Raph

[Beej]

One stat that does defend Raph is the 82% efficiency, that means of his 22 possessions, 18 went to a St.Kilda player and too our advantage.

If all our players were getting 82% efficiency, they might as well hand us the cup now.

If Raph plays a bad game, then I will criticise him, but he has been good the last two weeks and has done his job.

Yes players kicked goals on him because the team was caught out, not just Raph, he also stopped attacks, got some hard balls and hit targets 82% of the time.

Not bad for a hack player.

The thing I find is that when you need stats to defend a player it's usually an indication that the player was poor. Stats can confirm a good performance and they can confirm a bad performance. What stats can't do is cover up a poor performance.

Most of us use our eyes to determine how good a player was.

Raph had 8 kicks and 14 handballs. Efficiency counts handballs too. A player can have 14 handballs for a game and hit the target on all of them and his efficiency will be at 100%. Does that necessarily mean he's had a good game? No.

Lets say all of Raph's handballs hit the target today and four of his kicks missed the target. That's about 82% efficiency right there although his kicking efficiency would've been 50%.

And to the poster above who claims expectations are higher for Raph than for any other player. Are you kidding me?

Raph can have a below average game (certainly an extremely poor first half), as he did today IMO, and most of the sycophants on here will still claim he was good and deserves to keep his spot. Why? Sympathy for what he's endured in the past or because of some of the comments directed at him from the outer.

What stats don't show is that when the heat was on in the first half, he was nowhere near the pace.

Gerard Healy saw it. I saw it. Most of us who aren't blinded by sympathy for the bloke saw it. He was poor.

[Bernard Shakey]

Gerard Healy saw it?

What did he see and who cares what Gerard Healy saw?

I saw Raph play his part in a Saints win. That's all that matters to me.

[Beej]

Gerard Healy saw it?

What did he see and who cares what Gerard Healy saw?

I saw Raph play his part in a Saints win. That's all that matters to me.

Gerard Healy is a Brownlow medallist with an unbiased view and is employed for his special comments on a game of footy.

The footy public cares what he saw.

[markp]

Raph can have a below average game (certainly an extremely poor first half), as he did today IMO, and most of the sycophants on here will still claim he was good and deserves to keep his spot.

The only opinion that matters is that of the coach... and up until now he has disagreed with you.

FFS get over it.

[3rd generation saint]

Let's further examine the stats 82% or 18 of his 22 possessions hit their target too our advantage, he had 1 clanger, whuch means he had 1 possession that was to the oppositions advantage.
The other three possessions ended up being dead balls to neither teams advantage.
Doesn't really matter if they are handballs or kicks, if only 1 goes to the opposition out of 22, 3 are dead balls and therest to our advantage, the stats show he had a pretty effective day.
You see the stats go a bit deeper than just possessions.
Can't remember if it was one of his kicks, or handballs went directly to the opposition.
As I said if Raph had a bad day, well I would be saying he did, but I remember screaming about clangers from many of our players today, so let's just say Raph's one clanger didn't make up the majority of the mistakes the team made today.

[Beej]

Raph can have a below average game (certainly an extremely poor first half), as he did today IMO, and most of the sycophants on here will still claim he was good and deserves to keep his spot.

The only opinion that matters is that of the coach... and up until now he has disagreed with you.

FFS get over it.

Agreed. Nobody's opinion matters besides the coaches. Does that stop you from giving your opinion? I doubt it. Does that stop anyone on this site from giving an opinion?

If he keeps his spot then good on him. I wish him well in his next game and hope, for the club's sake, he doesn't put up a similar first half against Adelaide.

FFS grow a skin and understand that footballers cop criticism. It's a professional sport FFS.

[reincarnated]

Due to our position we can give him an extended run which he seemed to benefit from last year despite our up and down form

If he is a young and takes a few games to produce the goods well fine, as long as he does

Otherwise Reincarnated will have to go back to beating the wife

[bob__71]

better than gram

[Winmar7Fan]

One stat that does defend Raph is the 82% efficiency, that means of his 22 possessions, 18 went to a St.Kilda player and too our advantage.

If all our players were getting 82% efficiency, they might as well hand us the cup now.

If Raph plays a bad game, then I will criticise him, but he has been good the last two weeks and has done his job.

Yes players kicked goals on him because the team was caught out, not just Raph, he also stopped attacks, got some hard balls and hit targets 82% of the time.

Not bad for a hack player.

The thing I find is that when you need stats to defend a player it's usually an indication that the player was poor. Stats can confirm a good performance and they can confirm a bad performance. What stats can't do is cover up a poor performance.

Most of us use our eyes to determine how good a player was.

Raph had 8 kicks and 14 handballs. Efficiency counts handballs too. A player can have 14 handballs for a game and hit the target on all of them and his efficiency will be at 100%. Does that necessarily mean he's had a good game? No.

Lets say all of Raph's handballs hit the target today and four of his kicks missed the target. That's about 82% efficiency right there although his kicking efficiency would've been 50%.

And to the poster above who claims expectations are higher for Raph than for any other player. Are you kidding me?

Raph can have a below average game (certainly an extremely poor first half), as he did today IMO, and most of the sycophants on here will still claim he was good and deserves to keep his spot. Why? Sympathy for what he's endured in the past or because of some of the comments directed at him from the outer.

What stats don't show is that when the heat was on in the first half, he was nowhere near the pace.

Gerard Healy saw it. I saw it. Most of us who aren't blinded by sympathy for the bloke saw it. He was poor.

Couldn't have said it better. What stats also don't show is how many times he was beaten in contests he should have clearly won or lost possession from clumsy fumbles etc.

But your dead right looking at the game most of it he looked woeful then his stats are looked at and people are saying he played a good game.

[Beej]

Let's further examine the stats 82% or 18 of his 22 possessions hit their target too our advantage, he had 1 clanger, whuch means he had 1 possession that was to the oppositions advantage.
The other three possessions ended up being dead balls to neither teams advantage.
Doesn't really matter if they are handballs or kicks, if only 1 goes to the opposition out of 22, 3 are dead balls and therest to our advantage, the stats show he had a pretty effective day.
You see the stats go a bit deeper than just possessions.
Can't remember if it was one of his kicks, or handballs went directly to the opposition.
As I said if Raph had a bad day, well I would be saying he did, but I remember screaming about clangers from many of our players today, so let's just say Raph's one clanger didn't make up the majority of the mistakes the team made today.

Drop the stats would ya? This isn't baseball.

A player may have a clear opportunity to kick the footy to advantage but fluffs his kick. It's only a clanger if that kick results in a direct possession to the opposition.

If the kick results in dead ball, when it really should've resulted in a clear possession to us, does that mean the kick wasn't poor? No.

[Beej]

One stat that does defend Raph is the 82% efficiency, that means of his 22 possessions, 18 went to a St.Kilda player and too our advantage.

If all our players were getting 82% efficiency, they might as well hand us the cup now.

If Raph plays a bad game, then I will criticise him, but he has been good the last two weeks and has done his job.

Yes players kicked goals on him because the team was caught out, not just Raph, he also stopped attacks, got some hard balls and hit targets 82% of the time.

Not bad for a hack player.

The thing I find is that when you need stats to defend a player it's usually an indication that the player was poor. Stats can confirm a good performance and they can confirm a bad performance. What stats can't do is cover up a poor performance.

Most of us use our eyes to determine how good a player was.

Raph had 8 kicks and 14 handballs. Efficiency counts handballs too. A player can have 14 handballs for a game and hit the target on all of them and his efficiency will be at 100%. Does that necessarily mean he's had a good game? No.

Lets say all of Raph's handballs hit the target today and four of his kicks missed the target. That's about 82% efficiency right there although his kicking efficiency would've been 50%.

And to the poster above who claims expectations are higher for Raph than for any other player. Are you kidding me?

Raph can have a below average game (certainly an extremely poor first half), as he did today IMO, and most of the sycophants on here will still claim he was good and deserves to keep his spot. Why? Sympathy for what he's endured in the past or because of some of the comments directed at him from the outer.

What stats don't show is that when the heat was on in the first half, he was nowhere near the pace.

Gerard Healy saw it. I saw it. Most of us who aren't blinded by sympathy for the bloke saw it. He was poor.

Couldn't have said it better. What stats also don't show is how many times he was beaten in contests he should have clearly won or lost possession from clumsy fumbles etc.

But your dead right looking at the game most of it he looked woeful then his stats are looked at and people are saying he played a good game.

Agreed. A game of footy isn't played on a sheet of paper.

And where's the stat for goals kicked against him? I'm sure that would've read 3 or 4.

[bob__71]

Let's further examine the stats 82% or 18 of his 22 possessions hit their target too our advantage, he had 1 clanger, whuch means he had 1 possession that was to the oppositions advantage.
The other three possessions ended up being dead balls to neither teams advantage.
Doesn't really matter if they are handballs or kicks, if only 1 goes to the opposition out of 22, 3 are dead balls and therest to our advantage, the stats show he had a pretty effective day.
You see the stats go a bit deeper than just possessions.
Can't remember if it was one of his kicks, or handballs went directly to the opposition.
As I said if Raph had a bad day, well I would be saying he did, but I remember screaming about clangers from many of our players today, so let's just say Raph's one clanger didn't make up the majority of the mistakes the team made today.

Drop the stats would ya? This isn't baseball.

A player may have a clear opportunity to kick the footy to advantage but fluffs his kick. It's only a clanger if that kick results in a direct possession to the opposition.

If the kick results in dead ball, when it really should've resulted in a clear possession to us, does that mean the kick wasn't poor? No.

you really are a dead s*** mate....i think u should just f off

[Beej]

Let's further examine the stats 82% or 18 of his 22 possessions hit their target too our advantage, he had 1 clanger, whuch means he had 1 possession that was to the oppositions advantage.
The other three possessions ended up being dead balls to neither teams advantage.
Doesn't really matter if they are handballs or kicks, if only 1 goes to the opposition out of 22, 3 are dead balls and therest to our advantage, the stats show he had a pretty effective day.
You see the stats go a bit deeper than just possessions.
Can't remember if it was one of his kicks, or handballs went directly to the opposition.
As I said if Raph had a bad day, well I would be saying he did, but I remember screaming about clangers from many of our players today, so let's just say Raph's one clanger didn't make up the majority of the mistakes the team made today.

Drop the stats would ya? This isn't baseball.

A player may have a clear opportunity to kick the footy to advantage but fluffs his kick. It's only a clanger if that kick results in a direct possession to the opposition.

If the kick results in dead ball, when it really should've resulted in a clear possession to us, does that mean the kick wasn't poor? No.

you really are a dead s*** mate....i think u should just f off

Here's one of the feral sycophants now without the mental ability to hold a discussion without the use of a swear word.

[markp]

Raph can have a below average game (certainly an extremely poor first half), as he did today IMO, and most of the sycophants on here will still claim he was good and deserves to keep his spot.

The only opinion that matters is that of the coach... and up until now he has disagreed with you.

FFS get over it.

Agreed. Nobody's opinion matters besides the coaches. Does that stop you from giving your opinion? I doubt it. Does that stop anyone on this site from giving an opinion?

If he keeps his spot then good on him. I wish him well in his next game and hope, for the club's sake, he doesn't put up a similar first half against Adelaide.

FFS grow a skin and understand that footballers cop criticism. It's a professional sport FFS.

There is airing an opinion, and there is bleating on and on and on.... there is criticism, and there is vendetta.

[White Winmar]

What's objective about your post joffaboy? Nothing. Emotive crap. Pot. Kettle. Black. The same old crap as always. I apologise in advance as your abuse and name-calling always trumps reason. I'm just grateful you haven't accused me of racism.

Now to use your tactic against you. Take another look at the game. Objectively. Note the number of possessions he has that do find a team mate but that puts them under inordinate amounts of pressure. The handballs and taps to the feet of a team mate who is instantly besieged by opposition and therefore puts them under pressure. Plugger 66? Objective? Not that I disagree with p66's assessment. I agree with it largely. But in case you're having a bit of trouble understanding plain logic, p66's input is also just an opinion and therefore not objective. Bad in the first half, not bad in the second, average overall, or words to that effect. Please try harder in future. By all means defend your favourite players, but don't jump on the high horse and pretend you hold the high ground on logic and objectivity, when your posts clearly demonstrate the opposite.

[bob__71]

wanker

[norwood97]

raph emergency

[Beej]

I'm just grateful you haven't accused me of racism.

ROFL

I wouldn't count your chickens just yet.

[Beej]

Raph can have a below average game (certainly an extremely poor first half), as he did today IMO, and most of the sycophants on here will still claim he was good and deserves to keep his spot.

The only opinion that matters is that of the coach... and up until now he has disagreed with you.

FFS get over it.

Agreed. Nobody's opinion matters besides the coaches. Does that stop you from giving your opinion? I doubt it. Does that stop anyone on this site from giving an opinion?

If he keeps his spot then good on him. I wish him well in his next game and hope, for the club's sake, he doesn't put up a similar first half against Adelaide.

FFS grow a skin and understand that footballers cop criticism. It's a professional sport FFS.

There is airing an opinion, and there is bleating on and on and on.... there is criticism, and there is vendetta.

You really cannot handle an opinion can you?

One wonders why you're on a public forum...

[stinger]

great win saints...thank you ross and the 22 saints players for sending me to bed with a smile on my face for 15 of the past 16 weekends......well there was a bye .....

[White Winmar]

Yes OLB, I followed with alarm your recent travails. When does the trial start for the war crimes you committed?

[saint75]

Gerard Healy saw it?

What did he see and who cares what Gerard Healy saw?

I saw Raph play his part in a Saints win. That's all that matters to me.

Gerard Healy is a Brownlow medallist with an unbiased view and is employed for his special comments on a game of footy.

The footy public cares what he saw.

Just spat my coffee over the computer screen after reading the 'unbiased' part. Did you not listen to the commentary today?

Get off his back! Surely you have something more productive to do with your time..?? Or do you just get your kicks out of sticking the boots into Raph?

[Richter]

Not our worst today..... but next week, Schneider comes back in - missed him big time today. So who goes out?

IMO, Eddy stays in for Geary - I am really warming to the kid, appears able to play the tackling forward role well - bobbed up with a couple of crucial goals today.

So that for mine leaves one of two - either Dempster or Raph. And I have to say that I think Dempster gives the bigger upside.

[degruch]

[And to the poster above who claims expectations are higher for Raph than for any other player. Are you kidding me?

No...you got stuck into him at the mere mention of his name last week, after he played a perfectly good game. You're amongst a bag of supporters who expect magic from him...why? Does he look mystical to you? He looks like a footballer to me, one who did his job well last week. Just admit you have a hidden agenda.

Didn't see him this week, so haven't got much to add. Geez, I didn't give much of a sideways glance to him until I saw the rubbish heaped on him last week.

[bigcarl]

So that for mine leaves one of two - either Dempster or Raph. And I have to say that I think Dempster gives the bigger upside.

i thought raph was poor in the first half (and had quite a few mates) but was much improved after half time.

i maintain that he is being played out of position and is either a tallish mid or half forward rather than a close-checking defender.

dempster was the invisible man (either that or i missed the parts where he featured in the game). i'm assuming he must have had a negating role. what were others' thoughts on his performance?