The Modern Game

[rodgerfox]

you didn't answer my question. 'strength through loyalty' - explain to me how you represent those words

I'm unsure how it fits into this thread to be honest?? But I'll try anyway...

I'll assume you're talking about in a 'footy supporter' sense. To answer that question directly - I don't.

The 'Strength Through Loyalty' stuff is frogshyt.

It has no place in modern footy. No place in the AFL. There is no loyalty. It's a business. It's an entertainment business.

People make a living out if it. They come to a club because they're paid to. They leave a club if someone else offers them more.

We have Lyon who was poached from Sydney. All our assistants have been poached. Our CEO has been poached. Our entire footy dept. are at our club because we either offered them more money, or it represented a better opportunity for them personally.


When the St Kilda footy club was a club, Strength Through Loyalty meant something. It was a club. People were a part of it, and were the heartbeat of it.

Now, there is no heartbeat. It's a robot owned by the AFL.

Those who still cling to the bullshiit about footy clubs being 'our' club, and being loyal to clubs, and tradition and all that - are deluded.

Sucked in. Big time.


There's nothing wrong with loving the footy, and getting into it. It's an entertaining sport to many. But it's not a comp anymore. It's a business.

I don't have any loyalty to Coca-Cola or CUB. I like their products from time to time, but I'll criticise them if they change the recipe and it gets worse. It their prices go up, or they pay their new 'gun for hire' CEO too much.

I'm not loyal to them because they're a business. And I know they have no loyalty to me. It's a business relationship. I'm a consumer, they're a provider.

The St Kilda Footy is no different. The only difference is that their product is worse than anything that CUB can dish up.


So to answer your question, I don't fit into the frogshyt manufactured mottos that clubs use to suck people in emotionally.


To those who will get upset by these facts, don't get angry with me for saying it. Get angry with the AFL for hijacking our clubs. Get angry with the greedy self-serving 'boards' of the clubs, and the moronic footy fans for lapping it all up.

[BAM! (shhhh)]

Meh.

Two years, and I'm less sure about Lyon's ability than I was 12 months ago.

I was hopeful when he was appointed, doubtful this time last year and I'm back to cautiously optomistic now.

2007 was bad. He made mistakes. Players made mistakes. There were injuries. The sum total was that 2007 was bad.

2008 looked for a while like it might be a continuation of 2007. Struggling club, questionable gameplan, were we on the path to another St Kilda meltdown?

But sports is what have you done for me lately, and what the Saints have done for me lately is pull together and put on a great show for the 2nd half of '08. While put in their place by the Hawks and Cats in the finals, they beat good teams to earn their way into the finals (eventually top 4) and then to the prelim (putting Collingwood in their place as thouroughly as we were handled).

If we go way out on a limb and say that head coaching may be a learning curve even if the coach has completed the so-called apprenticeship, and that taking over a devoted and successful list (Saints) may not be as straightforward as a declining mess (ala Hawks-Clarkson), it may take some time to figure out the go.

So, I don't know whether I can grant Lyon as a genious whose ahead of the curve (though I hope so). On the basis of the past 2 years, he's earned enough benefit of the doubt that I'm cautiously optomistic.

[markp]

Silly me... I thought we made a prelim last year (with some key players injured or out of form) and only got rolled by a white-hot team who went on to beat the season's virtually unbeatable side.... I thought we had just completed a promising pre-season with a minimal injury list, key returns, the promise of a new resolve from core players, and an injection of some youthful exuberance and talent....

I was obviously wrong.... we are crap, there is no hope, we have lost already.

Let's not even bother.

Is it too early in the morning for vodka and valium?

Crikey.

[the shadow]

Mr X from the west, a physiologist does have a great deal of knowledge about the human mind and it's workings. It does depend however, on which branch of science you regard as being "right". Physiologists are basically reductionists. They reduce function down to its barest bits. In other words, they are very good at describing the workings of what we consider the mind, but they make no attempt to ascribe meaning to those functions. For reductionists the human mind is merely the product of electrical impulses caused by chemical changes in neurotransmitters in the synaptic clefts of individual neurons (nerve cells). You've got 10 to the power of 23 neurons and neural networks in your brain, that's 10 followed by 23 zeros. A staggering number. A very complex and miraculous organ. Perhaps the greatest achievement of natural engineering in the known universe. So a physiologist can tell you a lot about your mind. Where emotions come from and reside in the brain, how that interacts with the rest of the body in causing behaviour and so on....

Ascribing meaning to the workings of the mind is the province of psychologists, psychiatrists and philosophers. The opposite of the reductionist view is that the mind is far more complex than a bunch of neurons firing in certain sequences. Some argue that the mind is greater than the sum of its parts and that there are mysterious and as yet undiscovered functions and factors that affect the way we see the world and behave in it. Others, such as Buddhists believe the "mind" resides in the heart and is a form of spiritual energy and consciousness. There is no empirical evidence to back this proposition up, but there may be one day.

As for RL, I too was pretty unimpressed with the way we played in 2007 and said so in this forum. Rodgerfox is right to demand facts rather than emotion. So I had to concede that the team improved significantly from 2007 to 2008. Why? Well, we finished 9th in 2007 and 4th in 2008. We also scored more points in 2008. Our devastating injury tolls of the years 2003 to 2007 were also reduced. I think that's why we finished the year off so well last year. We were fitter and had fewer injuries than many other teams. So it would appear on the evidence of these facts that we have made significant improvement.

We also appear to be better off in the development/recruiting side of things. From a recruiting budget of about 100K under GT, which barely covered JB's salary and travel expenses, we now have two full timers and JB part time, as well as an extensive and formal national network in place. I think we are already seeing some reward in this area, with the "bottom age" drafting of Steven and Connors, both of whom look like developing into good players. Heyne was also a steal in the 40's. Of course the jury's still out on big Ben McEvoy, but he'll need time, as will Lynch.

We have also started to see some benefit from our increased use of our rookie list, something which delivered zip, apart from Milney, in the past. We have seen rookie listed players CJ, Geary, and Eddy produce some good footy. I know there is a lot of improvement necessary before they can be considered unqualified successes. There are also now some exciting prospects on the rookie list. I'm sure we'll get a couple of beauties out of the current batch. I know that last bit is speculative RF, but it's speculation and optimism based on some reasonable evidence.

I too still don't like watching the way we play sometimes. We were exciting and entertaining under GT, but ultimately flawed. I know he delivered RL a dedicated, professional and mature group that was ready to add the finishing touches. He must be commended for that. What we lacked was proper list management, sophisticated recruiting methods, and effective injury management. Of course it wasn't all GT's fault, but the fact remains we fell short because of these factors, and he did set himself up as the "officer in charge of just about everything".

There is something of an irony in the fact that while I was bagging RL for his overly defensive methods, the worm may have turned very quickly in game styles. I think his methods of the past two years may now help, as we are better prepared to execute and crack the newer defensive plans. Of course we need to keep evolving, but my fears that we had been left behind by the Hawks, Bulldogs and Cats have been allayed somewhat from what I've seen so far this year.

So I'm feeling pretty bullish about our prospects, not only for this year, but beyond. Like most sainters, I'm a fatalist at times because we've had to endure so much disappointment. I am coming around to admire RL and what he is trying to put in place. I think he suffers somewhat because, let's face it, he has about as much charm as a caravan park when dealing with the media. His predecessor was much slicker in this area. But I think RL is developing and the team along with him. From the outside the players appear to back him and the group sounds and looks united. The evidence in the end will be in when our season ends, hopefully on the winners dias in late September. Go sainters! And all ye who support them.

[Teflon]

There is something of an irony in the fact that while I was bagging RL for his overly defensive methods, the worm may have turned very quickly in game styles. I think his methods of the past two years may now help, as we are better prepared to execute and crack the newer defensive plans. Of course we need to keep evolving, but my fears that we had been left behind by the Hawks, Bulldogs and Cats have been allayed somewhat from what I've seen so far this year.

So I'm feeling pretty bullish about our prospects, not only for this year, but beyond. Like most sainters, I'm a fatalist at times because we've had to endure so much disappointment. I am coming around to admire RL and what he is trying to put in place. I think he suffers somewhat because, let's face it, he has about as much charm as a caravan park when dealing with the media. His predecessor was much slicker in this area. But I think RL is developing and the team along with him. From the outside the players appear to back him and the group sounds and looks united. The evidence in the end will be in when our season ends, hopefully on the winners dias in late September. Go sainters! And all ye who support them.

Thank you for an excellent post that captures this threads intent which some so clearly blinded by dislike for Lyon refuse to concede.

The game has gone defensive. We were already moving in that direction - did Lyon see that? or is that just his footy philosophy?

Dont know but I do know that I am also more confident about taking this new "form" of game on knowing my side can cut the mustard in it.

It really isnt that hard as you have shown Shadow.

[Teflon]

Silly me... I thought we made a prelim last year (with some key players injured or out of form) and only got rolled by a white-hot team who went on to beat the season's virtually unbeatable side.... I thought we had just completed a promising pre-season with a minimal injury list, key returns, the promise of a new resolve from core players, and an injection of some youthful exuberance and talent....

I was obviously wrong.... we are crap, there is no hope, we have lost already.

Let's not even bother.

Is it too early in the morning for vodka and valium?

Crikey.

I hear ya Mark - amazing the doomsayers so quick to "want facts" and yet then so easily ignore the GOOD facts that we have seen.

Ofcourse no one wants an overly boorish defensive side - the coach AND players have said they also dont want that but it takes time. But if your going to call for logic, rational reasoning in your conclusions about Lyons performance thus far at least be balanced in your assessment.

[linz]

What have we seen on-field, to make people think that Lyon is going to be a Premiership coach?

I know for a FACT that most, if not all opposition coaches rate Lyon very highly as an astute tactician and matchday coach.

Come on Yipper. Be serious.

By stating that you know for a fact, means you've spoken personally to the majority of all AFL coaches in a forum where they will speak honestly.

Without calling you a liar, I find that very hard to believe.[/quote]

Just out of interest Rodgerfox; Who would you rate as being the best coach to guide us for this season and beyond?
Grant Thomas or Ross Lyon

[Richter]

Good gracious "The shadow", you are one smart cookie! Not quite sure exactly what happened to you on the other thread the other day.....oh well, we can all have a bad day huh?

Mr X from the west, a physiologist does have a great deal of knowledge about the human mind and it's workings.

I agree with all the rest you have said re. the respective realms of physiology vs psychology, and as I am praising and agreeing with everything else you have written, I hope you don't find it intemperate of me I correct you on one little bit.... the "mind" you refer to here is better put as "the brain" - the brain being essentially the physical substance - which neurophysiologists are expert in investigating. "The mind" refers more broadly to the overall intellectual functioning and experience of consciousness - built up of perception, higher reasoning, emotion, memory and projective creativity; and incorporating both conscious and unconscious mechanisms. Hence the famous mind/body (where body=brain) duality question in philosophy....... subject/objective....... Ego/Other........ existentialism...... post-modernism........ etc.

You make a neat summation of our team's history of the last few years. And I love your reflexive optimism which I share.

So I'm feeling pretty bullish about our prospects, not only for this year, but beyond.................................... The evidence in the end will be in when our season ends, hopefully on the winners dias in late September. Go sainters! And all ye who support them.

I am a "sort of" believer in "The Window" theory. I think it does apply to some clubs. but less so to others. We are one club who it does currently apply to. Our best players are from the 2000-2 drafts. They should be coming through together and hitting what ought to be the blossoming of their playing careers over the next 3 years. After that I think we'll be shot for a good while.

In particular we need Roo to fire. I hope he has another couple few years of consistent endeavour in him. Though I am a bit wary of this knee trouble he has started to have. He is the lynchpin around which this side functions. I am confident that these next 2-3 years we will see the flowering of a fully fledged midfield group to complement his efforts up front.

Go Saints in 2009!

[markp]

Silly me... I thought we made a prelim last year (with some key players injured or out of form) and only got rolled by a white-hot team who went on to beat the season's virtually unbeatable side.... I thought we had just completed a promising pre-season with a minimal injury list, key returns, the promise of a new resolve from core players, and an injection of some youthful exuberance and talent....

I was obviously wrong.... we are crap, there is no hope, we have lost already.

Let's not even bother.

Is it too early in the morning for vodka and valium?

Crikey.

I hear ya Mark - amazing the doomsayers so quick to "want facts" and yet then so easily ignore the GOOD facts that we have seen.

Ofcourse no one wants an overly boorish defensive side - the coach AND players have said they also dont want that but it takes time. But if your going to call for logic, rational reasoning in your conclusions about Lyons performance thus far at least be balanced in your assessment.

Yup, I think the premise in the OP is a good one... and I think if you cant get excited at this stage of the year about this team and our prospects for the coming season then you should seriously consider giving it away... I mean what is the point?

There is an especially odd breed of supporter who sits in agony thru most every game, rubbing their faces, wringing their hands and bemoaning to the heavens "why are we so are crap?!" "you're useless xyz!", "sack the coach!". What they should really be screaming is "Help!... I hate my joyless life!... I need therapy!"

I suspect some of these characters have internet access too.

[Saints43]

Yup, I think the premise in the OP is a good one... and I think if you cant get excited at this stage of the year about this team and our prospects for the coming season then you should seriously consider giving it away... I mean what is the point?

The premise of the OP is ridiculous. If the game is going defensive then RL's gameplan in 2007 was not in preparation for this day. He didn't mean for us to play that way - it was a mistake.

Is that so hard to understand? It might be a happy co-incidence (it might be a stroke of luck that will win us the flag) but it was not planned. (That's what the OP is about BTW)

[rodgerfox]

Just out of interest Rodgerfox; Who would you rate as being the best coach to guide us for this season and beyond?
Grant Thomas or Ross Lyon

You cannot be serious?? Thomas is gone. He's been gone for 3 years now. Move on.

Fair dinkum. What a joke.

[rodgerfox]

The premise of the thread is completely wrong.

What Lyon brought to the table, by his admission, needed review. He has, again by his own admission, changed it.

So what Lyon 'revolutionised' 2 years ago, was deemed by himself, and the scoreboard to be a failure.


Secondly, me personally have never really had an issue with a particular style of play - as long as you do it well.

That's only ever been my concern with Lyon and our team over the past 2 years. We aren't following any sort of plan at all. We're all over the place.
No method. No system. No coherence. No consistency.

It's Lyon's job to get that. This is my where my criticims stems from.

[the shadow]

Nice work Richter! What you've stated is absolutely correct and pretty much represents the view of the mind and consciousness by science and philosophy today. I was trying to put the physiologists point of view, which BTW I think is incomplete. I'd also argue more along the lines of what you've proposed. I think we are in furious agreement here. Just defending the neuro-physiologists, as they do play an important role in unravelling the mystery and even the definition of what the mind is. What is obvious is that you were paying attention in those philosophy of science and the mind lectures! As I've said in another thread, in which I apologised for having a meltdown, this forum has many intelligent and insightful contributors. It makes most of the other fan sites look fairly pedestrian. I doubt you'll find anything as polished as your last post on any other fan site, Richter.

RF, I don't give RL credit for being a genius with the foresight to predict future patterns of play, but I think it's fair to say what has been perceived as an overly defensive game plan in the past, may suddenly become more effective. That may just be pure luck. But we deserve some. I too have been a critic of RL in the past, but I think on the available evidence, we seem to be improving. After all we did finish 4th last year having made a preliminary final, a position that would have been the envy of 12 other clubs.

I also think its a bit rich to say we have no method, system or coherence. Inconsistency I'd agree on, but I think that's what he's trying to achieve. More consistency through method and system. If anything, we've been criticised for being "overcoached", too predictable and a lack of flexibility. There are a number of experts, who see RL as a good tactician and can appreciate that he is working hard to create a more resilient unit through an emphasis on defence. Greg Denham recently said he thought RL's coaching alone was worth a couple of wins for the saints last year and that this year will be the same. KB agreed. I think his method is crystal clear, it's just not that palatable or attractive at times.

If we keep making finals and god forbid, win a premiership, I'll be the first to worship at the altar of Ross Lyon. FWIW, I think we're closer now than we have been since 2005. 2006 and 2007 were not lost years, just the opportunity to have a bit of a rebuild, get the right structures in place and get a shot at it while our core group of stars are still in their prime. The next three years represent our best chance. We have more than just hope. We are closer than most people believe. We've got a favourable draw and all we need is a better run with injuries to have a real crack.
As Henry Ford said, "Whether you think you can or you can't, you're right." So at this stage I hope the players and fans think we can.

[evertonfc]

Geez, the Fox raises a valid point and the world caves in around him.

Perspective - Ross Lyon is not untouchable and deserves the scrutiny any senior AFL coach gets.

[markp]

It might be a happy co-incidence (it might be a stroke of luck that will win us the flag) but it was not planned. (That's what the OP is about BTW)

Splitting hairs now, but I believe the OP leaves room for it to have partially been a 'happy coincidence', RL put the plan in place but how could anyone be sure of how the game would evolve?.... the result is what's important, and just maybe we are ahead of the curve a bit.

Wouldn't that be great?... reason to get exited even...?

I appreciate you editing your post by the way... I think you possibly had me confused with someone else, I dont pretend to be a great analyst of the game, and I dont use rolly eyes.

[rodgerfox]

The other irony with this thread, is that the OP has jumped to Lyo's defence countless times in regards to his defensive game plan by saying 'Paul Roos won a flag with Sydney by doing it'.

Yet now Lyon has revolutionised footy by being defensive?

[the shadow]

It's not meant as a personal criticism of RF. I acknowledge he is right to ask for the facts. The fact is if we have no system, coherence, consistency etc., how on earth did we finish 4th in 2008? As for RL, he gets plenty of scrutiny, on this site, in the media and from within the club. I'm sure no one believes he is above criticism, but putting things in perspective, surely he is not as completely hopeless as RF makes out, is he? Or am I missing something?

[Saints43]

I appreciate you editing your post by the way... I think you possibly had me confused with someone else, I dont pretend to be a great analyst of the game, and I dont use rolly eyes.

The opening of my post was petty and added nothing to my argument. Apologies for even posting it.

[markp]

I appreciate you editing your post by the way... I think you possibly had me confused with someone else, I dont pretend to be a great analyst of the game, and I dont use rolly eyes.

The opening of my post was petty and added nothing to my argument. Apologies for even posting it.

No stress.... cheers.

[rodgerfox]

The fact is if we have no system, coherence, consistency etc., how on earth did we finish 4th in 2008?

Put very simply, Roo dominated the second half of the year.

[Richter]

Geez, the Fox raises a valid point and the world caves in around him.

Perspective - Ross Lyon is not untouchable and deserves the scrutiny any senior AFL coach gets.

RF says we have no game plan, that we lack consistency, and that RL is consistently beaten.

1/ I am staggered to think that anyone could watch our games under RL and say that we have no game plan. Seems to be, when the oppo have the ball, pressure the man with the ball, each of our players be "accountable"...... when we have the ball, chip around, probing for an opening. IMO the major change from 2007 to 2008 was the addition of a more attacking flavour - breaking the lines with handballs and pace - I expect to see more of this in 2009. It is the only way that we can possibly add to our stock standard attacking ploy of kicking to Roo.

2/ Consistency - probably true to say we have been inconsistent. But that it hardly new - it has been the case for a decade under both the last two coaches.

3/ RL's record since starting as coach.....

H&A: Won 24, Lost 19, drawn 1

NAB Cup: Won 4, Lost 2.

Finals: Won 1, Lost 2.

Overall: Won 29, Lost 23, drawn 1: Winning percentage: 54% (excl NAB Cup). Source: http://afl.allthestats.com/coaches/coachrecs.php

[BAM! (shhhh)]

Interesting discussion, and I can see the basis of most expressed views (with the exception of the idea that Lyon has no system... love it or hate it, he's clearly got a system), but I do find myself wondering if the "defensive approach" necesserily translates into us being well prepared for lots of rolling zones in 2009.

We've certainly played a number of defensive zones in the last 2 (and more) years, played loose men in the back, put numbers behind the ball, etc. etc.

I'm not sure that necessarily translates any better than any other system to rolling zones. I'm not sure we're necessarily ahead of the curve in that sense. It could well be - it depends on what degree we try these zones during the H&A ourselves, our players should be well drilled in zoning by now.

I think it probably doesn't hurt that there's been a strong focus on building a running game with the intention of beating floods and zones, as it will continue to apply; the wheel does not need to be re-invented. It equally ought to be noted that our offensive systems have been a downfall. We broke down Hawthorn's zone during mid 2008 pretty well... but when we met them in finals, we couldn't touch it.

So I'm more conservative in any praise of foresight. Lyon's put us in a position which won't hurt us, while others are more of a mystery. I don't really think it's foresight - the rolling zone vs the Saints tactics are only similar in falling under the banner "defensive", IMO the only current coach who should be credited with the strategy is it's creator: Clarkson. That Clarkson has had such impact with a defensive system, and Lyon is a defensive system coach isn't foresight, it's co-incidence.

I do think it gives an opportunity for a defensive minded tactitian like a Ross Lyon to show foresight, by being able to get a couple of moves ahead on what the exploits will be to get through and the solutions to those... but until it happens, that's just optomism on my part.

[rodgerfox]

RF says we have no game plan, that we lack consistency, and that RL is consistently beaten.

1/ I am staggered to think that anyone could watch our games under RL and say that we have no game plan.

I don't think I've said that.

I've said that whatever game plan we have, we're not good at.

The coach could have the best, most fool-proof, perfect game plan in the entire universe - but that doesn't make you a good coach.

Getting your team to adhere to it is what makes you a good coach. We don't adhere to it.

That's the coaches fault.

[rodgerfox]

One other question....


Why does Lyon consistently say after games that 'we didn't have numbers back. They did, we just followed them'?

Or words to that effect.

[Saints Premiers 2008]

The fact is if we have no system, coherence, consistency etc., how on earth did we finish 4th in 2008?

Put very simply, Roo dominated the second half of the year.

he is a superstar obviously and of course he is going to be a focall point and a reaosn why we win games

he is the teams best player