Grant thomas

[oxx]

just said on the ms that when clubs play Richmond they know
what to expect as far as Game plan goes and are more than
prepared come game day,or something to that effect.

Wasn't a spray of spud at all,more like an honest opinion.

 

[cairo tiger]

playing against richmond all coaches know that they can out coach our bloke

 

[mighty tiges]

Just had Grant Thomas' aftergame interview. He said the Saints were flat today but got away with it as Richmond played the way they did with extra numbers down back. He said the game would have been closer if Richmond had played man-on-man.

 

[oxx]

Originally posted by mighty tiges
He said the game would have been closer if Richmond had played man-on-man.

If spud had of told us to play man on man instead of creating a loose
option in the centre
with no capable forwards inside 50 other than Brown
just to end up going sideways ???

Talk about looking stupid.

 

[mellowyellow]

Originally posted by mighty tiges
game would have been closer if Richmond had played man-on-man.

Oooh.... now there's somthing novel

 

[One-eyed Tiger]

Thomas, Frawley war of words
6:54:19 PM Mon 12 April, 2004
Paul Gough

A war of words has erupted between St Kilda coach Grant Thomas and Richmond coach Danny Frawley over the tactics of Saints’ tagger Steven Baker during the Easter Monday clash at the Telstra Dome.

Baker was reported for striking Richmond’s Kane Johnson during an often spiteful clash, with video replays of the incident showing clear contact by the Saint tagger to the Tiger star’s head well behind play.

Johnson had blood pouring from his eye as a result of the incident and was forced to leave the field for treatment before later returning.

However Thomas said it was Baker who had been the victim of some rough-house tactics by the Tigers, during the Saints’ 45 point victory which maintains their unbeaten start to 2004.

Thomas said Baker only struck Johnson because he was already concussed following the treatment dished out to him by the Tigers.

“Steven was felled off the ball about five times and quite obviously they (Richmond) had a tactic to do that,” Thomas said.

“And he actually didn’t have his full faculties with him (when he struck Johnson).”

However Frawley – a former teammate of Thomas during their playing days at St Kilda – was livid when told of Thomas’ comments after the game.

“That’s absolute crap, go and watch the tape (of the incident),” Frawley said.

Frawley said it was well known in the AFL that it was Baker who had a reputation of targeting players, not the other way around.

“Baker targets every opposition player,” he said.

“I will defend my players until the cows come home.”

But Thomas claimed Baker was targeted for extra physical treatment by the Tigers because they knew he would tagging Richmond’s match-winner Nathan Brown.

“He (Baker) copped a very big whack from (Shane) Morrison earlier in the game off the footy and they probably knew he (Baker) was on Brown.”

“Brown’s important to Richmond and they probably said Baker’s going to be on him, so don’t miss an opportunity to let him know that you’re there – and they didn’t.”

However despite claiming Baker was groggy when he struck Johnson in the third quarter, Thomas also said the Saints’ tagger had been given the all-clear by the medical staff at half-time.

Frawley said there had been “a few cheap shots” during the game but vowed it was not his team acting outside the rules.

“I will defend my players to the hilt, all I can say is watch the video and the AFL will look after those incidents,” he said.

“But if there has been innuendo from an opposition coach and he wants to have a crack at our players, I say we play the game fairly and squarely.”

“If they (St Kilda) want to mouth off while they are winners, that’s great but don’t bring us into it.”

“Let the AFL handle it…..end of comment.”

 

[One-eyed Tiger]

Now I've heard it all.............

 

[froars]

Thomas said Baker only struck Johnson because he was already concussed following the treatment dished out to him by the Tigers.

How many coaches would send a player back out onto the field with "concussion". Nice try, Grant. Baker is a dog and will get about 3 weeks if he's lucky.

 

[GhostofJimJess]

Originally posted by froars
How many coaches would send a player back out onto the field with "concussion". Nice try, Grant. Baker is a dog and will get about 3 weeks if he's lucky.

I'm pretty sure that the repercussions of a club sending a concussed player back onto the field can be extremely severe .... and I think it's based on the old "Van Der Haar Defense", where he claimed at the tribunal that he had no memory of belting an opposition player as he'd been knocked out himself prior to that.

The rules were tightened after that case, to make clubs liable to fielding "groggy" players ...

 

[Coach Required]

grant thomas your a ****er

if the guy had concussion he would have stumbled across the field before wacking johnson, baker knew exactly what he was doing and johnson even tryed to side step him before being wacked.

faces facts your main tagger will be out suspended for atleast 4 weeks.

I find it amusing that a week after St Kilda had a go at the Bombers for rough play they come out and get 2 players reported then try and turn it around and say the tigers were targeting the poor old st kilda players.

you have already used that excuse last week thomas in your defending the tactics against reiwoldt.

what a moron.