St Kilda v Hawthorn. 3:20@Marvel. AFL Round 4, 2019

[puppy_dog7]

MIRRA dragged the ball in thats HOLDING THE BALL

LONIE minutes later fumbled while
trying to take possession was set upon. NO PRIOR / ball up

CORRECT DECISIONS. Barrett is a flog. and anyone suggests it was wrong LEARN THE FING RULES.

You watch the umpires come
out and say it was correct. sore losers hawks. Saints got smashed by the umps where was certain goal to parker push in the back?

injuries?? boo hoo

we had mckenzie off for whole half.

We were tougher and better. admit it and move on you whinging ****s

Yeah that was such a joke. They spent all of 1 minute talking about our game and it was all about how Hawthorn were robbed on an incorrect decision? Like seriously? It was a 50/50 line ball decision at best. He dived on the footy and didn’t get it out, happens all the time, and if Lonie missed and we lose no one talks about it..
how about Damo mentions the blatant deliberate out of bounds from Mirra in the back pocket just a few minutes earlier?

 

[hk89]

At least better than you guys.
Certainly afl era weve never been that much of a disgrace. never tanked or lost by 200 points.

In terms of the most important metric, you've been equally s**t in the AFL era - zero flags each. Where Melbourne is different is that they've still got supporters around who remember the glory years when Melbourne were 3-peating (twice), and winning 5 flags in 6 years. Saints have some fans old enough to remember their single 1-peat. Saints fans should never enter into a success shitfight with any supporter that barracks for a club that has been around longer than Freo.

 

[aussierulesrules]

In terms of the most important metric, you've been equally s**t in the AFL era - zero flags each. Where Melbourne is different is that they've still got supporters around who remember the glory years when Melbourne were 3-peating (twice), and winning 5 flags in 6 years. Saints have some fans old enough to remember their single 1-peat. Saints fans should never enter into a success shitfight with any supporter that barracks for a club that has been around longer than Freo.

Relax mate, he's trolling. Just returned from a 2 week suspension, not long after a 1 week one, and heading hard and fast towards a 3-weeker or ban.

Just looking to see who he can trigger in the meantime and currently has Davey well and truly on the hook!

 

[RetroRandy66]

In terms of the most important metric, you've been equally s**t in the AFL era - zero flags each. Where Melbourne is different is that they've still got supporters around who remember the glory years when Melbourne were 3-peating (twice), and winning 5 flags in 6 years. Saints have some fans old enough to remember their single 1-peat. Saints fans should never enter into a success shitfight with any supporter that barracks for a club that has been around longer than Freo.

VFL? im talking about afl
and im sorry but 3 grand finals, drawn grand final, 3 night flags and countless top 4s is better than melbournes what is it it? 1 grand final thumping?

also id love to the winning %

so yes id happily have success discussion with the demons.
* vfl corrupt 6 team league.

we counting ports flags too? VFL lost to WAFL and SANFL. whos league better?

 

[hk89]

LOL.. So the Hawks had their two best mids out and the Saints had their two best mids (Steven and Hanners) out.

Well, we had our 3 best starting mids out. We are a team that even with our 3 best mids in, people describe as lacking midfield depth. The 3 you named as your starting midfield all had over 50 games experience. Due to our lack of midfield depth, only one of ours did, and he's a guy that has played his best footy on the wing rather than at the coalface, and was playing his third game in 12 months.

Obviously I'd be very happy with the win as a saints fan, it was a thrilling comeback, but the reality is you were well behind before our second defender went down, after which you kicked 4 unanswered goals to win. Up until that stage you were being comfortably beaten by probably the weakest starting midfield unit you'll see on the park all year. I had this game down as a likely loss before the bounce, so I was pleasantly surprised with the margin. If you want to see what a good team would have done to what we had on the park, watch Geelong tear us a new one next Monday. If O'Meara still doesn't get up, and Frawley and Stratton both miss, it will be very very ugly. Even with O'Meara and Stratton playing, it will be very likely be a heavy loss.

In terms of Hanners being in your two best mids. I fear you are heading for some disappointment. Obviously he wasn't 100% last year, but he's getting older , not younger, and last year was his worst year since his debut year. It is entirely possible his body is battered to the point you'll never see him at pre-2018 form again. If Hanners is truly in your two best mids, and he puts together a season like 2018, then you're midifeld is in even bigger trouble than ours.

 

[aussierulesrules]

Obviously Hannebery in 2018 form wouldn't be in our top 2 in the midfield. He frankly wouldn't actually get a game if he was averaging the 18 or so touches he did last year. Was lucky to keep getting picked by Sydney. He was playing at Dunstan and Armitage type levels and they're both in the VFL at the moment.

But obviously if we can get Hannebery right or even close to it he'll be huge for us, even just from a leadership perspective.

For all these excuses we're hearing about Hawthorn, they still had more rotations than us yesterday and they had a whopping 9 to our 1 who had played 150+ games out there.

I think Savage was our 2nd most experienced. Think about that for a second!

 

[aussierulesrules]

As for us having gotten 4 goals down, that's nothing new for us.

In R1 Gold Coast got 4 goals up and we reeled them in.

In R2 Essendon dominated the 3rd quarter and we got right back on top and last week we fell 31 points behind Freo, before getting right back into it, and in the end had about 5 more shots for goal and like yesterday, late blew lots of golden opportunities to score, which cost us another come-from-well-behind win.

 

[stfan]

Saints have some fans old enough to remember their single 1-peat. Saints fans should never enter into a success shitfight with any supporter that barracks for a club that has been around longer than Freo.

Success shitfight? It is just funny to read all the many melts in this thread by many Hawk's fans

Your comment obviously somehow implies that you were part of winning those flags.


LOL to those shallow enough to think that barracking for any club somehow infers any type of status. Though it probably explains the melts as they somehow think that losing a game reflects on them as a supporter.

 

[hk89]

Success shitfight? It is just funny to read all the many melts in this thread by many Hawk's fans

Your comment obviously somehow implies that you were part of winning those flags.

Which flags? I didn't talk about any Hawthorn flags.

LOL to those shallow enough to think that barracking for any club somehow infers any type of status.

I don't think that, although it is certainly a lot more fun IMO to barrack for a successful club. I just think it is funny to watch a Saints fan having a go at a Melbourne fan over their club's lack of success. Perhaps reply to your fellow saints fan who seems to be the one with status issues.

 

[hk89]

Obviously Hannebery in 2018 form wouldn't be in our top 2 in the midfield. He frankly wouldn't actually get a game if he was averaging the 18 or so touches he did last year. Was lucky to keep getting picked by Sydney. He was playing at Dunstan and Armitage type levels and they're both in the VFL at the moment.

But obviously if we can get Hannebery right or even close to it he'll be huge for us, even just from a leadership perspective.

That's a big if though. Hasn't your coach come out and said he was more broken than you thought he was? You're at least doing the right thing, and giving him time to get right instead of what Sydney did to him. For his sake I hope he can get right, but I'm not sure how much of his poor form last year was about him carrying stuff that he CAN get right vs the result of being heavily battered over the years, and his body no longer being able to do what he wants it to do, even if he's 100% injury free.

For all these excuses we're hearing about Hawthorn, they still had more rotations than us yesterday and they had a whopping 9 to our 1 who had played 150+ games out there.

I'm not surprised we had more rotations, with 1 less on the bench than you (and perhaps more than 1 when Cousins, Nash, Smith were off getting treatment, but I'd imagine you'd have had players off getting treatment at times too, so I wont harp on those 3). We were probably using as many rotations as we could with the smaller bench to give as many guys as possible a break. More rotations through a smaller bench doesn't necessary stop you falling in a heap though because it means you're resting less when you come off.

I think Savage was our 2nd most experienced. Think about that for a second!

Games tend to be won or lost based on how the midfield battle goes. We were easily more experienced over the entire ground, but our midfield was led by Worpel (15 games) and Cousins (11 games). We had Howe (51 games) coming back for his first AFL game for the year, and Scully playing more inside than wing to try to provide some experience. Your starting midfield was a good deal more experienced than ours. We also had nearly 400 games of experience sitting injured on the bench in the last quarter, while you had 38 games worth sitting injured on yours.

The winner is always going to label any reasons the loser puts forward for a loss as excuses, but it doesn't mean the explanations are not valid. Saints were 4 goals down against a paper thin midfield, and then came back with 4 unanswered goals when their opposition had their second defender go down, and were subsequently run over while having 1 less on the bench. Doesn't change the result, and it was a stirring finish from the Saints, but lets not pretend the comeback didn't have context. Sure, all games have ebbs and flows, however ignoring the fact that you saved your flow until our second defender for the day (and captain) went down with injury is just disingenuous.

As I said in my previous post, I thought before the game that Saints would have the better team on the park (at least in the areas that mattered most), which is why I'm surprised they had to rely on a comeback to seal the win. I figured this game would be over by half time. I was hopeful we could have a tilt at finals this year with some above average injury luck (it was clear we don't have the depth to cover even an average run of injury luck), but that doesn't appear to be happening. Some experience into what will be our midfield depth next year (and games into the likes of Nash and Scrimshaw) seems to be the best Hawk fans can hope for out of this season now. I imagine the same will probably end up being true for Saints and their large raft of inexperienced players, although if you could get Hanners back in 2015/2016 form, as well as some of your other outs, who knows...

 

[Falchoon]

Well played Saints. Deserved to win today but let’s be honest though if you put Mitchell, O’Meara, Shiels, Burgoyne, Birchall and Frawley in the Hawks team they win this game. The Saints were far from impressive considering the personnel Hawthorn had put out there.

Please don’t compare the Saints injured players against the Hawks. Aside from Geary the rest are VFL players at best.

Yes, please don't compare the Saints outs of Jack Steven, Dylan Roberton, Jake Carlisle & Jarryn Geary (& McCartin) with a bunch of 30 somethings with soft tissue injuries.

Not when we have Hannebery for that.

 

[Ekomaira]

just quickly, to all the morons complaining about the holding the ball that resulted in the goal at the end, I invite them to watch the start of the game again

17:34 remaining - free goes against Bruce for nudging Sicily in the back (Sicily goes the full superman to make sure the umpire saw it)

fair enough

16:54 remaining - 20 metres out straight in front, Sicily nudges Parker under the ball in the exact way he was just nudged under the ball, not paid a free kick

if one was paid, the other should have been paid. both Sicily and Parker exaggerated the contact made

there's your goal at the end

 

[puppy_dog7]

just quickly, to all the morons complaining about the holding the ball that resulted in the goal at the end, I invite them to watch the start of the game again

17:34 remaining - free goes against Bruce for nudging Sicily in the back (Sicily goes the full superman to make sure the umpire saw it)

fair enough

16:54 remaining - 20 metres out straight in front, Sicily nudges Parker under the ball in the exact way he was just nudged under the ball, not paid a free kick

if one was paid, the other should have been paid. both Sicily and Parker exaggerated the contact made

there's your goal at the end

Yep! Exactly right. At least they were consistent on being inconsistent.