Training 2020 Training - pics, reports etc

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

This is a shocking result if true, the club should fess up on this. I thought I read here on BF pre Saints game that Aints had little depth to replace any outs. Where does that leave us?

With less players to front up to a game. Here's who didn't play -

Kreuzer, Marchbank, Newman, Kemp, JSilvagni, Fisher, Macreadie, Dow and CCurnow that we know about. - 9 players
No players would have been held over for the man match though, given this was played on the Saturday.

We have 45 players on the list less (22 & 9) = 14 players available.
it's not hard to imagine another couple of players not getting up for the day.

It's not great but it's sort of understandable should our side have been made up of the following dozen players & a couple of ring-ins

BSilvagni, O'Dwyer, Cottrell, Phillips, Honey, Lang, De Koning, Owies, Moore, Goddard, Ramsay & Polson = Hardly an experienced and intimidating outfit.
 
With less players to front up to a game. Here's who didn't play -

Kreuzer, Marchbank, Newman, Kemp, JSilvagni, Fisher, Macreadie, Dow and CCurnow that we know about. - 9 players
No players would have been held over for the man match though, given this was played on the Saturday.

We have 45 players on the list less (22 & 9) = 14 players available.
it's not hard to imagine another couple of players not getting up for the day.

It's not great but it's sort of understandable should our side have been made up of the following dozen players & a couple of ring-ins

BSilvagni, O'Dwyer, Cottrell, Phillips, Honey, Lang, De Koning, Owies, Moore, Goddard, Ramsay & Polson = Hardly an experienced and intimidating outfit.

Kennedy & O'Brien?
 
My question is why exclude these 2? It does make your argument better but not entirely correct with these 2 playing. Anyhow...

Because I don't know which 12 played.
You can interchange any player you want though for O'Brien and Kennedy and the point still stands.

St.Kilda were a lot stronger and apparently we had a couple of non-Carlton ring-ins thrown in. Is my point any less valid?
 
Because I don't know which 12 played.
You can interchange any player you want though for O'Brien and Kennedy and the point still stands.

St.Kilda were a lot stronger and apparently we had a couple of non-Carlton ring-ins thrown in. Is my point any less valid?
Brilliant Harks thanks for the update, pity the club didn’t convey this.

So we just have to assume Saints had far more quality available it seems.

Re Stocker, it appears he did play, but what irritates me as that a 2nd year Saints dude was BOG. We need a Stocker dominating like this, so called 6th rated player is his draft.

What can you share re that Saints player?
 
Brilliant Harks thanks for the update, pity the club didn’t convey this.

So we just have to assume Saints had far more quality available it seems.

Re Stocker, it appears he did play, but what irritates me as that a 2nd year Saints dude was BOG. We need a Stocker dominating like this, so called 6th rated player is his draft.

What can you share re that Saints player?

Re Byrnes -

Have a look at the Saints board. They love him and hoped they'd see his debut last week.
Other than that, I wouldn't have even known who he was other than for his pick-up in the ND last year. He went @ 52
 
Because I don't know which 12 played.
You can interchange any player you want though for O'Brien and Kennedy and the point still stands.

St.Kilda were a lot stronger and apparently we had a couple of non-Carlton ring-ins thrown in. Is my point any less valid?

Point is - enough with the excuses. 1 goal a game? Seriously? Don’t care who played, not good enough for what ever reason and I still feel we had enough quality to do better. Let’s move on.
 
Point is - enough with the excuses. 1 goal a game? Seriously? Don’t care who played, not good enough for what ever reason and I still feel we had enough quality to do better. Let’s move on.

I don't understand, as every situation should be looked at for what it is.

If Liddle, Lloyd and MLG had to suit up to make up the numbers, would that makes for an excuse. :)

One has to compare apples with apples. What sort of apples were we and what sort of apples were The Saints? I find this a valid question.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I don't understand, as every situation should be looked at for what it is.

If Liddle, Lloyd and MLG had to suit up to make up the numbers, would that makes for an excuse. :)

One has to compare apples with apples. What sort of apples were we and what sort of apples were The Saints? I find this a valid question.

Harks - these are the same players that went out the week before and we couldn’t stop raving on about their performance. Not much changed at all.
Going by that, StKilda’s list must be something very, very special that the AFL clubs won’t be prepared for. I don’t see it and believe we had a bad day - nothing to do with who played or opposition for that much difference.
 
Harks - these are the same players that went out the week before and we couldn’t stop raving on about their performance. Not much changed at all.
Going by that, StKilda’s list must be something very, very special that the AFL clubs won’t be prepared for. I don’t see it and believe we had a bad day - nothing to do with who played or opposition for that much difference.

You may well be right and this isn't designed to applaud a one goal performance, but the point here is that -

1. We don't really know who played
2. We don't know who the two stand-ins were.

In a 14 vs 14 scratch match, 2 players makes for a huge difference, by anyones mathematics.

I just don't know what we had, but fair to say that if we didn't have 9-12 players not available, the end result may not have been quite so bad.
 
You may well be right and this isn't designed to applaud a one goal performance, but the point here is that -

1. We don't really know who played
2. We don't know who the two stand-ins were.

In a 14 vs 14 scratch match, 2 players makes for a huge difference, by anyones mathematics.

I just don't know what we had, but fair to say that if we didn't have 9-12 players not available, the end result may not have been quite so bad.
They had Ryder ruck. Brown at full back. Shane savage, Jimmy Webster, Dylan Roberton, Jack Sinclair all playing. All have plus 80 games of AFL Exoerience. They gave us jack mayo and Leo Connelly off the rookie list.
Our most experienced player in the scratch match was Darcy Lang. We obviously lost Fisher from the previous week and held out an emergency. Our next best experience was O’Brien on 16 games then Polson on 11. Very different story if we add Marchbank Dow and Fisher.
 
They had Ryder ruck. Brown at full back. Shane savage, Jimmy Webster, Dylan Roberton, Jack Sinclair all playing. All have plus 80 games of AFL Exoerience. They gave us jack mayo and Leo Connelly off the rookie list.
Our most experienced player in the scratch match was Darcy Lang. We obviously lost Fisher from the previous week and held out an emergency. Our next best experience was O’Brien on 16 games then Polson on 11. Very different story if we add Marchbank Dow and Fisher.

Positive signs for saints that those guys are in the reserves...they were mainstays of the St kilda team over the last few years and also newnes and Steven.

Early days but pretty impressed with their work so far with new recruits and ratts...kids like coffield, hunter, Wilkie etc have replaced those guys in the back half.

We'll see how they go away from marvel though.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top