Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
looks like they might persist with chips up in the forward half maybe??
while i dont doubt the blokes efforts etc
i reckon he is one of the best backs in the league and is a great set up player from the back line
i really dont agree with him going up forward to be honest
and with zac going to cop some weeks for that hit, that makes two defenders down if chips goes forward...raph will come in obviously (?) but i think we'll be exposed even more if chips isnt down there.
Essendon showed (me at least) beyond doubt that an unstoppable quality direct pass straight through the middle of the ground always beats one via the scenic route... (i.e. after a chain of passes and handballs).
You almost had enough time to boil an egg before we finally delivered some of our passes into the 50 and we were coralled and harassed as a result of our lack of pace.
Our midfield aren't doing anything wrong - they just lack a yard of pace otherwise they'd be choosing the direct quality approach too.
Last edited by samoht on Mon 17 May 2010 2:22pm, edited 2 times in total.
I like it. That way, when the ball goes in there fast, BJ is one-out (which he'll win more often than not) and when the ball goes in there at a more leisurely rate (like via the "scenic route"), whoever is in the ruck can push deep forward, like Gardi did yesterday and Kosi has so well in the past. That way all 3 of them are a good chance of kicking goals.
not sure whether this has been stated as i can't be bothered going through all the posts but i think our forward line was better than our back line because all our good players from defense were playing forward.
samoht wrote:Essendon showed (me at least) beyond doubt that an unstoppable quality direct pass straight through the middle of the ground always beats one via the scenic route... (i.e. after a chain of passes and handballs).
It's almost like we have become conditioned against looking inside - we do it very rarely these days.
samoht wrote:Essendon showed (me at least) beyond doubt that an unstoppable quality direct pass straight through the middle of the ground always beats one via the scenic route... (i.e. after a chain of passes and handballs).
It's almost like we have become conditioned against looking inside - we do it very rarely these days.
I actually want them to look a little further than inside 50.
samoht wrote:Essendon showed (me at least) beyond doubt that an unstoppable quality direct pass straight through the middle of the ground always beats one via the scenic route... (i.e. after a chain of passes and handballs).
It's almost like we have become conditioned against looking inside - we do it very rarely these days.
But don't youthink you need exceptional pace (of the type Davey and no. 32 and 38 possess) to do what Essendon did (i.e. dash clear and make space to deliver those unstoppable passes and expose us the way they did ?).
Essendon probably did it about 10 times .. whereas we might have managed to find clear space once or twice (lucky bounce maybe) - so it could be something beyond our control and ability and more to do with whether you have that exceptional pace or not.
One thing looking or wanting or trying to go direct and inside and another thing being able to actually go inside.
Are we trying to tread water until Roo gets back, or are we going to use Roo's absence to find other avenues to goal?
I think if it wasn't already clear, it is now that Roo has been the reason we've looked like a premiership contender for the best part of 15 months.
The finals last year reeked of reliance to me. The win over the Pies, the win over the Dogs then the loss to the Cats confirmed it - if it wasn't already evident over the past season or so.
We didn't make an effort at all during the off-season to address this. So either Lyon kidded himself that he was such a genius that it was his game plan and/or structures that resulted in our 'success', or he knows it's Roo and was prepared to keep rolling that dice.
So, Roo's gone. For a least another 6-10 weeks I assume.
The question is the same that I posed when Roo got hurt - do we use this as an opportunity to learn win without his input?
I really, really hope so.
But as yet (bar the Freo game) I'm not seeing it.
Losing games right now doesn't matter. We only need to 12 to make the 8. You can win the flag from outside the top 4. The only reason teams don't is that they aren't good enough and the better teams finish in the top 4.
If we can learn a new or altered style of play whilst Roo is in the grandstands, we are still a genuine contender.
If we just try to stick to what we've been doing for the past 2 years, we're just going to have to cross our fingers that Roo does come back for starters - and that he's as dominant as he was before he was hurt.
Frankly, it's quiet unlikely that the latter will happen.
Ross Lyon must concede he's been wrong. He nearly got away with it last year, but didn't.
It's unlikely we'll ever have a full list every week for a whole season again.
Credit to him and his assistants for steering a Ferrari for a season, but when you when you suddenly have to drive a Lotus-Cosworth, you find it's not quiet as easy.
You can't bank on players playing every game. We have up until now - and well, it cost us a flag.
We must try new things. Not shuffling the same plodders into different possies - but changes to our unsuccessful game plan and mindset.
We still have many, many top 10 draft picks, All-Australians, Premiership players and really legitimate footballers on the park.
I don't want him to 'leave the backline as it is'. We have to use the next month or two to improve - not just tread water until the messiah comes back and gets us out of the shiit.
There's a big chance that we'll lose more than win whilst learning a new style of play - but the reality is not only will we lose more than we win if don't change things, there's absolutely no guarantee we will be instantly 'fixed' when Roo comes back.
The problem we have, is that we've recruited based on our current style of play.
Now that it's evident our game plan and style is shiithouse, we may not be in a position to open games up and try to win on ability.
The bigger problem is, we have to try. I don't think we have a choice.
Last edited by rodgerfox on Mon 17 May 2010 4:08pm, edited 1 time in total.
You are a true cynic RF, so give me an honest answer, did you see early signs of a return to some kind of form last night?
It was completely different to last week, at least they were in the contest.
As far as finding some alternatives, and trying new things. I thought Heyne added a bit towards the end. His inside 50's were actually impressive. I'd like to see him stay in the side. What do you think?
SainterK wrote:You are a true cynic RF, so give me an honest answer, did you see early signs of a return to some kind of form last night?
It was completely different to last week, at least they were in the contest.
As far as finding some alternatives, and trying new things. I thought Heyne added a bit towards the end. His inside 50's were actually impressive. I'd like to see him stay in the side. What do you think?
I almost think that's worse.
Again, we had 11 more Inside 50s - and lost. Not only lost, but lost to freakin' Essendon!!
The system just isn't working.
Even when we were winning contested footy and tackles earlier in the game - we only ever got 1-2 goals in front.
samoht wrote:Inside 50 numbers at the end of the day mean nothing.
disagree. we had plenty of chances to put them away, but our forward line is inefficient.
you can blame poor delivery for all of kosi's woes if you like but the facts are:
1) he doesn't lead into space effectively.
2) he doesn't use his body well at all in marking contests.
3) he isn't a natural forward and has poor goal sense.
4) he is ineffective at ground level.
goddard would be a far better player to build an attack around and i hope we do this before the season slips away.
imo, the ability of the guy on the end of it is a key factor in how the ball is delivered in.
i was one of the guys who pushed for kosi to go forward a few seasons ago. i concede now that i was wrong about it. i feel partly to blame.
ruck him or move him to chf and make bj the focal point because it is costing us.
Why would the players move it quicker if BJ was there instead of Kosi. i am pretty sure when they kick it to Kosi they think he is going to mark it. They dont say lets stuff around with it and think I wish BJ was there so they would get it in quicker. BJ will continue to play a quarter here and a quarter there at FF because we can only use him out the middle for that long. Anyway it sounds like Fisher may be the man as well as Kosi. Thats gives us 2 talls now we need to work on the small and mid size players.
SainterK wrote:You are a true cynic RF, so give me an honest answer, did you see early signs of a return to some kind of form last night?
It was completely different to last week, at least they were in the contest.
As far as finding some alternatives, and trying new things. I thought Heyne added a bit towards the end. His inside 50's were actually impressive. I'd like to see him stay in the side. What do you think?
I almost think that's worse.
Again, we had 11 more Inside 50s - and lost. Not only lost, but lost to freakin' Essendon!!
The system just isn't working.
Even when we were winning contested footy and tackles earlier in the game - we only ever got 1-2 goals in front.
That's just not good enough.
Got any answers RF. Have asked you at least a dozen times but ignored me which shows most on here you are whinger without ideas and as you said I almost think thats worse.
SainterK wrote:You are a true cynic RF, so give me an honest answer, did you see early signs of a return to some kind of form last night?
It was completely different to last week, at least they were in the contest.
As far as finding some alternatives, and trying new things. I thought Heyne added a bit towards the end. His inside 50's were actually impressive. I'd like to see him stay in the side. What do you think?
I almost think that's worse.
Again, we had 11 more Inside 50s - and lost. Not only lost, but lost to freakin' Essendon!!
The system just isn't working.
Even when we were winning contested footy and tackles earlier in the game - we only ever got 1-2 goals in front.
That's just not good enough.
Of course the result is not good enough, I am sure you don't need to tell them that.
However you'd think it will do much to restore the players belief that if they do the hard things, they will at least be in the contest, something that wasn't even existent against Carlton.
They have been in form slump no doubt, Roo missing has just exposed it terribly, at least last night there were signs of life.
You didn't answer, what about Heyne, it was something new and what did you think?
Again, we had 11 more Inside 50s - and lost. Not only lost, but lost to freakin' Essendon!!
The system just isn't working.
Even when we were winning contested footy and tackles earlier in the game - we only ever got 1-2 goals in front.
Or the players are not capitalising.
I've said for weeks now that we need to develop a game plan that does not rely on players... and which will ideally work without the need for any of them to take the field at all.
Until we do that, I'm afraid we will keep losing games of football.
Again it's Quality vs Quantity ... inside 50 numbers need to be examined closely for their effectiveness.
How many of our inside 50's were balls that went in briefly and came back out or were delivered as effectively and decisively as Essendon's inside 50's?
SainterK wrote:
Of course the result is not good enough, I am sure you don't need to tell them that.
However you'd think it will do much to restore the players belief that if they do the hard things, they will at least be in the contest, something that wasn't even existent against Carlton.
They have been in form slump no doubt, Roo missing has just exposed it terribly, at least last night there were signs of life.
You didn't answer, what about Heyne, it was something new and what did you think?
I don't agree.
Roo's absence hasn't exposed a form slump - it's caused it.
Doing the hard things isn't enough under our style of play. We need Roo aswell.
We did the hard things in the GF last year. We did the hard things last night and when in front in all the key stats - we still only got to a 2 goal lead against a very average opponent.
SainterK wrote:
Of course the result is not good enough, I am sure you don't need to tell them that.
However you'd think it will do much to restore the players belief that if they do the hard things, they will at least be in the contest, something that wasn't even existent against Carlton.
They have been in form slump no doubt, Roo missing has just exposed it terribly, at least last night there were signs of life.
You didn't answer, what about Heyne, it was something new and what did you think?
I don't agree.
Roo's absence hasn't exposed a form slump - it's caused it.
Doing the hard things isn't enough under our style of play. We need Roo aswell.
We did the hard things in the GF last year. We did the hard things last night and when in front in all the key stats - we still only got to a 2 goal lead against a very average opponent.
Again no answers. You do lack knowledge dont you RF. By the way how is the job?
SainterK wrote:
Of course the result is not good enough, I am sure you don't need to tell them that.
However you'd think it will do much to restore the players belief that if they do the hard things, they will at least be in the contest, something that wasn't even existent against Carlton.
They have been in form slump no doubt, Roo missing has just exposed it terribly, at least last night there were signs of life.
You didn't answer, what about Heyne, it was something new and what did you think?
I don't agree.
Roo's absence hasn't exposed a form slump - it's caused it.
Doing the hard things isn't enough under our style of play. We need Roo aswell.
We did the hard things in the GF last year. We did the hard things last night and when in front in all the key stats - we still only got to a 2 goal lead against a very average opponent.
I have agreed with you on some occasions.
Like our tendency to kick it to Roo too often, resulting in an unhealthy reliance.
That the absence of Roo should be strengthening our side, and putting it in good stead to cope better without a heavy reliance on him.
I just won't agree that the losses you mentioned were a result of the game plan, Ross doesn't ask them to kick behinds you know!
we are into 2010 now and some sides are developing whilst we are at best stationary and we're also unsettled obviously - we can't be as strong as when Roo was playing.
We have a great defence - but it can't stop quality fast deliveries.
Essendon and Carlton have some exceptionally quick players plus some of their players are starting to develop - we may be falling behind - that's all it may be ?
plugger66 wrote: i am pretty sure when they kick it to Kosi they think he is going to mark it.
not on yesterday's evidence you would have to admit. we went to him many times for the grand return of one goal. it isn't working, plugger, and needs to change.
Last edited by bigcarl on Mon 17 May 2010 4:57pm, edited 1 time in total.
samoht wrote:Essendon showed (me at least) beyond doubt that an unstoppable quality direct pass straight through the middle of the ground always beats one via the scenic route... (i.e. after a chain of passes and handballs).
It's almost like we have become conditioned against looking inside - we do it very rarely these days.
I actually want them to look a little further than inside 50.
samoht wrote:Essendon showed (me at least) beyond doubt that an unstoppable quality direct pass straight through the middle of the ground always beats one via the scenic route... (i.e. after a chain of passes and handballs).
It's almost like we have become conditioned against looking inside - we do it very rarely these days.
But don't youthink you need exceptional pace (of the type Davey and no. 32 and 38 possess) to do what Essendon did (i.e. dash clear and make space to deliver those unstoppable passes and expose us the way they did ?).
Essendon probably did it about 10 times .. whereas we might have managed to find clear space once or twice (lucky bounce maybe) - so it could be something beyond our control and ability and more to do with whether you have that exceptional pace or not.
One thing looking or wanting or trying to go direct and inside and another thing being able to actually go inside.
No I don't. Of course it helps but the ball will always move through the air faster than anyone can run. Fast ball movement doesn't have to be reliant on leg speed.
plugger66 wrote: i am pretty sure when they kick it to Kosi they think he is going to mark it.
not on yesterday's evidence you would have to admit.
I didnt say he would mark it but players dont move it quicker or slower just because either BJ or Kosi are there. If i was a player in the midfield and I saw both BJ and Kosi up forward i would go to the big man more often.
