What was and wasn't finals quality v GWS?

[carn_sainter]

Let's assess the game in the context of a final.

Not up to finals standard:
- the opposition: they played slow, dumb, allowed us to set-up our defence and generally looked disinterested. Thought they were better than that.
- Dean Kent: as far as I saw, everything he did was not up to scratch. He went slow when he should have gone fast, he went fast when he should have gone slow, his handballs missed, he dropped several marks, some off his chest. I was completely underwhelmed.
- still some foot skills which were the difference between a fast rebound turning into a goal or a boundary throw in on our 50m arc


Up to finals standard:
- the backline: had a relatively easy task tonight given how GWS played, but Wilkie, Paton, Coffield, Carlisle, Howard all were rock solid. Long still could be in the play a bit more and Geary didn't do much but he also didn't do anything poorly.
- Steele and Clark in the middle: especially their ability to take the opponent away by accepting contact and still releasing the ball.
- wings holding position: I get frustrated by how unimpactful Billings especially, and Hill, can be but they're playing smart, well structured footy to hold their position and provide options on the fat side. Good play.
- King: his contesting was excellent. His 3rd quarter put them away.
- even contribution was great. As mentioned elsewhere, difficult to drop people from that team, though I would drop Kent.

[Devilhead]

Is there a couple of GWS guns that would like to jump ship?

[bangaulegend]

Pretty fair call over all . Will need to be a bit more accountable against the Dogs or the Pies but we did what we had to do tonight , a bit harsh on Kent thought he played his role nothing great but serviceable IMO, agree our skills were sloppy at times in the first half but lifted in the second but was that due to oppositions will for the contest or our did we actually start to believe in ourselves could have been a bit of both. At least we live to find out Go Sainters

[WellardSaint]

Wasn't as exciting as the Power or Swans wins, I worked tonight and was really looking forward to watching the replay but the quality was a bit scrappy.
But it's a huge win so that's good

[spert]

Slow first quarter from the midfield- lucky GSW didn't kick straight. Need to do better in contested marks. Still a bit slow to move the ball up the ground from defence. A win is a good tonic though.

[Teflon]

I thought we still could provide more lead up forward options
The class difference when they hit it right was stark .....L Cameron must be a shyte coach things are off there
Battle forward threw them off imo he gives us another dimension up there
Mids first qtr stood back at times
Ryder was huge plus Marshall
Sinclair did some nice things in traffic
Clark is a mid now
We at least didn’t zone out for a whole qtr like last week and when it’s not going bout way we just need to turn up the pressure efforts
Did what was needed in the end which was great for confidence

[fugazi]

What wasn't:
Intensity in first half was poor, a finals side would slice us apart.
Their kick ins had no heat on them at all.

What was:
Paddy ruck work and Steeles attack on the man and the ball.

[carn_sainter]

Battle forward threw them off imo he gives us another dimension up there

Agree with this. Forward line looked really good with Battle, Membrey, King, Marshall, Lonie, Butler. I'm a fan of Battle big time.

Which gets me thinking about which players do we have which are built to play finals? From last night's team
- Coffield
- Hill
- Steele
- Hannebery
- Clark
- Butler
- Ryder
- Marshall
- Long
- Battle
- Paton
- Wilkie
- Jones (though didn't play against GWS, is assumed to be back in)

Borderline
- King
- Geary
- Howard
- Membrey

Could make a huge difference if playing at their best
- Billings
- Ross

[Scollop]

Let's assess the game in the context of a final.

- Dean Kent: as far as I saw, everything he did was not up to scratch.


- even contribution was great. As mentioned elsewhere, difficult to drop people from that team, though I would drop Kent.

This thread seems to me about bagging one player only and focussing on the errors of one Saints player

We had a coach who used to do that. Focus on negatives. It’s unproductive and it’s a blame blame scapegoat mentality.

Firstly I’d love someone like DownAtTheJunction to do impact scores and especially to look at Kunty’s impact in that first half where the game was in the balance. Watch the replay and without listening to the muppet commentators try looking at our players and how each contribute.

Dean Kent worked his butt off. He dropped a couple of marks but he took plenty also. He wasn’t standing motionless to take the marks either. He sometimes runs 50-100 metres to lead and provide an option. I think we look at Members and King and applaud the way they get up the ground to take a mark on the wing, but we sometimes ignore the same thing from a bloke like Kent. I think Ratts asked him to do a specific role and be that marking leading get out option out of defense.

The other positives which seem to be ignored are his body shape and his impact at contests. He’s a solid man. He hits hard and he tackles hard and he hurts opponents. Seb doesn’t, Lonie doesn’t and generally JB doesn’t although he laid a beauty of a tackle in the game last night.

Anyhow, food for thought. I thought Kunty went ok

[saynta]

Stupid commentators get the tattoos mixed up and often call Membrey when it is Kent with the ball and last night were getting Seb and Hanners mixed up. Taylor was the dill I'm thinking.

[ace]

Is there a couple of GWS guns that would like to jump ship?

With their incompetent coach having his contract renewed I would think every one of the GWS guns would like to jump ship.
Fantastic list but a coach who can not even pi55 into a toilet bowl.