Autopsy Round 11, 2020: St.Kilda v Geelong *BYTEL DEBUT*

[Crusty Undies]

Yeah, if we are going to bag Richo for being sh*t, Ratts has to be accountable too. Richo played a lot of the kids that are Ratts first picked and also swapped Bruce for King who is probably around the same level already, Butler for Newnes- huge upgrade, Howard for Brown- upgrade, Hill for Newnes -break even and Paddy for Longer -huge upgrade. Richo had us at 6 wins 6 losses before injury really bit hard and we were struggling to be competitive against good sides. If we fall away now it will be a fail to me. Richo also didn't have Steele as good as he is and Clark, Paton and Coffield playing consistent good footy. Not many excuses for not making the most of this year to me unless we lose a heap of players to injury.

But why weren't steele clark coff and paton playing as good a footy as they are now? It's hardly a coincidence that our players all look better under ratts than they did less than a year ago under the chode.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

But why weren't steele clark coff and paton playing as good a footy as they are now? It's hardly a coincidence that our players all look better under ratts than they did less than a year ago under the chode.

You are taking the piss right?

 

[Crusty Undies]

You are taking the piss right?

On what earth am I taking the piss by suggesting that some coaches are more capable of getting the best out of their players than others? Honestly you need to get off your high horse sometimes.

 

[austinnn]

Geelong are a very good team and the gave us a lesson.
But in no way are they more than worthy than us for winning this years flag.
They have been beaten by GWS , Magpies , Carlton and WCE -they gave us a belting but they will not next time.
We had really no winners on the day and for us to be within striking distance at half time was a joke.
I remember we flogged the Tigers before they won the flag that year , so I wouldn't look to hard at our last loss.
No doubt a 4 day break and not having Jones , Ryder and Ross in the team hurt us.
Every game is important and our next 2 will tell us how far we go this season.
Bring back Jones , Ryder , Jones and it will give that much more experience to vastly improve on the shocker we just had.

I tend to agree. Geelong had a great day when absolutely everything went right, they kicked goals from everywhere, all players in sparkling form coming up against a lot of young players who were very tired and couldn't find what they needed to match the Cats man for man: Marshall, Membrey, King, Carlisle, Coffield, Wilkie, Billings, even Clark - all looked knackered all game.

As I posted earlier, they had a lot of frees paid to them early in the third that snuffed out any chance of a Saints win, all there but on another day an umpire might have let a few of them go.

They are a polished unit, and we are still in happy surprise blossoming period. Ratts has a challenge in front of him; how to change a game effectively when plan A is getting stomped on. So far, he's reacting too slowly or not well enough. How he improves this element of his coaching will really decide how far he can take us, so fingers crossed.

We'll see in the coming weeks how he does against the Lions and Eagles, St Kilda's two remaining Big Challenges.

I'm happy with where we're at. With a full team to chose from and players less knackered, and a bit more luck I'd expect us to be a better match for the cats, and now seeing how they play against us, I'd expect us to make a better account for ourselves come finals, if it pans out like that, or simply next year.

Yesterday was horrible, but not the kind of horrible that signifies a depressing future. Can't win em all, at least not yet. Can't wait for our boys to play em again if I'm honest.

 

[From 45]

It doesn't matter , if you can take someone ordinary ( ie Clinton Jones ) and take a Gary Ablett in his prime out of the game , its worth doing.
If other teams aren't doing it, bad luck to them.
Who cares what others are doing.

I don't care. Never said I did. It's just an observation.

 

[gringo2011]

But why weren't steele clark coff and paton playing as good a footy as they are now? It's hardly a coincidence that our players all look better under ratts than they did less than a year ago under the chode.

Steele is given licence to play front foot footy, he's a coaching upgrade. Clark, Paton and Coffield are probably just getting to a stage of experience that means that they are starting to do more than earn their spot. Coffield had only played 18 very unexciting games before this year. Clark a few more, but smashing games into him was what really got him going. I think the way we play is much more motivating under Ratts though.

 

[gringo2011]

I don't care. Never said I did. It's just an observation.

But other clubs are still doing it. It seems like Ryan Clark and Hutching are finding it harder to get a game, perhaps due to shorter quarters, but even guys like Guthrie have been playing a tight run with role at times. All mids are expected to be somewhat accountable these days unless they are a top flight champion. Cripps is finding it much harder this year because sides are putting a defensive minded midfielder on him and he can't get time and space. Even if you don't call it a tag it's still just semantics. Jones was denied his run against GC, it didn't look like a hard tag but just standing to the side he runs to and holding him up so he can't hit the ball at pace is still the same thing, denying the player he run and space.

 

[Browny2Carlisle]

Steele is given licence to play front foot footy, he's a coaching upgrade. Clark, Paton and Coffield are probably just getting to a stage of experience that means that they are starting to do more than earn their spot. Coffield had only played 18 very unexciting games before this year. Clark a few more, but smashing games into him was what really got him going. I think the way we play is much more motivating under Ratts though.

And they probably wouldn't be playing under Cho. Selling what Ratts and the guys have done a bit short here

 

[bird_man]

Steele is given licence to play front foot footy, he's a coaching upgrade. Clark, Paton and Coffield are probably just getting to a stage of experience that means that they are starting to do more than earn their spot. Coffield had only played 18 very unexciting games before this year. Clark a few more, but smashing games into him was what really got him going. I think the way we play is much more motivating under Ratts though.

Those three were always going to get better with experience so we can't totally credit Ratts for their form.

But, do you really think Richo would have backed an inexperienced back line of Howard, Wilkie, Coffield, Clark, Paton and Long all year?

He deserves credit for that IMO.

I'm no Richo backer, but I feel he would have gone back to the old faithful of Webster, Robbo or Savage after the Pies or Freo loss.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

On what earth am I taking the piss by suggesting that some coaches are more capable of getting the best out of their players than others? Honestly you need to get off your high horse sometimes.

Well duh...who would think that the youngest players got better with a bit of age, time in the system, games under their belts.
I thought if you got a good player in the draft they just played to their full potential first game.

If Dunstan, Ross, etc started playing better , its coaching for sure.

 

[BrutThough]

And they probably wouldn't be playing under Cho. Selling what Ratts and the guys have done a bit short here

In fairness, the only one not playing regular senior football under Richo last year was Coffield and that was when he was struggling to even touch the football at Sandy so his non-selection was completely justified.

 

[st_trav_ofWA]

Again you have that tv that shows that there was going to be a contest down the line. Maybe it was actually going to be what we saw most of the night and that was Geelong taking another uncontested Mark. The old coronavirus joke. Hilarious. Another 19 dead today. Hilarious

there are 18 players on the field in st kilda jumpers ... one of them was 10 meters away from Jake with a geelong player on him ...
the other 16 were further afield of that ... now some would have been 100m away so clearly not an option but im going to say that in that exact moment 30metres away 50 metres away 60 metres away there would have been a st kilda jumper to kick too unless of course every single stkilda jumper except hill and Jake were having a cup of tea in the forward 50... even if that was the case Jakes better option would have been to go the boundry line not the dinky kick to hill ...


anyway im done with this convo ... i know you will stew with it and stomp your feet like you always do but im done ...
byebye

 

[CaptainRisky]

King won't start getting free kicks untill we start hitting him up on the lead there is just to much going on in the pack situations

Yes , he has to start leading up so they have to chop his arms not standing in the goal square getting mauled

 

[From 45]

But other clubs are still doing it. It seems like Ryan Clark and Hutching are finding it harder to get a game, perhaps due to shorter quarters, but even guys like Guthrie have been playing a tight run with role at times. All mids are expected to be somewhat accountable these days unless they are a top flight champion. Cripps is finding it much harder this year because sides are putting a defensive minded midfielder on him and he can't get time and space. Even if you don't call it a tag it's still just semantics. Jones was denied his run against GC, it didn't look like a hard tag but just standing to the side he runs to and holding him up so he can't hit the ball at pace is still the same thing, denying the player he run and space.

Let's go back to your original point of Ratts being stubborn as an example of not tagging (not run with)Cunnington in the 1st round.

I replied back that it's a moot point because teams don't really tag these days like they did in yesteryear. That's a fact.

Players like Cunnington are extremely difficult to tag as he is contested ball player. It's pointless to tag these types of players. Even Hardwick had stated as such when he was questioned if he would tag Neale. He stated the same thing as I did.

Now if you're going to hang Ratts by not tagging a contested ball player,thats fine ,youre entitled to your opinion. Me on the other hand, dont believe it warrants criticism and not judging Ratts coaching ability based on the non tagging.

Anyway, you have made you're point and I have made mine.

It's been a good chat.

One thing we will agree on is we both are passionate and want to see our club succeed

 

[CaptainRisky]

Reports that Hill and Carlisle were crook on the bus to the game?
No excuse, but...

Where did the report come from ?

 

[gringo2011]

there are 18 players on the field in st kilda jumpers ... one of them was 10 meters away from Jake with a geelong player on him ...
the other 16 were further afield of that ... now some would have been 100m away so clearly not an option but im going to say that in that exact moment 30metres away 50 metres away 60 metres away there would have been a st kilda jumper to kick too unless of course every single stkilda jumper except hill and Jake were having a cup of tea in the forward 50... even if that was the case Jakes better option would have been to go the boundry line not the dinky kick to hill ...

....
anyway im done with this convo ... i know you will stew with it and stomp your feet like you always do but im done ...
byebye

Jake definitely ****ed that kick up, it was a messy ugly little looper, that said once Hill looked like he wasn't going to mark it, he seemed to just pull up all effort to win it back or even kill the contest. The Geelong player grabbed it and ran. Hill just stopped and looked like he'd done enough and that it was someone else's problem. It wasn't a great look, it's the stuff I reckon people get stuck into Seb for, he kind of looks like he's faking just enough effort when he really just wants to leave it to someone else. It might not be true, he's a very casual looking footballer, he looks like he's smiling away even when it's going badly for the side. He's probably just a chilled guy but he doesn't show signs of desperation, even faking it.

 

[gringo2011]

Where did the report come from ?

Channel 7 news.

 

[Saintbloke]

King won't start getting free kicks untill we start hitting him up on the lead there is just to much going on in the pack situations

King obviously needs more experience and needs a bit more bulk and learn how to use his body better- at this level of footy he gets bumped aside a bit easy.

 

[gringo2011]

Let's go back to your original point of Ratts being stubborn as an example of not tagging (not run with)Cunnington in the 1st round.

I replied back that it's a moot point because teams don't really tag these days like they did in yesteryear. That's a fact.

Players like Cunnington are extremely difficult to tag as he is contested ball player. It's pointless to tag these types of players. Even Hardwick had stated as such when he was questioned if he would tag Neale. He stated the same thing as I did.

Now if you're going to hang Ratts by not tagging a contested ball player,thats fine ,youre entitled to your opinion. Me on the other hand, dont believe it warrants criticism and not judging Ratts coaching ability based on the non tagging.

Anyway, you have made you're point and I have made mine.

It's been a good chat.

One thing we will agree on is we both are passionate and want to see our club succeed

I have said before I think he didn't send Steele to him because he wants Steele to be his own man not a negator long trerm. I think not putting someone on Cunners was illogical. You can't tag someone like him out completely but if Goldy taps it to the same player for the same clearance for a half of football, and you blow out a huge lead and lose, He deserves to be questioned.

He's done heaps right and changed structure and balance and not just done it with Richo's side minus injury. He's created his own favoured side and made us a much more dynamic and attacking side. He's getting more right than wrong but he doesn't seem to change stuff up when things turn sour. Maybe it's all bigger picture stuff but he's not Jesus either. He's going to make mistakes sometimes.

 

[st_trav_ofWA]

Jake definitely f’ed that kick up, it was a messy ugly little looper, that said once Hill looked like he wasn't going to mark it, he seemed to just pull up all effort to win it back or even kill the contest. The Geelong player grabbed it and ran. Hill just stopped and looked like he'd done enough and that it was someone else's problem. It wasn't a great look, it's the stuff I reckon people get stuck into Seb for, he kind of looks like he's faking just enough effort when he really just wants to leave it to someone else. It might not be true, he's a very casual looking footballer, he looks like he's smiling away even when it's going badly for the side. He's probably just a chilled guy but he doesn't show signs of desperation, even faking it.

100% Hill needed to go there ... even though the kick to every footy following person (besides old mate) was a terrible option to go to Hill needed to get to it and apply pressure or better still get it out of play ..

i think Hill is just a really easy going kind of guy .. when we are winning its seen as him being relaxed and enjoying his footy but when losing itcan be seen as he is disinterested in the footy ... kinda the ying to the yang of a bloke like BJ Goddard who took everything so seriously folding laundry looked like a competitive sport for him...

my money is that there wont be too much dwelling on the game as the focuse quickly moves to beating essendon but i do think in the review there will be a few low lights of the game where players wished they had that opportunity again

 

[plugger66]

100% Hill needed to go there ... even though the kick to every footy following person (besides old mate) was a terrible option to go to Hill needed to get to it and apply pressure or better still get it out of play ..

i think Hill is just a really easy going kind of guy .. when we are winning its seen as him being relaxed and enjoying his footy but when losing itcan be seen as he is disinterested in the footy ... kinda the ying to the yang of a bloke like BJ Goddard who took everything so seriously folding laundry looked like a competitive sport for him...

my money is that there wont be too much dwelling on the game as the focuse quickly moves to beating essendon but i do think in the review there will be a few low lights of the game where players wished they had that opportunity again

Just out of interest look at the game thread and see who got blamed the most. He couldn’t ignore.

ps. A few had a go at Carlisle. That is fact but double had a go at hill
We must have bugger all footy following people or maybe it’s the people blaming Carlisle are the non footy following people. I won’t be arrogant enough to say which group is which.

• #953

Hill cost that one too. Should ice him until he decides he wants in

Strangely this was gringo reaction after it happened so something has changed. Maybe you, jb and de facto have convinced him.

 

[#gosaintas]

Jake definitely f’ed that kick up, it was a messy ugly little looper, that said once Hill looked like he wasn't going to mark it, he seemed to just pull up all effort to win it back or even kill the contest. The Geelong player grabbed it and ran. Hill just stopped and looked like he'd done enough and that it was someone else's problem. It wasn't a great look, it's the stuff I reckon people get stuck into Seb for, he kind of looks like he's faking just enough effort when he really just wants to leave it to someone else. It might not be true, he's a very casual looking footballer, he looks like he's smiling away even when it's going badly for the side. He's probably just a chilled guy but he doesn't show signs of desperation, even faking it.

Carlisle clearly called Hill fwd to run onto a short kick. Bizarrely Hill let his opponent run past him to mark it.

 

[gringo2011]

Just out of interest look at the game thread and see who got blamed the most. He couldn’t ignore.

ps. A few had a go at Carlisle. That is fact but double had a go at hill
We must have bugger all footy following people or maybe it’s the people blaming Carlisle are the non footy following people. I won’t be arrogant enough to say which group is which.

• #953

Hill cost that one too. Should ice him until he decides he wants in

Strangely this was gringo reaction after it happened so something has changed. Maybe you, jb and de facto have convinced him.

I'm not very emotionally stable when I watch footy. I wouldn't take much I say seriously in moments of stress. In hindsight the blame was on both, Hill lacked effort or desperation, Jake gave him a hospital pass.

 

[gringo2011]

Carlisle clearly called Hill fwd to run onto a short kick. Bizarrely Hill let his opponent run past him to mark it.

Maybe Hill thought he'd fake and pull up for Carlisle to kick over the top and wrong foot his opponent.

 

[st_trav_ofWA]

Just out of interest look at the game thread and see who got blamed the most. He couldn’t ignore.

ps. A few had a go at Carlisle. That is fact but double had a go at hill
We must have bugger all footy following people or maybe it’s the people blaming Carlisle are the non footy following people. I won’t be arrogant enough to say which group is which.

• #953

Hill cost that one too. Should ice him until he decides he wants in

Strangely this was gringo reaction after it happened so something has changed. Maybe you, jb and de facto have convinced him.

a bad play can be on two players .... ill explain it one more time because it seems like every man and his dog gets it .... Jake made a howler of a mistake going for that kick ... Hill made a bad mistake into a hair pulling howler of a mistake for not going hard after it even though it was a shocking decision to take that option ....
so yes Hill is to blame ... and yes Jake is to blame ...
simples ...

if you dont get it as the brick wall behind you cause even that should understand that by now