'09 & '10 Saints "without" Zac Dawson are 5-0

[The Saintsational Man]

Also note, that 2 of those wins were against the Dogs in '09 (45 points) & the Cats in '10 (24 points).

At the moment, it's only a small record & it will be interesting to see if the trend continues today.

[saintnick12]

Also note, that 2 of those wins were against the Dogs in '09 (45 points) & the Cats in '10 (24 points).

At the moment, it's only a small record & it will be interesting to see if the trend continues today.

Hmmm Interesting Stat...though given we hardly lost any games last year its hard to count that. It will be interesting to see how we go without him in the next week or two. I for one think he is a crucial part of our plans and we need him up and firing in the finals.

[FQF]

Mention of the Bulldogs and Geelong games can be slightly deceiving given their forward line structure.

Last year the Dogs did not have a strong traditional full forward so Zac's role in the team would have been to man up on the resting ruckman, but otherwise he wasn't really needed.

Similarly Geelong do not have a dominating power forward. Mooney is solid, and usually dependable but he is no freak. Pods' fairtytale beginning looks to be going a little cold when it counts. And Hawkins is no big worry.

This year though, Zac would be our best bet for Hall, and I would feel comfortable in him at least breaking even with Mooney.

[SaintWal]

It will be interesting to see if we play backwards as much without him. Our problem (one of many) is that good sides shut down the easy chop out kick that our back line has utilised in the last two years. Dawson and Blake rarely look to attack when they win the ball but immediately check that they have a chop out player in position.

[The Saintsational Man]

.....it's now 6-0.

[GoTheTorp]

I forgot all about Zac

[noob]

like the geelong game earlier in the year seems like we play better with out him

[SaintSimmo]

The "Zac Theory" works!!!!

[Legendary]

A lot of merit in this thread --- it is not at all a dig at Dawson.

It is a reflection of how our structure operates better with a slightly smaller side.

We have more flexibility, win more of the ball, move it forward quicker, create more attack from our defensive half and apply more pressure to the opposition.

[FQF]

It all comes down to the question whether or not Blake and Gwilt can cover the two key forwards.

It will come down to each match being judged on the individual match ups...

[BigMart]

Gwilt has done the jobe on
Hall
Podsiadly
Goodes
and a couple of other talls this year....he is only 188cm but his strength allows him to play a bit taller....and his kicking from the last line is an assett (Zac - a liability) and he balances out Blake and Baker (Geary)...if he is getting well beaten Sam Fisher is always a good option and Gwilt can play HB/Wing/Hf and gives flexibility.

[SainterK]

Someone pointed out the fact that the Gwilts of the world, are likely to back themselves and take the game on.

[Quixote]

Jeez, we seemed OK today without Zacary....

[dcstkfc]

Jeez, we seemed OK today without Zacary....

Where's the Raph thread?

[Quixote]

Just stating facts mate.

[Bernard Shakey]

Just stating facts mate.

Facts are facts and the fact is we are better without having to worry about Zac watching his man and not the ball.