Tom Lee

This unofficial St Kilda Saints fan forum is for people of all ages to chat Saints Footy and all posts must be respectful.

Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators

saynta
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 23068
Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
Has thanked: 9001 times
Been thanked: 3913 times

Re: Tom Lee

Post: # 1623509Post saynta »

Impatient Sainter wrote:Looked like he was playing injured - trying to save his career. Roberton & Gilbert were no better.

You are joking arent you. They were so much better, they werentl even on the same planet
Having said that they werent greatl. Just goes to show how poor Lee was.
My heart sank when Lee was selected.


User avatar
skeptic
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 16965
Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 7:10pm
Has thanked: 3612 times
Been thanked: 2885 times

Re: Tom Lee

Post: # 1623515Post skeptic »

saynta wrote:
Impatient Sainter wrote:Looked like he was playing injured - trying to save his career. Roberton & Gilbert were no better.

You are joking arent you. They were so much better, they werentl even on the same planet
Having said that they werent greatl. Just goes to show how poor Lee was.
My heart sank when Lee was selected.

What a wonderful thing to say about a player that pulls on our jumper


gone fission
Club Player
Posts: 67
Joined: Sun 10 Apr 2016 4:14pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Tom Lee

Post: # 1623520Post gone fission »

saynta wrote:My heart sank when Lee was selected.
This is just a putrid attitude towards one of our players.

He may well not make it, but this loss certainly wasn't his fault.

So poor to bag a player like Lee after this pathetic effort from the club.


User avatar
Wayne42
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 4911
Joined: Mon 24 Jun 2013 10:27pm
Has thanked: 619 times
Been thanked: 558 times

Re: Tom Lee

Post: # 1623523Post Wayne42 »

gone fission wrote:
saynta wrote:My heart sank when Lee was selected.
This is just a putrid attitude towards one of our players.

He may well not make it, but this loss certainly wasn't his fault.

So poor to bag a player like Lee after this pathetic effort from the club.
Despite the way saynta worded it, Lee is a list clogger.


The Saints are under review, will it make any difference to the underachievers ?
saynta
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 23068
Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
Has thanked: 9001 times
Been thanked: 3913 times

Re: Tom Lee

Post: # 1623525Post saynta »

gone fission wrote:
saynta wrote:My heart sank when Lee was selected.
This is just a putrid attitude towards one of our players.


He may well not make it, but this loss certainly wasn't his fault.

So poor to bag a player like Lee after this pathetic effort from the club.

Yep it was a pathetic effort by a lot of players.

Lee was simply the worst.

I am at a loss to explain his selection after his poor performance against the blues.

Hopefully i have seen the last of him in the firsts.

He is a good VFL footballer, but that is his limit.

You wont get an apology from me for holding such views.


saynta
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 23068
Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
Has thanked: 9001 times
Been thanked: 3913 times

Re: Tom Lee

Post: # 1623526Post saynta »

Wayne42 wrote:
gone fission wrote:
saynta wrote:My heart sank when Lee was selected.
This is just a putrid attitude towards one of our players.

He may well not make it, but this loss certainly wasn't his fault.

So poor to bag a player like Lee after this pathetic effort from the club.
Despite the way saynta worded it, Lee is a list clogger.
That is now plain for every one to see.

Sad but true.


User avatar
skeptic
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 16965
Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 7:10pm
Has thanked: 3612 times
Been thanked: 2885 times

Re: Tom Lee

Post: # 1623528Post skeptic »

Every time a Saints player is picked... Even ones I don't personally rate, I hope they do well and I hope they prove me wrong.

My heart doesn't "sink" when someone gets given a chance.
I have nothing against criticising a bad performance, but I support my team.

That is just vicious


wally
Club Player
Posts: 817
Joined: Fri 16 Sep 2011 8:23am
Location: brisy
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 103 times

Re: Tom Lee

Post: # 1623540Post wally »

So who would be selected in his place to play on a 200cm forward?
I was there at ground level all of our backline were undersized


saynta
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 23068
Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
Has thanked: 9001 times
Been thanked: 3913 times

Re: Tom Lee

Post: # 1623542Post saynta »

wally wrote:So who would be selected in his place to play on a 200cm forward?
I was there at ground level all of our backline were undersized

I would have played Pierce.

He would have given Hickey a chop out in the ruck and also it would have allowed one of the ruckmen to drop back and help the defenders.

At least Pierce has potential at AFL level. Lee doesn't.

Not his fault he is not up to it.


User avatar
skeptic
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 16965
Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 7:10pm
Has thanked: 3612 times
Been thanked: 2885 times

Re: Tom Lee

Post: # 1623553Post skeptic »

saynta wrote:
wally wrote:So who would be selected in his place to play on a 200cm forward?
I was there at ground level all of our backline were undersized

I would have played Pierce.

He would have given Hickey a chop out in the ruck and also it would have allowed one of the ruckmen to drop back and help the defenders.

At least Pierce has potential at AFL level. Lee doesn't.

Not his fault he is not up to it.
Obviously the coaches think he at least has potential as he's gotten 4 games this year and previously had a contract extension.

Whichever way you try to dress it down now, to actually groan when a player is selected suggests that you hope they don't get the chance to prove themselves... A contrasting view to the club that at least gives him a shot when his form warrants it

Personally I think that is a terrible attitude from a so called supporter


To the top
SS Life Member
Posts: 3266
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2007 4:05pm
Been thanked: 390 times

Re: Tom Lee

Post: # 1623557Post To the top »

So someone suggests that we should have selected Pierce to assist our defence, which, as someone noted was out-sized and out-sized significantly.

That reminds me of the Thomas selection to include Brooks v Port Adelaide because Port Adelaide had a number of tall forward options - and asked Brooks to play as a defender where he had no experience.

That was a disaster both for the Club and the player.

We went out and recruited Carlisle for a reason - and drafted Goddard for a reason.

What references to our back-line being under pressure confirms is the importance Fisher is to this side and what (at 191cm) he brings to the table.

You have to get your match ups correct and absent Fisher, Dempster, Carlisle and Goddard that was always going to be a problem.

So we had Delaney and Lee carrying the load.

As I commented earlier, the question is can Lee hold a position in this side in the longer term (2018 onward and post Fisher because I would hope Fisher goes on in 2017) COMPLIMENTING Carlisle and Goddard?


User avatar
Impatient Sainter
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 4089
Joined: Tue 05 Apr 2016 3:30pm
Has thanked: 2622 times
Been thanked: 1078 times

Re: Tom Lee

Post: # 1623560Post Impatient Sainter »

I think we all now know that Tom Lee wont be at the club next year - just another player to make not it in the Saints litany of failures.


saintspremiers
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 25303
Joined: Tue 01 Feb 2005 4:25pm
Location: Trump Tower
Has thanked: 142 times
Been thanked: 284 times

Re: Tom Lee

Post: # 1623563Post saintspremiers »

saintkid wrote:Lee is a nice bloke who has tried hard and it's not his fault that our recruiters at the time were either blinded or under the influence of something to swap such a high draft pick for him. A very poor choice. There were never any quality highlights of him remotely justifying his worth.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/s ... 6490784785

So we get picks 24 and 43 in return for losing pick 12 for Pammy.

I had forgotten or wasn't aware the Crows drafted him in 2008!


i am Melbourne Skies - sometimes Blue Skies, Grey Skies, even Partly Cloudy Skies.
Tom_Sainter
Club Player
Posts: 635
Joined: Sun 14 Mar 2004 6:08pm

Re: Tom Lee

Post: # 1623575Post Tom_Sainter »

Was not our worst and think he has a future at the club. I would take him over Delaney every day of the week


User avatar
Con Gorozidis
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 23532
Joined: Thu 19 Jun 2008 4:04pm
Has thanked: 100 times
Been thanked: 78 times

Re: Tom Lee

Post: # 1623579Post Con Gorozidis »

Lee easily has enough raw talent. I dont know him personally and I may well be wrong but my opinion has always been that judging by his body shape - this is a bloke who doesnt take his physical training seriously enough. He has been in the AFL system for 5 years + and his body shape hasnt changed. This makes me suspicious.
I suspect he has a comfortable middle class life in Perth and is happy to play WAFL and be a local gun player rather than power up to AFL standard.

When he gets to 40 he will say to his mates - gee I wish I had trained harder when I had the chance. Or maybe he just wont give a sh*t.


To the top
SS Life Member
Posts: 3266
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2007 4:05pm
Been thanked: 390 times

Re: Tom Lee

Post: # 1623613Post To the top »

"his body shape has not changed"

!!!!!


BigMart
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 13622
Joined: Sat 22 Mar 2008 6:06pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Tom Lee

Post: # 1623614Post BigMart »

Tom Lee is just not big enough to play KPP

Not agile enough to play as a medium

He, unless he gets a perfect match up is not effective. Is a very good State League player with no scope.

194cm (query that) and 91kg
how does that even get considered against 203cm and 100kg (Wright) 199cm 98kg (Lynch) 197cm 96kg (Day)????

He is a similar size to Roberton, Gilbert, Dempster without their ability to play smaller


User avatar
shrodes
SS Life Member
Posts: 3088
Joined: Tue 12 Aug 2014 2:34pm
Location: Melbourne
Has thanked: 790 times
Been thanked: 435 times

Re: Tom Lee

Post: # 1623615Post shrodes »

BigMart wrote:194cm (query that) and 91kg
how does that even get considered against 203cm and 100kg (Wright) 199cm 98kg (Lynch) 197cm 96kg (Day)????

He is a similar size to Roberton, Gilbert, Dempster without their ability to play smaller
To be fair to the selectors, who else was there to pick? Bruce at 197cm and 97kg is really the only other player we could have swung down back at cost of having basically no forward options.

And if you say Coughlan at 195 / 83, he hasn't played an AFL game and would surely be out of depth weight wise?


saintbob
SS Life Member
Posts: 3619
Joined: Wed 21 May 2008 8:51pm
Location: Tassie
Has thanked: 486 times
Been thanked: 315 times

Re: Tom Lee

Post: # 1623628Post saintbob »

shrodes wrote:
BigMart wrote:194cm (query that) and 91kg
how does that even get considered against 203cm and 100kg (Wright) 199cm 98kg (Lynch) 197cm 96kg (Day)????

He is a similar size to Roberton, Gilbert, Dempster without their ability to play smaller
To be fair to the selectors, who else was there to pick? Bruce at 197cm and 97kg is really the only other player we could have swung down back at cost of having basically no forward options.

And if you say Coughlan at 195 / 83, he hasn't played an AFL game and would surely be out of depth weight wise?

I'd rather put time and effort into Coughlan, than DudLee who lays down after every contest like he has broken something!!!


cwrcyn
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 4284
Joined: Fri 15 Sep 2006 10:35am
Location: earth
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 1415 times

Re: Tom Lee

Post: # 1623632Post cwrcyn »

As for someone suggesting Lee doesn't train hard enough, he would already have been delisted if that were the case. Since drafted with us he's had two shoulder reconstructions and an ankle reconstruction. He's now carrying a knee issue as well. Some guys just never get a clear run at it. We expect theses players to be superhuman and not get affected by injuries. Some players are just beasts who have the strength and constitution to bounce back quickly. It's not just a mental thing. Do you reckon Lee wanted all these injuries? he just wants to play AFL like everyone else. People are judging him harshly because the the draft selection we used on him. Not his fault. Remember, Adelaide selected him at, what, pick 58? That was probably his true value. Watters and Pelchen were responsible for our selection of Lee at the price we paid for him.

Give Tom Lee a break...he sure deserves one.


Jacks Back
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 6594
Joined: Sat 11 Jun 2011 4:52pm
Location: Here
Has thanked: 1296 times
Been thanked: 465 times

Re: Tom Lee

Post: # 1623633Post Jacks Back »

I was a supporter of playing Lee in the ones but - no longer!

He is too short for a kpp, two slow anywhere on the ground, can't kick as good as his reputation seems to think he can, falls over too much, too injury prone. Delist at end of season and no more senior games, thanks!


As ex-president Peter Summers said:
“If we are going to be a contender, we may as well plan to win the bloody thing.”


St Kilda - At least we have a Crest!
loris
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 4639
Joined: Tue 22 Jan 2008 5:41pm
Has thanked: 410 times
Been thanked: 495 times

Re: Tom Lee

Post: # 1623636Post loris »

cwrcyn wrote:As for someone suggesting Lee doesn't train hard enough, he would already have been delisted if that were the case. Since drafted with us he's had two shoulder reconstructions and an ankle reconstruction. He's now carrying a knee issue as well. Some guys just never get a clear run at it. We expect theses players to be superhuman and not get affected by injuries. Some players are just beasts who have the strength and constitution to bounce back quickly. It's not just a mental thing. Do you reckon Lee wanted all these injuries? he just wants to play AFL like everyone else. People are judging him harshly because the the draft selection we used on him. Not his fault. Remember, Adelaide selected him at, what, pick 58? That was probably his true value. Watters and Pelchen were responsible for our selection of Lee at the price we paid for him.

Give Tom Lee a break...he sure deserves one.
+1

Tho' I cant support your last sentence 'cwrcyn'. - please no more breaks for Lee, think his body has been punished enough :wink: :wink:


saynta
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 23068
Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
Has thanked: 9001 times
Been thanked: 3913 times

Re: Tom Lee

Post: # 1623639Post saynta »

To the top wrote:So someone suggests that we should have selected Pierce to assist our defence, which, as someone noted was out-sized and out-sized significantly.

That reminds me of the Thomas selection to include Brooks v Port Adelaide because Port Adelaide had a number of tall forward options - and asked Brooks to play as a defender where he had no experience.

That was a disaster both for the Club and the player.

We went out and recruited Carlisle for a reason - and drafted Goddard for a reason.

What references to our back-line being under pressure confirms is the importance Fisher is to this side and what (at 191cm) he brings to the table.

You have to get your match ups correct and absent Fisher, Dempster, Carlisle and Goddard that was always going to be a problem.

So we had Delaney and Lee carrying the load.

As I commented earlier, the question is can Lee hold a position in this side in the longer term (2018 onward and post Fisher because I would hope Fisher goes on in 2017) COMPLIMENTING Carlisle and Goddard?
Not what i said at all.


saynta
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 23068
Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
Has thanked: 9001 times
Been thanked: 3913 times

Re: Tom Lee

Post: # 1623640Post saynta »

Tom_Sainter wrote:Was not our worst and think he has a future at the club. I would take him over Delaney every day of the week
Who was worse?


saynta
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 23068
Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
Has thanked: 9001 times
Been thanked: 3913 times

Re: Tom Lee

Post: # 1623641Post saynta »

Jacks Back wrote:I was a supporter of playing Lee in the ones but - no longer!

He is too short for a kpp, two slow anywhere on the ground, can't kick as good as his reputation seems to think he can, falls over too much, too injury prone. Delist at end of season and no more senior games, thanks!

plus one.


Post Reply