No Byrnes, no Saints!

[D.B.Cooper]

Byrnes (aka Byrbes) has now played in 5 of our 6 wins.
Was obviously the difference today.

No Byrnes, no Saints.

Won this match at the selection table by including the hard running young fella.

[The Fireman]

This has come as a huge shock to some of our saintsational seers

[CURLY]

Was ok today still far too many basic errors and poor decisions.

[The Fireman]

Was ok today still far too many basic errors and poor decisions.

[SaintPav]

Another spite thread.

How adorable.

[CURLY]

Another spite thread.

How adorable.

It’s all he’s got.

One of those supporters that actually hopes we go poorly or a player plays badly so he can be critical of a supporter who rated them.

[skeptic]

Boy this is the most conflictual days of posting I’ve ever seen here following a stirring victory

[magnifisaint]

I thought Byrnes was good. His kicking was fine and his run was great.

[The Fireman]

Boy this is the most conflictual days of posting I’ve ever seen here following a stirring victory

lol I guess it would be boring if we were all on the same page. Trouble is some on here are in totally different manuscripts

I am totally pumped. That is one of the greatest wins I’ve seen in ages.
Yet some feel the need to post the negatives and play it down. We know who they are.

[Moods]

Was ok today still far too many basic errors and poor decisions.

Quick to tell others they have no idea, but for you to form that opinion you must have been watching a different game. Was likely his best game he’s played for the club.

[CURLY]

Was ok today still far too many basic errors and poor decisions.

Quick to tell others they have no idea, but for you to form that opinion you must have been watching a different game. Was likely his best game he’s played for the club.

The missed tackle the over running of a marking opponent not taking the body. Still lands to many kicks on team mates heads.

At least he didn’t play on to his left foot today. Clearly that’s been worked on.

[repta]

Interesting quirk.
Doesn't strike me as a central player. However there maybe something in his leadership that is less apparent.
Wh9 did he replace? Was it Ross/Jones,?
Saints have been far more attacking in their wins

[mad saint guy]

Byrnes was very good against Sydney. The issue is that he tends to have 2-3 good game per year and offers absolutely nothing outside of that. I'd love it if he found consistency and played at his best most of the time. His bad games are really, really bad though. I feel like I've been duped twice by flashes of good form before so I'm not willing to say that this is a turning point. Kudos to him though. When everything clicks - he's up to the task. But that is rare

[skeptic]

Hi everyone, I’ve moved quite a few posts that were way off topic to the animal enclosure.

Previously I posted that I didn’t think you could do that and was deleting posts… particular shout out to Pav who has expressed concern RE this, but have figured it out now. It’s rather convoluted.

I’m going to open a thread about this momentarily to flag any issues but I might actually need to do some work for now but just FYI that’s what’s happened.

[Scollop]

Won this match at the selection table by including the hard running young fella.

Good point about the selected line up.

Obviously we had no choice with the injuries, but I think Byrnes and Phillipou were very timely

Both players were hungry to impress and both have good tanks.

The workload was shared. We came in with a good attitude. Melbourne Storm example for our players was all about setting standards even if you can’t play finals. It was timely because it added an extra dimension to the performance against the top side in the competition.

[B.M]

Gives maximum effort - good ordinary player

There’s nothing wrong with that

You need 24-30 ranked players on your list

He was very good Sunday, has played very good games in the past, is an elite runner. Just lacks polish.

[D.B.Cooper]

Gives maximum effort - good ordinary player

There’s nothing wrong with that

You need 24-30 ranked players on your list

He was very good Sunday, has played very good games in the past, is an elite runner. Just lacks polish.

Agreed, if player 24-30 on the list can add value and input when they play the depth is strong.

If Byrnes is best 22 we are struggling, if he’s rated 30 we’re in better shape.

[CURLY]

Has to get rid of his basic mistakes.

[Scollop]

Has to get rid of his basic mistakes.

How many ‘basic’ mistakes did Mason Wood make during the match? 5 clangers and 5 turnovers.

What about one of our mist highly paid in Brad Hill? 4 turnovers and 3 clangers.

Mattaes had a huge game…his disposal efficiency was 57%. Hunter Clark was under 40%.

You need to balance your criticism and direct it towards a few of our more senior players

Byrnes has only played 50 pdd games of senior footy. He is only 23. Still has some upside

[CURLY]

Has to get rid of his basic mistakes.

How many ‘basic’ mistakes did Mason Wood make during the match? 5 clangers and 5 turnovers.

What about one of our mist highly paid in Brad Hill? 4 turnovers and 3 clangers.

Mattaes had a huge game…his disposal efficiency was 57%. Hunter Clark was under 40%.

You need to balance your criticism and direct it towards a few of our more senior players

Byrnes has only played 50 pdd games of senior footy. He is only 23. Still has some upside

Step back and read my post.

BASIC MISTAKES

[Scollop]

Has to get rid of his basic mistakes.

How many ‘basic’ mistakes did Mason Wood make during the match? 5 clangers and 5 turnovers.

What about one of our mist highly paid in Brad Hill? 4 turnovers and 3 clangers.

Mattaes had a huge game…his disposal efficiency was 57%. Hunter Clark was under 40%.

You need to balance your criticism and direct it towards a few of our more senior players

Byrnes has only played 50 pdd games of senior footy. He is only 23. Still has some upside

Step back and read my post.

BASIC MISTAKES

Byrnes had zero clangers for the game

You’re tally of clangers is increasing every time you criticise him in this thread

You are basically a moron.

[CURLY]

Has to get rid of his basic mistakes.

How many ‘basic’ mistakes did Mason Wood make during the match? 5 clangers and 5 turnovers.

What about one of our mist highly paid in Brad Hill? 4 turnovers and 3 clangers.

Mattaes had a huge game…his disposal efficiency was 57%. Hunter Clark was under 40%.

You need to balance your criticism and direct it towards a few of our more senior players

Byrnes has only played 50 pdd games of senior footy. He is only 23. Still has some upside

Step back and read my post.

BASIC MISTAKES

Byrnes had zero clangers for the game

You’re tally of clangers is increasing every time you criticise him in this thread

You are basically a moron.

Landing kicks on blokes heads, missing basic tackles and not taking body in marking contests all don't count as recorded clangers.

Be my guest and go off your Herald Sun stats.

[D.B.Cooper]

Has to get rid of his basic mistakes.

How many ‘basic’ mistakes did Mason Wood make during the match? 5 clangers and 5 turnovers.

What about one of our mist highly paid in Brad Hill? 4 turnovers and 3 clangers.

Mattaes had a huge game…his disposal efficiency was 57%. Hunter Clark was under 40%.

You need to balance your criticism and direct it towards a few of our more senior players

Byrnes has only played 50 pdd games of senior footy. He is only 23. Still has some upside

Step back and read my post.

BASIC MISTAKES

Byrnes had zero clangers for the game

You’re tally of clangers is increasing every time you criticise him in this thread

You are basically a moron.

In one centre clearance in the 2nd 1/4 I think, Warner fended off 2 Saints players, Steele ( and I think) Clark, with no comment from Curly.

Guilden (I think) ran away from Byrnes and Curly posts “Byrnes burnt off”.

Poor Curly is so focused on young Byrnes and cheating umpires, it’s all he sees on the Telly.

The fact he wrote “NWM clearly touched the ball” intimating umpires cheating, when no Saint claimed it had been touched or remonstrated and the Saints players did not set up for a kick in doesn’t indicate to Curly that he is wrong.

He has a loop, cheating umpires, AFL conspiracy, Byrnes and that’s all he can focus on.

But Curly knows footy

[CURLY]

Has to get rid of his basic mistakes.

How many ‘basic’ mistakes did Mason Wood make during the match? 5 clangers and 5 turnovers.

What about one of our mist highly paid in Brad Hill? 4 turnovers and 3 clangers.

Mattaes had a huge game…his disposal efficiency was 57%. Hunter Clark was under 40%.

You need to balance your criticism and direct it towards a few of our more senior players

Byrnes has only played 50 pdd games of senior footy. He is only 23. Still has some upside

Step back and read my post.

BASIC MISTAKES

Byrnes had zero clangers for the game

You’re tally of clangers is increasing every time you criticise him in this thread

You are basically a moron.

In one centre clearance in the 2nd 1/4 I think, Warner fended off 2 Saints players, Steele ( and I think) Clark, with no comment from Curly.

Guilden (I think) ran away from Byrnes and Curly posts “Byrnes burnt off”.

Poor Curly is so focused on young Byrnes and cheating umpires, it’s all he sees on the Telly.

The fact he wrote “NWM clearly touched the ball” intimating umpires cheating, when no Saint claimed it had been touched or remonstrated and the Saints players did not set up for a kick in doesn’t indicate to Curly that he is wrong.

He has a loop, cheating umpires, AFL conspiracy, Byrnes and that’s all he can focus on.

But Curly knows footy

Wilson immediately disputed and commentary also said touched. If the goal umpire signaled touched and called for a review it would have been a point.

Byrnes had the chance to lay a very simple tackle but got pushed away and the Swans player turned and hit a target not far out from goal.

Byrnes is ok but makes far to many basic errors and when you are only ok you can't afford to do that .

[CURLY]

Has to get rid of his basic mistakes.

How many ‘basic’ mistakes did Mason Wood make during the match? 5 clangers and 5 turnovers.

What about one of our mist highly paid in Brad Hill? 4 turnovers and 3 clangers.

Mattaes had a huge game…his disposal efficiency was 57%. Hunter Clark was under 40%.

You need to balance your criticism and direct it towards a few of our more senior players

Byrnes has only played 50 pdd games of senior footy. He is only 23. Still has some upside

Step back and read my post.

BASIC MISTAKES

Byrnes had zero clangers for the game

You’re tally of clangers is increasing every time you criticise him in this thread

You are basically a moron.

In one centre clearance in the 2nd 1/4 I think, Warner fended off 2 Saints players, Steele ( and I think) Clark, with no comment from Curly.

Guilden (I think) ran away from Byrnes and Curly posts “Byrnes burnt off”.

Poor Curly is so focused on young Byrnes and cheating umpires, it’s all he sees on the Telly.

The fact he wrote “NWM clearly touched the ball” intimating umpires cheating, when no Saint claimed it had been touched or remonstrated and the Saints players did not set up for a kick in doesn’t indicate to Curly that he is wrong.

He has a loop, cheating umpires, AFL conspiracy, Byrnes and that’s all he can focus on.

But Curly knows footy

Wilson immediately disputed and commentary also said touched. If the goal umpire signaled touched and called for a review it would have been a point.

Byrnes had the chance to lay a very simple tackle but got pushed away and the Swans player turned and hit a target not far out from goal.

Byrnes is ok but makes far to many basic errors and when you are only ok you can't afford to do that .