Is There Anyone We Can't Beat?

[peter lockwood]

If we dont have our usual injuries and can play like we should as it appears on paper we can beat anyone anywhere!

[spert]

We can beat most, not all of the teams in the comp. The teams who consistantly beat us, have better middle-rung, middle-size players who can cover their stars if their star players have ordinary days -if our stars go ordinary, there's a big gap in talent to the next rung, if our stars go well, we win. I think RL is addressing this

[Saints Premiers 2008]

We can beat most, not all of the teams in the comp. The teams who consistantly beat us, have better middle-rung, middle-size players who can cover their stars if their star players have ordinary days -if our stars go ordinary, there's a big gap in talent to the next rung, if our stars go well, we win. I think RL is addressing this

our glaring losses in bigger games or closer games are from multiple goal effort from the smaller types...

at times our defensive pressure on certain forward pockets or makeshift forward pockets is terrible

attards effort against lovett last year in round 4 still haunts me...although lovett didnt kick a bag he had 4-5 set shots in the second half alone and ran attard ragged due to his lack of pace from the traditional forward pocket position

[rodgerfox]

We can beat most, not all of the teams in the comp. The teams who consistantly beat us, have better middle-rung, middle-size players who can cover their stars if their star players have ordinary days -if our stars go ordinary, there's a big gap in talent to the next rung, if our stars go well, we win. I think RL is addressing this

I find this opinion so completely incorrect it's not funny.

No team in the AFL has had as many 'stars' missing over the past 3 years as we have.

Not even close.

The sides that have come close in this regard, have finished in the bottom 4. If not bottom 4, then certainly bottom 6.

We were top 4 for two years straight (well, only % off top 4 in 06) with a huge amount of stars missing for most of both seasons.

I still cannot understand how that can equate to the 'ours stars carrying us' theory.

I believe we either had the best depth in the comp, or the most adaptable game plan in the comp. We could lose superstar players, and still make the top 4.

We either had great depth, or a very solid game plan. It simply had to be one or the other.

Last year, we had similar if not worse injuries. So, the 'dead wood' that was cleared, or the retirement of depth players such as Powell and Frankie cost us - or our game plan wasn't as simple and adaptable as previously.

If it is our depth that is now the problem - then I don't see how Ross Lyon is 'addressing' it? He's trimmed of depth players, for depth players and discards from other clubs.

What's the difference?

[Huzzad]

I think our depth hasn't been too bad. There have been a number of dissapointments, but some players have really stood up. Look at gilbert and Attard for example. The team is so used to injuries that our young guns have stood up, and I think with a much more stable pre-season and Ross Lyon losing his coaching virginity (for lack of a better euthemisim) I think we will see alot more depth in our team this year. Like every team, we will have passengers, but I think most of the boys have been great and learned alot over 07 and definatly don't think that we are a team of a couple of stars and the rest passengers. We just need a better plan than kick it to Roo, and I am sure Ross has been developing a strong game plan with the lessons learned in 08, and with this settled in the minds of the players, I think our depth will really show.