Matchwinners

[rodgerfox]

I remember writing a thread back in about 2002 or 2003 about our lack of matchwinners.

At the time, I think I defined a match winner as someone who is capable of kicking 6 in a match (and has done it), or 3-4 in a quarter.

For a midfielder or defender, it was that they were capable of getting 10-15 touches in a quarter and having a hand in 3-4 goals aswell.

Obviously they're not deadset strict definitions, but just a way of highlighting the type of player we didn't have - but needed to be a good team.
Basically, a guy who can win a game when it's in the balance - or turn a game with a freakish individual performance. Either for the whole match (ideally) or for a quarter.

I don't think we had one at the time. Maybe Harves.


Within a short period of time, we suddenly had quite a few....

Gehrig.
Roo.
Kosi.
Milne.
Hamill (sort of).
Harves.
Dal.
Lenny (sort of).
Luke Ball (kind of).

What we found from this sudden bevy of guys who the opposition knew could turn the game on it's ear - was that the lesser lights weren't given any attention so could bob up.
I remember Troy Schwarze getting 4 shots at goal in the first quarter of a game at the Dome because Gehrig, Roo and Milne were drawing all the attention.


Anyway, back to the present......

This has become an issue for us again. And it's glaring in Roo's absence. I'm going to lay off the whole 'no Roo no Saints' thing for now, and take a different approach to the issue.

We don't need Roo to win, or to play well. We need a matchwinner.

The finals last year were an example of Roo being a matchwinner. And in the Dogs and Pies games, us having a matchwinner was the difference.

In the GF, we didn't find that matchwinner. Roo wasn't up to it.


In Roo's absence this year, we have played OK in a statistical sense, and have been in the game in 2 of our 3 losses. The missing ingredient in the Port game and the Essendon one was that we didn't have anyone step up and win it off their own boot.


We have such a strict game plan, that I think isn't conducive to individual match winning performances.
Add to that, 4 of the guys listed above have gone.

Right now, I reckon we have 2 that are capable of this. Kosi hasn't done it for about 3 years though, and Milne seems only to be capable of it against weak opponents.
Actually, I'd say BJ is capable aswell - although hasn't been able to lately when we've needed it.

I think what gave us that real edge last year, was the strict discipline of the team - with the added ingredient of a legitimate matchwinner.

This year we've slipped a bit in the first part, and dropped dramatically in the second part.


There's two questions to this -

1) Why aren't guys like Dal and Kosi still able to be matchwinners? Has it been 'coached out of them'? Does our game nullify the type of flair and unpredictability required?
2) Do we have anyone capable in the next 6-8 weeks of being our matchwinners?



Thoughts?

[bigcarl]

in my mind there is no doubt that goddard should be playing close to goals in riewoldt's absence. he's a match-winner.

sure, you can be a match-winner in the midfield or defence ... but our current problem is forward efficiency. we dominated a fair bit of last week's game for little reward on the scoreboard.

[Mr Magic]

Do you mean 'matchwinner' like when Jason Blake is moved into the ruck at the start of the third quarter against Hawthorn in 2008 and turns the game around with his efforts?

Or do you mean 'matchwinner' when Gardiner takes a huge mark in the forward line deep in the game agaisnt Geelong in 2009?

Or do you mean 'matchwinner' when Zac Dawson is swung forward and kicks the crucial goal against Carlton in 2009?

Or do you mean 'matchwinner' when Sam Fisher finds himself with teh ball 20m out in the dying stages of teh game against WB in 2010?

Or does your definition of 'matchwinner' apply solely to multiple possessions/goals by an individual?

Are you talking about 'matchwinning performances' or 'matchwinners'?

[silvertop]

Dal can still be a matchwinner, that's why the opposition tag him so heavily. He has that match winning knack for creativity at times. I think under Ross he lost some of that spark though. It might also be an age thing. We really need a young matchwinner to step up, take some risks and add some enthusiasm back to the team.

[plugger66]

Under RF opinion of match winners we still have as many as back in the early 2000's. This is RF way of being negative without it look like he is being.

Todays match winners are
Rooy
Milne
Kosi
Lenny]
Dal
BJ
Joey


Pretty similar really so yes we still have match winners.

Got anything else to try and prove we are worse now than early to mid 2000's.

[rexy]

I get where your coming from, but not all matches won are defined by a match winner, dont think geelong had a match winner last night? But if Collingwood won then Beams would have been considered a match winner?

Guys capable of being the difference, Kosi? maybe but not for ages, Milne, Hayes, Dal, Goddard. Fisher and Gilbert can dominate play off a HBF with heaps of good posession, 15+ marks and forward entries.

Have we no match winners or have we not had one stand up at the right times in a couple of games this year?

Not sure that you have to be elite to be a match winner either? Guy like Josh Kennedy at WC has had a couple of match winning performances this year IMO, still a developing player though really.

Interesting post RF, when the team discipline and structure are only good enough to get you close you need an individual or two to stand up and be the difference, who will stand up next time we need it?

Maybe this is the key to winning the close ones?

[Mr Magic]

I get where your coming from, but not all matches won are defined by a match winner, dont think geelong had a match winner last night? But if Collingwood won then Beams would have been considered a match winner?

Guys capable of being the difference, Kosi? maybe but not for ages, Milne, Hayes, Dal, Goddard. Fisher and Gilbert can dominate play off a HBF with heaps of good posession, 15+ marks and forward entries.

Have we no match winners or have we not had one stand up at the right times in a couple of games this year?

Not sure that you have to be elite to be a match winner either? Guy like Josh Kennedy at WC has had a couple of match winning performances this year IMO, still a developing player though really.

Interesting post RF, when the team discipline and structure are only good enough to get you close you need an individual or two to stand up and be the difference, who will stand up next time we need it?

Maybe this is the key to winning the close ones?

Who was the matchwinner (using this definition) against WB a few weeks back?

I don't believe you need a 'matchwinner' (using this definition) if the players follow the gameplan and keep their 'structure' to win the close ones.

Who was the 'matchwinner' if Roo had kicked that set shot against Essendon last season?

Surely the 'matchwinner's' performance is still the same whether you win/lose those close games.
Beams still kicked 4 goals last night - does tha make it any less of a 4 goal performance that Collingwood lost?

[35...LEGEND]

There's two questions to this -

1) Why aren't guys like Dal and Kosi still able to be matchwinners? Has it been 'coached out of them'? Does our game nullify the type of flair and unpredictability required?
2) Do we have anyone capable in the next 6-8 weeks of being our matchwinners?



Thoughts?

Took a while but you got it in there Rog.

[rexy]

I get where your coming from, but not all matches won are defined by a match winner, dont think geelong had a match winner last night? But if Collingwood won then Beams would have been considered a match winner?

Guys capable of being the difference, Kosi? maybe but not for ages, Milne, Hayes, Dal, Goddard. Fisher and Gilbert can dominate play off a HBF with heaps of good posession, 15+ marks and forward entries.

Have we no match winners or have we not had one stand up at the right times in a couple of games this year?

Not sure that you have to be elite to be a match winner either? Guy like Josh Kennedy at WC has had a couple of match winning performances this year IMO, still a developing player though really.

Interesting post RF, when the team discipline and structure are only good enough to get you close you need an individual or two to stand up and be the difference, who will stand up next time we need it?

Maybe this is the key to winning the close ones?

Who was the matchwinner (using this definition) against WB a few weeks back?

I don't believe you need a 'matchwinner' (using this definition) if the players follow the gameplan and keep their 'structure' to win the close ones. Agree

Who was the 'matchwinner' if Roo had kicked that set shot against Essendon last season?

Surely the 'matchwinner's' performance is still the same whether you win/lose those close games.
Beams still kicked 4 goals last night - does tha make it any less of a 4 goal performance that Collingwood lost? agree also

Spot on magic, thats the point I was making, a different result last night and people would have said Beams was the match winner, performance would have been exactly the same though. No you dont need a match winner to win close games, bulldogs a great example, but someone to take it by the scruff in the last quarter last week would have been handy, may have got us over the line. Like I said RF makes a good point about match winners but they are not the be all and end all of winning games, in fact you only look for them when you lose IMO, where were they, when you win you take delight in the even performance yada yada yada.

[Milan Faletic]

I think BJ is a genuine match winner. He can turn a game on its head. He can mark, he can play at either end of the ground and is capable of kicking a bag of goals. Kosi took a step forward last week and I hope he uses the space of Subi tomorrow to take some marks on the lead. He is good when he makes space and we all know he can take a contested mark. With Roo out, he has the chance to show leadership and control the forward line by either marking or creating a contest for the crumbers. I think McEvoy will get there when he gets regular game time and Stanley with his combination of height and pace could be anything.

[Leo.J]

Kosi had a chance last week to be a match winner.

Had he kicked straight and held a couple of the marks he dropped...

Kosi could have quite easily kicked 5 maybe 6, which would have got us over the line.

[saintsRrising]

Did the Cats rely on "matchwinners" to beat the Pies yesterday.....or was it more just a real team effort where everyone did their bit (with obviously some being better than others)?

Did they just stick it out when the Pies were surging? Did they just stick to their gameplan to win?

Conversely: Don't the Pies have team chock full of "matchwinners" ?

[Saintsfan]

Under RF opinion of match winners we still have as many as back in the early 2000's. This is RF way of being negative without it look like he is being.

Todays match winners are
Rooy
Milne
Kosi
Lenny]
Dal
BJ
Joey


Pretty similar really so yes we still have match winners.

Got anything else to try and prove we are worse now than early to mid 2000's.

Schneider and Gardiner.

As per usual another RF attempt to get some on here to compare to the good old days of conseuctive prelim losses under his guidance.

[rodgerfox]

Kosi had a chance last week to be a match winner.

Had he kicked straight and held a couple of the marks he dropped...

Kosi could have quite easily kicked 5 maybe 6, which would have got us over the line.

Thankfully, someone understands footy.


You don't need a matchwinner every week. Ideally, your core game plan and the fundamentals you practice over the pre-season and every night on the track is what wins you most of your games.

However, there are the ones when you need that edge. The ones where you need someone to stand up and take it upon themselves and win it off their own boot.

Ones such as the final against the Dogs. The final against Collingwood, and the Grand Final.

The ones when it came to down to difference between the teams being one guy - Roo.


The last time I can remember us having a matchwinning performance from a 'matchwinner' aside from Roo was when Milne kicked 7 to get us over the line against the Tigers in 08.



I can't believe this place sometimes.

First it's people arguing we don't rely on Roo - now suddenly everyone acknowledges this.

Next it's people arguing we aren't in a form slump. Now suddenly it's clear that we are.

Now, people are arguing my point that we don't need matchwinners???

Get real.


This is so clearly an area we need to address to be a genuine contender again.

[Spinner]

Goddard
Montagna
Dal Santo
Hayes
Riewoldt
Fisher

Do it the most consistently.


Whats probably a better reflection of a team are the players that have absolutely little chance of being in the top three players of any week...Not necessarily a match winner - as this term is overrated.


Gwilt
Dawson
McQualter
Geary
King


To name a few.

[rodgerfox]

Goddard
Montagna
Dal Santo
Hayes
Riewoldt
Fisher

Do it the most consistently.

What the hell??

When have any of these guys won a game off their boot?

I'm not talking about playing well - I'm talking about breaking a game open and being the difference between the two teams when it matters.


The closest BJ has come would be the 4 goal quarter against West Coast. Sam Fisher has never done it, nor Joey, Dal hasn't done it since 2004.

Lenny is the exception. The only problem with Lenny is that he can play a blinder and we still can lose.

[SydneySainter]

Goddard
Montagna
Dal Santo
Hayes
Riewoldt
Fisher

Do it the most consistently.

What the hell??

When have any of these guys won a game off their boot?

I'm not talking about playing well - I'm talking about breaking a game open and being the difference between the two teams when it matters.


The closest BJ has come would be the 4 goal quarter against West Coast. Sam Fisher has never done it, nor Joey, Dal hasn't done it since 2004.

Lenny is the exception. The only problem with Lenny is that he can play a blinder and we still can lose.

Hayes and Roo won the preliminary final.

[saintsRrising]

I remember writing a thread back in about 2002 or 2003 about our lack of matchwinners.



I don't think we had one at the time. Maybe Harves.

Not one? LOL Well apart from those detailed below what about :

Lowe?
Burke?
Everitt? (if retained may well have been enough to have wona flaga few years later)
Aussie Jones?

Within a short period of time, we suddenly had quite a few....

Gehrig.
Roo.
Kosi.
Milne.
Hamill (sort of).
Harves.
Dal.
Lenny (sort of).
Luke Ball (kind of).



Thoughts?

Thought? Yes. Nice re-invention of history.

Gehrig. .................first played at Saints in 2001
Roo.......................first played at Saints in 2001
Kosi.......................first played at Saints in 2001
Milne......................first played at Saints in 2001
Hamill (sort of)........first played at Saints in 2001
Harves.
Dal.......................first played at Saints in 2002
Lenny (sort of)........first played at Saints in 1999


But according to you it was anger playinga lone hand in 02/03???
Luke Ball (kind of)...first played at Saints in 2003

[rodgerfox]

I remember writing a thread back in about 2002 or 2003 about our lack of matchwinners.



I don't think we had one at the time. Maybe Harves.

Not one? LOL Well apart from those detailed below what about :

Lowe?
Burke?
Everitt? (if retained may well have been enough to have wona flaga few years later)
Aussie Jones?

Within a short period of time, we suddenly had quite a few....

Gehrig.
Roo.
Kosi.
Milne.
Hamill (sort of).
Harves.
Dal.
Lenny (sort of).
Luke Ball (kind of).



Thoughts?

Thought? Yes. Nice re-invention of history.

Gehrig. .................first played at Saints in 2001
Roo.......................first played at Saints in 2001
Kosi.......................first played at Saints in 2001
Milne......................first played at Saints in 2001
Hamill (sort of)........first played at Saints in 2001
Harves.
Dal.......................first played at Saints in 2002
Lenny (sort of)........first played at Saints in 1999


But according to you it was anger playinga lone hand in 02/03???
Luke Ball (kind of)...first played at Saints in 2003

Perhaps before anyone else posts something as embarrassing as this, people should be clear (or maybe even read what I wrote in the OP) on what a 'matchwinner' is.

It's not a good player. It's not a very good player.

It's a bloke who can turn the game and win it himself.

Like James Hird in that West Coast game back in 04. Like Roo in the Prelim last year. Like Lockett used to do. Like J Brown does.

Nathan Burke was never a matchwinner. Loewe was, but not after about 99.


Try to pick apart the thread as much as you like, but the reality is that we need more matchwinners.
We need guys like Milne and Kosi to be matchwinners again. We need guys like Dal and BJ to be able to break open a game and carry the team over the line like Judd or James Hird.

Roo does this, and has done it several times over the past 5 years.

I can't remember seeing anyone else do it for years.

[rodgerfox]

But according to you it was anger playinga lone hand in 02/03???
Luke Ball (kind of)...first played at Saints in 2003

You are seriously on another planet.

Did you grasp (or even bother reading) a single word that I wrote in the OP?

[saintsRrising]

Did you grasp (or even bother reading) a single word that I wrote in the OP?

Yes it was another veiled "Bag Lyon" thread.


While more "stars" would always be welcome (hardly needs a genius to realise that) you will win more games by the team playing well, rather than hoping that a star here and there hasa brillinat quarter to "turn" the game.

[rodgerfox]

Did you grasp (or even bother reading) a single word that I wrote in the OP?

Yes it was another veiled "Bag Lyon" thread.

Oh Ok. That explains your ridiculous response.

[plugger66]

But according to you it was anger playinga lone hand in 02/03???
Luke Ball (kind of)...first played at Saints in 2003

You are seriously on another planet.

Did you grasp (or even bother reading) a single word that I wrote in the OP?

Why would he read it. You have yet to make sense in the past so odds are you will not again.

[saintsRrising]

Did you grasp (or even bother reading) a single word that I wrote in the OP?

Yes it was another veiled "Bag Lyon" thread.

Oh Ok. That explains your ridiculous response.

Well given your ridiculous premise....and lack of looking who was on our list back then...

....besides the powers that be were willing to trade away matchwinners like Hall, Everitt etc....

[saintsRrising]

So where is the RF strategy for all these instant extra matchwinners?


Yes I agree if we had Gablett, Sandilands, Pavlich, Scarlett it would be great. How do we get them? Please outline?

PS: Can I have the tats number too as some extra cash would be handy.
I had some in 02/03, but more now please....