Increased midfield depth wins us the game

[mischa]

And Grant was going to take that famed CEO's job at one of the myriad Eaglemont companies that was top and tailed by Bill Express ("On Q" from memory, with the way paved by the king of 60's sly grog, Lindsay Fox, who was their biggest shareholder).

Good luck to Grant - another job he didn't get. And a good thing too.

You are a sick f***. Get Professional help

[bigcarl]

then again, he kicked two (well riewoldt actually kicked one of them for him) very important last quarter goals to stop the blues' run. so it is hard to discount his value as a forward.

He kicked them as a ruckman.

his best role is ruck/forward, but with riewoldt the only other marking forward can we afford to use him there? there's plenty who say he can't go against the better ruckman in the league in any case.

tbh i've been disappointed in his form as a key forward where he does tend to get a bit lost thus far. but i haven't lost faith in him as a player. he was magnificent last night.

[Teflon]

Gram too...as midfielder probably played his best midfield game for us to date.

He was fantastic.

I did not believe he could play in the midfield. Real midfield. Where it hurts. With Judd standing next to him. I had Grammy picked as a one-trick pony - and I didn't even rate that trick all that much...

A fantastic addition to this club if he can continue on like that.

Was also nice to see NDS pushing his tagger around a bit..

What...nomention of the coaching move to put him in there?

Fairly audacious I woulda thought..it took balls to go head to head with Judd....and zip from you?

Hmm...any agendas there?

[Saints43]

Gram too...as midfielder probably played his best midfield game for us to date.

He was fantastic.

I did not believe he could play in the midfield. Real midfield. Where it hurts. With Judd standing next to him. I had Grammy picked as a one-trick pony - and I didn't even rate that trick all that much...

A fantastic addition to this club if he can continue on like that.

Was also nice to see NDS pushing his tagger around a bit..

What...nomention of the coaching move to put him in there?

Fairly audacious I woulda thought..it took balls to go head to head with Judd....and zip from you?

Hmm...any agendas there?

I would have thought it pretty clear that the coach put Gram in the middle.

Grant Thomas didn't.

Well done Ross Lyon and Jason Gram.

PS. The NDS comment was also a compliment to RL.

The only agenda I have is wanting St Kilda to do well.

[Teflon]

Gram too...as midfielder probably played his best midfield game for us to date.

He was fantastic.

I did not believe he could play in the midfield. Real midfield. Where it hurts. With Judd standing next to him. I had Grammy picked as a one-trick pony - and I didn't even rate that trick all that much...

A fantastic addition to this club if he can continue on like that.

Was also nice to see NDS pushing his tagger around a bit..

What...nomention of the coaching move to put him in there?

Fairly audacious I woulda thought..it took balls to go head to head with Judd....and zip from you?

Hmm...any agendas there?

I would have thought it pretty clear that the coach put Gram in the middle.

Grant Thomas didn't.

Well done Ross Lyon and Jason Gram.

PS. The NDS comment was also a compliment to RL.

The only agenda I have is wanting St Kilda to do well.

I think he'll be a good coach. Whats your thoughts on why he wont be?

[Saints43]

I think he'll be a good coach. Whats your thoughts on why he wont be?

In my opinion we are now playing almost exactly like we did before he was appointed. There is far less running back to fill up space - the "accountability" of those who thought it was tactical cutting edge science.

It seems to me that we have wasted a lot of time.

Having said that we have won our last three games and it would be pretty hard to argue with that. When I got home from the game RL was on the telly smiling the players were singing the song. Happy days.

I can't say he wont be a good coach. We are beating the opposition we are meeting.

I also want him to be a good coach.

We have a fundamental disagreement on the quality of staff at his disposal.

I'm not sure that had RL and Ratten walked into the wrong boxes that the result wouldn't have gone the other way.

[WayneJudson42]

I think people misunderstand the whole purpose of running numbers back.
This is something that we didn't know how to do, nor were we encouraged to do.

I seriously doubt that RL's goal was to have us playing 100% flood. BUT you have to learn it properly before you can use it effectively as required. He's been saying all along that he wants quick ball movement forward, ad we are starting to see it happen. Albeit later than we would have hoped.

I also belive that the preferred plan requires a higher level of fitness, which also takes time. Interesting how we appear to be finishing games stronger the last few rounds.

[Teflon]

I think he'll be a good coach. Whats your thoughts on why he wont be?

In my opinion we are now playing almost exactly like we did before he was appointed. There is far less running back to fill up space - the "accountability" of those who thought it was tactical cutting edge science.

It seems to me that we have wasted a lot of time.

Having said that we have won our last three games and it would be pretty hard to argue with that. When I got home from the game RL was on the telly smiling the players were singing the song. Happy days.

I can't say he wont be a good coach. We are beating the opposition we are meeting.

I also want him to be a good coach.

We have a fundamental disagreement on the quality of staff at his disposal.
I'm not sure that had RL and Ratten walked into the wrong boxes that the result wouldn't have gone the other way.

Anyone who suggests we are now magically playing as we "used to" is dreaming. We are a MUCH more accountable footy side than previous all out shoot outs under the Grant Thomas "Brisbane of 2003" inspired game style....surely your not saying we are just "back to normal" are you?

As for the quality of people at Lyons disposal...might be worth remembering Lyons had a fair hand in ensuring he surrounds himself with some good people - certainly his efforts to attract Misson from Sydney are bearing some fruit....thats not just good luck...

We won our previous game from a 33 point deficit INTERSTATE....hadnt happened in the preceeding 7 years......whatever Lyon is instilling.....its certainly different to what we have done interstate in terms of come back wins before.....must be that scientifically enhanced accountable footy that appears to have only just be invented at Moorabbin..

Loved the ruck work last night - what did you think of this? or was this too just us getting back to where we were in 04/04?

[WayneJudson42]

Too funny. We are so far removed from where we were a few years ago. Perhaps in ladder position, but that's all.

Different list, different style, more accountability. Don't forget those blowouts against the Eagles and Crows.

We have'nt 'wasted time'. We have taken time to learn a new style... BIG difference. IMHO

[WayneJudson42]

BTW, our off-field personal is 100% better than we had a few years back... not the annual Assis'nt Coach revolving door policy.

[Saints43]

Anyone who suggests we are now magically playing as we "used to" is dreaming. We are a MUCH more accountable footy side than previous all out shoot outs under the Grant Thomas "Brisbane of 2003" inspired game style....surely your not saying we are just "back to normal" are you?

No. We are more defensive than that gameplan. But we are closer to previous regimes than we are to the practice match against Collingwood at Princes Park.

As for the quality of people at Lyons disposal...might be worth remembering Lyons had a fair hand in ensuring he surrounds himself with some good people - certainly his efforts to attract Misson from Sydney are bearing some fruit....thats not just good luck...

We have a complete (or more complete - I don't know) football structure. I remember sending a proxy vote to GW on that basis. Did you?

We won our previous game from a 33 point deficit INTERSTATE....hadnt happened in the preceeding 7 years......whatever Lyon is instilling.....its certainly different to what we have done interstate in terms of come back wins before.....must be that scientifically enhanced accountable footy that appears to have only just be invented at Moorabbin...

I'm pretty sure that our percentage was significantly better. Feel free to use your own science

Loved the ruck work last night - what did you think of this? or was this too just us getting back to where we were in 04/04?

I didn't mention 04. King is still a crab. Better crab than Knoble, Acland ,Rix. I would prefer MG because he's better at rucking. We were pretty lucky to get King weren't we? The cast off from a rich man's table.

[Saints43]

[We have a fundamental disagreement on the quality of staff at his disposal.
I'm not sure that had RL and Ratten walked into the wrong boxes that the result wouldn't have gone the other way.

What do you think? Did RL beat the odds against superior talent?

[Teflon]

Anyone who suggests we are now magically playing as we "used to" is dreaming. We are a MUCH more accountable footy side than previous all out shoot outs under the Grant Thomas "Brisbane of 2003" inspired game style....surely your not saying we are just "back to normal" are you?

No. We are more defensive than that gameplan. But we are closer to previous regimes than we are to the practice match against Collingwood at Princes Park.

Nonsense. You stated we are "where we were" game plan. Now your shifting your tripe to "we are more defensive"......make up your mind or just say if your not sure. It ok to admit you dont have any of the answers at times...

As for the quality of people at Lyons disposal...might be worth remembering Lyons had a fair hand in ensuring he surrounds himself with some good people - certainly his efforts to attract Misson from Sydney are bearing some fruit....thats not just good luck...

We have a complete (or more complete - I don't know) football structure. I remember sending a proxy vote to GW on that basis. Did you?

Sure. I dont remember selecting the personnel we got in though - do you? or maybe Ross Lyon might.....GT had his pick for fitness also twice - Starcevich/Larcome......that worked a treat...

We won our previous game from a 33 point deficit INTERSTATE....hadnt happened in the preceeding 7 years......whatever Lyon is instilling.....its certainly different to what we have done interstate in terms of come back wins before.....must be that scientifically enhanced accountable footy that appears to have only just be invented at Moorabbin...

I'm pretty sure that our percentage was significantly better. Feel free to use your own science

Speaking of science. Do use some and show me the last time we came back from 5 goals down interstate?.........weare all looking forward to it..

Loved the ruck work last night - what did you think of this? or was this too just us getting back to where we were in 04/04?

I didn't mention 04. King is still a crab. Better crab than Knoble, Acland ,Rix. I would prefer MG because he's better at rucking. We were pretty lucky to get King weren't we? The cast off from a rich man's table.

King the crabb...your showing where the logic comes from there...let me guess...Kosi is still "top 3 rucks "in AFL also? we all just "farting at thunder"...

King, Gardiner give you first use of the ball. Ratten on radio yesterday lamented the fact Carlton dont have an experienced ruckman and that "crabbs" had actually cost them games a few times this year - Hille at Essendojn destroyed them. You stick to borrowing Grants marketing drivel......Id prefer to listen to the long standing views of people who actuall ACHIEVED something in football.

BTW I'll take the current crabbs over what we previously had for a ruck division.....so glad we got a coach who DID something bout it other than trot out excuses over 5 years while our mids had to "steal' clearances from the opposition.........I wonder what we couldve been like with King in 04...

[plugger66]

Still wanting you to answer how we were supposed to get these ruckmen.

[Teflon]

Still wanting you to answer how we were supposed to get these ruckmen.

I agree with you.

The AFL between 2002 and 2006 placed an embargo on the trading of ruckman. There were no trades offered or made at which St Kilda couldve participated.

Besides...isnt the point really we had ruckman...I mean Knobel, Ackland, Blake and a raw Kosi who was "top 3 in the AFL" so we woluldnt have needed a King or Gardiner out of the centre square......would we?

[plugger66]

Still wanting you to answer how we were supposed to get these ruckmen.

I agree with you.

The AFL between 2002 and 2006 placed an embargo on the trading of ruckman. There were no trades offered or made at which St Kilda couldve participated.

Besides...isnt the point really we had ruckman...I mean Knobel, Ackland, Blake and a raw Kosi who was "top 3 in the AFL" so we woluldnt have needed a King or Gardiner out of the centre square......would we?

My point and you know it is if we traded for a good ruckman we may not have got Dal, Goose, Joey and so on and we also had no money in the salary cap. We have better ruckmen now so we obviously dont have any holes in the side. The only problem is we have lost 7 games. Every side except maybe Geelong have weaknesses ours was our ruck which we tried at address through trades and the draft.

[saintsRrising]

We have better ruckmen now so we obviously dont have any holes in the side. .

I am not sure what year is your basis..

But at the end of 2006 we were short:

*2 ruckmen (with Gardi, King and Ben, with back up from Kosi I think we are ok for now for a reasonable period)

*a minimum of two quick mids and another mid or two (Harvey playing on beyond reasonable likely expectations has helped to mask, but not overcome, a distinct lack of midfielders following the aging Thommo, Powell and Pecket retiring AND the fact that the way the game has evolved to require more midfielders than required seerla years back. We were still short and RL's very recent move of Gram and Sam, along with the emergence of Jones and Armo is at last getting our numbers up to a reasonable level. Greater rookie developments is also starting to play dividens and one could envisage ina year or twoo Jones, Geary and Eddy all being part of our midfield rotation.

*a medium forward (basically still need one....Charlie provides some variation, but would appear to bea smidgeon short of being an AFL player)

* a key backman (Really still need one. However Blake has steadilly improved the last two years and looks a much better backmen than a ruckman. However if Max retired at the end of this year we would be in diabolocal trouble...so please please stay on Max.) Eddy may eventually grow into beinga key defender...but he is a fair way off it at present.

If Max and Banger both retired this year it would make it hard to push fora top 4 spot next year.

[Teflon]

Still wanting you to answer how we were supposed to get these ruckmen.

I agree with you.

The AFL between 2002 and 2006 placed an embargo on the trading of ruckman. There were no trades offered or made at which St Kilda couldve participated.

Besides...isnt the point really we had ruckman...I mean Knobel, Ackland, Blake and a raw Kosi who was "top 3 in the AFL" so we woluldnt have needed a King or Gardiner out of the centre square......would we?

My point and you know it is if we traded for a good ruckman we may not have got Dal, Goose, Joey and so on and we also had no money in the salary cap. We have better ruckmen now so we obviously dont have any holes in the side. The only problem is we have lost 7 games. Every side except maybe Geelong have weaknesses ours was our ruck which we tried at address through trades and the draft.

My point is we failed. The end. You can put "try' in front of it all day long but the scores on the board so to speak...

[plugger66]

Still wanting you to answer how we were supposed to get these ruckmen.

I agree with you.

The AFL between 2002 and 2006 placed an embargo on the trading of ruckman. There were no trades offered or made at which St Kilda couldve participated.

Besides...isnt the point really we had ruckman...I mean Knobel, Ackland, Blake and a raw Kosi who was "top 3 in the AFL" so we woluldnt have needed a King or Gardiner out of the centre square......would we?

My point and you know it is if we traded for a good ruckman we may not have got Dal, Goose, Joey and so on and we also had no money in the salary cap. We have better ruckmen now so we obviously dont have any holes in the side. The only problem is we have lost 7 games. Every side except maybe Geelong have weaknesses ours was our ruck which we tried at address through trades and the draft.

My point is we failed. The end. You can put "try' in front of it all day long but the scores on the board so to speak...

Yes we failed and we now have 2 ruckmen but are we better. No because we have holes elsewhere as nearly every club has and we did back 2004-2007. We had no ruckmen then. Pretty sure injuries cost us more back then than a lack of ruckmen.

[Teflon]

Still wanting you to answer how we were supposed to get these ruckmen.

I agree with you.

The AFL between 2002 and 2006 placed an embargo on the trading of ruckman. There were no trades offered or made at which St Kilda couldve participated.

Besides...isnt the point really we had ruckman...I mean Knobel, Ackland, Blake and a raw Kosi who was "top 3 in the AFL" so we woluldnt have needed a King or Gardiner out of the centre square......would we?

My point and you know it is if we traded for a good ruckman we may not have got Dal, Goose, Joey and so on and we also had no money in the salary cap. We have better ruckmen now so we obviously dont have any holes in the side. The only problem is we have lost 7 games. Every side except maybe Geelong have weaknesses ours was our ruck which we tried at address through trades and the draft.

My point is we failed. The end. You can put "try' in front of it all day long but the scores on the board so to speak...

Yes we failed

Thank you - the rest is excuses.

That will be all.

[plugger66]

Still wanting you to answer how we were supposed to get these ruckmen.

I agree with you.

The AFL between 2002 and 2006 placed an embargo on the trading of ruckman. There were no trades offered or made at which St Kilda couldve participated.

Besides...isnt the point really we had ruckman...I mean Knobel, Ackland, Blake and a raw Kosi who was "top 3 in the AFL" so we woluldnt have needed a King or Gardiner out of the centre square......would we?

My point and you know it is if we traded for a good ruckman we may not have got Dal, Goose, Joey and so on and we also had no money in the salary cap. We have better ruckmen now so we obviously dont have any holes in the side. The only problem is we have lost 7 games. Every side except maybe Geelong have weaknesses ours was our ruck which we tried at address through trades and the draft.

My point is we failed. The end. You can put "try' in front of it all day long but the scores on the board so to speak...

Yes we failed

Thank you - the rest is excuses.

That will be all.

Yep people who cut out the part of the quote to win an arguement lose the arguement. You officially lose the arguement by resorting to that.

[Teflon]

Still wanting you to answer how we were supposed to get these ruckmen.

I agree with you.

The AFL between 2002 and 2006 placed an embargo on the trading of ruckman. There were no trades offered or made at which St Kilda couldve participated.

Besides...isnt the point really we had ruckman...I mean Knobel, Ackland, Blake and a raw Kosi who was "top 3 in the AFL" so we woluldnt have needed a King or Gardiner out of the centre square......would we?

My point and you know it is if we traded for a good ruckman we may not have got Dal, Goose, Joey and so on and we also had no money in the salary cap. We have better ruckmen now so we obviously dont have any holes in the side. The only problem is we have lost 7 games. Every side except maybe Geelong have weaknesses ours was our ruck which we tried at address through trades and the draft.

My point is we failed. The end. You can put "try' in front of it all day long but the scores on the board so to speak...

Yes we failed

Thank you - the rest is excuses.

That will be all.

Yep people who cut out the part of the quote to win an arguement lose the arguement. You officially lose the arguement by resorting to that.

are they not your words?

as I said the rest is inconsequential, excuses,history.

let us join hands and move forth together....

[plugger66]

Still wanting you to answer how we were supposed to get these ruckmen.

I agree with you.

Thanks Teffers.

[Teflon]

Still wanting you to answer how we were supposed to get these ruckmen.

I agree with you.

sold!

anytime Plugger.

Next week we are doing "How to appoint a non-credentialled bush coach into an AFL role..."

[Dan Warna]

<shrug> ruckman are a hard pick

we tried to grab a premiership ruckman, Crapuano, he had nothing left in him, he was finished when he got here

knobel was limited, and took the cash job at Richmond.

Brooks was to be a project player, didn't get the extra centremetres of growth and never came, many draftees don't take the next step, but he was a gun junior and Port charged hard for him, as they expected him to be a 10 year player.

H.ackland, was serviceable in his first year, dropped of in his second, saw the winds of change and left for a cash job at Carlton

Attempted trade for Cox, thwarted with an injury to MG which saw cox elevated to no.1 ruckman and dominated

Attempted trade for White, outbid by Melbourne, who subsequently were punished for salary cap infringements ><

doc Clarke, pretty much worse than monkhorst for on field contribution, although more than a quality person.

MG, trying hard, can't get on the field, serial injuries has seen him play a handful of games in 18 months.

Kosi, was drafted as a 192cm KPP, late growth spurt saw him as 197/198 cm ruck/forward utility

Blake, drafted as a 188cm utility, growth spurt saw him being used as a 192 cm KPP/ruck/ruck rover/tagger (even lyon has through him in the ruck)

King, considered finished at Geelong, second lease of life at st kilda, seems to be really contributing at this stage, will he be a salmon and extend his career by a good few years? possibly...

its not like we didn't try to fix the ruck situation over the years...