Stanley in for Patterson next week.....

[kaos theory]

OK, I'm one who did not get carried away with stanley, and was happy to accept he doesn't need to play seniors this year.....

But don't I think patterson is ready yet. He actually looked a little better in the ruck when he went there for a few times, but has zero presence as a forward.

Other options might be lynch or hyne, but if we need a kosi replacement, then stanely could at least offer more movement and uncertainty for oppositions...

Stanely is still raw, and lacks the maturity to play consistently through the yr, but he would have a bigger impact up forward than patterson...

[plugger66]

OK, I'm one who did not get carried away with stanley, and was happy to accept he doesn't need to play seniors this year.....

But don't I think patterson is ready yet. He actually looked a little better in the ruck when he went there for a few times, but has zero presence as a forward.

Other options might be lynch or hyne, but if we need a kosi replacement, then stanely could at least offer more movement and uncertainty for oppositions...

Stanely is still raw, and lacks the maturity to play consistently through the yr, but he would have a bigger impact up forward than patterson...

What actually happens if he played like Pattison today in a poorer competition. Surely then Pattison deserves another chance.

[borderbarry]

Disappointed in Paterson and McEvoy. We still need that 3rd forward.

[markp]

Yup... we won by 100 points, but we need to shyte bag someone.

He'll do.

[kaos theory]

OK, I'm one who did not get carried away with stanley, and was happy to accept he doesn't need to play seniors this year.....

But don't I think patterson is ready yet. He actually looked a little better in the ruck when he went there for a few times, but has zero presence as a forward.

Other options might be lynch or hyne, but if we need a kosi replacement, then stanely could at least offer more movement and uncertainty for oppositions...

Stanely is still raw, and lacks the maturity to play consistently through the yr, but he would have a bigger impact up forward than patterson...

What actually happens if he played like Pattison today in a poorer competition. Surely then Pattison deserves another chance.

Yep, the reality is that Lyon doesn't like to change things around too much and he tends to give players a few weeks to settle in.

I expect he will play the 3 weeks, assuming he is not completely terrible next week....

This is just my opinion....I think stanely has a loooong way to go....but I don't think he would have been worse than patterson....and would have added more for the opposition to think about.

But I understand what Lyon is doing here....so I expect patersion will se out the 3 weeks.

[Bernard Shakey]

Pattison was very ordinary and I don't think it was just a bad game.

[bigred]

Ask a Richmond supporter....

No wait...don't.

[midas_touch]

Pattison is absolute garbage. If hes not good enough for Richmond, he certainly aint gonna be good enough for us. Stanley has gotta come in next week.

[bigred]

I was very surprised by Pattison's inclusion this week.

I honestly see him as being third string, worst case scenario list filler.

My personal opinion is that if he isnt setting the world on fire @ Sandringham then he shouldn't be even close.

But anyway, I am not the coach thank goodness. They know many things that I do not....

So he deserves a shot.

[evertonfc]

Yup... we won by 100 points, but we need to shyte bag someone.

He'll do.

We also lost a grand final last year by 12 points.

It's all about getting better.

Great win tonight; still room to improve. Simple as that.

[realdeal]

Pattison is absolute garbage. If hes not good enough for Richmond, he certainly aint gonna be good enough for us. Stanley has gotta come in next week.

How's Zac Dawson going? bla bla..

[kosifantutti23]

I was disappointed with Pattison and McEvoy tonight. I'd certainly give McEvoy more time but if Stanley is fit I'd have him ahead of Pattison.

[Milan Faletic]

Pattison was very ordinary and I don't think it was just a bad game.

Agree Bernard. At half time my brother said how slow he was and how he looked like a Richmond player and I said, give him a chance, but with the way we were playing, and with no Roo or Kosi, he had his chance in the last quarter but just isn't there at this point.

McEvoy was quiet but will get there. Pattison was not great.

[plugger66]

I was very surprised by Pattison's inclusion this week.

I honestly see him as being third string, worst case scenario list filler.

My personal opinion is that if he isnt setting the world on fire @ Sandringham then he shouldn't be even close.

But anyway, I am not the coach thank goodness. They know many things that I do not....

So he deserves a shot.

But that is the point. He was one of the best last week for Sandy and was playing forward so why shouldnt he have played. People want Stanley in and can bet none of them saw him play yesterday. What if he played the same as Pattison but in a weaker comp. Should he get a chance then?

[wallbanger]

Not up to it I don't reckon. Not trying to bag the bloke after only his first game, but he just doesn't seem to possess anything (other than height) to give you confidence that he will get better. Maybe I'll be proven wrong - I hope so, but I don't think so.

Would much prefer seeing a young fella (i.e Stanley or even Lynch) given time whilst Kosi is out.

[markp]

Yup... we won by 100 points, but we need to shyte bag someone.

He'll do.

We also lost a grand final last year by 12 points.

It's all about getting better.

Great win tonight; still room to improve. Simple as that.

"It's all about getting better"... yup, Ross reads this site and takes notes.

Pattison was drafted as back-up... it was his first game, he's young, and we all know rucks famously take longer to develop... obviously a project and no Roo, but geez, is it really necessary to write him off just yet?

Of course not... it's just the arm chair nuffy brigade want to be able to say "I told you he was no good"... tragic really.


Carry on.

[ace]

If we bring in Stanley to replace Patterson it means Pattsion will get his second game with the Saints.

[maverick]

Yup... we won by 100 points, but we need to shyte bag someone.

He'll do.

We also lost a grand final last year by 12 points.

It's all about getting better.

Great win tonight; still room to improve. Simple as that.

So bagging the 22nd player picked in his first game for the club helps does it?

[Darrel Baldock]

hey Ace, wouldn't that be Pattsion's first game?

[Goose is king]

Who cares if we won by 104 points. If a player wasn't up to scratch then he should be replaced because not all sides are as bad. Pattison and McEvoy did litlle, lets be honest. For ruckmen they are still young but I agree with the original post, Stanley would offer more up forward and couldn't do less than Big Mac and Pattison did last night.

[barks4eva]

It was a tough initiation for Pattison, up against quality opposition in a very tight game, where we struggled to win clear ball and ........

seriously he's too slow and offers nothing,

he's backup for the backup surely,

very surprised to see him selected,

If Stanley is fit then I cannot see any reason as to why he would not be selected before Pattison!

Pattison would ( and did ) struggle to get a game with Richmond if ( when ) he was still there!

[Quixote]

Yup... we won by 100 points, but we need to shyte bag someone.

He'll do.

[PJ]

My take is that Stanley is not 100%.

It's interesting that we tried Stanley in the NAB in this role and didn't see Patto (perhaps injured) at all. Now we have Patto - anyway I wouldn't be too hard on him he's still learning the saints footy game plan and even though he looked a little lost he gave it a crack.

[older saint]

from what RL said pre game Stanley played 20 min last week and did not get picked as not the preparation required for a senior game.

King in for McEvoy - he needs games time but cannot just be given games and has had 2 poor ones.

Look at the opposition next week need a tall forward who can mark, whether Presti plays or not.

Stanley could be option if plays well in 2's or perhaps Lynch. Colllingwood will put Maxwell on whoever plays 3rd tall to zone off so may even be a raph comes in and Mini plays more a defensive forward

[SainterK]

Perhaps the games into Patto is for a reason, our two most experienced ruckman are 30+ so it's not the silliest idea to get some games into him.

Out of interest, when was his last game at senior level?

As for Ben, I just don't see how dropping him would be of benefit at this stage in his development. He needs games, he needs to learn.