Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
Nick Riewoldt's teammates.
Joel Selwood' teammates.
Chris Judd's teammates.
Daniel Rich's teammates.
Jonothan Brown's teammates.
Any of the Rising Star winners and runners up of the past 10 year's teammates.
And so on, and so on.
It's nonsense.
Obviously you'll be a better, more prepared player after 4 years in the system.
But to suggest that there is a clear 4 year apprenticeship before you can play AFL is laughable.
Fact or assumptive opinion?
Thank you for hijacking the thread BTW.
RL simply stated his belief that it takes many players 4 years before they become good players, with the odd exception. I thought it was clear enough.
The players that you quoted are what RL refers to as the exceptions.. or "special".
Maybe you should read things before you post cr@p.
Hotel De Los Muertos: Your room is ready... Care to step inside?
Nick Riewoldt's teammates.
Joel Selwood' teammates.
Chris Judd's teammates.
Daniel Rich's teammates.
Jonothan Brown's teammates.
Any of the Rising Star winners and runners up of the past 10 year's teammates.
And so on, and so on.
It's nonsense.
Obviously you'll be a better, more prepared player after 4 years in the system.
But to suggest that there is a clear 4 year apprenticeship before you can play AFL is laughable.
Fact or assumptive opinion?
Thank you for hijacking the thread BTW.
RL simply stated his belief that it takes many players 4 years before they become good players, with the odd exception. I thought it was clear enough.
The players that you quoted are what RL refers to as the exceptions.. or "special".
Maybe you should read things before you post cr@p.
Please dont bring facts into the equation. RF's straw man construction depends on what he wants to believe.
Bringing in what RL actually said destroys the straw man and hence RF reason for being regarding this forum.
Lance or James??
There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, "Enough is enough." For me, that time is now. I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in <redacted>. Over the past three years, I have been subjected to a <redacted>investigation followed by <redacted> witch hunt. The toll this has taken on my family, and my work for <redacted>and on me leads me to where I am today – finished with this nonsense. (Oops just got a spontaneous errection <unredacted>)
Nick Riewoldt's teammates.
Joel Selwood' teammates.
Chris Judd's teammates.
Daniel Rich's teammates.
Jonothan Brown's teammates.
Any of the Rising Star winners and runners up of the past 10 year's teammates.
And so on, and so on.
It's nonsense.
Obviously you'll be a better, more prepared player after 4 years in the system.
But to suggest that there is a clear 4 year apprenticeship before you can play AFL is laughable.
Didn't Lyon clearly quote "unless they're something special" and don't these players you've just mentioned clearly fit into the 'special' player category? You've only just mentioned four of the current top ten AFL players in the league and a soon to be top ten who had already been playing footy against grown men and had a body strong enough to play AFL footy when he was drafted.
Players like Armitage, Geary, Eddy, Stevens and Lynch aren't players who are special, just players who have great potential if developed properly. You don't just throw boys among the wolves with the attitude of "what doesn't kill you, makes you stronger", because developing a body to be match-fit for AFL isn't that simple.
Last edited by SydneySainter on Thu 22 Oct 2009 6:39am, edited 1 time in total.
Nick Riewoldt's teammates.
Joel Selwood' teammates.
Chris Judd's teammates.
Daniel Rich's teammates.
Jonothan Brown's teammates.
Any of the Rising Star winners and runners up of the past 10 year's teammates.
And so on, and so on.
It's nonsense.
Obviously you'll be a better, more prepared player after 4 years in the system.
But to suggest that there is a clear 4 year apprenticeship before you can play AFL is laughable.
Ahh of course, the ineptitude of the average footy follower and forum poster to grasp the concept of neither black or white.
Just because Ross says a 4 year apprenticeship to become an AFL player, doesn't mean they won't play a game during this period.
Nick Riewoldt's teammates.
Joel Selwood' teammates.
Chris Judd's teammates.
Daniel Rich's teammates.
Jonothan Brown's teammates.
Any of the Rising Star winners and runners up of the past 10 year's teammates.
And so on, and so on.
It's nonsense.
Obviously you'll be a better, more prepared player after 4 years in the system.
But to suggest that there is a clear 4 year apprenticeship before you can play AFL is laughable.
Ahh of course, the ineptitude of the average footy follower and forum poster to grasp the concept of neither black or white.
Just because Ross says a 4 year apprenticeship to become an AFL player, doesn't mean they won't play a game during this period.
But you do have form, let's be honest
Yes I would've thought that Lyon's meaning was more than obvious. They may well play games, but it will take around 4 years to become AFL players at a level where they will make a contribution. It seems most on here are acknowledging this - some posters are seemingly trying to make something out of this quite reasonable and mature statement from a top level AFL coach.
I want to stand for something. I'm a loyal person and I think at the end of my career it will be great to look back and know that I'm a St Kilda person for life.
- Nick Riewoldt. May 19th 2009.
Nick Riewoldt's teammates.
Joel Selwood' teammates.
Chris Judd's teammates.
Daniel Rich's teammates.
Jonothan Brown's teammates.
Any of the Rising Star winners and runners up of the past 10 year's teammates.
And so on, and so on.
It's nonsense.
Obviously you'll be a better, more prepared player after 4 years in the system.
But to suggest that there is a clear 4 year apprenticeship before you can play AFL is laughable.
So rodger, can either you or violent stool post the links were any of the above you mentioned have publicly disagreed with Lyon's position on this?
meher baba wrote:As far as I can work out, Lyon's comments had everything to do with learning the game and nothing whatsoever to do with physical maturity.
The comments on here suggesting that GT ruined the careers of Ball, Kosi, Goose, etc. by making them play AFL too early are utterly ridiculous.
There might be some issues about how those players were managed when they became injured (although I also believe these criticisms are way overstated on this forum).
But it is utter codswallop to suggest that, when they were fit to play, they should ever have been left out of our AFL team on some spurious grounds that they were "not physically mature enough".
NO one even mentioned ruined careers just that the work load contributed to injuries. Just stating a different philosophy to R Lyon, which obviously did not work.
Check back on Selwood and i think you will find even he missed a few games with "injuries" in his first season.
Regarding physical maturity this is the only physical game in the world that has 18 year olds against men in such a willing contest week after week after week .
In the US the average College footballer goes pro at 20 -21
Rugby League see a few 18 year olds but generally they are of Island origins and their bodies more physically mature than most, i.e. Isreal Folua.
Rugby not too many 18 year olds out there.
It is not codswallop to suggets resting players based on physical maturity or condition. Mick Malthouse - Premiership Coach _ has done it with Collingwood players over the last few years, as have several other coaces, It is called list management for the whole seaosn and not just a one week at a time attitude.
What a load of bollocks!! GT was right in 2004: you always play your best available side unless (as happened this year) you have won enough games to be assured of the minor premiership or if you are way out of contention and there are some players with niggles who you want to rest.
Young draftees are going to be playing football somewhere, and I have seen no evidence that the VFL (which has poorer quality grounds and seems to feature a reasonably high level of ill-disciplined, needlessly violent acts) is any "safer" a place for a young player to learn the game.
If they are good enough to play AFL, then they play AFL.
Would Geelong have won the 2007 Premiership without Joel Selwood?
meher baba wrote:As far as I can work out, Lyon's comments had everything to do with learning the game and nothing whatsoever to do with physical maturity.
The comments on here suggesting that GT ruined the careers of Ball, Kosi, Goose, etc. by making them play AFL too early are utterly ridiculous.
There might be some issues about how those players were managed when they became injured (although I also believe these criticisms are way overstated on this forum).
But it is utter codswallop to suggest that, when they were fit to play, they should ever have been left out of our AFL team on some spurious grounds that they were "not physically mature enough".
What a load of bollocks!! GT was right in 2004: you always play your best available side unless (as happened this year) you have won enough games to be assured of the minor premiership or if you are way out of contention and there are some players with niggles who you want to rest.
Young draftees are going to be playing football somewhere, and I have seen no evidence that the VFL (which has poorer quality grounds and seems to feature a reasonably high level of ill-disciplined, needlessly violent acts) is any "safer" a place for a young player to learn the game.
If they are good enough to play AFL, then they play AFL.
Would Geelong have won the 2007 Premiership without Joel Selwood?
You're funny. Are you on a commission with GT?
How do you justify rushing players back too soon? Hamill, Kosi, Ball??
Hotel De Los Muertos: Your room is ready... Care to step inside?
meher baba wrote:As far as I can work out, Lyon's comments had everything to do with learning the game and nothing whatsoever to do with physical maturity.
The comments on here suggesting that GT ruined the careers of Ball, Kosi, Goose, etc. by making them play AFL too early are utterly ridiculous.
There might be some issues about how those players were managed when they became injured (although I also believe these criticisms are way overstated on this forum).
But it is utter codswallop to suggest that, when they were fit to play, they should ever have been left out of our AFL team on some spurious grounds that they were "not physically mature enough".
What a load of bollocks!! GT was right in 2004: you always play your best available side unless (as happened this year) you have won enough games to be assured of the minor premiership or if you are way out of contention and there are some players with niggles who you want to rest.
Young draftees are going to be playing football somewhere, and I have seen no evidence that the VFL (which has poorer quality grounds and seems to feature a reasonably high level of ill-disciplined, needlessly violent acts) is any "safer" a place for a young player to learn the game.
If they are good enough to play AFL, then they play AFL.
Would Geelong have won the 2007 Premiership without Joel Selwood?
You're funny. Are you on a commission with GT?
How do you justify rushing players back too soon? Hamill, Kosi, Ball??
I think perhaps there are three seperate arguments, that have been bundled up together somehow.
*Regularly playing young players who are not physically mature enough.
*Recognising those with a unique talent to make a case to play consistent footy early.
*Needlessly, and in some cases irresponsibly, rushing players back from injury.
Milton66 wrote:You're funny. Are you on a commission with GT?
How do you justify rushing players back too soon? Hamill, Kosi, Ball??
I don't for the life of me see how you make the argument with Hamil and Kosi (Ball is another story).
If I recall correctly, Kosi major management issue early in his career was his back and then his head...
hardly hindering him today.
As for Hamil,
well he was rested for a very very long time. His issues appeared degenerative. I wouldn't class that down to how GT used him.
Ball you can mount an argument for.
i wonder wo made the deciions of Hamill - 2 weeks? GT ?
yes he rested him, but he should not have played him against melbourne in the final when he was injured anyway!
Just another vehicle for RF to critisise RL and bait other forum members.
Go back and read his first baiting post - it degenerated from there - as usual.
Lance or James??
There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, "Enough is enough." For me, that time is now. I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in <redacted>. Over the past three years, I have been subjected to a <redacted>investigation followed by <redacted> witch hunt. The toll this has taken on my family, and my work for <redacted>and on me leads me to where I am today – finished with this nonsense. (Oops just got a spontaneous errection <unredacted>)
rodgerfox wrote:
Although as is clearly apparent, disagreeing with Ross Lyon is a federal crime on here.
Does RL post here?
Lance or James??
There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, "Enough is enough." For me, that time is now. I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in <redacted>. Over the past three years, I have been subjected to a <redacted>investigation followed by <redacted> witch hunt. The toll this has taken on my family, and my work for <redacted>and on me leads me to where I am today – finished with this nonsense. (Oops just got a spontaneous errection <unredacted>)
He's stuck with this line the entire time he's been in charge.
I just don't happen to agree with it.
rodgerfox wrote:
Mr Magic wrote:
Who are the many?
Nick Riewoldt's teammates.
Joel Selwood' teammates.
Chris Judd's teammates.
Daniel Rich's teammates.
Jonothan Brown's teammates.
Any of the Rising Star winners and runners up of the past 10 year's teammates.
And so on, and so on.
I thought all of the above didn't agree with it RF?
Is it just you not agreeing with it or all of the above as you so clearly stated??
Lance or James??
There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, "Enough is enough." For me, that time is now. I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in <redacted>. Over the past three years, I have been subjected to a <redacted>investigation followed by <redacted> witch hunt. The toll this has taken on my family, and my work for <redacted>and on me leads me to where I am today – finished with this nonsense. (Oops just got a spontaneous errection <unredacted>)
He's stuck with this line the entire time he's been in charge.
I just don't happen to agree with it.
rodgerfox wrote:
Mr Magic wrote:
Who are the many?
Nick Riewoldt's teammates.
Joel Selwood' teammates.
Chris Judd's teammates.
Daniel Rich's teammates.
Jonothan Brown's teammates.
Any of the Rising Star winners and runners up of the past 10 year's teammates.
And so on, and so on.
I thought all of the above didn't agree with it RF?
Is it just you not agreeing with it or all of the above as you so clearly stated??
Milton66 wrote:You're funny. Are you on a commission with GT?
How do you justify rushing players back too soon? Hamill, Kosi, Ball??
I don't for the life of me see how you make the argument with Hamil and Kosi (Ball is another story).
If I recall correctly, Kosi major management issue early in his career was his back and then his head...
hardly hindering him today.
As for Hamil,
well he was rested for a very very long time. His issues appeared degenerative. I wouldn't class that down to how GT used him.
Ball you can mount an argument for.
Hamill should not have been rushed back for the finals.
Kosi should have been given the year off when Gian'a belted his head. Images of Ball in the change rooms unable to walk still haunt me.
Criticism where criticism is due but this is just plain silly
Kosi's comeback was delayed repeatedly from that injury and eventually he made his come back in the 2s (and ran into an umpire if i recall). If he was medically cleared and fit to play they why wouldn't u play him.
You think Kosi would accept sitting on his ass doing nothing for 11 games when he, the doctors and the club knew he was fine.
As for Hamil, his recurrent injury started in 2005 (at least that's when he started missing large chunks of games). The final they "rushed him" back for was in 2006. He missed large portions of the season being rested including the 2005 pre-lim.
Ur criticism of these 2 player's management completely falls apart
yipper wrote:
Yes I would've thought that Lyon's meaning was more than obvious.
I nkow what his comments are.
He's stuck with this line the entire time he's been in charge.
I just don't happen to agree with it.
Doesn't mean I hate him, doesn't mean anything other than I don't agree with him. I think it's nonsense.
Although as is clearly apparent, disagreeing with Ross Lyon is a federal crime on here.
Why is it nonsense, and what is your preferred approach?
Over to you...
Yes, why is it nonsense to suggest that it takes 4 years for young blokes to become good AFL players??
I want to stand for something. I'm a loyal person and I think at the end of my career it will be great to look back and know that I'm a St Kilda person for life.
- Nick Riewoldt. May 19th 2009.
Milton66 wrote:You're funny. Are you on a commission with GT?
How do you justify rushing players back too soon? Hamill, Kosi, Ball??
I don't for the life of me see how you make the argument with Hamil and Kosi (Ball is another story).
If I recall correctly, Kosi major management issue early in his career was his back and then his head...
hardly hindering him today.
As for Hamil,
well he was rested for a very very long time. His issues appeared degenerative. I wouldn't class that down to how GT used him.
Ball you can mount an argument for.
Hamill should not have been rushed back for the finals.
Kosi should have been given the year off when Gian'a belted his head. Images of Ball in the change rooms unable to walk still haunt me.
Criticism where criticism is due but this is just plain silly
Kosi's comeback was delayed repeatedly from that injury and eventually he made his come back in the 2s (and ran into an umpire if i recall). If he was medically cleared and fit to play they why wouldn't u play him.
You think Kosi would accept sitting on his ass doing nothing for 11 games when he, the doctors and the club knew he was fine.
As for Hamil, his recurrent injury started in 2005 (at least that's when he started missing large chunks of games). The final they "rushed him" back for was in 2006. He missed large portions of the season being rested including the 2005 pre-lim.
Ur criticism of these 2 player's management completely falls apart
Fair cal on Kosi, but at the time, I would have preferred they rest him. IIRC at the time, he was quite disillusioned about playing.
As far as player management goes, it's not just about when they return.. it's about how the are rehabbed.
we'll agree to disagree on this.
Hotel De Los Muertos: Your room is ready... Care to step inside?
yipper wrote:
Why is it nonsense, and what is your preferred approach?
Over to you...
Yes, why is it nonsense to suggest that it takes 4 years for young blokes to become good AFL players??[/quote]
Because it doesn't.
Sure, for some it does. But it isn't a rule of thumb. Lyon has used the term 'apprenticeship' alot. In my view, it holds guys back.
Clinton Jones didn't take 4 years.
Some take 0 years, some take 1 year, some take 2 years, some take 3 years, some take 4 years.
Why would the majority of people on here agree with the '4 year rule', yet think we blew it in 04 and 05?
Most of our list hadn't been around for 4 years back then.
