Preview Round 10, 2019: St.Kilda v Carlton - Marvel Stadium, Sunday 26th May, 3:20PM AEST

[gringo2011]

I don't think we are that much Infront of Carlton list wise
Some would argue Carlton's list has more promise than ours. But I think at the moment Carlton is a rabble off the field and it's got a crappy mojo on the field at the moment from being down for so long. A bit like Melb.

I think we should win but we ain't no power house either.
If we win by any margin I'll be wrapt.
If we lose I'll be bloody disappointed. But I think it would be cos we still have quite a few of our best 22 out.
So I wouldn't panic and demand a cull of coach and players.

So yeah, We should win but with our injuries we may lose. It is what it is.

yeah, I'm nervous but don't think I'll melt as much as you'd expect losing to a s**t side. We aren't miles in front and sit somewhere in a big pack of second tier teams. We aren't a top 4 contender but with luck and form could sneak into finals. Could just as easily drop our heads for a period and end up bottom 3. I think we look a lot like North last year, a bit has gone right and we are pretty buoyant because of it but some of the gloss has started to wear off and we are probably starting to find our true level. It's a super even year and anyone can beat anyone if they bring their best.

 

[gringo2011]

Fringe players who think the coach players favourite - I'm shocked at that accusation.

Every coach has favourites. And the guys who are on the fringe who aren't getting a game rationalise their lack of talent or effort as the coach not liking them enough. Reality is, if they were good enough they would be playing. No coach, especially one coaching for their career, is going to leave good players who could help him win.

What if your form was great and you felt you had worked super hard on every area that they said was holding you back? What if you saw underperformance and little things other players did that were not seen as issues in them but were in you. You start to feel like there is no point to it. You could do everything you were asked and they found new reasons while promoting someone who did half as much and the side was losing any way. You don't feel like there is much integrity in you coach or selection committee. Players were given targets, met them then new targets were made for them to delay them playing for a few weeks. There was no way we should have selected a few last year on their output but we kept them in regardless. You'd think when the season was over at about round 6 you'd be trying players and churning the list over to see what you had.

 

[kernelT]

Could not agree more with both posts!

Yup aussierulesrules absolutely nailed it...

 

[kernelT]

Farcical situation where some players don't have to perform in the VFL but get picked for the ones, while others get it done consistently yet can't crack a game... same goes for consistently using the younger players as a scapegoat after a loss, while senior players continue to cruise despite putrid form and effort.

 

[MrFoster]

I know I have been quite negative on Mckenzie.. but the truth is based on his physical attribute, endurance, speed.. he should have been our elliott Yeo, or Isaac Smith.. a fast wing man capable of attcking or defending.. and able to accumulate high possesions or at least the highlight video shown demonstrated that https://m.afl.com.au/video/2014-09-15/draft-prospect-daniel-mckenzie

In his draft year video, he looks confident, purposeful, often uses his speed to play on.. and run off opponent.. and taking contested marks.. a complete contrast to the player he is now...

Just thinking, in a team that have not prioritised skills, the most important part of the game.. that’s why the general skills of the team is poor, a lot of possesions we get is rushed, fumbled; smothered.. players need to work so hard to win possesion then disposes it under pressure.. e.g. constantly under pressure when you get the ball and then bust a gut to get it back... I really wonder Richo’s pressure/effort first phililosophy is the reason why so many of our draftees stagnant or fail..

The theory is, if you are surrounded by good skilled players e.g. Hawthorn.. where each possesion is clean and pin pointed to their team mate like a well oiled machine.. you’ll be able to flourish and develop your game, gaining confidence.. compared to being in a poorly skilled team, constantly under pressure.. a good skilled player will eventuately fumble, turn the ball over because none of the ball they get is clean, always rushed.. thus losing confidence.. There are only so many poor skills players you can carry in a team before it becomes the norm.. In addition, our manic pressure game definitely uses up a lot of energy.. impacting general skill level e.g. goal kicking.

Anyway, rant over.. hope the team beats Carlton.. go saints..

 

[BrutThough]

What if your form was great and you felt you had worked super hard on every area that they said was holding you back? What if you saw underperformance and little things other players did that were not seen as issues in them but were in you. You start to feel like there is no point to it. You could do everything you were asked and they found new reasons while promoting someone who did half as much and the side was losing any way. You don't feel like there is much integrity in you coach or selection committee. Players were given targets, met them then new targets were made for them to delay them playing for a few weeks. There was no way we should have selected a few last year on their output but we kept them in regardless. You'd think when the season was over at about round 6 you'd be trying players and churning the list over to see what you had.

Some players are held to other standards but that's just a reality of AFL. Those players who don't get dropped straight away have usually earned some benefit of doubt from the coaches. Thats what showing up to preseason in good shape gets you.

 

[Jughead77]

Its been a long time since I've felt this nervous about a game. On paper this would be the blues strongest lineup this year with only simpson and doc injured. Cant stress the importance of starting the game well. Break their resistance early!

The whole week my carlton supporting colleague has been up and about, chirpy, calling this week a certainty. A quick glance at the blues board reveals the same confidence. where they get it from ill never know. i know we have a few outs but surely we get the job done here right??

im doubly nervous now because i wagered the blues fella 100 push ups for the loser. it wouldn't be so bad if both of us weren't in our 40s and 15kg past our prime.

i never ever melt after a loss. but if we get done tmr, watch out! For the love of god, allah, buddha, ganesh, lenny and any other deity, just ******* get the job done boys!

 

[cooperrules]

I know I have been quite negative on Mckenzie.. but the truth is based on his physical attribute, endurance, speed.. he should have been our elliott Yeo, or Isaac Smith.. a fast wing man capable of attcking or defending.. and able to accumulate high possesions or at least the highlight video shown demonstrated that https://m.afl.com.au/video/2014-09-15/draft-prospect-daniel-mckenzie

In his draft year video, he looks confident, purposeful, often uses his speed to play on.. and run off opponent.. and taking contested marks.. a complete contrast to the player he is now...

Just thinking, in a team that have not prioritised skills, the most important part of the game.. that’s why the general skills of the team is poor, a lot of possesions we get is rushed, fumbled; smothered.. players need to work so hard to win possesion then disposes it under pressure.. e.g. constantly under pressure when you get the ball and then bust a gut to get it back... I really wonder Richo’s pressure/effort first phililosophy is the reason why so many of our draftees stagnant or fail..

The theory is, if you are surrounded by good skilled players e.g. Hawthorn.. where each possesion is clean and pin pointed to their team mate like a well oiled machine.. you’ll be able to flourish and develop your game, gaining confidence.. compared to being in a poorly skilled team, constantly under pressure.. a good skilled player will eventuately fumble, turn the ball over because none of the ball they get is clean, always rushed.. thus losing confidence.. There are only so many poor skills players you can carry in a team before it becomes the norm.. In addition, our manic pressure game definitely uses up a lot of energy.. impacting general skill level e.g. goal kicking.

Anyway, rant over.. hope the team beats Carlton.. go saints..

Strong in the contest.

 

[Enclosed_Animal]

The main issue I have with Ben being picked this week is that I'm a big fan of his talent and attributes, but don't think we do him any favours, by continually bringing him back into the seniors off what by all non-propaganda reports are very ordinary VFL games. (Like late last year when he was brought back in off a 4 disposal game for Sandy!)

Then we bemoan the fact that he regularly starts games well in the seniors, but then usually completely disappears as the game wears on.

He was putrid for two straight weeks before being dropped this time, and really looked like he needed a good spell in the VFL, and probably a lot of midfield time- to get his fitness up and get more used to getting his hands on the ball more, and also playing midfield, where we hope he will play more in the future- but then we bring him back in immediately, off what sounded like a pretty average game (reportedly lots of midfield time, for just 15 disposals).

So even if he really rises to the occasion and has a good one this week, it probably won't be long before he's back to being very average again, which doesn't do him or us any favours in the short, or long term.

Next time he gets dropped, I'd really love to see him kept at Sandy until he's genuinely kicking ass down there for 4 quarters, possibly for a couple of weeks in a row, because I think that will be much better for his development.

Right now he knows that he doesn't even have to play well at Sandy and he'll get picked in the 1's, and I don't think it does him any favours and I'm sure it wouldn't be great for the morale of plenty of others at Sandy.

Great post mate.

I actually think some of the above discussion has become too focused on discussing specific players and their attributes. For those questioning selection, I actually think it has very little to do with advocating for a specific player. It has to do with the integrity of the process overall.

I think the point being made is that the players with the best form in the VFL should be at the head of the line for selection (Clark, Joyce, White etc) but they aren't. Or if they do get selected they are played out of position, and then dropped again (Marsh, Clark, Joyce, Lonie etc)

On the flip side, players with average to poor VFL form (and sometimes non-existent VFL form) are picked ahead of them (Long, Phillips, Pierce etc) while others don't seem to ever get dropped (Newnes, Kent, DMac etc) because they are the favourites.

The main argument used to justify this is usually the 'like for like' idea in selection (see picking Young over Clark when Long went out). But that doesn't hold when the following week we select Long for Paton. Hence people see no logic to selection and begin to vent frustration.

It also doesn't help that in another thread, half a dozen people were discussing how average / anonymous Long was immediately after the game, but how the coaches will inevitably love him (was magically named BOG despite most people considering that at least half a dozen others played clearly superior games) and will automatically select him (because if he was picked off 4 kicks last year, having 8 kicks last week means he was a walk up certainty).

So I think the frustration isn't necessarily that player x was picked or that player y wasn't in any given week, its that the logic behind selection is very unclear, and that the goalposts seem to move from one player to another. That there is something fundamentally wrong with the process (and this remains flawed regardless of the results which may fluctuate from week to week). I think a degree of fairness and consistency is just what people are wanting, and we don't appear to be getting it.

Side note: Just because Ledger, Curran or Lee didn't have the most successful AFL careers, doesn't mean we were correct in not picking them. The were consistently our best players in the VFL and better performed than many that got opportunities ahead of them. The same way that for 2 years, Jack Steven, Armo, Luke Miles, and Tom Lynch were our best VFL players and should have been given more opportunities (especially Lynch). But we consistently picked players like Robert Eddy, Brett Peake and Raph Clarke instead. Look how that turned out. For me we should reward VFL form with selection regardless of who the player is.

 

[Mikka84]

Ok so I'm late to this BigFooty party and read much more than I would dare write but for the life of me I don't understand you.
This year due to a very fortunate change in life I'm back to being able to walk to watch the Saints for the first time since I was a kid growing up in the 80's in Cheltenham.
Last week I went to the 'G' (by tram) and saw a team with 11 players with under 20 games take it right up to the pies.
You might not like the construct of the team and the 'who' is in it but to say there is no development of young players is just a load of crap.

You don’t need to understand me, that all good. I’m glad you’re feeling better and can get to games.

We’re playing ‘kids’ under necessity. They’re actually not kids as well. We had to go for mature players again, out of necessity. Why? I’ll leave that to your imagination, as you keep reading and pondering everyone’s comments.

The fact is, our development of young kids over a number of years is not great. Our program in my opinion is terrible. Over the years we’ve totally lacked in management from coaches to health scientist. Partly because of money, partly because of greed. I won’t go into that here.

I’m more than comfortable if you don’t like what I say. What I’m not comfortable with, is how this footy club is managed in the last. Last year was a step. We’re making improvements. More to come.

 

[Mikka84]

Have fun with those models on the yacht Mikka!

View attachment 679993

That’s me in the pink singlet..

 

[kernelT]

That’s me in the pink singlet..

You been working out bro? (and tanning hard)

 

[Mikka84]

You been working out bro? (and tanning hard)

Haha. Didn’t skip leg day either.

Monaco 1, Mikka 0. Struggling this morning.

 

[jwikked]

Farcical situation where some players don't have to perform in the VFL but get picked for the ones, while others get it done consistently yet can't crack a game... same goes for consistently using the younger players as a scapegoat after a loss, while senior players continue to cruise despite putrid form and effort.

Newnes hasn't missed a game since Round 1 2014.

 

[Jade Buddha]

My 2 cents

If you look at where our problems are they are not in the backline.
long’s inclusion helps the forwards and occasionally the midfield
Our forwards have been well below par and we need to a much greater return and structure
Yep long hasn’t been smashing it but what other forward options are there
For me it’s either him or move Battle to th

 

[aussierulesrules]

Re the talk this week about Newnes' last two games (where he's played mostly forward, and been down on his early-season form) and also the somewhat surprising call-up that Phillips got (especially since, like we'd been talking about in here, we already seemed to have too many in the team who's best position is the wing, and because there were only two to go around, some were being played out of position to fit them all in- so it made little sense to bring in someone else, who's only position is the wing!), it was mentioned in an article on either the club website, or the AFL website, that Newnes had missed the main training session leading up to our game against West Coast.

So I think it's pretty safe to say that Jack has again copped an injury, that is restricting him, but not preventing him from playing outright.

Hence his drop in output this last two weeks, being played mostly forward in that time (after spending the early part of the year on the wing), and hence Phillips getting a call-up, when he didn't seem to be doing all that well in the VFL.

We obviously wanted a like-for-like replacement for Newnes not being up to playing wing, and didn't want to re-adjust the team by putting an Acres or Sinclair back there from the forwardline.

 

[VDS66]

Great post mate.

I actually think some of the above discussion has become too focused on discussing specific players and their attributes. For those questioning selection, I actually think it has very little to do with advocating for a specific player. It has to do with the integrity of the process overall.

I think the point being made is that the players with the best form in the VFL should be at the head of the line for selection (Clark, Joyce, White etc) but they aren't. Or if they do get selected they are played out of position, and then dropped again (Marsh, Clark, Joyce, Lonie etc)

On the flip side, players with average to poor VFL form (and sometimes non-existent VFL form) are picked ahead of them (Long, Phillips, Pierce etc) while others don't seem to ever get dropped (Newnes, Kent, DMac etc) because they are they are the favourites.

The main argument used to justify this is usually the 'like for like' idea in selection (see picking Young over Clark when Long went out). But that doesn't hold when the following week we select Long for Paton. Hence people see no logic to selection and begin to vent frustration.

It also doesn't help that in another thread, half a dozen people were discussing how average Long was in the twos, but how the coaches will inevitably love him (was magically named BOG despite most people considering that at least half a dozen others played clearly superior games) and will automatically select him (because if he was picked off 4 kicks last year, having 8 kicks last week means he was a walk up certainty).

So I think the frustration isn't necessarily that player x was picked or that player y wasn't in any given week, its that the logic behind selection is very unclear, and that the goalposts seem to move from one player to another. That there is something fundamentally wrong with the process (and this remains flawed regardless of the results which may fluctuate from week to week). I think a degree of fairness and consistency is just what people are wanting, and we don't appear to be getting it.

Side note: Just because Siposs, Ledger, Curran or Lee didn't have the most successful AFL careers, doesn't mean we were necessarily justified in not picking them. On VFL performance, IMO they should have been given many more opportunities. The same way that for 2 years, Jack Steven, David Armatage Luke Miles, and Tom Lynch should have been given more opportunities (especially Lynch). But we consistently picked players like Robert Eddy, Brett Peake and Raph Clarke instead. Look how that turned out. For me we should reward VFL form with selection regardless of who the player is.

It's a bit like great shield players like Hodge not making the test team IMO.

 

[VDS66]

Re the talk this week about Newnes' last two games (where he's played mostly forward, and been down on his early-season form) and also the somewhat surprising call-up that Phillips got (especially since, like we'd been talking about in here, we already seemed to have too many in the team who's best position is the wing, and because there were only two to go around, some were being played out of position to fit them all in- so it made little sense to bring in someone else, who's only position is the wing!) it was mentioned in an article on either the club website, or the AFL website that Newnes had missed the main training session leading up to our game against West Coast.

So I think it's pretty safe to say that Jack has again copped an injury that is restricting him, but not preventing him from playing outright.

Hence his drop in output this last two weeks, being played mostly forward in that time (after spending the early part of the year on the wing), and hence Phillips getting a call-up, when he didn't seem to be doing all that well in the VFL.

We obviously wanted a like-for-like replacement for Newnes not being up to playing wing, and didn't want to re-adjust the team by putting an Acres or Sinclair back there from the forwardline.

In a roundabout way I think you have nailed our dilemma...

We havevheaps of players who can play wing.

Which means other players get played put of position. There's your problem. They aren't versatile enough to play elsewhere effectively.

That a list balance issue IMO.

 

[gringo2011]

Re the talk this week about Newnes' last two games (where he's played mostly forward, and been down on his early-season form) and also the somewhat surprising call-up that Phillips got (especially since, like we'd been talking about in here, we already seemed to have too many in the team who's best position is the wing, and because there were only two to go around, some were being played out of position to fit them all in- so it made little sense to bring in someone else, who's only position is the wing!), it was mentioned in an article on either the club website, or the AFL website, that Newnes had missed the main training session leading up to our game against West Coast.

So I think it's pretty safe to say that Jack has again copped an injury, that is restricting him, but not preventing him from playing outright.

Hence his drop in output this last two weeks, being played mostly forward in that time (after spending the early part of the year on the wing), and hence Phillips getting a call-up, when he didn't seem to be doing all that well in the VFL.

We obviously wanted a like-for-like replacement for Newnes not being up to playing wing, and didn't want to re-adjust the team by putting an Acres or Sinclair back there from the forwardline.

Wouldn't want to try Acres there would they.

 

[gringo2011]

In a roundabout way I think you have nailed our dilemma...

We havevheaps of players who can play wing.

Which means other players get played put of position. There's your problem. They aren't versatile enough to play elsewhere effectively.

That a list balance issue IMO.

I know, it's bizarre how that happened. We only recruit half back flankers and wingmen and then we have too many of the same types who can't get a game. So weird. It's not like we need mids, the world is changing and we see a day where no player will be expected to go and win their own ball or have to rove taps. It will be a better world when no child has to grow up to run through the middle of an oval. Richo is a humanitarian like Mother Theresa.

 

[George]

Some players are held to other standards but that's just a reality of AFL. Those players who don't get dropped straight away have usually earned some benefit of doubt from the coaches. Thats what showing up to preseason in good shape gets you.

Exactly right but imagine turning up out of shape for every single pre-season of your career.

 

[jwikked]

I had good mail which didn't come to fruition at least i had a crack.

You're 100% right, I was wrong to have a crack at you. Sorry about that, it wasn't personal I can assure you.
I shouldn't have done it, and hopefully, normally wouldn't have.

 

[VDS66]

I know, it's bizarre how that happened. We only recruit half back flankers and wingmen and then we have too many of the same types who can't get a game. So weird. It's not like we need mids, the world is changing and we see a day where no player will be expected to go and win their own ball or have to rove taps. It will be a better world when no child has to grow up to run through the middle of an oval. Richo is a humanitarian like Mother Theresa.

Mother Choresa...

 

[VDS66]

Exactly right but imagine turning up out of shape for every single pre-season of your career.

Stop defending the club and endorsing the coach!

 

[George]

Stop defending the club and endorsing the coach!

I'm sorry oh enlightened one.