King and Caminiti

[bigcarl]

Caminiti is more key position size. Ultimately we need someone who can provide a counter to King. Someone of key position size and strength. Caminiti may fit the bill. It’s too early to say.

Sharman I see as more of a Membrey type. Good third forward/goal-kicker, Perhaps not quite strong enough to hold his own in a pack situation.

[spert]

Caminiti is a young guy with a lot of potential, but a way off senior football.

[The G Train Legacy]

They are different type of players.

Also, Sharman played 3 good games 2 years ago and hasn't shown anything since. I'll be a believer when I see it, but I haven't seen it yet.

Last year Sharman played some good games in defence and there's the small matter of him winning us the game against Geelong. In that game he beat Tom Stewart hands down. Although he may still have things to learn, he can play.

That's a considerable exaggeration, some of Sharman's contests on Stewart in that game were overblown a little too, Stewarts stats were still in the mid 20s. It also neglects the performances from some other lesser knowns in the team that no one saw coming, and especially Geelong didn't see coming, namely the game from Windy.

He completely nullified Stewart who had no influence on the game, in fact he aerially dominated Stewart. This had the effect of removing Geelong's brickwall defence and allowing King to dominate.

I think Tom Stewart had 26 disposal in that game, I'd be happy if players in our backline get dominated that much.

6, 26 or 56, doesn't matter. He had no influence on the game.

[CQ SAINT]

They are different type of players.

Also, Sharman played 3 good games 2 years ago and hasn't shown anything since. I'll be a believer when I see it, but I haven't seen it yet.

Last year Sharman played some good games in defence and there's the small matter of him winning us the game against Geelong. In that game he beat Tom Stewart hands down. Although he may still have things to learn, he can play.

That's a considerable exaggeration, some of Sharman's contests on Stewart in that game were overblown a little too, Stewarts stats were still in the mid 20s. It also neglects the performances from some other lesser knowns in the team that no one saw coming, and especially Geelong didn't see coming, namely the game from Windy.

He completely nullified Stewart who had no influence on the game, in fact he aerially dominated Stewart. This had the effect of removing Geelong's brickwall defence and allowing King to dominate.

I think Tom Stewart had 26 disposal in that game, I'd be happy if players in our backline get dominated that much.

6, 26 or 56, doesn't matter. He had no influence on the game.

His influence was muted by his opponents.
Sharman didnt fall into the trap of playing defensively, he attacked the ball in the air and won it.

Now, his ground work doesn't matter if he keeps marking the ball and kicking it straight.

If Geelongs midfield sets up long enough, they get numbers back while their defence attacks.

But if you put the ball into dangerous spots and get your hands firmly around it, Geelong will speed up their attack and open up the game.

Geelong like to control the tempo of the game and kill you with clean marking and disposal. They just don't expect us to be clean with marking and possession.

That is all about to change. We have Wood and Crouch in great shape and form, we half flankers and wings who can attack, make play and defend at both ends.

We just need a leaping ruckman who can dominate centre clearances, cause Steele, Crouch and Windhager can even up stoppage clearances, but the really tall rucks hurt us in the middle.

[Vortex]

They are different type of players.

Also, Sharman played 3 good games 2 years ago and hasn't shown anything since. I'll be a believer when I see it, but I haven't seen it yet.

Last year Sharman played some good games in defence and there's the small matter of him winning us the game against Geelong. In that game he beat Tom Stewart hands down. Although he may still have things to learn, he can play.

That's a considerable exaggeration, some of Sharman's contests on Stewart in that game were overblown a little too, Stewarts stats were still in the mid 20s. It also neglects the performances from some other lesser knowns in the team that no one saw coming, and especially Geelong didn't see coming, namely the game from Windy.

He completely nullified Stewart who had no influence on the game, in fact he aerially dominated Stewart. This had the effect of removing Geelong's brickwall defence and allowing King to dominate.

I think Tom Stewart had 26 disposal in that game, I'd be happy if players in our backline get dominated that much.

6, 26 or 56, doesn't matter. He had no influence on the game.

His influence was muted by his opponents.
Sharman didnt fall into the trap of playing defensively, he attacked the ball in the air and won it.

Now, his ground work doesn't matter if he keeps marking the ball and kicking it straight.

If Geelongs midfield sets up long enough, they get numbers back while their defence attacks.

But if you put the ball into dangerous spots and get your hands firmly around it, Geelong will speed up their attack and open up the game.

Geelong like to control the tempo of the game and kill you with clean marking and disposal. They just don't expect us to be clean with marking and possession.

That is all about to change. We have Wood and Crouch in great shape and form, we half flankers and wings who can attack, make play and defend at both ends.

We just need a leaping ruckman who can dominate centre clearances, cause Steele, Crouch and Windhager can even up stoppage clearances, but the really tall rucks hurt us in the middle.

Players performances are obviously always assessed by the coach through the lens of the game plan and the player role and how well the player executed within that so just at a guess Cooper probably got a tick from Ratts in a great win but objectively he only won the ball in the air 4 times and Ratts would have reviewed those 4 marks against the game plan. But 9 disposals and 1 goal was his stats and then being dropped the following week suggests he struggled to execute, and clearly still is. Meaning you need more than mark and kick in AFL.

If I'm guessing it's because creating a game plan around aerial dominance is a very low percentage play unless you are the second coming of Wayne Carey and in AFL a missed mark by Cooper usually results in a goal to the opposition.

2 of his attempted marks in that game probably got him dropped alone.

[CQ SAINT]

The best defences often dominate with aerial prowess.
I'll argue, that a lead up forward, who can take a grab and kick straight is what it takes to beat these teams. You move their focus and unsettle their system.
They double team the keys and seem to be able to get away with constantly breaking and playing on the edge of the rules.
The reference to Carey, in the modern era was shallow. Mobility, endurance and height is the new prototype. Wayne Carey however, was 192cm, Hird, Lockett, Dunstall, etc.
Im assuming lots of these guys wouldn't cut it as key forwards today. They'd be handy third talls though.

[Vortex]

The best defences often dominate with aerial prowess.
I'll argue, that a lead up forward, who can take a grab and kick straight is what it takes to beat these teams. You move their focus and unsettle their system.
They double team the keys and seem to be able to get away with constantly breaking and playing on the edge of the rules.
The reference to Carey, in the modern era was shallow. Mobility, endurance and height is the new prototype. Wayne Carey however, was 192cm, Hird, Lockett, Dunstall, etc.
Im assuming lots of these guys wouldn't cut it as key forwards today. They'd be handy third talls though.

I think we are in general agreement except for I think Sharman is way off the pace as that player.

[CQ SAINT]

They are different type of players.

Also, Sharman played 3 good games 2 years ago and hasn't shown anything since. I'll be a believer when I see it, but I haven't seen it yet.

Last year Sharman played some good games in defence and there's the small matter of him winning us the game against Geelong. In that game he beat Tom Stewart hands down. Although he may still have things to learn, he can play.

That's a considerable exaggeration, some of Sharman's contests on Stewart in that game were overblown a little too, Stewarts stats were still in the mid 20s. It also neglects the performances from some other lesser knowns in the team that no one saw coming, and especially Geelong didn't see coming, namely the game from Windy.

He completely nullified Stewart who had no influence on the game, in fact he aerially dominated Stewart. This had the effect of removing Geelong's brickwall defence and allowing King to dominate.

I think Tom Stewart had 26 disposal in that game, I'd be happy if players in our backline get dominated that much.

6, 26 or 56, doesn't matter. He had no influence on the game.

His influence was muted by his opponents.
Sharman didnt fall into the trap of playing defensively, he attacked the ball in the air and won it.

Now, his ground work doesn't matter if he keeps marking the ball and kicking it straight.

If Geelongs midfield sets up long enough, they get numbers back while their defence attacks.

But if you put the ball into dangerous spots and get your hands firmly around it, Geelong will speed up their attack and open up the game.

Geelong like to control the tempo of the game and kill you with clean marking and disposal. They just don't expect us to be clean with marking and possession.

That is all about to change. We have Wood and Crouch in great shape and form, we half flankers and wings who can attack, make play and defend at both ends.

We just need a leaping ruckman who can dominate centre clearances, cause Steele, Crouch and Windhager can even up stoppage clearances, but the really tall rucks hurt us in the middle.

Players performances are obviously always assessed by the coach through the lens of the game plan and the player role and how well the player executed within that so just at a guess Cooper probably got a tick from Ratts in a great win but objectively he only won the ball in the air 4 times and Ratts would have reviewed those 4 marks against the game plan. But 9 disposals and 1 goal was his stats and then being dropped the following week suggests he struggled to execute, and clearly still is. Meaning you need more than mark and kick in AFL.

If I'm guessing it's because creating a game plan around aerial dominance is a very low percentage play unless you are the second coming of Wayne Carey and in AFL a missed mark by Cooper usually results in a goal to the opposition.

2 of his attempted marks in that game probably got him dropped alone.

Just a little trivia. After the Geelong win in R9, Cooper had 4 marks, 9 disposals and 1 goal in a R10 win against Adelaide too, then 7 disposals and 1 goal in round 11, then Ratten dropped him and got a contract extension.

At that stage Coops had played 7 games, averaged 1.8 goals and 9.8 disposals, oops, I forgot the 4 marks and we were at the top of the ladder. Just think about that. It's great that Membrey goes and helps down back but it saves games, not wins them.

We won 3 more games for the season, Cooper went to learn something in the VFL and came back and played in defence. Ratten aged 15 years, hit the plonk and faded back off into obscurity.

Sharman is still there and just had his first real pre-season, put on 5 kg and came from the back of the pack to the middle of the endurance runners in the team. He is 22.

[CQ SAINT]

I think some reject small forward from Melbourne got gifted a few games over Sharman, because our mids didn't know how to track a midfield that revolves with defensive runners. We were going to bomb it over their heads and hope King spilled a mark and the 4 crumbers could pick it up. Who knew King would start holding marks and kicking goals?

[CQ SAINT]

Currently, after 11 seasons in the system Membrey is an established 3rd tall.
He averages 12.8 possessions, 6 marks and 1.7 goals.
He started at St.kilda with 2 key forwards around him and flourished.

After 15 matches, at 22, he was taking 6 marks, getting 12 disposals and was averaging 2.6 goals in a mid ladder list.

Sharman came from 3rds local via SANFL reserves and after 7 Games, had
4 marks, 1.8 goals and 9.8 disposals.

3 kicks and 2 marks average splitting 10 years of development on 2 blokes with obvious skill to kick and mark the ball. Cooper started cause everyone was injured and we have 1 apprentice full forward, who started leading, marking and kicking straight after Sharman was dropped in round 12, 2022.

I'm startled at the insights expressed about Sharman. Bewildered even.
However I'm not concerned that Owens, Phillipou, Hayes and Sharman are all competing at once and have all been here less than 2 seasons, add King and Higgins and we are going places.

[Vortex]

They are different type of players.

Also, Sharman played 3 good games 2 years ago and hasn't shown anything since. I'll be a believer when I see it, but I haven't seen it yet.

Last year Sharman played some good games in defence and there's the small matter of him winning us the game against Geelong. In that game he beat Tom Stewart hands down. Although he may still have things to learn, he can play.

That's a considerable exaggeration, some of Sharman's contests on Stewart in that game were overblown a little too, Stewarts stats were still in the mid 20s. It also neglects the performances from some other lesser knowns in the team that no one saw coming, and especially Geelong didn't see coming, namely the game from Windy.

He completely nullified Stewart who had no influence on the game, in fact he aerially dominated Stewart. This had the effect of removing Geelong's brickwall defence and allowing King to dominate.

I think Tom Stewart had 26 disposal in that game, I'd be happy if players in our backline get dominated that much.

6, 26 or 56, doesn't matter. He had no influence on the game.

His influence was muted by his opponents.
Sharman didnt fall into the trap of playing defensively, he attacked the ball in the air and won it.

Now, his ground work doesn't matter if he keeps marking the ball and kicking it straight.

If Geelongs midfield sets up long enough, they get numbers back while their defence attacks.

But if you put the ball into dangerous spots and get your hands firmly around it, Geelong will speed up their attack and open up the game.

Geelong like to control the tempo of the game and kill you with clean marking and disposal. They just don't expect us to be clean with marking and possession.

That is all about to change. We have Wood and Crouch in great shape and form, we half flankers and wings who can attack, make play and defend at both ends.

We just need a leaping ruckman who can dominate centre clearances, cause Steele, Crouch and Windhager can even up stoppage clearances, but the really tall rucks hurt us in the middle.

Players performances are obviously always assessed by the coach through the lens of the game plan and the player role and how well the player executed within that so just at a guess Cooper probably got a tick from Ratts in a great win but objectively he only won the ball in the air 4 times and Ratts would have reviewed those 4 marks against the game plan. But 9 disposals and 1 goal was his stats and then being dropped the following week suggests he struggled to execute, and clearly still is. Meaning you need more than mark and kick in AFL.

If I'm guessing it's because creating a game plan around aerial dominance is a very low percentage play unless you are the second coming of Wayne Carey and in AFL a missed mark by Cooper usually results in a goal to the opposition.

2 of his attempted marks in that game probably got him dropped alone.

Just a little trivia. After the Geelong win in R9, Cooper had 4 marks, 9 disposals and 1 goal in a R10 win against Adelaide too, then 7 disposals and 1 goal in round 11, then Ratten dropped him and got a contract extension.

At that stage Coops had played 7 games, averaged 1.8 goals and 9.8 disposals, oops, I forgot the 4 marks and we were at the top of the ladder. Just think about that. It's great that Membrey goes and helps down back but it saves games, not wins them.

We won 3 more games for the season, Cooper went to learn something in the VFL and came back and played in defence. Ratten aged 15 years, hit the plonk and faded back off into obscurity.

Sharman is still there and just had his first real pre-season, put on 5 kg and came from the back of the pack to the middle of the endurance runners in the team. He is 22.

Well as they say in cricket if there is grass on the pitch "then let's play", the opportunity is there for his taking.

But on the Ratts hitting the plonk thing, that's pretty low.

[CQ SAINT]

They are different type of players.

Also, Sharman played 3 good games 2 years ago and hasn't shown anything since. I'll be a believer when I see it, but I haven't seen it yet.

Last year Sharman played some good games in defence and there's the small matter of him winning us the game against Geelong. In that game he beat Tom Stewart hands down. Although he may still have things to learn, he can play.

That's a considerable exaggeration, some of Sharman's contests on Stewart in that game were overblown a little too, Stewarts stats were still in the mid 20s. It also neglects the performances from some other lesser knowns in the team that no one saw coming, and especially Geelong didn't see coming, namely the game from Windy.

He completely nullified Stewart who had no influence on the game, in fact he aerially dominated Stewart. This had the effect of removing Geelong's brickwall defence and allowing King to dominate.

I think Tom Stewart had 26 disposal in that game, I'd be happy if players in our backline get dominated that much.

6, 26 or 56, doesn't matter. He had no influence on the game.

His influence was muted by his opponents.
Sharman didnt fall into the trap of playing defensively, he attacked the ball in the air and won it.

Now, his ground work doesn't matter if he keeps marking the ball and kicking it straight.

If Geelongs midfield sets up long enough, they get numbers back while their defence attacks.

But if you put the ball into dangerous spots and get your hands firmly around it, Geelong will speed up their attack and open up the game.

Geelong like to control the tempo of the game and kill you with clean marking and disposal. They just don't expect us to be clean with marking and possession.

That is all about to change. We have Wood and Crouch in great shape and form, we half flankers and wings who can attack, make play and defend at both ends.

We just need a leaping ruckman who can dominate centre clearances, cause Steele, Crouch and Windhager can even up stoppage clearances, but the really tall rucks hurt us in the middle.

Players performances are obviously always assessed by the coach through the lens of the game plan and the player role and how well the player executed within that so just at a guess Cooper probably got a tick from Ratts in a great win but objectively he only won the ball in the air 4 times and Ratts would have reviewed those 4 marks against the game plan. But 9 disposals and 1 goal was his stats and then being dropped the following week suggests he struggled to execute, and clearly still is. Meaning you need more than mark and kick in AFL.

If I'm guessing it's because creating a game plan around aerial dominance is a very low percentage play unless you are the second coming of Wayne Carey and in AFL a missed mark by Cooper usually results in a goal to the opposition.

2 of his attempted marks in that game probably got him dropped alone.

Just a little trivia. After the Geelong win in R9, Cooper had 4 marks, 9 disposals and 1 goal in a R10 win against Adelaide too, then 7 disposals and 1 goal in round 11, then Ratten dropped him and got a contract extension.

At that stage Coops had played 7 games, averaged 1.8 goals and 9.8 disposals, oops, I forgot the 4 marks and we were at the top of the ladder. Just think about that. It's great that Membrey goes and helps down back but it saves games, not wins them.

We won 3 more games for the season, Cooper went to learn something in the VFL and came back and played in defence. Ratten aged 15 years, hit the plonk and faded back off into obscurity.

Sharman is still there and just had his first real pre-season, put on 5 kg and came from the back of the pack to the middle of the endurance runners in the team. He is 22.

Well as they say in cricket if there is grass on the pitch "then let's play", the opportunity is there for his taking.

But on the Ratts hitting the plonk thing, that's pretty low.

At least it was accurate.

[Vortex]

At least it was accurate.

How so and even if it is, is it necessar? Or is there a less hateful way to strengthen your argument!

If it is true, I wouldn't blame the guy for having addiction issues based on the significant suffering he experienced prior to taking the coaching role.

[CQ SAINT]

At least it was accurate.

How so and even if it is, is it necessar? Or is there a less hateful way to strengthen your argument!

If it is true, I wouldn't blame the guy for having addiction issues based on the significant suffering he experienced prior to taking the coaching role.

Now now Vortex, don't get distracted because I checked your colorful claims on why Sharman was dropped.

Brett will be ok. There are more serious issues for him to focus on, rather than the success of St.Kilda.

Let's take the focus off Cooper Ratten and put it back on Cooper Sharman.

[Vortex]

At least it was accurate.

How so and even if it is, is it necessar? Or is there a less hateful way to strengthen your argument!

If it is true, I wouldn't blame the guy for having addiction issues based on the significant suffering he experienced prior to taking the coaching role.

Now now Vortex, don't get distracted because I checked your colorful claims on why Sharman was dropped.

Brett will be ok. There are more serious issues for him to focus on, rather than the success of St.Kilda.

Let's take the focus off Cooper Ratten and put it back on Cooper Sharman.

All good CQ, Cooper is one of many fascinating sub plots for 2023 with regards to list development under Ross.

I'll be ecstatic if the young fella if he makes the grade but right at this very point my view is he's way off the pace.

The positive is he's got a two year contract to make the most of his opportunity.

[King Max]

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/aft ... 5crdv.html

St Kilda are considering naming rookie Anthony Caminiti for a round one debut against Fremantle, just a month after he joined the Saints during the pre-season supplementary selection period.

With Max King and Jack Hayes out and Tim Membrey highly unlikely to play against the Dockers at Marvel Stadium, spots have opened up inside forward 50 and Saints sources said Caminiti was in the frame, having made a huge impression in his month of training.

[Vortex]

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/aft ... 5crdv.html

St Kilda are considering naming rookie Anthony Caminiti for a round one debut against Fremantle, just a month after he joined the Saints during the pre-season supplementary selection period.

With Max King and Jack Hayes out and Tim Membrey highly unlikely to play against the Dockers at Marvel Stadium, spots have opened up inside forward 50 and Saints sources said Caminiti was in the frame, having made a huge impression in his month of training.

If this happens then it really signals what Ross thinks of the other talls on the list he could possibly pick ahead of Caminiti in the midst of an injury crisis.

He looks hard and cut, let's hope he's got a bit of peacock about him.