - Betts

The one that looked the most dangerous all night was Jack Martin who I assume was opposed to Coffield & Long for parts of the night.

[CURLY]

Betts, Casboult, McKay and McGovern, the Blues three main scorers, kicked a total of one goal and zero behinds between them.

I reckon that’s their four main scorers!

I was concerned when Casboult took that mark on the lead in the first quarter. I can’t remember what happened with the kick but he wasn’t a threat for the rest of the game.

The match ups though they rotate to me from TV appeared to be:

Howard - McKay
Carslile - Casboult
Wilkie - McGovern
Paton - Betts

The one that looked the most dangerous all night was Jack Martin who I assume was opposed to Coffield & Long for parts of the night.

Martin was running through the middle. Think Coffield had that bloke that came back into the side.

[Ghost Like]

Ryder has to play in my opinion. Let Marshall run himself into the ground, then release Paddy to negate any chance of a resurgence. Who misses out??? This depends on the opposition structure.

Does Ryder fill the same role as Jono Marsh? If so, wouldn't he be a pretty decent swap (although a little slower) with a chop out in the ruck?

That makes sense. Ryder's value of negating a ruck led comeback, assisting a tiring Marshall is possibly more value than Marsh. In retrospect it is two of Ryder, Battle & Marsh.

[BarryGrogan]

Ryder has to play in my opinion. Let Marshall run himself into the ground, then release Paddy to negate any chance of a resurgence. Who misses out??? This depends on the opposition structure.

Does Ryder fill the same role as Jono Marsh? If so, wouldn't he be a pretty decent swap (although a little slower) with a chop out in the ruck?

No.

Marsh plays almost a defensive forward role.

He's really interesting that guy. Plays kind of small and defensive - but he's a good contested mark so you need a tall on him.

Ryder is an issue in that we need him in ruck contests - but that's about it really.

So do we accept getting beaten in the ruck and having those momentum swings that we've seen over the past two weeks - or do we bring Ryder in and risk losing mobility in another area of the ground?

[samoht]

Interesting team stats:
We won less hitouts and only had 3 "hitouts to advantage" vs 9 "hitouts to advantage" by Carlton - but even though we were 6 hitouts to advantage down, we still won 3 more clearances.

So much for "hitouts to advantage."

Anyway, Marshall had 19 disposals around the ground - which is the most important stat for me.

[carn_sainter]

Interesting team stats:
We won less hitouts and only had 3 "hitouts to advantage" vs 9 "hitouts to advantage" by Carlton - but even though we were 6 hitouts to advantage down, we still won 3 more clearances.

So much for "hitouts to advantage."

Anyway, Marshall had 19 disposals around the ground - which is the most important stat for me.

I don't think they count tbem as HO to advantage because he did it at least 3 times from memory...but Marshall likes to grab the ball and kick it rather than tap to a mid

He's never precise with these kicks. It's fast but imprecise...i can see good teams making us pay for that kind of ball movement

Ryder isn't on the scrap heap by any means. Clearances and ruck work have been huge in deciding all 5 games for us. Ryder gave the dogs an absolute bath

The problem with playing both is actually Marshall. He hasn't figured out how to be effective sharing the load. He's better overall than Ryder. If you could play only 1, it's Marshall.

But he's also the reason playing 2 might not work.

Tough decisions. As long as Marsh and Battle are performing we probably won't play Ryder.

We're actually bloody tall...Marshall, King, Carlisle, Howard are all more or less 200cm tall already...hard to justify a 5th guy at that height

[BarryGrogan]

So much for "hitouts to advantage."

It's a rubbish stat. The definition of a 'Hitout to Advantage' is misleading.

And so is a Clearance for that matter. The difference between a good clearance, a poor clearance and a neutral clearance is enormous. But the stat doesn't distinguish.

[Joffa Burns]

Marshall needs help in the ruck. He's getting beaten

Ryder is an issue in that we need him in ruck contests - but that's about it really.

So do we accept getting beaten in the ruck and having those momentum swings that we've seen over the past two weeks - or do we bring Ryder in and risk losing mobility in another area of the ground?

Marshall was clearly dominant over Pittonet around the ground and broke even in hitouts and clearances.
Not sure how this equates to being beaten as written in the match thread or repeated as a general comment that we will be beaten each week?

Do we want to lose a runner who is contributing like Kent or a flexible mid sizer like Marsh or Battle and also lose Marshalls value around the ground for Ryders tap ruck work and nothing more?
It's a no for me.

Rowan Marshall: Disposals - 19, Kicks - 14, Handballs - 5, Marks - 3, Tackles - 3, Hitouts - 22, Clearances - 7
Marc Pittonet: Disposals - 5, Kicks - 3, Handballs - 2, Marks - 3, Tackles - 3, Hitouts - 22, Clearances - 2

[stkfc1]

Bit of a weird feeling. Win is a win but besides the first quarter, we we were fairly average. A better team would have beaten us. Ran out of gas half way through the 2nd and we were getting killed in contested marks for most of the game. It was like we were kicking it straight to Liam Jones half the night. Kuddos to a much maligned player, as he's become a very good defender.

[Ghost Like]

Marshall needs help in the ruck. He's getting beaten

Ryder is an issue in that we need him in ruck contests - but that's about it really.

So do we accept getting beaten in the ruck and having those momentum swings that we've seen over the past two weeks - or do we bring Ryder in and risk losing mobility in another area of the ground?

Marshall was clearly dominant over Pittonet around the ground and broke even in hitouts and clearances.
Not sure how this equates to being beaten as written in the match thread or repeated as a general comment that we will be beaten each week?

Do we want to lose a runner who is contributing like Kent or a flexible mid sizer like Marsh or Battle and also lose Marshalls value around the ground for Ryders tap ruck work and nothing more?
It's a no for me.

Rowan Marshall: Disposals - 19, Kicks - 14, Handballs - 5, Marks - 3, Tackles - 3, Hitouts - 22, Clearances - 7
Marc Pittonet: Disposals - 5, Kicks - 3, Handballs - 2, Marks - 3, Tackles - 3, Hitouts - 22, Clearances - 2

Interesting JB, I still think it is a horses for courses selection. If we were to solely concentrate on stats versus one person in a single game and the ultimate effect, Marshall would have been dropped after the Collingwood game.

Thankfully Ratten & his staff recognised an opportunity for Marshall and he responded. I see games where a supreme tap ruckman will be more valuable than a low possession runner.

[Scollop]

If Ryder was 29 years of age and played the way he did in 2017 then I’d play him alone rather than RoMa

I don’t want to see Paddy there unless Rowan is injured. I think they’ll play Paddy and Rowan together in a game where perhaps there’s 2 blokes like Natanui and Hickey and maybe it might work, but if it doesn’t then I’m happy for Rowan to ruck alone for the rest of the year

I’d rather we have as many quicker nimble blokes rather than playing Ryder. Marsh is improving and he is a very versatile player and a good threat up forward. We have enough options like Battle, King and Carlisle who can contest a few ruck duals at stoppages

[Joffa Burns]

Marshall needs help in the ruck. He's getting beaten

Ryder is an issue in that we need him in ruck contests - but that's about it really.

So do we accept getting beaten in the ruck and having those momentum swings that we've seen over the past two weeks - or do we bring Ryder in and risk losing mobility in another area of the ground?

Marshall was clearly dominant over Pittonet around the ground and broke even in hitouts and clearances.
Not sure how this equates to being beaten as written in the match thread or repeated as a general comment that we will be beaten each week?

Do we want to lose a runner who is contributing like Kent or a flexible mid sizer like Marsh or Battle and also lose Marshalls value around the ground for Ryders tap ruck work and nothing more?
It's a no for me.

Rowan Marshall: Disposals - 19, Kicks - 14, Handballs - 5, Marks - 3, Tackles - 3, Hitouts - 22, Clearances - 7
Marc Pittonet: Disposals - 5, Kicks - 3, Handballs - 2, Marks - 3, Tackles - 3, Hitouts - 22, Clearances - 2

Interesting JB, I still think it is a horses for courses selection. If we were to solely concentrate on stats versus one person in a single game and the ultimate effect, Marshall would have been dropped after the Collingwood game.

Thankfully Ratten & his staff recognised an opportunity for Marshall and he responded. I see games where a supreme tap ruckman will be more valuable than a low possession runner.

Take you point Casper, but still don't want to see Ryder and Marshall together.
Reason being the massive output drop from Marshall and Ryders lack of impact outside of the ruck contest.
Also like the output from another runner rather than Ryder.

Reiwoldts comments were interesting in the HS below.

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/ ... a0c9160d23

St Kilda must pick Rowan Marshall as its lone ruckman and leave Paddy Ryder out
When St Kilda plays Paddy Ryder alongside Rowan Marshall it robs the young Saint of his mojo. Marshall should be given the freedom to shoulder the load on his own, and it’s why Ryder’s days are numbered, writes Nick Riewoldt.

Nick Riewoldt, Herald Sun
Subscriber only
Paddy Ryder’s days in the St Kilda line-up might be numbered.

Seemingly unhappy at sharing the ruck duties at Port Adelaide, he left the Power
for greater opportunity.

Essendon was keen to lure him home, and they would have loved to have him running out against the Magpies last night.

But he chose the Saints.

It seemed a strange decision in the off-season given the emergence of the man nicknamed The Prospect in 2019, Rowan Marshall.

When Ryder arrived at Moorabbin, most football pundits had one concern: Would his arrival stall the development of the Saints rising star?

Most AFL players, particularly the ultra competitive ones, want to be “The Man”.

Whether that’s being the forward focal point, the “hit-to” mid or the No.1 ruckman, they thrive on the responsibility that comes with shouldering more than their share of the load.

Max Gawn does it.

Brodie Grundy does it.

Rowan Marshall can do it.

Average performances in rounds 1-3, albeit a small sample size, seemed to confirm what many had feared.

That sharing the ruck duties with Ryder had robbed Marshall of his mojo.

Neither of them was able to have any impact as a forward (although Marshall can hold his own in that position) and Marshall looked out of rhythm when he eventually took his turn in the ruck.

His numbers suffered across the board which is to be expected given reduced playing time, but the sum of their parts didn’t get close to the impact Marshall had when riding solo last year.

Marshall’s disposal average dropped from 18 to 12. His clearances from 5.5 to 1.

It appeared as though he deferred to Ryder, his senior, and a player who is greatly respected across the competition.

That can be a natural reaction for a young player.

Time will tell, but Marshall seems to be the type that needs, and will continue to thrive, the greater the responsibility.

Ryder is an elite tap ruckman and has been a star for a long time, but at this stage of his career doesn’t provide enough around the ground or as a forward to warrant deploying two big men.

In contrast, Marshall can do everything.

He’s not as adept at tap work as Ryder, but jumped all over Marc Pittonet at centre bounces on Thursday night, then followed up at ground level winning a game-high seven clearances.

He marks it cleanly overhead. He is a beautiful, thumping kick and covers the ground like a midfielder.

In two games since assuming the solo ruck mantle his AFL player rating points have doubled, score involvements doubled and he leads the team in contested possessions and clearances.

It has proven to be a winning formula.

The other obvious advantage in rolling with one ruckman, as Richmond and Shaun Grigg proved, is the balance of options it provides your team.

In addition to Marshall’s dominance, what isn’t helping Paddy’s case, is by selecting one of Josh Battle or Jonathon Marsh in preference to Ryder, Brett Ratten has at his disposal power athletes who can play a variety of roles.

Battle was a solid performer at halfback in 19 games last season and so far this year has played in all parts of the ground.

The big surprise has been Marsh.

Only the bravest analyst would have predicted during the pre-season that the ex-Magpie would be keeping Ryder out of a spot.

He is a bruiser Marsh.

Happy to sacrifice himself at the contest, if he doesn’t mark it, it’s coming to ground.

Then “The Mozz Squad” gets to work.

Dan Butler, Jade Gresham, Jack Billings, and Brad Hill et al take over once the ball is on the deck.

Marsh is explosive at ground level himself and takes some of the heat off young key forward Max King.

Quite simply, the Saints look faster, and more dangerous with him, as opposed to a resting ruckman, in the front half.

The Saints have been crying out of for a young ruck star since Peter Everitt burst onto the scene.

They found mature warriors in Steven King and Michael Gardiner a decade ago, and then found their man in Ben McEvoy before bizarrely trading him just as he was ready to explode.

Ryder was a star at Essendon and Port, and could be for another club.

But Marshall is the Saints man now.

They just need to give him the stage, and watch him shine.

[SaintPav]

Is Marsh better better than Bruce is the question?

[Joffa Burns]

Is Marsh better better than Bruce is the question?

Bruce was a loss, mo doubt.
Retain Bruce, don't recruit Ryder and find a pick for Jones and we're good to go.