Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
longtimesaint wrote:
Al this means little if all your players have absolute intensity and are a committed team.
Watch the Round 18 match last year when we beat the dogs 4 weeks before the finals.
It only means little if the opposition also doesn't bring absolute intensity and aren't a committed team. If they also bring it, and they have a far better group of players - you'll get rolled every single time.
Really good teams bring both. Absolute intensity and are committed - and they have really good players.
For the record, Dalhaus didn't play that night. And Redpath, Wallis and Morris all went off hurt.
saintsRrising wrote:
Have to disagree on Boyd. He is not elite, and will not be elite. The Doggies chased him as a key forward and he has now fallen into the niche of ruck/forward and back up ruck and has failed to live up to the hype. Yes his GF was good, but was against weak opposition where he was playing. His GF was right game at the right time against the right opponents.
I agree he's not an elite player in the usual sense of the word.
My point with Boyd is though - he played an elite game in the biggest game of all against the second best team in the comp on the day that he needed to.
Who do we have, that could do the same?
Obviously it's a hypothetical as we haven't been in that situation - but looking at our list, it's my opinion that we don't have anyone capable of stepping up and putting in performances like that over a finals series then stepping up even further to be BoG in a Grand Final.
saintsRrising wrote:
Have to disagree on Boyd. He is not elite, and will not be elite. The Doggies chased him as a key forward and he has now fallen into the niche of ruck/forward and back up ruck and has failed to live up to the hype. Yes his GF was good, but was against weak opposition where he was playing. His GF was right game at the right time against the right opponents.
I agree he's not an elite player in the usual sense of the word.
My point with Boyd is though - he played an elite game in the biggest game of all against the second best team in the comp on the day that he needed to.
Who do we have, that could do the same?
Obviously it's a hypothetical as we haven't been in that situation - but looking at our list, it's my opinion that we don't have anyone capable of stepping up and putting in performances like that over a finals series then stepping up even further to be BoG in a Grand Final.
I just can't see it.
Shane Ellis
Aaron Keating.
Both spuds who excelled on GF day.
It happens.
Holder of unacceptable views and other thought crimes.
Frawley on SEN today said Acres needed to improve his disposal, straight after Acres turned it over, it would have to be a discussion point amongst the coaches.
The Saints are under review, will it make any difference to the underachievers ?
Johnny Member wrote:I'm still not seeing anyone jump out as an A-grader.....
Jack Steven is the only thing at our club close to an A grader, (Roo aside)
Jake Carlisle has been disappointing this year. I know he's finding his feet but the pace of the game looks too fast for him, or he's disinterested, I can't work out which yet. Seb Ross is the ONLY player this year worthy of even discussing whether he can be A grade this year. At the moment he's a solid B grader who's at least having a crack. The rest of the midfield is serviceable at best.
Wayne42 wrote:Frawley on SEN today said Acres needed to improve his disposal, straight after Acres turned it over, it would have to be a discussion point amongst the coaches.
At least he has the ball to dispose of it. At least he gets in the right spots.
Wayne42 wrote:Frawley on SEN today said Acres needed to improve his disposal, straight after Acres turned it over, it would have to be a discussion point amongst the coaches.
At least he has the ball to dispose of it. At least he gets in the right spots.
I get the impression that no one around Acres know what he's going to do.
He's nowhere near predictable enough to his teammates, which is very important.
I don't even think he knows what he's going to do.
Footy has been littered over the years with players who get plenty of pill, but very few are considered very good players unless they use it effectively.
Johnny Member wrote:I get the impression that no one around knows what he's going to do.
He's nowhere near predictable enough to his teammates, which is very important.
I don't even think he knows what he's going to do.
BigMart wrote:A bigger concern is that he makes strange decisions
Are you referring to Turnbull or Acres ?
Last edited by ace on Mon 10 Apr 2017 9:41am, edited 3 times in total.
The more you know, the more you know you don't know.
When I was a young child, I knew that I knew so much about so much.
Now that I am old and know so much more, I know that I know so much about so little, and so little about so much.
If you are not engaging AI actively and aggressively, you are doing it wrong.
You are not going to lose your job to AI.
You are going lose your job to somebody who uses AI.
Your company is not going to go out of business because of AI.
Your company is going to go out of business because another company used AI.
- Jensen Huang, CEO of NVIDIA
Wayne42 wrote:Frawley on SEN today said Acres needed to improve his disposal, straight after Acres turned it over, it would have to be a discussion point amongst the coaches.
At least he has the ball to dispose of it. At least he gets in the right spots.
I get the impression that no one around Acres know what he's going to do.
He's nowhere near predictable enough to his teammates, which is very important.
I don't even think he knows what he's going to do.
Footy has been littered over the years with players who get plenty of pill, but very few are considered very good players unless they use it effectively.
I reckon he's one of those players where everyone goes up a notch when he gets it. There is an air of expectancy that something can happen. I reckon he does ok in scoring involvements and probably Gresham does too.
Johnny Member wrote:
As a result we bottomed out and had 2 x top 3 picks in succession.
We didn't get a Selwood. A Bont. A Judd. A Reiwoldt.
Instead, we got a Curren, a Templeton, a Sinclair, a Newnes etc. etc.
Which of Curren, Templeton, Sinclair and Newnes were top 3 picks?
That's just Johhny's arguing style, Winmar. He compares picks 1, 3, 4 and 7, with three rookie picks and a pick in the thirties. Have you read his "flat hands" theory yet about MCCartin and Bruce? I love his posts because I get to laugh so hard. Always cheers me up.
I started with nothing and I've got most of it left!
Johnny Member wrote:
As a result we bottomed out and had 2 x top 3 picks in succession.
We didn't get a Selwood. A Bont. A Judd. A Reiwoldt.
Instead, we got a Curren, a Templeton, a Sinclair, a Newnes etc. etc.
Which of Curren, Templeton, Sinclair and Newnes were top 3 picks?
That's just Johhny's arguing style, Winmar. He compares picks 1, 3, 4 and 7, with three rookie picks and a pick in the thirties. Have you read his "flat hands" theory yet about MCCartin and Bruce? I love his posts because I get to laugh so hard. Always cheers me up.
Arguing?
Why do you perceive every discussion as an 'argument'? Why so defensive?
It clouds your judgement and makes you come across as very insecure.
My comment was very simple, and far from an argument.
The club expected to snare a superstar or two with the amount of first round draft picks they had over the period in question - but they didn't find that superstar. They instead found depth players of limited ability and a couple of others that the jury is still well and truly out on.
No, your comment was not simple, it was stupid and nonsensical. A bit like your "flat earth", I mean "flat hands" pearler. Have you sent that one to Aaron Hamill to include in his program for the forwards? Either you're a genius so far ahead of your time no one can recognise your brilliance, or you just post a lot of impulsive and ridiculous nonsense. You damn yourself with ridiculous comments you can't logically justify.
Straightforward in your non existent ability to draw logical conclusions from facts. That's the simplicity part of this. In psychology we call what you do transference, where you transfer the qualities you most hate in yourself onto others, hence your assertions that I'm hysterical, ignorant of the facts, can't reason, or acknowledge facts or mount and understand simple arguments. Describes you to a tee, I would've thought. Hoisted by your own petard, chumley bumley. Now go away, or I will taunt you a second time!
I started with nothing and I've got most of it left!
White Winmar wrote:No, your comment was not simple, it was stupid and nonsensical. A bit like your "flat earth", I mean "flat hands" pearler. Have you sent that one to Aaron Hamill to include in his program for the forwards? Either you're a genius so far ahead of your time no one can recognise your brilliance, or you just post a lot of impulsive and ridiculous nonsense. You damn yourself with ridiculous comments you can't logically justify.
Straightforward in your non existent ability to draw logical conclusions from facts. That's the simplicity part of this. In psychology we call what you do transference, where you transfer the qualities you most hate in yourself onto others, hence your assertions that I'm hysterical, ignorant of the facts, can't reason, or acknowledge facts or mount and understand simple arguments. Describes you to a tee, I would've thought. Hoisted by your own petard, chumley bumley. Now go away, or I will taunt you a second time!
Ummm, I never said nor asserted you were hysterical.
Do you want me to humiliate you by bringing out the quote? Or would you prefer to withdraw sensibly and avoid further embarrassment? Thanks for reminding me of your endearing quality I forgot to mention. Selective memory.
I started with nothing and I've got most of it left!
White Winmar wrote:The WC outsmarted us and GT's obstinance beat us that day. But I digress.
I didn't think GT even attended draft day?
<warning for baiting>
Baiting??
The post I replied to stated that GT was involved directly in drafting, but I was under the impression that he was criticised for not being involved at all - and not even attending the draft? I might be wrong though, hence me asking the question.
Who am I supposedly baiting?
See JM, this is where you fall down. It's obvious to anyone with half a brain cell that you were baiting me. You do post some really good things. I even praised another of your posts recently, but this is a classic example of where you muck up, and paint yourself into a corner. Of course coaches have a say in drafting. Having been to numerous meetings where draft strategy is discussed, they have an enormous input, especially in the time of GT. Probably a bit less now but I have been out of the game since 2012.
GT insisted on Ball. We wanted Judd, but the final consensus was that we would take Ball at 2, WC would take Polak or Sampi at 3 (both WA boys) and that Fremantle would take the one left over at 4, leaving Judd at 5. When the day came, WC looked at our table with huge grins as they announced Judd at 3. They rolled us, pure and simple. GT was as furious as anyone, as was RB, who'd coached Judd at East Sandy juniors and was red hot on him. Quite simply, he was the best player in the draft by a mile, with only his shoulders a question mark.
Hawthorn only took Hodge because his coach at the Falcons, Mickey Turner, monstered them into it. GT said afterwards that he left the drafting to Bevo, which was complete bulls*** and typical of what GT always did. Accept the praise, deflect the criticism. I was there. That's how it went down. If you knew anything about the way GT did things, you would know that he was a complete control freak. Nothing happened without his imprimatur. He was the right man at the right time, but that howler will haunt him forever, because it cost him, and us at least two flags. He could've gone down in history as our greatest coach. In the end, he didn't even get us to a GF. When they broke up, Butterrsssssss let him know all about it as well. Hope that clears all that up for you.
Fall down? Paint myself into a corner??
I asked a question. That's all. Very simple.
You're very emotive, and very defensive.
Why would you perceive such a simple question as baiting?
I didn't. The moderators did. You posted, whining about being pinged for baiting. I tried to clear up your mistaken beliefs with the truth. That was obviously too much for you. Are you ok? You seem unwell and unable to grasp the simplest concepts of truth. I won't upset you by engaging you further. I really feel sorry for you.
Very emotive once again. Borderline hysterical.
I didn't whine.
I asked a question. Very simple.
Remember this little gem, Johnny? Oh wait. It must be a fabrication or you've been quoted out of context, right? Thought I'd save you the trouble.
I started with nothing and I've got most of it left!
White Winmar wrote:Do you want me to humiliate you by bringing out the quote? Or would you prefer to withdraw sensibly and avoid further embarrassment? Thanks for reminding me of your endearing quality I forgot to mention. Selective memory.
Humiliate me?
Now you are being hysterical. You're posting on the other matter was borderline hysterical - but now you are being outright hysterical.
I'd go as far as to say you're unhinged.
You should have a read of the stuff you're posting.
You're hilarious. Always half a step behind, Johnny. Pointing out someone who tells a bare faced lie in a pathetic attempt to save face is not hysterical. As for humiliating you, you're doing a good enough job of that yourself. How's the flat hands theory going? Heard back from Sammy, yet? What about the deeper issues. Richo called yet?
I started with nothing and I've got most of it left!
White Winmar wrote:You're hilarious. Always half a step behind, Johnny. Pointing out someone who tells a bare faced lie in a pathetic attempt to save face is not hysterical. As for humiliating you, you're doing a good enough job of that yourself. How's the flat hands theory going? Heard back from Sammy, yet? What about the deeper issues. Richo called yet?
White Winmar wrote:You're hilarious. Always half a step behind, Johnny. Pointing out someone who tells a bare faced lie in a pathetic attempt to save face is not hysterical. As for humiliating you, you're doing a good enough job of that yourself. How's the flat hands theory going? Heard back from Sammy, yet? What about the deeper issues. Richo called yet?
"Flat hands"
I agree with Johnny Member about this practice.
It's been there for years, Beau Maister was good at it.
I saw Beau in a WAFL game on the weekend, his marks were perfect.
A real Sainter will pledge allegiance to the ❤ and despise the Pies, the Blues, and the Injectors.
Remember one of the 10 Commandments : Thou shalt have no other team before thee
and despise the Pies, the Blues, and the Injectors.