a goal-kicking forward line

[saintsRrising]

So Rodge WHO is that FIFTH discard that you claim we secured in this years trade week????

Did we not elevate Attard to our list?

Where did he come from? Outer space?

1/ As far as I am aware the elevations are:
Elevated Rookies:
Jarryn Geary
Clinton Jones

2/ Attard was not traded for!!!! He was aquired in the rookie draft in the year prior!!! which has nothing to do with the trade period. (You might note also that the 2007 rookie selectons have not even occurred yet!!!!!!!!!!!!)


3/ What you said was:

Besides, we've just come off a trade period where we picked up 5 discarded players

Rookie elevations are not part of trade period....and even if they were the picking up as you call it with Attard was the year prior.




Use of the rookie list to give players a second chance is a reasonable use of the rookie system.

[saintsRrising]

You clearly stated in that ridiculous rant that you foolishly re-posted, that our list was good enough to win the flag. It's clear - it's there in black and white!

Obviously not in black in white enough because you are still misquoting me!!

Right at the start of it I said:

"Talking Windows I think we have seen the first window of a premiership for the Saints has closed . . . i.e. the one that would have been led by our older core of players. Peckett, Powell and Aussie are now gone . . .

Our older guard players that are now remaining will be support players rather than the core that we win with.

However our second window of opportunity is fortunately already opening for us . . . and if a lot goes right it may even snag us a flag in 2007 which would be great for Banger. "


That means that we needed to rebuild Rodge...and that in my estimation it would mainly be our next generation players who will win it for us

You may not have noticed but Brooks and Mcqualter did not improve....nor did Watts....etc...

[rodgerfox]

You clearly stated in that ridiculous rant that you foolishly re-posted, that our list was good enough to win the flag. It's clear - it's there in black and white!

Obviously not in black in white enough because you are still misquoting me!!

Right at the start of it I said:

"Talking Windows I think we have seen the first window of a premiership for the Saints has closed . . . i.e. the one that would have been led by our older core of players. Peckett, Powell and Aussie are now gone . . .

Our older guard players that are now remaining will be support players rather than the core that we win with.

However our second window of opportunity is fortunately already opening for us . . . and if a lot goes right it may even snag us a flag in 2007 which would be great for Banger. "


That means that we needed to rebuild Rodge...and that in my estimation it would mainly be our next generation players who will win it for us

You may not have noticed but Brooks and Mcqualter did not improve....nor did Watts....etc...

Huh?

Saying in black and white that we have the talent to win the 2007 flag means that we need to rebuild???

On what planet??

As for Brooks, McQualter and Watts not improving - that's not the point. They were on the list. The same list you said outright was good enough to win the flag.
The same list which you have now changed your tune to say was mismanaged and is no good.

[bigcarl]

And on topic - yes, we need a forward line that kicks goals.

very succinctly put, dodger. it seems so simple as to be self-evident, yet this season we failed in this regard.

[rodgerfox]

And on topic - yes, we need a forward line that kicks goals.

very succinctly put, dodger. it seems so simple as to be self-evident, yet this season we failed in this regard.

It's not the forward line though causing it. It's the result.

The midfield was the problem.

The problem was injuries to Hayes, Ball, Max, Goose, Goddard and Gram.

If the backline can win contests, midfielders can break to space confidently before the contest even happens. The backmen come away and find a midfielder by himself. He has time to find a good forward target under no pressure. He looks like a hero.

Take out Max and Goose, and suddenly the midfielder needs to get back to help in contests. When we do win the ball in the back half, our midfield is back. The opposition midfield fills holes in the midfield.

We get stagnent. We can't break lines.

Put the blokes I mentioned above in the team and fit, and the forwards output would improve dramatically.

[bigcarl]

Put the blokes I mentioned above in the team and fit, and the forwards output would improve dramatically.

probably. still, i think we are leaving too much to too few up forward. i'd like to see a half-forward line of BJ, Riewoldt, Gilbert.

that would spell the end, once and for all, of the "kick-it-to-roo" gameplan and give our blokes multiple options going forward, rather than just the one.

[rodgerfox]

that would spell the end, once and for all, of the "kick-it-to-roo" gameplan and give our blokes multiple options going forward, rather than just the one.

But I think that's a bit of a myth BigCarl.

The times when we appear to 'kick-it-to-Roo' are the times when our midfield is under pressure.

When our midfield is on top, we score easily and seem to have endless avenues to goal.

Under Thomas and under Lyon, the plan has never been simply 'kick it to Roo'.

It's been 'kick it to the best forward option'. The only 'problem' is that Roo is often the best option! The second problem is that when the midfield is under pressure and not breaking lines, the delivery is always under duress and quiet often simply kicked to the 'hot spot'.

[bigcarl]

that would spell the end, once and for all, of the "kick-it-to-roo" gameplan and give our blokes multiple options going forward, rather than just the one.

But I think that's a bit of a myth BigCarl.

The times when we appear to 'kick-it-to-Roo' are the times when our midfield is under pressure.

When our midfield is on top, we score easily and seem to have endless avenues to goal.

Under Thomas and under Lyon, the plan has never been simply 'kick it to Roo'.

It's been 'kick it to the best forward option'. The only 'problem' is that Roo is often the best option! The second problem is that when the midfield is under pressure and not breaking lines, the delivery is always under duress and quiet often simply kicked to the 'hot spot'.

i take your point. everyone looks better when their midfield is on top.

i do think it is telling however that geelong, the eventual premiers, had five guys who kicked 30 or more goals for the season and also were the best at converting inside 50s to goals.

we had three and (though we improved in the second half of the season) were among the worst at converting inside 50s into goals.

[rodgerfox]

Footy is so much like basketball these days it's not funny.

Once upon a time, there was no 3-pointer in basketball.

It was introduced, basically to counter zone defence - or as we call it, flooding.

If you 'flood' the key, then the attacking team can effectively get a free shot worth 3 points.

If you spread your defence to counter the 3 pointer, the attacking team can go inside easily and score.


Although we don't have a 3-pointer in footy (well not yet anyway!), we do have the options of shaking up the defence by scoring from many angles.

If your forwards do all the scoring, it becomes predicatable. If you constantly try to bomb long goals from your midfield, it becomes predictable.

You need to be able to score from anywhere, and by everyone. If you're good at it, you'll try to score from your midfield against a team with a great defence. And you'll try to use your key forwards against teams who don't have a strong back 6.

When we're fit, we can do both. Our midfielders can kick goals. All of them can.
Our forwards can kick goals - all of them can.
Our defenders can kick goals - nearly all of them can.

We've got a great balanced list. We just need them fit and healthy.

As mentioned somewhere else in this thread, at the same time we were being criticised for being 2 dimensional, Sydney won a flag with O'Loughlin and Hall sharing the same % of goals as Roo and Gehrig.

One thing we do need, is a fast, strong medium forward to somehow come close to replacing Aaron Hamill. Not for goal output neccessarily, but for defensive pressure.

[rodgerfox]

i do think it is telling however that geelong, the eventual premiers, had five guys who kicked 30 or more goals for the season and also were the best at converting inside 50s to goals.

True - but it's got to be noted that Geelong had no injuries to what is a quality backline and what is a quality midfield.

A forward only gets the ball if someone kicks it to them.

Depending on how good the kick is, often results in how many times they get it.

How good the kick is is often dependent upon how much pressure the guy kicking it is under.

[bigcarl]

One thing we do need, is a fast, strong medium forward to somehow come close to replacing Aaron Hamill. Not for goal output neccessarily, but for defensive pressure.

gilbert? bj?

[rodgerfox]

One thing we do need, is a fast, strong medium forward to somehow come close to replacing Aaron Hamill. Not for goal output neccessarily, but for defensive pressure.

gilbert? bj?

Gilbert maybe, in time - but not BJ.

I don't think BJ's defensive side is that great yet.

Allen is one I'm very interested in. He had a bit of Jarrod Waite about him.

[bigcarl]

I don't think BJ's defensive side is that great yet.

maybe not, but his kicking for goal is pretty good. i'm all for playing guys where they can hurt the opposition most

[rodgerfox]

I don't think BJ's defensive side is that great yet.

maybe not, but his kicking for goal is pretty good. i'm all for playing guys where they can hurt the opposition most

Sure, I think he'd be great up forward. My response was more in relation to him being there as a 'forward defender'.

[bigcarl]

Sure, I think he'd be great up forward. My response was more in relation to him being there as a 'forward defender'.

i think gilbert would be ideal in that forward defender role. might even kick a couple if he works on his action

[Teflon]

what a shame Dodg...you turn a good thread into your personal rants/attacks on SR.

If you dont agree with him - ok. But why the need to belittle him for having the gonads to actually have a view ?

[Oh When the Saints]

what a shame Dodg...you turn a good thread into your personal rants/attacks on SR.

If you dont agree with him - ok. But why the need to belittle him for having the gonads to actually have a view ?

rodgerfox is putting his points across without abuse as far as I can see.

What ******* arrogance to suggest that 'Ross' agrees with your crap. You wanker. Fair dinkum.

This is the only comment that was out of line. In 6 pages of heated debate, that's a damn good effort by usual standards.

It's a vigorous argument but no one has really resorted to attacking the messenger.


They're staying on message.


Leave the moderating to the mods

[rodgerfox]

what a shame Dodg...you turn a good thread into your personal rants/attacks on SR.

If you dont agree with him - ok. But why the need to belittle him for having the gonads to actually have a view ?

rodgerfox is putting his points across without abuse as far as I can see.

What ******* arrogance to suggest that 'Ross' agrees with your crap. You wanker. Fair dinkum.

This is the only comment that was out of line. In 6 pages of heated debate, that's a damn good effort by usual standards.

It's a vigorous argument but no one has really resorted to attacking the messenger.


They're staying on message.


Leave the moderating to the mods

Good moderating too.

Left it alone, and it fizzled out and got back on track.

[saintsRrising]

Though....as Rodge keeps misquoting me....let it be noted that I have not said or claimed that Ross "agrees" or endorses my personal views.

I have yes said that on some things that we seem to have the same or similar views. This is not Ross endorsing my view....just that we have come independtly to similar conclusions on some matters.

In a world of many billions it is impossible for everyone to have unique views.....and just because two or more people have the same opinion on a matter does not mean that one person has "endorsed" the other person.


Rodge also keeps stating incorrectly that I keep changing my views slavishly following each years premiership team....again incorrectly ...and without offering any examples of how.

I posted in this string earlier an opinion piece I wrote BEFORE Ross took charge......and the FACT that Ross's recruiting priorities were very similar to mine is an indication that we reached idependently similar conclusions about how the list needed to improve.....and not as Rodge is trying to infer that I am copying Roos or Ross is copying me....or that I am somehow following each years premier.

The piece was written a year befor Geelong won their flag.....and post Cats flag I fail to see how I have changed my posts or views on how the Saints should play.



Now no one stands still, and the game and opinions do change and evolve....

But for the past three years my pist have been pretty consistent on how the saints need to play, to improve and how the list needed to be evolved.

Rodge keeps posting that I slavishly follow each years Premier....but fails to provide any examples of how and why I have done this.


All this despite as Rodge would say....my 5000 words post of which there are many....and so Rodge should therefore be able to easily find the examples of my flip flopping around.

But he cannot because I have not.

Instead he picks out half a sentence.....and misquotes it.....such as the rubbish he is posting about my views on trading.

[rodgerfox]

Rodge also keeps stating incorrectly that I keep changing my views slavishly following each years premiership team....again incorrectly ...and without offering any examples of how.

I posted in this string earlier an opinion piece I wrote BEFORE Ross took charge......and the FACT that Ross's recruiting priorities were very similar to mine is an indication that we reached idependently similar conclusions about how the list needed to improve.....and not as Rodge is trying to infer that I am copying Roos or Ross is copying me....or that I am somehow following each years premier.

You do.

It clearly says in the 'piece' that our list is good enough to win the flag. Now, you're saying that our list is no good and needs to rebuild.

You've clearly, in black and white, changed your tune 180 degrees on that point. And that is just one of many.

The piece was written a year befor Geelong won their flag.....and post Cats flag I fail to see how I have changed my posts or views on how the Saints should play.

You've said we need to improve. You say it like it is some sort of brilliant revelation. You fail to accept that all the improvement you listed in your 'piece' would be instantly rectified and reached if we are fit and injury free. Exactly as Geelong's 2006 deficiencies were addressed last year - because they were injury free.

Now no one stands still, and the game and opinions do change and evolve....

Ahh, finally. You admit it. You do change your views with premier. Good, we're getting somewhere. You should just leave it at that.

But for the past three years my pist have been pretty consistent on how the saints need to play, to improve and how the list needed to be evolved.

Well no, you don't.

You said our list was god enough to win the flag. Now you're saying it's not. Although oddly even though you now claim it's improved thanks to your recruiting, oops, I mean 'Ross'' recruiting. Has it improved? Or has it not?

So our list was good enough to win the flag. It's now been improved by you and 'Ross'' recruiting genius - but now the list is no good?

It just doesn't add up.

Rodge keeps posting that I slavishly follow each years Premier....but fails to provide any examples of how and why I have done this.

You clearly do. And have done for 3 years.

First it was Sydney.

They had a game plan, we didn't. That was what it was all about - tactics and game plan. That was the missing ingredient we needed.

Then it was West Coast. Rookies. That's what we needed. That was the missing ingredient.

Now it's Geelong. Off-field structure and addressing weaknesses is what we need. That's now the missing ingredient!

The thing that shiits me with your rants, is that you won't concede or acknowledge that quite simply the only thing we've lacked is fit players. All your tactical garbage about rookies, game plan etc. are rubbish. You need to concede that the single most important factor in AFL footy is fit players.

Sydney, with all their tactics and game plans, couldn't get within 40 points of anyone, and were sitting 14th on the ladder until they went 10 weeks without an injury. Tactics? Or injuries?

West Coast, with all their rookies were beaten in a GF when they lost 2 players to injury. Last year in 07 they fell over at years end when they suffered injuries. Rookies? Or fit players?

And Geelong. Didn't finish in the top 10 when they had injuries, Last year with a dream run were great. If anyone tries to tell me that Neil Balme was the difference, I'll spew up. Neil Balme, or injuries?

You were also talking up Mark Williams and his genius of 'teaching'. Simply because they were winning. He taught Rodan and Motlop to be superstars, he brilliantly taught Westhoff.

What happened to his brilliant teachings on GF day?

Port had injuries in 06. Bad injuries. They didn't last year. Brilliant teacher? Or good injury run?

You simply look at who's winning, and try to come up with some ridiculously over complicated way to explain it.

The funny thing is, we 'addressed' the tactics and game plan by hiring a new coach. Didn't help.

We addressed rookies. Didn't help.

We addressed weaknesses in our list. Didn't help.

It's no wonder you change your view depending on who's winning at the time - cause you're never bloody right!

You're like one of the knobs that backs 20 horses in the Melbourne Cup and brags about their astuteness when they get the winner! Telling everyone all the factors that led to the brilliant selection.

[saintsRrising]

Ah..once again pure Rodgerfox....where you distort and fabricate what I have posted on in the past.

Do you do this to be mischevious/ Because you like to bait as opposed to debate......or simply because your memory is very poor???

You clearly do. And have done for 3 years.

First it was Sydney.

They had a game plan, we didn't.

When did I say that the Saints did not havea game plan? An outright lie by you.

I stated that the Saints had too predictable a game plan and that offensively (ie when the opposition had the ball) that our game plan was a joke.

I also stated that GT ingnoring the flood was ill-founded and interestlingly enough when he at last started to use tactics to counter it in his last half year post Bonnie Doon the fortunes of the club improved!! and yes I posted during that last hal year that tactically I thought he was at last caoching well.

That was what it was all about - tactics and game plan. That was the missing ingredient we needed.

Rubbish, gain you are making things up!!!...I have always posted that there are MANY ingredients thata team and coach need to get right...firnes and game plan being just some, with other aspects such as list management, rookies, player development etc etc..

Then it was West Coast. Rookies. That's what we needed. That was the missing ingredient.

Yes I pointed out that WC along with MOST OTHER CLUBS was making full use of the rookie system but the saints were not utilising it properly. Yes I hightlighted that WC had 7 ex-rookies in their Premiership team...and from memory was the first to realise this and post on it.... rookie wise they have done better than most. But MOST AFl clubs have exploited the rookie system much greater than the saints.

Now it's Geelong. Off-field structure and addressing weaknesses is what we need. That's now the missing ingredient.

err cough cough....I was posting on the need to do this at the time of GT's sacking...ie a YEAR prior to the cats winning their flag!!!!!

The fact that year later in was shown to have been a key part of the Cats success is fact.

But it was not the only reason....ie as I have posted they completely overhauled their fitness side from May 2006.....and also addressed the players mindset by using specialist consultants.

The thing that shiits me with your rants, is that you won't concede or acknowledge that quite simply the only thing we've lacked is fit players.

I won't for simply it is not the ONLY thing we have lacked.

I have always said it was a factor.,,but it is one of many. You bemoan lack of player...what about the two seasons that GT bungled how much our players were paid so that we had to play with a list up to 2 players short!!!!!! An extra 2 players might have been handy!!!

I also know that when Ross arrived that he was stunned in the Saints incompetence in the area off player conditioning and and fitness and demanded that this be addressed. GT left a mess.

I also know after speaking to an ex-Saints Club Doc that under the previous regime that player conditioning was a joke with medical advice not always followed and failure to have individual fitness plans for players to the extent required for modern football.

You prattle on about the fitness of our players being the only issue....but completely disregard the clear incompetence of the former coach in this regard who insisted on full responsibilty and accountabilty in this area and got it....much to the cost of the St Kilda Football Club. RB also bears accountabilty for not acting quicker than he did.

[barks4eva]

I also know that when Ross arrived that he was stunned in the Saints incompetence in the area off player conditionaing and and fitness and demanded that this be addressed. GT left a mess.

I also know after speaking to an ex-Saints Club Doc that under the previous regime that player conditioning was a joke with medical advice not always followed and failure to have individual fitness plans for players to the extent required for modern football.Y

ou prattle on about the fitness of our players being the only issue....but completely disregard the clear incompetence of the former coach in this regard who insisted on full responsibilty and accountabilty in this are and got it....much to the cost of the St Kilda Football Club.

Well articulated and I absolutey agree 100%, as I did with the rest of what you wrote, but only quoted this part because it is the very issue that dodgy keeps prattling on about,

sure dodger is going to make the point that Thomas Maximus was messiah like for getting us to a preliminary final with a long injury list, but what he fails to recognize is the exact precise point you make sRr and that is that Thomas Maximus was largely to blame, for running the entire football department like a fair dinkum chook raffle, which in the end possibly cost us a premiership or two


now dodgy, back in your foxhole, you're completely owned

[saintsRrising]

You were also talking up Mark Williams and his genius of 'teaching'. Simply because they were winning. He taught Rodan and Motlop to be superstars, he brilliantly taught Westhoff.

What happened to his brilliant teachings on GF day?

Firstly on your point "Simply because they were winning."....UTTER rubbish as I posted at the start of the season what PA were doing and why they would be successful. You should rember this as you rubbished my post at the time..... 6 months later PA were in the GF.


In my book....Williams overachieved with PA in 2007.



In my book one of William's greatest strengths is his teaching ability. many football players, ex- football players and coaches have commented on this as well as other people such as Champion Tennis Players who have observed him in action first hand.

A swag of AFL coaches are emerging from the assistants that have coahed under him is also testament to his ability in this reagrd.

He got his list to over achieve in 2007. Yes they flopped on GF Day (though the Cats were awesome).....but the fact that he actually got them into a GF (something that your hero GT never did with the Saints) in 2007 with the list at his disposal was a very good achievement. Many pundits did not have them even making the 8 in 2007.

In 2008 they will improve again. In 2007 they were ahead of the plan.

[bigcarl]

john kennedy senior used to say he'd play his best players forward because the team that kicked the highest score would win the game, and yes, he knew you had to get the ball down to them.

[Oh When the Saints]

john kennedy senior used to say he'd play his best players forward because the team that kicked the highest score would win the game, and yes, he knew you had to get the ball down to them.

Kouta also said in his book that Pagan's style of coaching was outdated and unsuited to how football needed to be played, and that results of the club suffered because of the way they were playing.

And Pagan only won a flag eight years ago.


Footy changes very quickly.