Ratten would be a fool to ever play Kent again!

[Wayne42]

If Kent gets dropped for the game against Freo and we still lose, who are we turning on next week, any ideas ?

See I don’t understand what you’re saying here...

Turn in him? The guy has been the close to the most heavily criticised player on the list for 2-3 years... there was a whole thread started pre-game about the meltdown of his selection... and then he turns in an absolutely stinking performance and you’re arguing what... that he’s been scapegoated?

Is there even an argument here that he shouldn’t be scapegoated and that that isn’t the right thing to do? Clearly worst on ground. Bloody Owens on debut had more of the ball.

Yes no one player is responsible for a loss but a terrible performance with a critical error from an underperforming player deserves heat.

How bad does he have to perform for some of you guys to start questioning his spot in the team?

He's not the main reason we lost, sure he's crap but the coach sees something in him that those on the outside don't see, when we lose another game and Kent's not in the team then i'm predicting the collective will turn on another player and blame him. Let's wait and see.

Thats the point though isn’t it... he was as you said “crap” and the coach sees something in him that nobody on the outside sees. Hence the criticism of for picking him when it is so obviously a bad move.

The fact that others will play bad at other times and get criticism is hardly an argument that Kent is harshly maligned

I'm just not agreeing with the notion that we lost purely because we played Kent, which was vented on here after the game, we have many issues that might only be fixed in the year's ahead with good drafting.

Until then we'll have scapegoats.

[Devilhead]

Not sure what Sharman has done wrong to not get picked but when I saw saw Kent picked ahead of him with no 2nd tall target forward I was like ...... wtf?

As pointed out earlier you have Butler Gresh and Higgo rotating forward

Match Committee got it seriously wrong

[damienc]

I know it’s a little fashionable to bag the disloyal forumites that bag Kent…
But somebody go ahead and justify that performance

28yo old, 70 odd games… best preseason of his career (like I haven’t heard that before)…

4 touches, one tackle, a goal gifted to him by the opposition passing to him in error practically on the goal line…

And all that I can forgive.

But when the game is on the line and he has the chance to do the job he’s there to do WHEN IT MATTERS… he melted under pressure like butter dropping an uncontested mark and goal.

Absolute rubbish performance

If I was Sharman, Bytel, NWM, Long and just about anyone else… I would lead a revolt of Kent was selected to play ahead of me.

We couldn’t find a spot for a guy like Dunstan but Kent survives… and it’s not even as though one couldn’t see that performance coming.

Sorry to be fired up but I am SICK AND TIRED of Kent’s utter mediocrity REWARDED time and time again.

That was hands down one of the worst performances a Saints player has ever put in.

A complete non entity that popped up just in time to stuff up the unstuffable or so I thought.

If Kent plays again… short of being the last fit player on the list I’m out on Ratten.
Is an absolute joke that this guy keeps getting opportunity after opportunity for the very predictable same old results.

Please let’s not keep trying to fight reality

It's rare that I agree with you but on this you're spot on.

[D.B.Cooper]

Of course one player is not to blame.

However Kent is not AFL standard and has never been more than a fringe player or back up in teams that have largely been middle to bottom teams.

Whilst Kent is best 22 we will never be more than middle of the road.

He’s given better service than I thought he would when we traded for him but he is very limited as a player.

Good leg speed but doesn’t use it to advantage.
Racking kick but inaccurate.
Big body but not an aggressive player.
Not a strong endurance runner or a high pressure player.
Struggles to win possessions or limit his opponent doing so.

Personally I’d rather have dumped Kent and retained Lonie, as at least Lonie while floored was elite at crumbing and getting to the right spot front and square.

BTW I had no issue with delisting Lonie, just felt he offered more than Kent.

[Bowey Boy]

I remember Lyon kept playing Robert Eddy.

[st.byron]

Of course one player is not to blame.

However Kent is not AFL standard and has never been more than a fringe player or back up in teams that have largely been middle to bottom teams.

Whilst Kent is best 22 we will never be more than middle of the road.

He’s given better service than I thought he would when we traded for him but he is very limited as a player.

Good leg speed but doesn’t use it to advantage.
Racking kick but inaccurate.
Big body but not an aggressive player.
Not a strong endurance runner or a high pressure player.
Struggles to win possessions or limit his opponent doing so.

Personally I’d rather have dumped Kent and retained Lonie, as at least Lonie while floored was elite at crumbing and getting to the right spot front and square.

BTW I had no issue with delisting Lonie, just felt he offered more than Kent.

Kent doesn’t get anywhere enough of the footy, but the biggest issue IMO is his disposal and ball handling. I can think of three separate occasions where easy chest marks have just bounced off his chest. He’s not clean with the footy. He’s not the Lone Ranger, but when you get it as little as he does………..

[st.byron]

Of course one player is not to blame.

However Kent is not AFL standard and has never been more than a fringe player or back up in teams that have largely been middle to bottom teams.

Whilst Kent is best 22 we will never be more than middle of the road.

He’s given better service than I thought he would when we traded for him but he is very limited as a player.

Good leg speed but doesn’t use it to advantage.
Racking kick but inaccurate.
Big body but not an aggressive player.
Not a strong endurance runner or a high pressure player.
Struggles to win possessions or limit his opponent doing so.

Personally I’d rather have dumped Kent and retained Lonie, as at least Lonie while floored was elite at crumbing and getting to the right spot front and square.

BTW I had no issue with delisting Lonie, just felt he offered more than Kent.

Kent doesn’t get anywhere enough of the footy, but the biggest issue IMO is his disposal and ball handling. I can think of three separate occasions where easy chest marks have just bounced off his chest. He’s not clean with the footy. He’s not the Lone Ranger, but when you get it as little as he does………..

[SunnyErnie]

I know it’s a little fashionable to bag the disloyal forumites that bag Kent…
But somebody go ahead and justify that performance

28yo old, 70 odd games… best preseason of his career (like I haven’t heard that before)…

4 touches, one tackle, a goal gifted to him by the opposition passing to him in error practically on the goal line…

And all that I can forgive.

But when the game is on the line and he has the chance to do the job he’s there to do WHEN IT MATTERS… he melted under pressure like butter dropping an uncontested mark and goal.

Absolute rubbish performance

If I was Sharman, Bytel, NWM, Long and just about anyone else… I would lead a revolt of Kent was selected to play ahead of me.

We couldn’t find a spot for a guy like Dunstan but Kent survives… and it’s not even as though one couldn’t see that performance coming.

Sorry to be fired up but I am SICK AND TIRED of Kent’s utter mediocrity REWARDED time and time again.

That was hands down one of the worst performances a Saints player has ever put in.

A complete non entity that popped up just in time to stuff up the unstuffable or so I thought.

If Kent plays again… short of being the last fit player on the list I’m out on Ratten.
Is an absolute joke that this guy keeps getting opportunity after opportunity for the very predictable same old results.

Please let’s not keep trying to fight reality

I agree 100%. At the end of the day, when we sacked Richo and made Ratts coach we proved that we were not serious. Ratts is exactly the same as Richo. ie. stubborn, inflexible, no plan B and keeps flogging a dead horse by playing oldies that will not take us forward ie. Kent and Geary. Because of Watto, Richo and Ratts we have been in no mans land for 10 years and with all the damage our list managers have done, probably another 10 years at least before we challenge.

[SunnyErnie]

If Kent gets dropped for the game against Freo and we still lose, who are we turning on next week, any ideas ?

That is irrelevant. Kent should never play again unless we have no other player available.

[Wayne42]

If Kent gets dropped for the game against Freo and we still lose, who are we turning on next week, any ideas ?

That is irrelevant. Kent should never play again unless we have no other player available.

He'll play again, maybe even against Freo.

[Devilhead]

Sharman has to replace Kent.

Sharman would at least keep the opposition backline honest with his marking power and agility giving King a chop out - this is an absolutely no brainer except our Match Committee outsmarted itself and thought the resting Ruckman or Wood could fill that role.

It was an absolutely perplexing decision which had me shaking my head and then had me shaking it some more

And Connolly in for Ross .... younger, quicker and better disposal version

Of course Jones, Clark and Ryder all back in once fit

[bangaulegend]

If Kent gets dropped for the game against Freo and we still lose, who are we turning on next week, any ideas ?

That is irrelevant. Kent should never play again unless we have no other player available.

He'll play again, maybe even against Freo.

As much as I would be against it I would not be surprised but if he plays or not I very much doubt we can beat Freo at home anyway . Not saying we can't win but on what I saw on Friday night & the players that are unavailable it's going to be a big ask . I hope they prove me wrong

[Wayne42]

If Kent gets dropped for the game against Freo and we still lose, who are we turning on next week, any ideas ?

That is irrelevant. Kent should never play again unless we have no other player available.

He'll play again, maybe even against Freo.

As much as I would be against it I would not be surprised but if he plays or not I very much doubt we can beat Freo at home anyway . Not saying we can't win but on what I saw on Friday night & the players that are unavailable it's going to be a big ask . I hope they prove me wrong

Can't wait for selection at week's end and then the game on Sunday to see if Rath has been able to turn it around.

[Ghost Like]

If Kent gets dropped for the game against Freo and we still lose, who are we turning on next week, any ideas ?

That is irrelevant. Kent should never play again unless we have no other player available.

He'll play again, maybe even against Freo.

Do you want to see him kept in the side W42?

[spert]

We lost the game due to sloppy coaching and lack of onfield leadership- Kent was just one of many players who didn't do enough in a team who ran on the ground with a lack of spark.

[B.M]

Kent
Owens
Byrnes

Should be dropped going on their performance v Collingwood

[Wayne42]

If Kent gets dropped for the game against Freo and we still lose, who are we turning on next week, any ideas ?

That is irrelevant. Kent should never play again unless we have no other player available.

He'll play again, maybe even against Freo.

Do you want to see him kept in the side W42?

The question i have is, What is the role Ratten/Rath have asked Kent to do, is he a defensive forward asked to nullify one of the opposition's quality rebounders, if that's a yes then he stays.

We really need to find some better quality midfielders, we really need to improve our disposal, we really need a Key defender and we need an AFL quality ruckman, Kent at Sandy doesn't fix any of that.

[Ghost Like]

If Kent gets dropped for the game against Freo and we still lose, who are we turning on next week, any ideas ?

That is irrelevant. Kent should never play again unless we have no other player available.

He'll play again, maybe even against Freo.

Do you want to see him kept in the side W42?

The question i have is, What is the role Ratten/Rath have asked Kent to do, is he a defensive forward asked to nullify one of the opposition's quality rebounders, if that's a yes then he stays.

We really need to find some better quality midfielders, we really need to improve our disposal, we really need a Key defender and we need an AFL quality ruckman, Kent at Sandy doesn't fix any of that.

Totally agree regarding our midfield & disposal skills.

Kent being kept on our list is a spot taken that could go to a key back, an AFL quality ruck or a better quality mid. The only bonus we got from playing Owens is that he's one game closer to that 50+ games mark. We cannot expect miracles from kids but we can expect better from Kent.

Who was the quality Collingwood rebounder that Kent shut down?

[SunnyErnie]

If Kent gets dropped for the game against Freo and we still lose, who are we turning on next week, any ideas ?

That is irrelevant. Kent should never play again unless we have no other player available.

He'll play again, maybe even against Freo.

If he does then Ratts is an idiot.

[spert]

I'm sure Kent was trying hard, so don't bag him. If he had not played, we still would have been beaten due to the rubbish midfield effort. Where's our captain so far- he should be putting in a bigger effort to lead the team. There was bugger-all leadership the other night.

[st.byron]

I'm sure Kent was trying hard, so don't bag him. If he had not played, we still would have been beaten due to the rubbish midfield effort. Where's our captain so far- he should be putting in a bigger effort to lead the team. There was bugger-all leadership the other night.

I don't think trying hard should mean a player is insulated from criticism. Kent was terrible. Least disposals of any player on the ground. 1 goal that was handed to him. Total howler that was a momentum killer - the sort of howler we've seen from him before. If a 70 odd game player who's 28 turns in a performance like that and there's a pattern of performances like that then his place should be in serious question.
When he was offered a new contract I just sighed in resignation. How long will we keep on rewarding mediocrity?
Okay so he tries hard - that's not an excuse for rubbish performance. A poor result with a good excuse is still a poor result.

[CURLY]

I'm sure Kent was trying hard, so don't bag him. If he had not played, we still would have been beaten due to the rubbish midfield effort. Where's our captain so far- he should be putting in a bigger effort to lead the team. There was bugger-all leadership the other night.

29 and 7 tackles I reckon he did his part.

Kent cost us the game he is actually the worst player I've seen at StKilda.

[skeptic]

If Kent gets dropped for the game against Freo and we still lose, who are we turning on next week, any ideas ?

That is irrelevant. Kent should never play again unless we have no other player available.

He'll play again, maybe even against Freo.

Do you want to see him kept in the side W42?

The question i have is, What is the role Ratten/Rath have asked Kent to do, is he a defensive forward asked to nullify one of the opposition's quality rebounders, if that's a yes then he stays.

We really need to find some better quality midfielders, we really need to improve our disposal, we really need a Key defender and we need an AFL quality ruckman, Kent at Sandy doesn't fix any of that.

IMO that’s the BS cop out trash that has seen us be a mediocre team for ten years.

You cannot take performances like that and justify them with rhetoric like oh but he was doing his role.

You cannot justify a role where someone doesn’t get near the contest, doesn’t get near the ball, “guards space” and then makes really bad errors at crucial times.

That performance categorically STUNK. He had no positive agency in the game.

Things like zoning, pressure acts etc aren’t an instead of actual impact proposition… you do that stuff in addition to impacting the game.

The fact 3 days later you’re not sure what his role was just crystallises then fact that he was ineffective because football is not rocket science.
You should be able to watch a game and generally know how they performed and what they did.

In terms of negative/defensive performances, it’s one thing if he played on Sidebottom and kept him to 7 touches for the game but it is loser rhetoric to have someone unsighted in a half of football and go it may be that he was doing a role.

Why do ppl persevere with this garbage?

Kent is not the reason we lost this game… but he sure as hell didn’t do much to help us win it… especially when he had the opportunity too.
And it’s not as though this is the first of this type of performance or that he has suddenly developed a super stealthy secret role known only to the coach that is secretly really effective

He’s a known quantity. The game on Friday night is a slightly worse version of the standard game he’s played for the last 3 years.

It just blows my mind that ppl could watch that and find a way to rationalise him into staying.
Tell me that Owens, Windhager, NWM, Long, Bytel, Heath, Sharman all couldn’t equally run like he did and someone not produce more.

Sadly, though I think he’ll be dropped this week… he’ll be back in a week or two… then he’ll play in a game against the wooden spooners where he’ll have 10 touches and 3 goals in a 40pt win and his fans will go “stick it up them Kent, keep proving the doubters wrong!”

Meanwhile opposition fans will keep laughing at us

[shanegrambeau]

Apart from Billings’s and Hunter’s injuries - and let’s be honest, they weren’t exactly on fire (tho Hunter showed a bit)- it’s an indictment of how poorly they must view Long, how much Butler has declined in importance, how badly Sharman must have got somebody’s knickers in a knot, and how desperate we must be as a team.

I don’t think having Long there, or even Jack Lonie, whom I rated the best of the three, would have won us the game. We were overrun and dysfunctional.

I heard Buckley try to say - before dunderhead Lyon interrupted him again - that some teams just don’t fire in Round One because they have already played (overplayed) the game in their heads prior to the actual game. And hence they are cognitively overload. Consequently, they can look lazy or tired on the field.

He also made an excellent point about Brad Hill, who is our best ball user (Bucks’s words, and mover) and that he was easy to destroy and mess up for Collingwood because they knew St Kilda would go to him. He said St Kilda’s problems are not because of Hill.and it doesn’t matter 5he f how much we are paying him. So Kent and Hill are not to blame.. Kent was useless, yes. Hill was useful but highlighted how poor our game plan is. By the way, Sinclair was invisible in the first quarter two.

Kent can do one nice thing. Snatch the ball at eye level and throw it on his boot. He may be good for the odd linking handball like Ross (although Ross has more to offer) After that, I just don’t know why we pick him - have never really.

[saynta]

I'm sure Kent was trying hard, so don't bag him. If he had not played, we still would have been beaten due to the rubbish midfield effort. Where's our captain so far- he should be putting in a bigger effort to lead the team. There was bugger-all leadership the other night.

29 and 7 tackles I reckon he did his part.

Kent cost us the game he is actually the worst player I've seen at StKilda.

Worse than Rix?