The Fox Report - Round 3

[rodgerfox]

Didn't see the game, so I can't really comment on it. Haven't seen any replays or highlights either.

However, in this weeks' edition of the The Fox Report we'll take a look at the bigger picture....

After Westaway came out pre-season and said that we needed to play with some flair and be more attacking, I was interested. Intrigued actually.

He either was telling the coach indirectly to get with the times and change his plan. Or re-iterating what he'd already spoken to the coach about. Or Lyon had spoken to him and already told him what he was changing. Or, and this may well be the case, Lyon had always intended to morph us into what we've seen this year all along. Only the fools thought we'd have instant success under a new coach. It takes time. Years.
For Westaway to say that publicly, was intriguing. For a President who doesn't have alot to say, I thought this was significant.

Anyway, we'll probably never know the backgound to his comments, but he was right.


We have some holes in our team. Some battlers. I always used to believe that duds don't play in Premierships. However in recent times we've seen guys like Lewis-Thompson, Seaby, Thurstans, Stokes and many more win flags - so I don't think this is a valid rule anymore.
We have a few guys, who ideally wouldn't be playing. They'd be squeezed out of the best 22.
The good news on that front is that we have both Clarkes, Maguire, and Max in the stands as 'depth' currently.


The ruck duo is an interesting one. Playing very good footy both of them. Two ruckmen who have more than one string to their bows. As per GTs infamous misquote, ruckman who only contest hitouts then render you one man down after that, are useless.
Fortunately, we have 2 guys who offer good contests at bounces. They offer aggression. And they also offer a goal or two given the chance.
Most teams will have one good ruckman, and a plodder off the bench. We have 2 pretty good options.
Keeping them fit is the key.
Keeping them fit has been their problem their entire careers. Hopefully we've found some magic that other clubs couldn't find.



It's amazing what happens when kids become men.

It's also amazing what confidence comes with being fit and healthy. Suddenly we see Hayes, Baker, BJ, Gram, Kosi, Ball and Dal fit for a change. We see Joey and Gilbert with that extra pre-season and 22 games under their belts.

They are different people, all of them.
Confidence in themselves, and each other. It shows. The ability of men who are fit to carry out the coaches orders compared to kids who are timid and hurting, is incredible.
It can explain the 'Geelong of 2007 Syndrome', and hopefully the 'Saints of 2009 Syndrome' too.
It can explain why suddenly Enright, Corey, Ling and Kelly go from being average footballers, to being part of arguably the best and deepest midfield the game has seen.


Off-field, I'm very happy with our approach.
Now this is something where I'm prepared to already say that I was wrong.
I was seeing no passion, no enthusiasm, no intent from anyone off-field. Now that Fraser has resigned, and we're winning, it all seems very 'Saintly' again.
It seems that whatever approach was being taken by the coaching staff in regards to getting our player's heads right, has worked.
Maintaining it of course is the challenge, but full credit for addressing the major problem with the group. Their heads.
And off-field, we handled that very well. Kept it quite, no panic, no big 'Archie Fraser-esque'' statements - just get the job done.

People get upset when the Pres and the Board are invisible. I did - because I felt the coaches weren't capable of generating some excitement inside and outside of the club, so I felt someone needed to.
Coaches must love the fact that the Pres and the Board are invisible. They must absolutely love it.
Because they obviously had faith in what Lyon and his team were trying to do, and left them to it.
Well done to all in that regard.


My main criticisms of Lyon, and the current status...

We Rely on Roo.
Myth busted!


....or addressed and fixed.
To be fair to me, it was an issue. To be fair to Lyon, now it doesn't seem to be!

Our Good Players aren't Playing Well.
Myth busted!


....or addressed and fixed.
To be fair to me, it was an issue. To be fair to Lyon, now it doesn't seem to be!


We are Mentally Fragile
Myth busted!


....or addressed and fixed.
To be fair to me, it was an issue. To be fair to Lyon, now it doesn't seem to be!


Recruitment of Average Players
Jury is still out on this, as it's very early days.

When your good players are up and about, your depth looks good. Average players are carried. It's when your good players are battling that you really find out whether your duds are duds or not.

My theory is that our average players are still fragile, but hopefully our stars can hide them for another 6 months.


Look, basically if we can continue to play like we have been, and other clubs can continue to look vunerable like they currently do, we can do very well this year.
Sadly though, it's highly unlikely the year will pan out like that.

We still have room for improvement though. Apart from our intensity and effort, we've been pretty average. Not very 'clinical' and certainly massive room for improvement in our skills.
We also have plenty of room for Roo to improve.

We can get better. And we'll need to. Because Geelong and Hawthorn will get better too.

[bergholt]

We have some holes in our team. Some battlers. I always used to believe that duds don't play in Premierships. However in recent times we've seen guys like Lewis-Thompson, Seaby, Thurstans, Stokes and many more win flags - so I don't think this is a valid rule anymore.
We have a few guys, who ideally wouldn't be playing. They'd be squeezed out of the best 22.
The good news on that front is that we have both Clarkes, Maguire, and Max in the stands as 'depth' currently.

Recruitment of Average Players
Jury is still out on this, as it's very early days.

When your good players are up and about, your depth looks good. Average players are carried. It's when your good players are battling that you really find out whether your duds are duds or not.

My theory is that our average players are still fragile, but hopefully our stars can hide them for another 6 months.

This is undoubtedly true. On current form, the top 10 or 15 are good enough to make anyone look good - if we'd recruited Nathan Carroll, for instance, I'm sure he'd look a superstar right now. But, as you say, we probably have sufficient depth outside the current 22 to fill holes as and when they open.

The bottom few at the moment are, in order from the bottom:

Gwilt
Dawson
Geary
Blake
McQualter
Ray
Schneider

Schneider, Ray and McQualter look pretty good right now and will probably play the majority of games. Blake is fine as a purely defensive player but is always a little suspect on the ball. Geary may well be a good player one day, and is surely learning from week-to-week, but at the moment still has serious deficiencies. He's the sort of player that we have the luxury to be able to carry while he's learning. Dawson is similar; he'll be replaced in an instant by Max, but is learning all the time, and i'm happy we have him on the list.

And then Gwilt. I don't think Gwilt will ever be a great footballer. He looks ok when we're playing well, but just doesn't seem to have the hunger and drive to be an elite player. But I know many disagree with this.

Still, as you say, plenty of depth waiting to fill these spots; X, Raph, Maguire, Max, Jack Steven, Dempster, etc. It's all positive.

[Cairnsman]

Now this is something where I'm prepared to already say that I was wrong.

Hey Rodgerfox shouldn't you have posted this in Joffaboy's "The I was wrong thread"

[MC Gusto]

[Or, and this may well be the case, Lyon had always intended to morph us into what we've seen this year all along. Only the fools thought we'd have instant success under a new coach. It takes time. Years.

Agreed. Lyon has developed our defensive base, our agression towards the man and ball and sharpened our skills. He has brought in the players to suit his gameplan. This has meant a couple of years of adjustment and to be fair some pretty ordinary footy. But now the dividend has paid and we are seeing the results of that hard yakka being unleashed and converting into scoring. Kudos to you Lyon. We are looking far more likely than the team of '04 / '05 in my opinion.


Fair post dodger.

[Ghost Like]

A little disappointed Rodger, I do enjoy reading your reports whether I agree with them in part or 100% is neither here nor there, they are a good read.

I'm disappointed you have not seen the game which makes the 'Round 3' part of the heading misleading and I'm sure if you had seen the game some of your concerns may have been addressed somewhat, particularly the 'clinical' aspect and the point you make relating to our 'fragile' 'average' players. My opinion is that it is those average players finally having the confidence to step up that enable our good players to shine. They compliment each other.

Look forward to your next report.

[TheOptimist]

Given your statement that it would take time, which I agree with, and it has taken time.

I find it odd that you criticize Ross in other posts, yet are you open to the possibility that he built the current game plan / style up starting with teaching the players defence?

My view is that what you're seeing (or not in your case LOL) is what he aspired to, but the club is making noises about "flair" because of negative feedback on his early years.

[rodgerfox]

Given your statement that it would take time, which I agree with, and it has taken time.

I find it odd that you criticize Ross in other posts, yet are you open to the possibility that he built the current game plan / style up starting with teaching the players defence?

My view is that what you're seeing (or not in your case LOL) is what he aspired to, but the club is making noises about "flair" because of negative feedback on his early years.

I was never overly critical of our game plan.

I think they're overrated. I've always believed that if you have good players, and they're fit, and you can get them to give 110% for 4 quarters every week, you'll be a very good side. Regardless of your game plan.

My criticisms of Lyon were focussed on the output from our good players. None of them were playing well consistently over a 2 years period.
That's not the type of thing that should take time.

Perhaps though, Lyon has taken on board the criticism from some that his game plan simply didn't suit our list. Perhaps it was his game plan that was causing poor performance from out good players.

Perhaps the changes he's implemented suit our guys, and therefore they're better at it and rejuvenated?

[markp]

I think they're overrated. I've always believed that if you have good players, and they're fit, and you can get them to give 110% for 4 quarters every week, you'll be a very good side. Regardless of your game plan.

You think Mark Harvey (and whatever his game plan is) would've won the hawks a flag last year?

A relatively fair report in all... But I do think Westaway was mostly just pitching for members.

Shame you didn't see the game though.... and shame you didn't give RL the time and support you now say he always needed.

[markp]

Only the fools thought we'd have instant success under a new coach. It takes time. Years.

Funny, I thought GT said last night that Leigh Matthews would have.

Fool?

[InkerSaint]

Great to see you keep your "weekly commitment" rf, even if it is more of an insight commentary than a report.

I suppose CJ would be on your list of "ordinary" players... the only man in either team on the park this week with a double-figure tackle count.

I believe all of these so-called "average" players add value if they adhere to the game plan, and play well with intensity... which I consider players such as Gwilt and McQualter have done. Dawson and Geary can be afforded a little slack. They can only be picking up good mental habits out there. And their efforts are not what I'd consider "sub-par".

I was never overly critical of our game plan.

I think they're overrated. I've always believed that if you have good players, and they're fit, and you can get them to give 110% for 4 quarters every week, you'll be a very good side. Regardless of your game plan.

Disagree here. I don't think Ross Lyon has concocted the gameplan in a vacuum, rather it is in response to the competition leaders' playing styles. To my eye it is almost as if he looked hard at the two finals games against Geelong and Hawthorn, identified the most glaring deficiencies, and worked to plug the holes over summer. The fact that he had instilled discipline in the group, and convinced them that they could be more effective by adhering to a gameplan, has meant that they could adopt tactical changes with remarkable speed.

[TheOptimist]

Only the fools thought we'd have instant success under a new coach. It takes time. Years.

Funny, I thought GT said last night that Leigh Matthews would have.

Fool?

Touche.

There's a combination of a few things happening here...

1- Only a handful of senior players performed at their best over the first few years. Why didn't the rest? Either they had reservations about the new coach; were made to play in a style unacustomed to; or they were pissed off the GT was gone.

2- With a change in strategy and requirements, plyaers have had to change the way they play and their fitness levels. In which case, that would take time. If the first 3 weeks are any indication, it appears that our senior players are starting to shine once again.

3- PLayers that were unable to execute according to the coaches demands have been cut, and suitable players added.

Or simply all of the above.

The bottom line is that whatever the plan was, it appears to be falling into place.

[rodgerfox]

The bottom line is that whatever the plan was, it appears to be falling into place.

Or that the plan has changed.

[rodgerfox]

Only the fools thought we'd have instant success under a new coach. It takes time. Years.

Funny, I thought GT said last night that Leigh Matthews would have.

Fool?

Why is it funny?

[TheOptimist]

The bottom line is that whatever the plan was, it appears to be falling into place.

Or that the plan has changed.

Perhaps. I think Ross himself has been open about it. He made the comment after the game that the players and coaches have grown as a group. He admits he got things wrong.

Does it matter? You say changed, I say evolved. Then again, I am the optimist.

[markp]

Only the fools thought we'd have instant success under a new coach. It takes time. Years.

Funny, I thought GT said last night that Leigh Matthews would have.

Fool?

Why is it funny?

Just my sense of humour... you wouldn't know much about that.

It amuses me that by your definition perhaps GT is a fool.

[ThePunter]

Blake would just about be the first picked at the moment. His game was faultless on Saturday, and his kicking was superb. He never missed a target. He is twice the player he was two years ago.

I think the five blokes who are playing for their spots, week in, week out, are Gwilt, McQualter, Dawson, Geary & Jones. Jones was in our best 2 players on the weekend, Gwilt & Geary produced their best games for the year, McQualter hasn't put a foot wrong, and Dawson does his job. While I have no doubt Dawson will make way for Hudghton when Max is fit, the others have no immediate irresistable replacement currently not playing. I would probably replace Gwilt with R Clarke, but the other three do not deserve to be replaced by a X Clarke or Armitage at the moment.

[markp]

The bottom line is that whatever the plan was, it appears to be falling into place.

Or that the plan has changed.

You said game plans are over-rated.... so why would changing it alter results?

[rodgerfox]

The bottom line is that whatever the plan was, it appears to be falling into place.

Or that the plan has changed.

You said game plans are over-rated.... so why would changing it alter results?

I didn't say the game plan had changed, did I?

[rodgerfox]

It amuses me that by your definition perhaps GT is a fool.

Why is that funny?

[rodgerfox]

Blake would just about be the first picked at the moment. His game was faultless on Saturday, and his kicking was superb. He never missed a target. He is twice the player he was two years ago.

He made 10 errors and gave away 3 frees.

[yipper]

Blake would just about be the first picked at the moment. His game was faultless on Saturday, and his kicking was superb. He never missed a target. He is twice the player he was two years ago.

He made 10 errors and gave away 3 frees.

How do you know? You stated you have not been to the game, nor watched any tape of it in your post of this morning!! Are you assuming he made 10 errors and gave away 3 free kicks??

[markp]

It amuses me that by your definition perhaps GT is a fool.

Why is that funny?

Ok, it's not funny anymore... it's tedious.

Because you have an undying man-crush on GT. He is your boyfriend.

Hence (it was) funny.

[rodgerfox]

How do you know? You stated you have not been to the game, nor watched any tape of it in your post of this morning!! Are you assuming he made 10 errors and gave away 3 free kicks??

There's this little thing called the Internet.

[yipper]

How do you know? You stated you have not been to the game, nor watched any tape of it in your post of this morning!! Are you assuming he made 10 errors and gave away 3 free kicks??

There's this little thing called the Internet.

Oh well then - it must be absolute right then!! What were the errors he made exactly??
Those of us at the game, and again watching the reply, would reckon Blake played very, very well.

[saintly]

if you look at the eagles forum
http://www.eaglesflyinghigh.com/forum/v ... &start=255

and they you would think would be objective about the saints performance. . their main comments were our tackling, the forward pressure , and they thought that we could go far in this season if can can keep this style of footy up.