Raph

Moods · Post: # 1060914Post **Moods** » Wed 13 Apr 2011 9:05pm

I'm neither a Raph lover or hater. He has played some great games for the club, and in fact I had so much confidence that this would be his break out year that I picked him in my SC team.

1st rd he was good. Rd 2 only just passable. 3rd rd - abysmal. I watched from the 3rd level for the first time in ages which probably gives you a better perspective of how the play is unfolding. He was indecisive, slow, and was one of the worst offenders of the handball happy brigade. He looked petrified to kick the thing. He is very much a confidence player, and at the moment his confidence is down, way down.

Gwilt wasn't much better, but for mine has more credits in the bank after last year, particularly the GF's. I have voiced my skepticism re Lynch many times before, but why keep him on the list if he performs and he's not picked? Has performed 2 weeks in a row in the magoos by all reports, therefore deserves a go. I would drop Raph.

spert · Post: # 1061010Post **spert** » Wed 13 Apr 2011 11:01pm

I like the guy, but he aint up to it..plays like a good reserves player and goes to ground too easy and coughs up the ball under pressure. IMHO not up to senior level.

AnythingsPossibleSaints · Wed 13 Apr 2011 11:10pm

gringo wrote:Lynch who is possibly more a Baker replacement, only Simpkin is left to come in that could play as a tall back.

If the reports that Lynch has grown to 194cm (which is taller than Blake, Fisher and Gwilt) are correct, it's fair to say he's probably not suited to be the "Baker replacement", unless we want the tallest backline ever.

Bernard Shakey · Wed 13 Apr 2011 11:43pm

He hasn't had eight years as is being touted here. We are three games into his eighth year with the Saints. More than a couple of those years have been marred by injury. I believe that if Raph can stay healthy, we will see the form we saw last year, which we need badly this year.

ralphsmith · Thu 14 Apr 2011 2:28pm

If he doesn't get injured, and gets important match time, I hope we can turn him into a solid defender.

He has missed out on critical match time and experience in recent years.

His mind and body need to hardened for the contest.

White Winmar · Thu 14 Apr 2011 10:19pm

Sorry BS but he's had eight pre-seasons and he is 5 months into his eighth season at the club when you take the pre-season into account.
O.K., at a stretch he's been there for eight preseasons and is 7.5 years into his career. How long does he get? You're clutching at straws. He ain't going to get better and on demonstrated form, he just ain't good enough. I'd love you to be my boss. Eight under performing years and more chances? Where do I sign? Or do I just join the public service?

Bernard Shakey · Thu 14 Apr 2011 10:30pm

White Winmar wrote:Sorry BS but he's had eight pre-seasons and he is 5 months into his eighth season at the club when you take the pre-season into account.
O.K., at a stretch he's been there for eight preseasons and is 7.5 years into his career. How long does he get? You're clutching at straws. He ain't going to get better and on demonstrated form, he just ain't good enough. I'd love you to be my boss. Eight under performing years and more chances? Where do I sign? Or do I just join the public service?

He has never been as bad as most whinging supporters would have you believe. We must have the biggest pack of whingers of all time.
I'd rather have the ball in Raph's hands than Gram's.

Dr Spaceman · Thu 14 Apr 2011 10:39pm

White Winmar wrote:Sorry BS but he's had eight pre-seasons and he is 5 months into his eighth season at the club when you take the pre-season into account.
O.K., at a stretch he's been there for eight preseasons and is 7.5 years into his career. How long does he get? You're clutching at straws. He ain't going to get better and on demonstrated form, he just ain't good enough. I'd love you to be my boss. Eight under performing years and more chances? Where do I sign? Or do I just join the public service?

Raph has no trade value. Are you suggesting we simply delist him a la Shane Wakelin?

In the end all this talk is irrelevant. Only 3 rounds have been played and there's a minimum 19 to go before any decision to retain/trade/delist is made on any player.

Raph's future at St Kilda will be decided more by what he does in those 19 games than by what he's done in the previous 7.5 years

bigred · Post: # 1061256Post **bigred** » Thu 14 Apr 2011 10:54pm

Dr Spaceman wrote:
White Winmar wrote:Sorry BS but he's had eight pre-seasons and he is 5 months into his eighth season at the club when you take the pre-season into account.
O.K., at a stretch he's been there for eight preseasons and is 7.5 years into his career. How long does he get? You're clutching at straws. He ain't going to get better and on demonstrated form, he just ain't good enough. I'd love you to be my boss. Eight under performing years and more chances? Where do I sign? Or do I just join the public service?
Raph has no trade value. Are you suggesting we simply delist him a la Shane Wakelin?

In the end all this talk is irrelevant. Only 3 rounds have been played and there's a minimum 19 to go before any decision to retain/trade/delist is made on any player.

Raph's future at St Kilda will be decided more by what he does in those 19 games than by what he's done in the previous 7.5 years

Agreed. If he breaks down again its curtains.
If he cannot play consistent good football I can see him being delisted.
Trade value? Well really you would have to say Nil. I cannot recall a player being universally panned as much as Raph has. I dare say that St.Kilda supporters in general are responsible for this. Would take a coach with absolute complete confidence in his ability to take that punt.

You are spot on in regards to the next 19 rounds being his most important. There are others in the same situation also.

You see glimpses with Raph. And only glimpses. The odd passage of play in the past few years. But it is never sustained. He has the natural ability and talent but it seems to just desert him.

I've been a supporter of his for years. Backed him in against a flood of abuse...but sheesh he has run out of time. He is the only one that can do anything about it.

To the top · Thu 14 Apr 2011 11:27pm

Our rucks being thrashed, our lazy mid-field being slaughtered and our attack non existant meant our defence was under extreme pressure.

And they had Ryder to contend with.

So we had players up to attempt to spoil him - including Clarke backing into the contest on numerous occasions trying to put a fist on the pill.

This is not how he plays his best footy - which we saw on display until injured last season.

I didn't think any of our defenders had a great game v. Essendon - in fact I don't think we had one "winning" player on the night.

As we improve as a team - hopefully, because we have the cattle - and pressure is built around the ground, our defenders will improve.

The real problem we had was that the comprehensive thrashing by Essendon (again) found our defenders who can actually rebound back in the defensive 50 countering not only their opponent but other Essendon players - and not countering some such as Watson who took 3 uncontested chest marks in the F50 for 3 goals.

That was a measure of the comprehensive thrashing - and the disruption to our defence.

I would not consider replacing Clarke with Blake because that will only make our defence more static - as with Baker.

Like for like in terms of taking an opponent is Dempster - and Clarke wins that hands down.

When you have to go back on someone else's opponent and when you get the pill and look to see no St Kilda player making position to receive up the ground a player looks bad - and that was the assessment v. Essendon.

Look at the team performance.

That said, I still worry about Dawson (looks timid and frail therefore not an aggressive leader you like to see in the key defensive positions) and I think our 30 years olds (ex Hayes who is class) have had their day - along with Dempster and McQualter and Gamble and the like.

The positive is Armitage, Smith, Steven and Stanley - plus there are Lynch, Simpkin and Johnson - and the kids we drafted because we went for medium/small quicks to fix a problem the trading for Lovett and the trading for Peake confirmed.

DK27 · Post: # 1061282Post **DK27** » Fri 15 Apr 2011 12:38am

Raph, Gamble and Peake and playing seconds this weekend so it looks like they won't play seniors on Thursday.

Gamble and Peake deserve to get dropped. Raph when up and playing with confidence is a really good player. He hasn't shown it enough but is worth persisting with as his best is very good. Gamble and Peake's best is just adequate in my opinion.

Cheers.

Moods · Post: # 1061301Post **Moods** » Fri 15 Apr 2011 10:16am

DK27 wrote:Raph, Gamble and Peake and playing seconds this weekend so it looks like they won't play seniors on Thursday.

This from Herald Sun this morning.

Under VFL rules, the Saints can't send struggling players back to regain form with affiliate Sandringham on Sunday

Not sure where you're getting info from DK27 but it doesn't appear the players you have mentioned will be playing with Sandy this weekend.

bergholt · Post: # 1061303Post **bergholt** » Fri 15 Apr 2011 10:37am

Moods wrote:Not sure where you're getting info from DK27 but it doesn't appear the players you have mentioned will be playing with Sandy this weekend.

they're named in the vfl side. the conclusion we've come to seems to be that players dropped to sandy this week can't then play for st kilda the week after.

Dr Spaceman · Fri 15 Apr 2011 10:44am

bergholt wrote:
Moods wrote:Not sure where you're getting info from DK27 but it doesn't appear the players you have mentioned will be playing with Sandy this weekend.
they're named in the vfl side. the conclusion we've come to seems to be that players dropped to sandy this week can't then play for st kilda the week after.

It's all a bit confusing but that certainly makes sense.

To the top · Fri 15 Apr 2011 11:40am

Remember that Clarke had a similar injury to Riewoldt in the second half of last season (v Fremantle?) - so he has had a limited preparation with few (if any) pre-season games.

He did not appear in the NAB Cup.

A case may have been made that his match fitness is lacking because of these circumstances - and approvals may have been obtained on that basis.

spert · Post: # 1061328Post **spert** » Fri 15 Apr 2011 11:53am

We seem to have spent quite a few seasons waiting for some players to realise their full potential, but I'm afraid if it hasn't happened by now it never will, and the supposed potential was never there. Should have been a cull after 09 GF.

thejiggingsaint · Fri 15 Apr 2011 11:57am

Give the guy a chance!!!!!

Dr Spaceman · Fri 15 Apr 2011 11:59am

thejiggingsaint wrote:Give the guy a chance!!!!!

+ many

BigMart · Post: # 1061339Post **BigMart** » Fri 15 Apr 2011 12:04pm

Clarke had a FULL pre season.....he was injured R9 last year......by the start of preseason he had 22 weeks to recover.....he played in all preseason matches......he played well in two of them....it has been 11 months since his injury.....plenty of time to recover

No excuses for a 26yo player in his 8th season....if he cannot be a regular, he is a liability

Dr Spaceman · Fri 15 Apr 2011 12:08pm

BigMart wrote:Clarke had a FULL pre season.....he was injured R9 last year......by the start of preseason he had 22 weeks to recover.....he played in all preseason matches......he played well in two of them....it has been 11 months since his injury.....plenty of time to recover

No excuses for a 26yo player in his 8th season....if he cannot be a regular, he is a liability

Why are some people so hell bent on marking his papers now when there's a minimum of 19 games to go before the club can make any decision on him

SainterK · Post: # 1061343Post **SainterK** » Fri 15 Apr 2011 12:12pm

Agree a long way to go, and if at any stage he needs some time at Sandy to get his confidence up, I don't see the shame in that either.

BigMart · Post: # 1061346Post **BigMart** » Fri 15 Apr 2011 12:17pm

Because he needs to deliver....consistently....good games cannot be sandwiched by shockers......

He needs to improve markedy and quickly......

He gets games and chances on what he can deliver, but not on what he does deliver.....

desertsaint · Fri 15 Apr 2011 12:27pm

really wanted him to succeed, but gave up a few years ago. don't blame him for the geelong loss - he never should have been matched against byrnes - but it was clearly the biggest mismatch in the game and cost us the game. it gave geelong an easy avenue which they exploited.
no trade value - but no playing value either - why keep him?

markmark · Post: # 1061352Post **markmark** » Fri 15 Apr 2011 12:42pm

Iâ€™m sure he played forward as a junior, for Christ sake give him some freedom from this strict game plan and he just might blossom

BigMart · Post: # 1061358Post **BigMart** » Fri 15 Apr 2011 1:09pm

Is his general lack of awareness cause by a conservative gp which requires him to be more concerned with taking the pecentage option, rather than the instinctive one......he seems so worried about making mistakes he second guesses himself, and gets caught...or puts himself under pressure....

Also putting him fwd actually puts more pressure on him......harder for a fwd to get a kick than a defender