Just beat the "drop Dal Santo" post for the worst post of the year.Behind Play wrote:I will not attend another game when Dawson or Clark are in the team.
So enjoy your next few years at home then.
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
IMO, it's not simply about whether the forward line would function better or worse with Walsh in it.St Chris wrote:Why not give Walsh a run?? No he is not ready yet. But would him coming in really make our forward line function any worse than it did last night?? And is there any better option?? When Kosi is not in the ruck, play him at CHF, and keep Walsh back in the goal square, with Jack or Milne standing right next to him.
Agree...I think his punishment should be to go around to Andrew Carazzo's house and do the dishes each night, then watch his game 20 times this week. Very annoying to see poor attitude creeping back into his game, after he seemed to have conquered it the last 2 years. Hoping he'll be back next week, certainly no way in hell he'll be dropped from the team IMO.rexy wrote:Milan faletic
Whilst I would find it a tad reactionary to drop DalSanto on the basis of one game, his effort was attrocious last night. I am not talking about posession either, I am talking about attitude, not only did he fail to get the ball, he also allowed his opponent to lead him to it when they had it, failed to chase or apply preassure and generally just cruised around saying to himself gee Im being well tagged.
As I said, a bit drastic to drop him on that basis, but not much more far fetched than your insistance on dropping Schneider? Looks to be working overtime for a small forward IMO.
And I agree, refusing to go to games based on your disagreement with selection is ridiculous. Just hpe this poster can reflect on this decision and is just angry and upset at our recent poor form.
degruch wrote:Agree...I think his punishment should be to go around to Andrew Carazzo's house and do the dishes each night, then watch his game 20 times this week. Very annoying to see poor attitude creeping back into his game, after he seemed to have conquered it the last 2 years. Hoping he'll be back next week, certainly no way in hell he'll be dropped from the team IMO.rexy wrote:Milan faletic
Whilst I would find it a tad reactionary to drop DalSanto on the basis of one game, his effort was attrocious last night. I am not talking about posession either, I am talking about attitude, not only did he fail to get the ball, he also allowed his opponent to lead him to it when they had it, failed to chase or apply preassure and generally just cruised around saying to himself gee Im being well tagged.
As I said, a bit drastic to drop him on that basis, but not much more far fetched than your insistance on dropping Schneider? Looks to be working overtime for a small forward IMO.
And I agree, refusing to go to games based on your disagreement with selection is ridiculous. Just hpe this poster can reflect on this decision and is just angry and upset at our recent poor form.
correct.One Eyed Saint wrote:With Zac & Kosi up forward, the ball will come out faster than it comes in.
If we persist with Kosi up forward we need more mobile and fleet of foot forwards than Zac.
Was thinking Zac as the hit up forward,between 40 and centre,Kos and Ray at home ,Mcq,Tiprat and Peake buzzing around.One Eyed Saint wrote:With Zac & Kosi up forward, the ball will come out faster than it comes in.
If we persist with Kosi up forward we need more mobile and fleet of foot forwards than Zac.
Walsh? In the AFL after playing what, 5 games of footy? He would be consistently out played in front of goal, have ordinary defensive skills and his athleticism wouldn't be much good loping 10m behind his opponent.One Eyed Saint wrote:Absolutely crazy I am!!!!!!
Why would we want to bring in TW who would give us:
* Defensive pressure
* Greater one on one physical presence
* Greater athleticism
To replace Zac who gives us:
* Limited defensive pressure (needs chop out from teammates)
* Bugger all physical presence
* Average atheticism.
Agree that Zac was the only one looking to take a mark up forward. The problem I have with him is confidence. As soon as he took that mark (what, 40, 45 out?) he looked desperately everywhere to find someone to dish it off to. The moment he did that you could tell he was going to spray the shot, which he did. Need to spend a bit more time in front of goals in training maybe? Or just get given a few full games at FF, rather than getting wrenched around the ground willy nilly.mad saint guy wrote:Walsh? In the AFL after playing what, 5 games of footy? He would be consistently out played in front of goal, have ordinary defensive skills and his athleticism wouldn't be much good loping 10m behind his opponent.One Eyed Saint wrote:Absolutely crazy I am!!!!!!
Why would we want to bring in TW who would give us:
* Defensive pressure
* Greater one on one physical presence
* Greater athleticism
To replace Zac who gives us:
* Limited defensive pressure (needs chop out from teammates)
* Bugger all physical presence
* Average atheticism.
I'm not bagging him at all; I think his progress has been excellent, but you are absolutely deluding yourself if you think he wouldn't be a complete liability in an AFL side this week.
I agree that Zac had a horrid start to the season but I don't think people have actually bothered watching him in the last two games. He hasn't been brilliant but he hasn't made mistakes either. He made some good spoils last night and was the only player who ever looked like taking a mark up forward.
Congratulations BP, top two of the worst posts in a single thread I've seen...first you post your dummy spit in a public forum & then you tell people who read it that it's not their business...that's pure goldBehind Play wrote:What I do is not your businessplugger66 wrote:Why keep it. You are obviously not going again this year.Behind Play wrote:Not ripping it up fool, as usual you are a wankaplugger66 wrote:Another great supporter. Be like a tigers supporter and rip up your membership. No one needs supporters like you.Behind Play wrote:I will not attend another game when Dawson or Clark are in the team.
Good to see you know how to spell Clarke ya muppet.plugger66 wrote:Another great supporter. Be like a tigers supporter and rip up your membership. No one needs supporters like you.Behind Play wrote:I will not attend another game when Dawson or Clark are in the team.
I see you're back on here, "ace", yet no response to your big chest-thumping, pile of verbal diarrhea on your other post? So, do you take it back, or are you going to step up to the line and back up what you said? Or are you too busy cowering? We're waiting.ace wrote:I would like to see Dawson played at centre half forward, he seemed to be better at that position when moved there than Koschitze.
If he plays the true position his pathetic kicking wont be such a problem but he would provide the marking target on the forward line that is missing.
Goddard and Fisher are not tall enough and Gilbert is just so reliable marking in defence.
I would also like to see Goddard up forward when we are in attack, but further back when the opposition has possession.
Wholesale droppings are not called for especially when the replacements are no better.
With almost as many inside 50s as Carlton it is the forward structure that seems to be the problem.
6 goals, 7 goals, 9 goals maybe this week it can go into double figures.
B: Baker, Fisher, Blake
HB: Clarke, Gilbert, Gwilt
C: Montagna, Hayes, Gram
HF: McQualter, Dawson, Goddard
F: Milne, Koschitzke, Schneider
R: Gardiner, Dal Santo, Jones
Int: King, Ray, Geary, Armitage
In: Armitage
Out: Steven
Emerg: Stanley, Steven, Peake
anyone find that annoying, why not press lyon for who else might get the chop?SainterK wrote:http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/l ... 5865734126
The Saints will make up to three changes this week, with Steven King missing with a hamstring problem. Ben McEvoy will replace him, and it's likely to be a permanent swap.