The Modern Game

[WayneJudson42]

Ugly as it mey be, but the modern game is a result of coaches trying to go one better in a tactical sense.

The sad reality is that you can play whatever style you like, but if a coach devises a way to shut you down, then you're scroowed which ever way.

So do you roll over or join them?

Perhaps the AFL should look at some serious rules like a minimun of players in defensive zones, or even like rugby where after 5tackles, they turn it over. Perhaps a cap on handballs in any one set play?

Mins you, having said that, just take a look at videos from the 8's and it wasn't too pretty back then, either.

um, no! Those type of rule changes should never ever ever be considered.

How about we just the scrap the game, call it something else , and start again. FFS.

ok

[mbogo]

Wow - what a mishmash of erudite expression and absolute tripe - in this thread.
The game evolves, has evolved, needs to evolve and will continue to, no matter what over-controlling bullsh*te the AFL invent to try to control the directions.
I am sure that no one intended to create the over defensive merry-go-round style but that is what we have, and it was created from a series of stats and 1%ers and facts like the issue that better defence wins more finals and more clean handballs and disposals means more possession.
And teams with more possessions win.
Simple really!
But u gotta love Roger - I thought he said last year he stopped going to games anyway in 2008 - so he probably has no idea how we are going or anything about our game plan. [Personally I remember a half-non critical post about Lyon in early 2007 - but that is it - until the tirade and "I loved Grant" stuff began again!]
I also remember that most on here at the start of 2008 thought a top 4 finish would be good enough for coach Lyon.
I was one of these - and face facts - it was!
This year the corollary is that we need to make the GF or we have gone backwards!
Do we have the list for this, or the coach?
Not sure! But I reckon to get there we need a supreme effort in the "box" in '09.
But cut out the crap, guys - it is painful, embarrassing and just so totally vacuous.
See you at the footy.
Go Saints!

[Teflon]

So lets put your "Lyons just taking to long" into context.

The list isnt as good as it was - I mean by your own ranking we are now 3rd best in the comp - in 04/05 some had us best (and Id argue the Dogs depth is now better than ours - as we have seen we are "thin" when we lose a player....see Luke Ball against Hawks prelim...)....so we may even be 4th best list getting round (and if we are honest the impressive talent Carlton/Richmond have coming through you could mount an argument they are in better shape...I dont think Mqualter/Clint Jones would get a game for them - do you??.....but lets go with your theory for now...)

I don't think St Kilda have ever had the best list in the competition. The results the previous coach was getting were about right as well. You can argue that Carlton and Richmond have better prospects over the next three years but you would be wildly incorrect IMO. Carlton's list has massive flaws in both defence & forward lines. Richmond is the same. St Kilda has a good defence, good midfield and I would argue that problems with our forward line are self imposed.

Clinton Jones shouldn't get a game for us. He shouldn't play for us. As far as I'm concerned he is a waste of development time of a player with more scope for improvement (almost anyone else on the list). McQ will take a step this year (but I agree with you generally on him). Have a look at the bottom end of other teams lists - they all have pretty ordinary players.

Mq/Jones imo are both list cloggers - just my view.
As for Carltons/Richmond deficiency I think they are still behind where we are at in development - the question is for how long?...For example, IMO our defence is 1 season away from losing a gun FB only to be replaced with a Zac Dawson type which will SEVERELY hamper our structure.....we'll see how good our defence is then....I dont see Zac stopping Buddy myself....

Regardless, Lyons taken over a list that is slipping - needs depth added badly, he doesnt have the top 10 pick luxury to revamp as his predecessor did so he needs to be far more astute through rookies, scholarships, draft picks etc

When you say Lyon took over a list that is slipping... how far did 'the list' slip between September 2006 and march 2007. Or did the performances slip? The list issues were exacerbated by the list group performance falling away.

This is an obvious one. This list - compared to when we became a "good team" and all talk about our "list" began - from around 04/05 - has been slipping....dont believe me? Simply Have a look at the mix of experience to youth ratio we had then to now AND factor in guys like Hamills, Gehrigs, Powells, Thompsons, Harveys were contributing enormously to what we have underneath Lenny/Ball now?.......ofcourse the list has slipped - the depth just aint there now for a start...and if I had to pick between Gehrigs output from back then to 07...

Yeah you can talk performance betweeb 06/07 - I think you need to take a longer view on list development/decline than that. What can you do in 1 year to really change this trend??

He's had to revamp a "one size fits all" game plan that fell down badly when sides simply refused to play "shoot outs" and got numbers back,
He's had to re-educate a side to play a new way
Hes had to adapt to the caper of senior AFL coach - including deal with the media
He's had to do this while navigating his way through a Board spill that led to major changes
Lose a legend and a Coleman medallist...

This is a statement that continually gets made on this forum - that St Kilda performed the charge of the light brigade each week and just kicked helicopters to Gehrig & Riewoldt. St Kilda were a high scoring and defensively sound unit (as well as generally being highly motivated). These attributes don't come about just with a pat on the arse and "Do it for the jumper" jingoism. Although I will agree that the refusal to pay tempo football when required was a philosophical failing. I don't believe RL has had to perform a re-education. The style of football he says he wants St Kilda to play is not like switching from golf to the high-jump. It's the same game.

St Kilda had 1 game style and could not adapt to another -thats the point and I do believe Lyon wants a team that can both attack and defend and this is not easy to master, does require a certain skill level (which we are suspect on) and is why IMO hes quite dramatically turned the list over in 2 yrs. The way Geelong flooded and pulled us apart in the club record games holder match for Harvs highlighted this to me way back then. It still took to long for that coach to admit he had a problem with this style and do something about it instead of cr@ping on about belief clouds.....and corporate jibberish. He simply tactically had no answers - the cupboard was bare Im afraid. Lyon IMO is at least attempting to address this via both personnell and game plan changes - thats a mini rebuild (along with the class retirements) and re education process in anyones language and it takes time.

And I agree that RL has had to learn the non-technical aspects of the job such as media. To me RL hasn't presented as the fastest learner in the game.

Hes not as media savvy as GT was, and I agree hasnt mastered this are as fast. He doesnt have the "smooth" look of a corporate salesman, hes no sheedy "marketing" guru but first and foremost I want a coach who is technically astute and I think he is that. You only have to listen to the way he pulls a game apart when he explains the deficiencies - no spin, just a clear indication he knows where and why we need to improve. I much prefer that to the other. I dont think Alan Jeans was ever "media savvy" ...but in a very understated way could clearly articulate where it was won/lost and why and what needed to be worked on. Media savvy skills can come later for mine and already Lyons improving in this area.

Despite all this this he gets us to a prelim in yr 2..........(where you say our list is at..)

And hes taking to long for your liking????

The greatest concern with St Kilda late 2003 onwards (since we've been a good team) has been consistency of performance. This is the most important measure of a coaches performance. Our best and worst is as far apart as I can ever remember.

Id argue that the NOW gap between our best and worst player is also as far apart now than it has been in 7 years - see my point on list slippage. Thats NOT a coincidence.

I am yet to be convinced that RL is going to get this right. If he does I believe that we can still have a tilt at the flag.

Fair enough and true he may not - time will tell but I at least think we need to be realistic with timeframes for where we are at. IMO the "come down" for many St Kilda supporters from "great list, great potential" has been hard to swallow but I think its time we looked at our side with opposition glasses on to get an independent view on some of our "stars" (make sure you listen to those who genuinely follow footy - not twits with agendas).

F@rk me - you should get on the plane and have a chat to Obama - I reckon in a day or two you'd have this global financial crisis sorted....

Whatever.

Last point was a cheap shot - for that I apologise.

[Teflon]

That's not really true. I was very supportive of Ross Lyon when he took over. I had private concerns about 3 months in, then started to share them publicly.
My concerns at the time, are exactly the same as they are now.

My concerns at the time, related to recruitment, and the performances of our ready made players.

you gave the new coach 3 months before developing "concerns" over recruitment/player performance?

Generous of you.

Seriously, your here to troll and with that tripe we all know it. You've lost the passion, dont like the coach, the game, life, whatever....give us all a break and pop over to the Collingwood boards for a decade or 3 where you'll be feted as football oracle.... and stop wasting everyones time with silly piddle.

[rodgerfox]

you gave the new coach 3 months before developing "concerns" over recruitment/player performance?

The recruited of Gardiner and Clarke was a mistake. It didn't even take 3 months to realise this. The problem since, is that recruiting old rejects has become a habit.

Player performance - absolutely. Good players playing poor football when a new coach walks into the joint is a huge concern. Generally, players will be doing everything to impress. Usually, you actually a get a huge peak in individual performance when a new coach rocks up.

I was very, very concerned by this. However, as I said they were private concerns at the time.
It wasn't until things got worse, that I began to express my concerns.


I was completely unaware that expressing concerns in relation to a footy club was tabou on a footy forum. My apologies.

[rodgerfox]

But u gotta love Roger - I thought he said last year he stopped going to games anyway in 2008 - so he probably has no idea how we are going or anything about our game plan. [Personally I remember a half-non critical post about Lyon in early 2007 - but that is it - until the tirade and "I loved Grant" stuff began again!]

You're quite simply a liar.

[Mr Magic]

you gave the new coach 3 months before developing "concerns" over recruitment/player performance?

The recruited of Gardiner and Clarke was a mistake. It didn't even take 3 months to realise this. The problem since, is that recruiting old rejects has become a habit.

Player performance - absolutely. Good players playing poor football when a new coach walks into the joint is a huge concern. Generally, players will be doing everything to impress. Usually, you actually a get a huge peak in individual performance when a new coach rocks up.

I was very, very concerned by this. However, as I said they were private concerns at the time.
It wasn't until things got worse, that I began to express my concerns.


I was completely unaware that expressing concerns in relation to a footy club was tabou on a footy forum. My apologies.

Apology accepted.

[mbogo]

But u gotta love Roger - I thought he said last year he stopped going to games anyway in 2008 - so he probably has no idea how we are going or anything about our game plan. [Personally I remember a half-non critical post about Lyon in early 2007 - but that is it - until the tirade and "I loved Grant" stuff began again!]

You're quite simply a liar.

Pity we do not have a search by date function on here, hey Rog?
I could say the same about you with your outrageous claims that you ever supported Lyon - give us all a break!

"after 3 months" - I assume means you decided he was no good in December 2006

[Mr Magic]

That's not really true. I was very supportive of Ross Lyon when he took over. I had private concerns about 3 months in, then started to share them publicly.
My concerns at the time, are exactly the same as they are now.

My concerns at the time, related to recruitment, and the performances of our ready made players.

By my reckoning, given that Lyon was appointed October? 2006, then roger was having 'private concerns' about him which he then 'started to share publicly' in January 2007?

Ok I can understand how roger would have questioned the 'recruiting at that time, but given we hadn't as yet even played an intra-club practice match at that stage, how exactly could he have concerns over 'the performances of our ready made players'?

[mbogo]

Now that seems accurate - Magic - but I wonder, when I was saying how I thought this or that - and Roger stating categorically that I am a liar - if this would not be in breach of Forum Rules section 1 and 2 .....
Any ruling on this type of blatant, personal and unjustified abuse mods?
In response I call for some random sampling of Rogerfox posts about Lyon from Jan 2007 to March 2007 to test his unwarranted accusation"!
Mind you since I did not categorically state anything - this in itself proves that he is in breach of the rules!
How can we have a debate when someone just comes out and says "liar" FFS!

[Teflon]

Now that seems accurate - Magic - but I wonder, when I was saying how I thought this or that - and Roger stating categorically that I am a liar - if this would not be in breach of Forum Rules section 1 and 2 .....
Any ruling on this type of blatant, personal and unjustified abuse mods?
In response I call for some random sampling of Rogerfox posts about Lyon from Jan 2007 to March 2007 to test his unwarranted accusation"!
Mind you since I did not categorically state anything - this in itself proves that he is in breach of the rules!
How can we have a debate when someone just comes out and says "liar" FFS!

Dont waste your time mbogo - whats tha saying bout never having a battle of wits with an unnarmed man?

[WayneJudson42]

Now that seems accurate - Magic - but I wonder, when I was saying how I thought this or that - and Roger stating categorically that I am a liar - if this would not be in breach of Forum Rules section 1 and 2 .....
Any ruling on this type of blatant, personal and unjustified abuse mods?
In response I call for some random sampling of Rogerfox posts about Lyon from Jan 2007 to March 2007 to test his unwarranted accusation"!
Mind you since I did not categorically state anything - this in itself proves that he is in breach of the rules!
How can we have a debate when someone just comes out and says "liar" FFS!

Dont waste your time mbogo - whats tha saying bout never having a battle of wits with an unnarmed man?

Oh, and the worst injury run in 7 had nothing to do with results ether. It was all RL's fault.

[Shaggy]

RodgerFox made the call straight away on what will happen after the sacking of GT.

We will be in for a change in game plan, certain players will not adapt, then gone, and then the Saints go into rebuild.

This was ridiculed at the time by Tef who thought bringing in talls to win the tap, flooding and Kosi at FF were the answer.

RF is disillusioned and arrogant as a result which I can fully understand.

I suspect RF will rethink if RL starts to get the best out of Kosi, Ball, Dal, X, Raph, Gilbert, Bakes, Goose, Fish and McQ. This is forgiving RL that power players like AH, G-Train, Vossy and Brooks were pre-maturely culled (IMO) because they were not suited to the game plan RL originally thought would win us the premiership.

There is no doubt RL is changing for the better as he is learning IMO
It’s the learning process which is the problem IMO since our list in now at its maturity.

Time to deliver the best out of our key players otherwise we are f***ed.

[Mr Magic]

RodgerFox made the call straight away on what will happen after the sacking of GT.

We will be in for a change in game plan, certain players will not adapt, then gone, and then the Saints go into rebuild.

This was ridiculed at the time by Tef who thought bringing in talls to win the tap, flooding and Kosi at FF were the answer.

RF is disillusioned and arrogant as a result which I can fully understand.

I suspect RF will rethink if RL starts to get the best out of Kosi, Ball, Dal, X, Raph, Gilbert, Bakes, Goose, Fish and McQ. This is forgiving RL that power players like AH, G-Train, Vossy and Brooks were pre-maturely culled (IMO) because they were not suited to the game plan RL originally thought would win us the premiership.

There is no doubt RL is changing for the better as he is learning IMO
It’s the learning process which is the problem IMO since our list in now at its maturity.

Time to deliver the best out of our key players otherwise we are f***ed.

Shaggy,
I, and I'm sure others, have no issue with rodger predicting what would happen as soon as GT was sacked.
None at all.

What I take issue with is the bs he's now spruiking that he gave RL 3 months and due to 'recruitment and good existing players not performing' he lost faith in RL's coaching ability.

The second part of that statement does not wash with the facts (we played no games in the 3 month period so how could good existing players be performing badly?)

[rodgerfox]

Now that seems accurate - Magic - but I wonder, when I was saying how I thought this or that - and Roger stating categorically that I am a liar - if this would not be in breach of Forum Rules section 1 and 2 .....
Any ruling on this type of blatant, personal and unjustified abuse mods?
In response I call for some random sampling of Rogerfox posts about Lyon from Jan 2007 to March 2007 to test his unwarranted accusation"!
Mind you since I did not categorically state anything - this in itself proves that he is in breach of the rules!
How can we have a debate when someone just comes out and says "liar" FFS!

You are a liar.

"[Personally I remember a half-non critical post about Lyon in early 2007 - but that is it - until the tirade and "I loved Grant" stuff began again!] "

If you can find one single post where I have ever said, or even intimated that "I loved Grant" then post it - otherwise, admit you're a liar and apologise.

One single post. Just one. If anyone can find one single post where there is the slightest reference to me 'loving Grant', then produce it.

Otherwise MBOGO, you are a liar.

It doesn't even have to include the words "I love Grant" (even though MBOGO has clearly said I stated those words hence him using quotation marks). Doesn't even have to use those words, it can even include some form of reference to me loving him or even some form of reference to me thinking he is, or was anything more than an above average coach who was good for our club, and shouldn't have been sacked when he was.

Go on, find one post, one comment. One thread.

Please don't get me confused with the other morons on here who seem to think that being critical of Lyon instantly means you're 'against us' therefore must love GT.

[rodgerfox]

Shaggy,
I, and I'm sure others, have no issue with rodger predicting what would happen as soon as GT was sacked.
None at all.

Well you're wrong.

At the time, almost every single poster had 'issue' my ideas as to what a premature sacking of a coach at that time would mean to our club.

Even though I was 100% correct, just about everyone took great issue with it.

[rodgerfox]

"after 3 months" - I assume means you decided he was no good in December 2006

I was actually still 'trying' to be supportive and look for positives after a year into the job....

http://www.saintsational.com/forum/view ... ght=resume


So please, let's not bullshiit about me being 'anti-Lyon' from the start. I liked Lyon, and was very pleased when we got him.

I made several posts and threads about it.

[Mr Magic]

So you do have a problem with the sacking of GT and the appointment of RL?

And yet you gave RL 3 months before you started to publicly voice the private concerns you had?

You can't have it both ways roger - you either were a critic from the beginning (no problem) or you weren't. It's just that your last current position (I gave him 3 months) seems a little at odds with your newest current position (I predictd it)?

[rodgerfox]

So you do have a problem with the sacking of GT and the appointment of RL?

And yet you gave RL 3 months before you started to publicly voice the private concerns you had?

You can't have it both ways roger - you either were a critic from the beginning (no problem) or you weren't. It's just that your last current position (I gave him 3 months) seems a little at odds with your newest current position (I predictd it)?

Voicing concerns doesn't mean you 'hate him' or are 'against him'.

I had concerns very early. I had concerns the moment he said he did't really want the job, and I had concerns the moment he signed Clarke and Gardiner.

Voicing concerns doesn't mean you aren't supportive.

The thread I posted, is very supportive of Lyon. I was very supportive of Lyon.
That doesn't mean you aren't allowed to be critical.

The difference is now, I'm not supportive. I haven't been supportive for a while now. I don't see anything happening that suggests we're headed in the right direction, infact quite the opposite.


Does that make sense? Are you able to comprehend the concept of someone not being completely, and moronically black or white?

Do you understand that intelligent humans can view things and situations with both eyes open? And be able to support something or someone, and at the same time being critical as well?


Seriously, I worry about the state and future of the world when I encounter some people on here.

[rodgerfox]

So you do have a problem with the sacking of GT and the appointment of RL?

The sacking of GT was incorrect. Yes, I said this then and I still say it now.

Wrong time, and wrong reasons.

BAd move.

The hiring of Lyon I was wrong abaout. I thought it was a great appointment at the time. I posted several threads at the time making this clear.

I was wrong. It wasn't a good appointment.

[Mr Magic]

So you do have a problem with the sacking of GT and the appointment of RL?

The sacking of GT was incorrect. Yes, I said this then and I still say it now.

Wrong time, and wrong reasons.

BAd move.

The hiring of Lyon I was wrong abaout. I thought it was a great appointment at the time. I posted several threads at the time making this clear.

I was wrong. It wasn't a good appointment.

Well time will prove if you were correct the first time or correct now.

[MC Gusto]

rodger 5000+ posts = get a life

[Cairnsman]

Like a pitbull on a meat wagon...they never let go

[mbogo]

Now that seems accurate - Magic - but I wonder, when I was saying how I thought this or that - and Roger stating categorically that I am a liar - if this would not be in breach of Forum Rules section 1 and 2 .....
Any ruling on this type of blatant, personal and unjustified abuse mods?
In response I call for some random sampling of Rogerfox posts about Lyon from Jan 2007 to March 2007 to test his unwarranted accusation"!
Mind you since I did not categorically state anything - this in itself proves that he is in breach of the rules!
How can we have a debate when someone just comes out and says "liar" FFS!

You are a liar.

"[Personally I remember a half-non critical post about Lyon in early 2007 - but that is it - until the tirade and "I loved Grant" stuff began again!] "

If you can find one single post where I have ever said, or even intimated that "I loved Grant" then post it - otherwise, admit you're a liar and apologise.
One single post. Just one. If anyone can find one single post where there is the slightest reference to me 'loving Grant', then produce it.
Otherwise MBOGO, you are a liar.
It doesn't even have to include the words "I love Grant" (even though MBOGO has clearly said I stated those words hence him using quotation marks).

The quotation marks were to indicate my metaphorical allusion to the general penchant of your posts - I assume that my reference to your tirade was not an issue.
I look forward to further scintillating repartee with you throughout the year. (Do I need to say <sarcasm> now as well, to indicate my use of syntax?)

[matrix]

ffs resize the avatar