Will Lyon's stubbornness stop the Saints winning the flag?

[VietNam_Saint]

If he doesn't take advantage of our position and rotate/manage our players, then he is a fool. For crying out loud, we're not asking him to rest half the team. Just use common sense.

The suspension of Kingy was the best thing that could have happened. He will come back fresh for the last part of the year plus finals and it's given McEvoy 4 bonus games to gain experience. On that basis it might be a good idea if Blake gets suspended this week so Maguire can get a game.

Nick , you say your trying to have a discussion .
from the very outset it seems like you are trying to pick a fight .

How about asking questions before making statements if you want a discussion.

[markp]

Please comment on the below statement which I have copied and pasted from my original post.....

The suspension of Kingy was the best thing that could have happened. He will come back fresh for the last part of the year plus finals and it's given McEvoy 4 bonus games to gain experience

It could be a blessing in disguise, but I would've rather had King in the side against the cats.

Players are either fit to play or not, I think pick the best team available... it's hardly foolish... and the title of the thread is a blatant troll, so dont carry on if people jump down your throat.

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

Sydney went through the 2005 season using 25 players for the year.

Does that mean that's the only way to go about winning a flag? Is there only one way to "skin a cat"? Ross is going damn well, but I hope he isn't stuck in 2005 and we're not Sydney.
Mick Malthouse is pretty handy, too and he "dropped" 3 guys 2 weeks ago, despite having just won the past 4 and they then went out and won by over 80 points, then thrashed Essendon last week.
On the "form ladder" (the past 6 weeks) they're well on top (about 20% better than us), despite the fact we've played 3 of the bottom 4 teams in that time. That way (making positive changes, when necessary, to make the team stronger and to "keep the pressure on the team") is working a treat for them. That's also basically what we were doing earlier in the year (when we were smashing everyone), before Ross said that "stability" was the way to go. Our percentage then was about 210, since then it's about 140. I preferred the former.

[degruch]

Sydney went through the 2005 season using 25 players for the year.

Does that mean that's the only way to go about winning a flag? Is there only one way to "skin a cat"? I hope Ross isn't stuck in 2005 and we're not Sydney.
Mick Malthouse "dropped" 3 guys 2 weeks ago, despite having just won the past 4 and they then went out and won by over 80 points.
On the "form ladder" (the past 6 weeks) they're well on top (about 20% better than us), despite the fact we've played 3 of the bottom 4 teams in that time. That way (making positive changes, to "keep the pressure on the team") is working a treat for them. That's also basically what we were doing earlier in the year (when we were smashing everyone), before Ross said that "stability" was the way to go. Our percentage then was about 210, since then it's about 140. I know which one I prefer.

Collingwood played and out of form Port, Freo and Melbourne in that time too. I think Mick Malthouse whould have preferred not to make any changes, as players dropped were due to poor form. Additionally, they had injuries to counter.

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

Collingwood played and out of form Port, Freo and Melbourne in that time too. I think Mick Malthouse whould have preferred not to make any changes, as players dropped were due to poor form. Additionally, they had injuries to counter.

They "dropped" 3 and one more was out with injury and he was quoted as saying that it was to "keep the pressure on the team", or words to that effect. So it was a strategic move and looks to have worked very well, like "dropping" Dal and Milne did for us last year (despite Dal having just had 27 possies the week before and Milne leading our goalkicking at the time).
They've also come from much further back, having been practically written off 6 weeks ago, whereas 6 weeks ago we were on top of the ladder and flying. So percentage wise, they've probably gone up by about 70, while we've dropped by 70.

[Moods]

Sydney went through the 2005 season using 25 players for the year.

Does that mean that's the only way to go about winning a flag? Is there only one way to "skin a cat"? Ross is going damn well, but I hope he isn't stuck in 2005 and we're not Sydney.
Mick Malthouse is pretty handy, too and he "dropped" 3 guys 2 weeks ago, despite having just won the past 4 and they then went out and won by over 80 points, then thrashed Essendon last week.
On the "form ladder" (the past 6 weeks) they're well on top (about 20% better than us), despite the fact we've played 3 of the bottom 4 teams in that time. That way (making positive changes, when necessary, to make the team stronger and to "keep the pressure on the team") is working a treat for them. That's also basically what we were doing earlier in the year (when we were smashing everyone), before Ross said that "stability" was the way to go. Our percentage then was about 210, since then it's about 140. I preferred the former.

Fair point. There is always more than one way to do things. However the OP suggested that RL would be a fool not to change the team around now that top 2 has been secured. I'd suggest that history tells us it's not foolish to change the team unless absolutely neccessary. In fact history tells us that the majority of teams that win the flag have a very stable team.

I'm not sure playing McEvoy will benefit us greatly short term (unless King or Gardiner get injured) and it's short term that the club is aiming at at the moment.

[degruch]

They "dropped" 3 and one more was out with injury and he was quoted as saying that it was to "keep the pressure on the team", or words to that effect. So it was a strategic move and looks to have worked very well, like "dropping" Dal and Milne did for us last year (despite Dal having just had 27 possies the week before and Milne leading our goalkicking at the time).
They've also come from much further back, having been practically written off 6 weeks ago, whereas 6 weeks ago we were on top of the ladder and flying. So percentage wise, they've probably gone up by about 70, while we've dropped by 70.

That's a tiny bit of an exaggeration...our percentage was not 240% 6 weeks ago, and Collingwood's wasn't 50%. They've had a very easy run, playing 2 weak teams away, the rest at home. In the same time we've played red hot Essendon, Brisbane, Carlton and Geelong outfits. I'm not sure dropping anyone from Collingwood made a difference, they're lucky they've had so few changes to make IMO. But hey, who'd know.

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

"Fair point. There is always more than one way to do things. However the OP suggested that RL would be a fool not to change the team around now that top 2 has been secured. I'd suggest that history tells us it's not foolish to change the team unless absolutely neccessary. In fact history tells us that the majority of teams that win the flag have a very stable team.

I'm not sure playing McEvoy will benefit us greatly short term (unless King or Gardiner get injured) and it's short term that the club is aiming at at the moment."

I wouldn't make any changes unless it was improving the team for that week, unless, as you said, someone genuinely needed/would benefit from a rest. I don't believe we should make "changes for the sake of changes" or have "stability for the sake of stability". It's better to "play each ball on its merits", like we seemed to be at selection earlier in the year and at the end of last year.

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

They "dropped" 3 and one more was out with injury and he was quoted as saying that it was to "keep the pressure on the team", or words to that effect. So it was a strategic move and looks to have worked very well, like "dropping" Dal and Milne did for us last year (despite Dal having just had 27 possies the week before and Milne leading our goalkicking at the time).
They've also come from much further back, having been practically written off 6 weeks ago, whereas 6 weeks ago we were on top of the ladder and flying. So percentage wise, they've probably gone up by about 70, while we've dropped by 70.

That's a tiny bit of an exaggeration...our percentage was not 240% 6 weeks ago, and Collingwood's wasn't 50%. They've had a very easy run, playing 2 weak teams away, the rest at home. In the same time we've played red hot Essendon, Brisbane, Carlton and Geelong outfits. I'm not sure dropping anyone from Collingwood made a difference, they're lucky they've had so few changes to make IMO. But hey, who'd know.

I'm talking relatively. They had the "form ladder" on one of the shows on Monday night and Collingwood's percentage for the last 6 weeks is about 160%, which is about 70% higher than it was for the first 8 weeks, while ours is about 140% (for the last 6 weeks), which is about 70% lower than it was after round 8. They are big turn-arounds.

[saintly]

different teams do things differently

Lyon obviously believes its better to have a stable team in uness the player has not played well for a couple of weeks gwilt now geary.

malthouse, has rested players, gellong is probably resting players. tut they also did that last year and it did not work bulldogs also did it last year and it did not work. we won't know which method is better until after the the grand final.

however if milne is injured he should have had the operation (if he needed one) when he was out in round 10.

and if ball is injured he should be rested.

[degruch]

They "dropped" 3 and one more was out with injury and he was quoted as saying that it was to "keep the pressure on the team", or words to that effect. So it was a strategic move and looks to have worked very well, like "dropping" Dal and Milne did for us last year (despite Dal having just had 27 possies the week before and Milne leading our goalkicking at the time).
They've also come from much further back, having been practically written off 6 weeks ago, whereas 6 weeks ago we were on top of the ladder and flying. So percentage wise, they've probably gone up by about 70, while we've dropped by 70.

That's a tiny bit of an exaggeration...our percentage was not 240% 6 weeks ago, and Collingwood's wasn't 50%. They've had a very easy run, playing 2 weak teams away, the rest at home. In the same time we've played red hot Essendon, Brisbane, Carlton and Geelong outfits. I'm not sure dropping anyone from Collingwood made a difference, they're lucky they've had so few changes to make IMO. But hey, who'd know.

I'm talking relatively. They had the "form ladder" on one of the shows on Monday night and Collingwood's percentage for the last 6 weeks is about 160%, which is about 70% higher than it was for the first 8 weeks, while ours is about 140% (for the last 6 weeks), which is about 70% lower than it was after round 8. They are big turn-arounds.

OK, I getchya now. But they are percentages based on two polar opposite 6 week runs in terms of opposition. We both played Melbourne (us away, them at home) and we both played Essendon (us whilst they were top 4 aspirants, them on the way down...good game from the Pies though), but the rest is heavily weighed in the Pies favour. We're obviously travelling very well.

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

different teams do things differently

My point exactly. How well did our side respond last year after Dal and Milne were "dropped"? Everyone was effectively, or actually "put on notice" and the team turned their year around enormously. That seemed to continue into this year and all our guys seemed to play like their lives depended on it, for 4 quarters a week, until Ross came out in about round 8 and said that he wanted to keep the side "stable, like the Australian cricket team".
Since then, as the stats show, our percentage is about 70% lower than for the first 8 weeks and that 4 quarter intensity has been absent a fair bit since. Guys that thought their spot was on the line every week now think that they can get away with playing less than their best and still keep their spot. I'm very glad they've made at least one change this week, to keep everyone on their toes and from becoming complacent. Some of us want to watch them every week, not just in big games and finals, which are easier for them to be motivated to play their best in.

[clarky449]

God im glad Ross is coach...

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

OK, I getchya now. But they are percentages based on two polar opposite 6 week runs in terms of opposition. We both played Melbourne (us away, them at home) and we both played Essendon (us whilst they were top 4 aspirants, them on the way down...good game from the Pies though), but the rest is heavily weighed in the Pies favour. We're obviously travelling very well.

Theirs was possibly a bit easier, but they did play 2 genuine interstate games. We played Melb at a neutral venue (that we won at last year) and the rest at home and we played Essendon 7 weeks ago, not in the last 6. As I said, we played 3 of the bottom 4 teams in the last 6 and during a few of those weeks Collingwood were without guys like Medhurst, Didak and Davis, who are huge omissions.
Our 70% drop is a lot, especially since we played a lot of in-form and top 4 (at the time we played them) teams in the first 8 weeks, plus Adelaide and Port in Adelaide (when they were going well, to very well).
We're going damn well now and may still be good enough to win the flag going like this, but we were going noticeably better then. As I said, I preferred the former.

[White Winmar]

Looks like the paw widdle puddy tatts have started their regime of resting players already!

[White Winmar]

Looks like the paw widdle puddy tatts have started their regime of resting players already!

[felixleo]

Can't see Ross resting anyone of his best twenty two if they are fit to play.
Especially with Dempster coming in I think Ross would probably want the side to settle with him in it. Plus with the full side in he can tinker with structures and tactics also winning form obviously is good form don't mess with it.

[older saint]

While i do not agree wit the opening comments a few changes such as Geary's , due to form will not hurt before seasons end so that IF we were to have an injury in finals whoever came in has played senior footy in 2009.

[Nick]

MaGuire in for his 100th and Blake rested...the one and only change this week.

[saintly]

Nick - I actually reckon we've been quite conservative with our njury management this year. When Kosi experienced hammy tightness, he rested the game out and took the next week. See what happened when Cousins didn't do the same in 1st round? Gilberts ankle the same. Milney missed a couple with a knee. If they're injured they don't play. What makes you think that the players are mentally tired? I certainly didn't see that last week. I saw 22 blokes raring to go. They have systems in place to predict injuries from what I've read, and with Missions' record at the Swans, I have complete confidence that our injury management is 1st class.

Blokes have had niggly injuries and been rested. They have generally come straight back into the team though. The bug bear appears to be with some, that Lyon hasn't tested our list enough. I say play our strongest 22 each week, particularly as we are gunning for a flag. List experimentation if for the last 6 rounds when you have no hope of making the finals

Luke Ball for instance

[plugger66]

MaGuire in for his 100th and Blake rested...the one and only change this week.

Yep thats going to happen. Not.

[bozza1980]

Nick you are right that we should be taking no unnecessary risks with players now that our position in the top 4 is secured. At the same time I don’t feel that there is a need to unnecessarily rest players.

All that said, I do believe that the club as a general rule has taken this approach with our injury management. I think in each known case the club has erred on the side of caution each time.

I’m not saying that we should blindly accept what the club does but I do think that they are doing all the right things with injury management, and now with a top 2 spot and the serious tilt at the flag it offers all but secured, I don’t think they are going to risk a potential flag by playing a player at risk of injury. Conversely, they aren’t going to flirt with form by resting blokes who are best served by a kick and a catch in the AFL each weekend.

[Moccha]

If he doesn't take advantage of our position and rotate/manage our players, then he is a fool. For crying out loud, we're not asking him to rest half the team. Just use common sense.

The suspension of Kingy was the best thing that could have happened. He will come back fresh for the last part of the year plus finals and it's given McEvoy 4 bonus games to gain experience. On that basis it might be a good idea if Blake gets suspended this week so Maguire can get a game.

Of course you're right.

Why don't you apply for the coaching position?

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

We can all rest easy now. Ross is going to pick our side based on whether our opposition is going to "respect us" or not, as a result of our selections. Forget about what's best for us, just as long as they (who I'm sure are really concerning themselves with what we're doing!) respect us.

[markp]

We can all rest easy now. Ross is going to pick our side based on whether our opposition is going to "respect us" or not, as a result of our selections. Forget about what's best for us, just as long as they (who I'm sure are really concerning themselves with what we're doing!) respect us.

And 1 + 1 = 5.