Nick Dal Santo Disposal Effectiveness

[chodadude]

Interesting to note that on the weekend Nick had the lowest disposal effectiveness % in the whole Saints team.

At 57%, even lower then the king of clangers, Luke Ball.

Needs to lift, in the area of his game which I thought was his strength.

Compusure and foot skills.

 

[Squizz]

I must admit I did not notice any real problems with his disposal aside from that missed shot on goal which should have been nailed.

Only had one actual clanger and one free kick against.

He seemed to being trying to work more in tight, which does lead to rushed dispoal. Adam Simpson had 32 possessions, but I would not have had him in their best 5 players.

 

[Faz 2000]

Some of the "effective disposal" stats are BS anyway. Dal's disposal is A-grade, and everyone in the league knows it. A bad game, or a dodgey stat, either way it's not a big deal.

 

[Squizz]

I agree - with your signoff (you anomalous freak).

 

[dg102]

Ive watched the north game a couple times now, and i just wanna say. I didnt find anything much to rave on Dal Santo about. The commentators gave him a big wrap for his BIG COMEBACK game. But I thought it was his average stick around the packs and collect possesions type of game, throw in quite a few clangers in crucial times aswell. 4 tackles for the game is ok but he holds up the play alot. You never see him break packs or gut run out of defence. Just little nobby kicks here and there. Hes supposed to be a midfielder not a fill in defender but he hangs out around half back flank all the time.

 

[Faz 2000]

Dal's "comeback" game against the Roos was the same as his games before he got dropped. He hasn't changed at all.

He is a very talented player who underachieves by, as you say, hanging out at half back instead of winning his team the game. With his disposal, evasiveness and class, 15-20 touches forward of the middle would be worth much more than his 30 touches off half back.

His being dropped was a message and a publicity stunt. It also technically amounts to tanking/match-fixing, because Dal Santo is clearly in the team's best 22 but was not selected, but that's another conversation.

 

[HoldenMCaulfield]

Dal's "comeback" game against the Roos was the same as his games before he got dropped. He hasn't changed at all.

He is a very talented player who underachieves by, as you say, hanging out at half back instead of winning his team the game. With his disposal, evasiveness and class, 15-20 touches forward of the middle would be worth much more than his 30 touches off half back.

His being dropped was a message and a publicity stunt. It also technically amounts to tanking/match-fixing, because Dal Santo is clearly in the team's best 22 but was not selected, but that's another conversation.

You obviously know better as a Carlton supporter, but doesn't tanking involve losing games ?

I thought we WON against Fremantle !

But you're right, that's another conversation.

 

[Faz 2000]

Well, in this other conversation, is the result the important thing or the intent? It's an interesting line of thinking/conversation, one well beyond what the average football fan is capable of participating in.

I'd suggest a team that's fielding less-than-their-best lineup, with no injury or suspension reason for doing so, is artificially influencing the outcome of the game.

But I am also from the school of thought that says tanking is a massive non-issue from the "no sh1t, Sherlock" files. Of course it happens, in a way, and everyone does it.

 

[cartwright]

Well, in this other conversation, is the result the important thing or the intent? It's an interesting line of thinking/conversation, one well beyond what the average football fan is capable of participating in.

I'd suggest a team that's fielding less-than-their-best lineup, with no injury or suspension reason for doing so, is artificially influencing the outcome of the game.

But I am also from the school of thought that says tanking is a massive non-issue from the "no sh1t, Sherlock" files. Of course it happens, in a way, and everyone does it.

I think you're drawing a long bow there.
Dal was dropped for not meeting team expectations, or not abiding by the ethos that the team had all agreed on.
If we were playing like Geelong/Dogs/Hawks he probably would have had a few weeks to redeem himself. We aren't. He didn't perform so was dropped.

 

[Faz 2000]

Thanks for reading and understanding what I'm saying, anyway, rather than just going for jingoistic name-calling.

Sure, it's a long bow, but while everyone in the AFL media/world loves talking about Carlton's tanking without ever really defining what tanking *IS*, I think it's very interesting to look at decisions all clubs make in that light.

People are very quick to say "Carlton tank, St Kilda never do".

If tanking is intentionally picking not your best team... then all teams have done that (eg. for discipline reasons). So it can't be that.

If tanking is sending players who COULD play but need medical attention off for season-ending surgery, then all teams have done that, too. So it can't be that.

If tanking is sending out a team with specific instructions to lose... well every player in the AFL has sworn black and blue that that doesn't happen. So it can't be that.

Just always interesting to look at decisions made (like dropping Dal Santo, CLEARLY in St Kilda's best 22 and one of the most talented players at the club), in certain "legal" ways.

 

[cartwright]

Sure, I understand what you're saying.
If it was round 19 & we were looking more & more like not making the 8, then I think a lot of people would be screaming "Tanking", but that's not the case.

We were 1 game out of the 8, and it was a game we really needed to win to stay in touch.

The easier option would have to been to field the "best 22", (even if they weren't performing)

 

[Squizz]

Yeah, we're tanking by dropping Dal so we can finish 9th.

 

[Look2Me4Guidance]

Dal's "comeback" game against the Roos was the same as his games before he got dropped. He hasn't changed at all.

He is a very talented player who underachieves by, as you say, hanging out at half back instead of winning his team the game. With his disposal, evasiveness and class, 15-20 touches forward of the middle would be worth much more than his 30 touches off half back.

His being dropped was a message and a publicity stunt. It also technically amounts to tanking/match-fixing, because Dal Santo is clearly in the team's best 22 but was not selected, but that's another conversation.

Not right mate. His last quarter was a perfect example of what he needed to improve on. His work rate was first class.

 

[dg102]

Your right Faz, tanking is something the coach does before the game. Not the players, but Saints didnt tank by dropping dal and milny, it was disiplinary. The players have to play up to there OWN standards at StKilda now. Not by team standard. If you play below par, your dropped and that goes for everyone including Rewoldt. Im sure he had something to do with introducing this proccess with RL too

 

[SaintsSeptember]

If the coach normally gets the players motivated before the game and then chooses not to, it could be considered tanking.
In Ross Lyons case this is the first time he has managed to motivate them.!!!

The main ingredient for tanking would be motive, and the Saints would appear to have little motive at this time. Roll Lyon would have "no" motive, because some of us are already calling for his head. He would be doomed if we got the wooden spoon this year.

 

[stfan]

Dal needs to get his confidence back...

His disposal is not as good as it has been in the past.

We need him firing....as he can cut teams to ribbons when on song.

 

[Fehring]

Well, in this other conversation, is the result the important thing or the intent? It's an interesting line of thinking/conversation, one well beyond what the average football fan is capable of participating in.

I'd suggest a team that's fielding less-than-their-best lineup, with no injury or suspension reason for doing so, is artificially influencing the outcome of the game.

But I am also from the school of thought that says tanking is a massive non-issue from the "no sh1t, Sherlock" files. Of course it happens, in a way, and everyone does it.

Wouldn't you love to be able to not pick your best side and still win, rather than picking your best side and getting flogged week after week as you have for the past five years?

Anyway, pick who you want this week. Rogering no.11 is on the way. You are our b1tch.

And, by the way, how is Cain Ackland going on that massive two year deal? We've got another bargain for you at the end of the year. Michael Rix for Kreuzer. Rix is even better than Ackland.

 

[Otiman]

And, by the way, how is Cain Ackland going on that massive two year deal? We've got another bargain for you at the end of the year. Michael Rix for Kreuzer. Rix is even better than Ackland.

Would be a better option than Cloke.

The Ackland deal was for 3 years, if memory serves.

 

[Persevering Saint]

Oh, so sorry, Faz 2000, I forgot - we're meant to be talking about CARLTON and how roughly treated they are about tanking on this board... so sorry.

At the risk of imposing upon your blessed presence among us, I would like to suggest an intelligent football fan would be able to rise above the average to realise, in their enlightenment, that there's truth to the old saying, "you have to be willing to sometimes lose the battle, to win the war." Dal and Milne were dropped so that, even if we DID lose to Freo, everyone would be on notice, and we would do better for the rest of the year. Lose one game to play better in every one from that point on.

As for the pesky issue of why this thread was actually started, Dal's disposal was pretty ordinary, but his tackling and work-rate was much, much better. that probably means he was concentrating on these aspects - the ones that got him dropped - more than his disposal. I think he has to be able to do all of those to the level required of our best midfielder, but he's only human, and he's allowed to be a bit messed-up in a comeback game.