Xavier and Raph Clarke

Bernard Shakey · Sun 29 Mar 2009 4:58pm

st.byron wrote:
Bernard Shakey wrote:Xavier was brilliant for Sandy today. May be a straight swap.
Did you see the game Bernard?
If he was fit enough to play a brilliant game for Sandy, why wasn't he selected for the Sainters?

Your guess is as good as mine.

st.byron · Post: # 714926Post **st.byron** » Sun 29 Mar 2009 5:17pm

stinger wrote:
you reckon..???..flower me.....who gives a stuff what you reckon.....not me, not ross and thankfully not the clarke brothers.....

Yes I do reckon. Looked at over the course of his 8 years at the Saints, X is a substantial underachiever.
He has a one year contract which suggests that the coaching staff are getting tired of his inconsistency too. If he's the star that some on here are saying he is why didn't they stitch him up for three years at least?
Good player - but can't stay fit.

As for your rudeness and insulting manner - just more of the same.
Water - duck - back.

St DAC · Post: # 714930Post **St DAC** » Sun 29 Mar 2009 5:20pm

st.byron wrote:Thanks for pointing out that the coaching staff make the decisions re the list. I thought it was up to me.

My pleasure. You appeared misinformed.

In future I'll limit expressing my opinion to internet forums designed for expressing opinions.

Don't hold back on my account; express away.

st.byron · Post: # 714971Post **st.byron** » Sun 29 Mar 2009 6:17pm

St DAC wrote:
st.byron wrote:Thanks for pointing out that the coaching staff make the decisions re the list. I thought it was up to me.
My pleasure. You appeared misinformed.

In future I'll limit expressing my opinion to internet forums designed for expressing opinions.
Don't hold back on my account; express away.

thanks DAC. Shall do.

Zed · Post: # 714981Post **Zed** » Sun 29 Mar 2009 6:40pm

I like the work our fitness guy (Misson ?) is doing with the group as whole. I think the last 12 months we seem to have been better prepared physically and less injuries.

Maybe the clarkes will come good later this year. If not - maybe time to get rid of them at year end

stinger · Post: # 715297Post **stinger** » Mon 30 Mar 2009 10:42am

Bernard Shakey wrote:
st.byron wrote:
Bernard Shakey wrote:Xavier was brilliant for Sandy today. May be a straight swap.
Did you see the game Bernard?
If he was fit enough to play a brilliant game for Sandy, why wasn't he selected for the Sainters?
Your guess is as good as mine.

he was short on match practice ...is all......

stinger · Post: # 715300Post **stinger** » Mon 30 Mar 2009 10:44am

st.byron wrote:
Water - duck - back.

if that was correct you would not have responded.......i'm betting x will make you eat your words....i

st.byron · Post: # 715319Post **st.byron** » Mon 30 Mar 2009 11:44am

stinger wrote:
if that was correct you would not have responded.......i'm betting x will make you eat your words....i

yeh righto Mr.Adversarial, you win.
I hope X does make me eat my words. Can only be good for the Saints if it happens.

stinger · Post: # 715359Post **stinger** » Mon 30 Mar 2009 12:40pm

st.byron wrote:
stinger wrote:
if that was correct you would not have responded.......i'm betting x will make you eat your words....i
yeh righto Mr.Adversarial, you win.
I hope X does make me eat my words. Can only be good for the Saints if it happens.

got something right for once....

matrix · Post: # 715368Post **matrix** » Mon 30 Mar 2009 1:00pm

to the OP questions.....
some peoples bodies just cant stand up to the physical pressure of afl.
i think raph will be fine, but X im not so sure.
although i would love to have both in the team

Spinner · Post: # 715400Post **Spinner** » Mon 30 Mar 2009 1:52pm

Apparently Raph will be ok for Adelaide!

ausfatcat · Post: # 715404Post **ausfatcat** » Mon 30 Mar 2009 2:06pm

Spinner wrote:Apparently Raph will be ok for Adelaide!

http://www.saints.com.au/news/newsartic ... fault.aspx

bigcarl · Post: # 715540Post **bigcarl** » Mon 30 Mar 2009 6:17pm

ausfatcat wrote:
Spinner wrote:Apparently Raph will be ok for Adelaide!

http://www.saints.com.au/news/newsartic ... fault.aspx

that would be an unexpected bonus

st.byron · Post: # 715610Post **st.byron** » Mon 30 Mar 2009 8:24pm

stinger wrote:
got something right for once....

Keep count for me would you. I'm not bright enough to do it myself.

stinger · Post: # 715617Post **stinger** » Mon 30 Mar 2009 8:32pm

st.byron wrote:
stinger wrote:
got something right for once....
Keep count for me would you. I'm not bright enough to do it myself.

okay ...happy to help....

....that's two....

mightysainters · Tue 31 Mar 2009 12:14am

Posted the same thing 2 weeks ago only to be howled down for having it in for them. In reality their bodies are just not up to the rigours due to lack of Pre seasons in which have not seasoned their bodies, their niggling injuries are a constant set back, and unfortunately I don't think it will get any better, now I hope kosi can stay injury free as he showed somegreat signs after quater time

PJ · Post: # 716200Post PJ » Tue 31 Mar 2009 11:48pm

Apparently Raph will be ok for Adelaide!

Apparently not.

Lower back issues... or believe what you want.

Need him in the backline big time.

st.byron · Post: # 716357Post **st.byron** » Wed 01 Apr 2009 2:12pm

Raph not ok for Adelaide - out for three weeks. Bloody hell. The Clarke brothers are about as frustrating as they come.

From The Age

"LUCKLESS St Kilda defender Raphael Clarke has been sidelined with injury again after scans yesterday confirmed another hamstring strain that will keep him out of the side for three weeks.

The Saints had hoped that the injury, suffered in the third quarter of the game against Sydney on Saturday night, was a back-related problem that would not force him to miss games.

Scans yesterday confirmed that while the cause of the strain was tightness in the back, the effect was the same and Clarke, who had only just recovered from a hamstring injury, had suffered a new hamstring strain.

"Scans on his back showed it is definitely a back-related hamstring problem but he will still miss three weeks," Saints football manager Greg Hutchison said.

"It is a completely different injury to the hamstring he had just come back from.

"I don't think we need to change what we are doing. We are going to keep doing what we are doing with him, and it is just unfortunate he has some lower-back problem but it is not anything that will threaten his long-term future."

Captain Nick Riewoldt remains underdone for fitness, having played only one pre-season practice game, and while there was speculation when he left the ground on Saturday night that he had injured his hamstring, the club has confirmed he had only cramped in the calf.

The Saints are to welcome Lenny Hayes back into the side to meet the Crows in Adelaide on Friday night while full-back Max Hudghton may return sooner than the two to three weeks further he was expected to be missing."

SuperSaint · Post: # 716465Post **SuperSaint** » Wed 01 Apr 2009 7:24pm

OK had to add to this thread about the Clarke brothers. There is no denying their natural talent. Every Saints supporter want them to succeed and they are both very likeable clubmen however, the biggest reason for their inability to get their bodies right and their continual injuries is their attitude to preparation and training hard. They both do not work hard enough at pushing themselves and are too laid back and casual in their efforts. Watching Harvs and Lenny train and then watching these two was and still is 'chalk and cheese' in comparison. They both lack the desired intensity and mental toughness to get to the next level in their careers. Jimmy Bartel was picked after Xavier in the famous Hodge, Judd, Ball 2001 draft and Xavier (as well as his brother) unfortunately do not come close to him in determination, preparation and hardness, Ask his Geelong team-mates about his lone effort on the Kokoda Trail over the off season.

saintbrat · Post: # 716467Post **saintbrat** » Wed 01 Apr 2009 7:27pm

SuperSaint wrote:OK had to add to this thread about the Clarke brothers. There is no denying their natural talent. Every Saints supporter want them to succeed and they are both very likeable clubmen however, the biggest reason for their inability to get their bodies right and their continual injuries is their attitude to preparation and training hard. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .

and you've been to training every day to see this?

SuperSaint · Post: # 716468Post **SuperSaint** » Wed 01 Apr 2009 7:38pm

saintbrat wrote:
SuperSaint wrote:OK had to add to this thread about the Clarke brothers. There is no denying their natural talent. Every Saints supporter want them to succeed and they are both very likeable clubmen however, the biggest reason for their inability to get their bodies right and their continual injuries is their attitude to preparation and training hard. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .
and you've been to training every day to see this?

Saintbrat, don't need to be at training 'every day' to come to this conclusion.

Devilhead · Post: # 716469Post **Devilhead** » Wed 01 Apr 2009 7:43pm

The solution to the Clarke brothers is simple and effective

They need to grow big F*** off handlebar moustaches

saintbrat · Post: # 716472Post **saintbrat** » Wed 01 Apr 2009 7:49pm

SuperSaint wrote:
saintbrat wrote:
SuperSaint wrote:OK had to add to this thread about the Clarke brothers. There is no denying their natural talent. Every Saints supporter want them to succeed and they are both very likeable clubmen however, the biggest reason for their inability to get their bodies right and their continual injuries is their attitude to preparation and training hard. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .
and you've been to training every day to see this?
Saintbrat, don't need to be at training 'every day' to come to this conclusion.

so how do you know?
or is it just your 'assumption'.........

SuperSaint · Post: # 716478Post **SuperSaint** » Wed 01 Apr 2009 8:09pm

saintbrat wrote:
SuperSaint wrote:
saintbrat wrote:
SuperSaint wrote:OK had to add to this thread about the Clarke brothers. There is no denying their natural talent. Every Saints supporter want them to succeed and they are both very likeable clubmen however, the biggest reason for their inability to get their bodies right and their continual injuries is their attitude to preparation and training hard. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .
and you've been to training every day to see this?
Saintbrat, don't need to be at training 'every day' to come to this conclusion.
so how do you know?
or is it just your 'assumption'.........

I thought I made myself clear.......I have been exposed to enough training sessions (without being there 'every day' as you put it) to form my opinion and conclusion.

saintbrat · Post: # 716482Post **saintbrat** » Wed 01 Apr 2009 8:23pm

SuperSaint wrote:
saintbrat wrote:
SuperSaint wrote:
saintbrat wrote:
SuperSaint wrote:OK had to add to this thread about the Clarke brothers. There is no denying their natural talent. Every Saints supporter want them to succeed and they are both very likeable clubmen however, the biggest reason for their inability to get their bodies right and their continual injuries is their attitude to preparation and training hard. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .
and you've been to training every day to see this?
Saintbrat, don't need to be at training 'every day' to come to this conclusion.
so how do you know?
or is it just your 'assumption'.........
I thought I made myself clear.......I have been exposed to enough training sessions (without being there 'every day' as you put it) to form my opinion and conclusion.

I didn't notice that you said -' having been to training reguarlarly or on occasion...'
you just mentioned that you "don't need to be at training 'every day' to come to this conclusion." not that you had actually attended training

If you have been regularly then I guess youu may see more than those of us unable to go very often. and thus be able to draw the conclusion.

hence those of us who don't get very often wait impatiently for any news from training sessions.