Boring Wins v Entertaining Losses

[Teflon]

Dunno what all the fuss is about.... I mean... give me 6-6 as long as we keep kicking 100+ scores any day. If our opponents kick 120 who cares, winning is an aside on the way to 100 pts isn't it????

Yeah... that's it ..

[Moods]

I'm not sure which thread it was, but I'm sure after the Richmond game Joffa posted along the lines that he thoroughly enjoyed the game. Joffa can you confirm?

[Con Gorozidis]

i vote for entertaining wins.
nednt be a trade off.
man we have been so close. if we were 8-4 id be one very happy sainter.

[SainterK]

I enjoyed the first 5 rounds, they were both defensive and entertaining wins.

What do we call them?

Need a new word.

Hmmm.

[SaintPav]

An interesting thread a few years ago by the OP of this one.

I'm seeing a trend.

A little resistant to change there Joffa?

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=34194

In JB's defence, we were not winning back then and not even close to starting our run.

We/ve gone too far the other way..The attacking footy is great and exciting but can't totally throw out the defence either when required. We have completley lost the ability to close down a game and play tempo footy when we need to and this is blantantly obvious in our losses against Richmond and Adelaide.

[james rose]

An interesting thread a few years ago by the OP of this one.

I'm seeing a trend.

A little resistant to change there Joffa?

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=34194

In JB's defence, we were not winning back then and not even close to starting our run.

We/ve gone too far the other way..The attacking footy is great and exciting but can't totally throw out the defence either when required. We have completley lost the ability to close down a game and play tempo footy when we need to and this is blantantly obvious in our losses against Richmond and Adelaide.

That is kind of the point.

How many teams start winning as soon as they change their game style.

I think our results stack up well for a team that has completely changed its style.

[SaintPav]

Not that we'd want to close down a game when we're behind..

I'm glad that don't put the ball up in the air any more....

[SainterK]

Incorrect

First five rounds were defensively sound, big scores weren't kicked.

Things went pear shaped during and after the Hawks game.

I think Sam Fisher continues to be underated, lets see now that he has a game under his belt (really started looking like Fish in the last half) over the next few weeks before making big calls about unbalanced football.

(not directed at you Pav, just generally)

[joffaboy]

An interesting thread a few years ago by the OP of this one.

I'm seeing a trend.

A little resistant to change there Joffa?

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=34194

So what - said I didn't like the style in some games under Lyon and do like the entertaining game style of Watters.

Even the worst game I enjoyed the win.

I really enjoyed being 12-0 at this time in 2009 v 6-6 in 2012.

Didn't you?

[plugger66]

I find Sp comments the funniest. Hopes the A league takes over from the AFL in 20 years times. Well 5 years in SP and the A league wont take over from the VFL the way it is going. And I thought you just told us you love the game. Obviously didnt 5 years a go. Maybe you should have followed the A league for the last 5 years and tell us how well it is run by their administrators.

[joffaboy]

An interesting thread a few years ago by the OP of this one.

I'm seeing a trend.

A little resistant to change there Joffa?

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=34194

In JB's defence, we were not winning back then and not even close to starting our run.

We/ve gone too far the other way..The attacking footy is great and exciting but can't totally throw out the defence either when required. We have completley lost the ability to close down a game and play tempo footy when we need to and this is blantantly obvious in our losses against Richmond and Adelaide.

That is kind of the point.

How many teams start winning as soon as they change their game style.

I think our results stack up well for a team that has completely changed its style.

But you dont get the point of the thread.

So many posters here want to demonise Ross Lyon because he was instrumental in us NOT winning a flag because of his gameplan.

They then go on to laud Watters entertaining gameplan.

Personally I prefer Watters gameplan over Lyon's BUT

I preferred the win loss ratio and the fact that we had two chances to win a flag because of it over struggling at 6-6 not making the four and having NO statistical chance of winning the flag.

I would like to know, why many are satisified with this current result - especially the crap on here after the Adelaide game.

To me it seems a more deep seated issue about St.Kilda supporter mentality. It seems that many weren't comfortable with Lyon getting us to the big dance on two consecutive occasions. They seem more comfortable to be a circus act entertaining team that is non threatening to the big boys.

You know mid table below, where we traditionally belong. Comfortable, non threatening, mediocre. Lyons teams may have been boring, stop start, stopage based, lock down drudge, but it was never mediocre in the years we challenged.

So here some news James Rose. I have stated on this thread on numerous posts, I prefer Watters style to Lyons style, but I prefer Lyons results.

Seems like you and many others just prefer 6-6 v 12-0 because it is safe and not a threat.

Fair enough. Your call

[3rd generation saint]

I understand your point JB, of course I loved being 12 zip 3 years ago. But in 09 we we're playing power football, not only did we have the best defence, but one of the best attacks as well.
Roo kicked 70 odd goals, Kosi kicked 40+, Milney 50+ Schneider 20+ etc, it wasn't boring dour defence in 09.
In retrospect we should have won a flag, unfortunately, there was this team called Geelong that I feared all 09 would spoil the year.
Trust me if we had played any one else in that Grand Final, playing how we did, we would have won by 5 goals plus.
I still say RL tinkered with the gameplan in 10 after Roo went down in order to compensate for his loss, and we never got back to that 09 power brand of fottball.
Yes it was still efeective in 10, and the big what if that we all know was probably the difference between us winning the flag.
However, the GF Replay, I have to admit really effected me, more than I have admitted. We just didn't give a whimper in that 2nd game.
Then that first game against Geelong in 11 where we could only manage 6 goals, when with the amount of play we had, should have kicked double that.
Ever since then, RL's ultr defensive style was just painful to win, even our wins we're painful, because most we're not decisive, we didn't kill teams like we did in 09, we just seemed tired and uninteresting.
The only game we really looked like the team of 09 last year was against Freo in Perth (ironic I know).
We just ground them down, and looked good doing it.
I do agree though, I think Fisher has left a big hole in our defence, especially as neither Gwilt or Blake we're available or fully match fit.
If Fisher had not gone down, well I reckon West Coast would have been our only lost.
But yes it is good to know that teams will have to kick more than 12 goals now, to beat us.

[Johnny Member]

We were 10-0 in 2004, and 10-0 in 2009.

Didn't mean s***. Still doesn't.

We were 5-5 this year - guess what? Doesn't mean s*** in relation to 2009 or 2004.


For mine, being entertaining is a deadset non-issue. I know the AFL, the TV channels and most new supporters care as the game is purely an entertainment business. But for me, it's about playing the type of footy that is going to win a flag, and playing it at the right time.

In 2004, we didn't have the cattle to play it at the right time. In 2009 it was both - it wasn't the type of footy that was going to win a flag, and we weren't able to play it at the right time.


Right now, we're not playing the type footy that will win a flag. But I'm very confident we're very close to getting it right.

[plugger66]

We were 10-0 in 2004, and 10-0 in 2009.

Didn't mean s***. Still doesn't.

We were 5-5 this year - guess what? Doesn't mean s*** in relation to 2009 or 2004.


For mine, being entertaining is a deadset non-issue. I know the AFL, the TV channels and most new supporters care as the game is purely an entertainment business. But for me, it's about playing the type of footy that is going to win a flag, and playing it at the right time.

In 2004, we didn't have the cattle to play it at the right time. In 2009 it was both - it wasn't the type of footy that was going to win a flag, and we weren't able to play it at the right time.


Right now, we're not playing the type footy that will win a flag. But I'm very confident we're very close to getting it right.

What a lot of crap. 2009 wasnt the type of footy to win a flag. Crap. Bad kicking cost us the flag not he type of footy. You dont win 19 in a row if it isnt the right type of fotty to win a flag. I can bet any money you like you never mentioned once during 2009 that this type of footy wouldnt win us a flag. It is hindsight rubbish.

[SainterK]

This thread is 4.5 years early

[Moorabbin Saints]

I like watching us play attacking footy, but I'd still rather win 1-0 than lose 129-130.

Used to love the fact that we'd concede 8 goals to half time in a tight game and they'd kick 2 more goals for the rest of the game. Used to love being 15 points up with 10 minutes left and think there's no chance we will lose this.

[joffaboy]

This thread is 4.5 years early

No it isn't.

It is basically in response to revisionism like we just go from RodgerMember that we weren't playing football to win a flag in 2009.

It is unmittigated garbage. 7.7 to 7.1 at halftime in the 09 GF with not one rushed and more than 3 gettable goals (not even mentioning Milnes grubber not making it from 30 metres out).

This revisionist hindsight claptrap has been all too prevelant since Lyon left and it is coupled with the OTT praise of Watters and his entertaining gameplan even though it has us at 6-6 with no statistical chance of even making it to the GF.

A bloke named Tom Harley who knows more than any us what it takes to win a flag commented on the critisism of Lyons gamestyle in 10 when he first became a commentator..."Attack for the membership...defence for the premiership". In essence attack will thrill the fickle ignorant supporters but defence will win you flags.

We didn't win in 09 not because of Lyons gameplan but the players butchering the ball in front of goal. But the meme on here has been set by straw man arguments that Lyon cost us a flag when it is illogical garbage.

[Johnny Member]

Boy, you seem pretty worked up Joffaboy. Is your fat little face all screwed up whilst you're typing?

Man, go and hang out with your family or something. Talking about footy to strangers via your PC is hardly worth getting so upset about.

[joffaboy]

Boy, you seem pretty worked up Joffaboy. Is your fat little face all screwed up whilst you're typing?

Man, go and hang out with your family or something. Talking about footy to strangers via your PC is hardly worth getting so upset about.

You know you have won the argument with RodgerMember gets personal.

You've got nothing mate, just toss in your straw man revisionism, it makes you look very ignorant and the above posts makes you look like a troll.

Mate if you are utterly defeated and your arguments have been totally deconstructed, just quietly walk away from the debate, instead of posting inflammatory nothing post like this attempting to take the thread off topic.

Pretty poor trolling effort 3/10

[SainterK]

Kind of going off track here a bit though....

To be honest, can't say I remember much of the 2009 grand final anymore JB. It's so long ago, and not one I choose to watch.

Ross did select the team though, Schneider and Milne were never guys you'd 100% back kicking for goal then, and certainly not now.

They missed gettable goals, however they did prior to that GF, and continued to after the GF.

I don't buy that a coach can pardon himself of a GF loss, because of guys missing shots on goal, just makes no sense to me?

He selected the team in the knowledge of players strengths and weaknesses, they were his choices.

If that's your argument, we could criticise him for selecting both of those guys then to play in the 2010 GF (I don't agree with your logic, but it's just an example)

[SainterK]

Oh and what's with the bullying on here lately to conform with opinion?

Johnny can think/feel about any game how ever they want.

As can I.

As can you.

It's discussion, nobody has to win.

(shrugs)

[Dr Spaceman]

I have no doubt that Ross Lyon is a great coach who was able to get our team to the big dance in 2009 & 2010. And with a bit of luck we could have snuck a flag or two out of it.

However it's possible to have that opinion and still accept the possibility that some of Lyon's decisions during those seasons, and on those days, may have lead to our ultimate failure to win those Grand Finals.

It doesn't have to be one or the other. Just because someone is great doesn't mean they're infallible.

So did he screw up? Stuffed if I know (or anyone else for that matter).

[joffaboy]

I don't buy that a coach can pardon himself of a GF loss, because of guys missing shots on goal, just makes no sense to me?

So wouldn't he expect professionals to score from the top of a goalsquare running into an open goal?

If that's your argument, we could criticise him for selecting both of those guys then to play in the 2010 GF (I don't agree with your logic, but it's just an example)

No - he get critisised and accused of costing us the 09 GF because of his gameplan. That gameplan got us twice as many inside 50's in the first half but the players stuffed up kicking 7.7.

It is ridiculous to blame a coach for a players kicking. Milne has kicked over 500 goals, Schneider kicked 5 goals in a PF, dont give me this crap that there were better choices for that GF than thoses two.

Anyway that is totally specious. It is a straw man argument brought in by the likes of revisionist JohhnyFox.

Anyway if this is the case using your logic Watters should be held to account for his teams terrible kicking against Adelaide, but instead gets lauded for his entertaining style and the teams terrific fightback

Sounds like convenient double standards to me.

[joffaboy]

Oh and what's with the bullying on here lately to conform with opinion?

Johnny can think/feel about any game how ever they want.

As can I.

As can you.

It's discussion, nobody has to win.

(shrugs)

So you approve of somebody getting personal because i called out his argument?

he can post what he likes but if it is revionist claptrap and BS just to support a straw man argument I'll call it as I see it.

From his purile personal attack it is patently obvious I hit the nail on the head and he resorts to attempting to jack the thread.

Thats fine also (if a little predictable and pathetic) because it is amusing to see the change of tack when called

[joffaboy]

ISo did he screw up? Stuffed if I know (or anyone else for that matter).

Thats the whole point.

But so many Lyon haters state it as an indisputable fact.