Thread starter
#1
It's funny to note how followers of other teams here, and on talkback,(coincidentally mostly Geelong) and some 'experts' including often, Fat Billy, in the media, underestimate Saints ability to transfer their gameplan to the G. The reasons go as follows:
Saints play 'indoors' and it sometimes rains and is windy at the G - Well both teams are playing in exactly the same conditions.
The G is wider than Docklands and this will create a problem for Saints' gameplan - Saints have won at Subi and AAMI. Geelong's home ground is the skinniest in Australia.
Saints play only one game, round 22 v Melbourne, on the G - Seems interstate teams have won premierships on the G without having played there often. How many games did Geelong play on the G prior to their GF win in 2007 and indeed did they only lose 2008 because Hawthorn plays more games at their home ground?
The MCG argument is a crock and smacks of desperation to find a fault with the Saints gameplan. It is finals style football and has proven to work on a variety of grounds.
Saints play 'indoors' and it sometimes rains and is windy at the G - Well both teams are playing in exactly the same conditions.
The G is wider than Docklands and this will create a problem for Saints' gameplan - Saints have won at Subi and AAMI. Geelong's home ground is the skinniest in Australia.
Saints play only one game, round 22 v Melbourne, on the G - Seems interstate teams have won premierships on the G without having played there often. How many games did Geelong play on the G prior to their GF win in 2007 and indeed did they only lose 2008 because Hawthorn plays more games at their home ground?
The MCG argument is a crock and smacks of desperation to find a fault with the Saints gameplan. It is finals style football and has proven to work on a variety of grounds.
