Lyon Promises Exciting Footy

[Dr Spaceman]

did I miss any?

Oh my stars....

[markp]

did I miss any?

Wow.

Your obsession with me is truly disturbing.

I'm sorry, I thought this was a football forum... you know, for discussing football.

Perhaps old age is getting the better of you, is it past your nap time or are you drunk again?

Looks like the lynch-mob is out again.

[matrix]

i bet you one million flowers that.....you didnt miss anything

[rodgerfox]

Did do it last year.

It was exciting to watch our defence make the opposition turnover the ball and us score on the rebound.

Exciting to see Roo kick goal after goal.

Our forward defence wasn't as good this year and Riewoldt being out for 4 months didn't really help the scoring.

Do you remember the game before Riewoldt went down?

So the fix is to keep Roo fit?

Brilliant!! Ingenius!!!!

[joffaboy]

Did do it last year.

It was exciting to watch our defence make the opposition turnover the ball and us score on the rebound.

Exciting to see Roo kick goal after goal.

Our forward defence wasn't as good this year and Riewoldt being out for 4 months didn't really help the scoring.

Do you remember the game before Riewoldt went down?

So the fix is to keep Roo fit?

Brilliant!! Ingenius!!!!

Don't know if you agree or not but apparently it has been noted that Riewoldt is one of the better players in the League and one of the best forwards.

May have slipped past you but how was our attack in R2? You know the round before Riewoldt was injured? How many did we score and how many did Riewoldt kick?

As for you question, I thought it would be imperative to keep one of the best players in the League fit, however you question was why didn't we play exciting football last year. Last year was 2009 and we did play exciting attacking football, brought about by defence.

So apart from you silly sarcasm, you have attempted to retort to the wrong part of my answer.

As someone else said, your modis opperandi is well known, and I am just playing a straight bat to see how far you twist and distort the fact that you made an error in your first question.

[joffaboy]

did I miss any?

Wow.

Your obsession with me is truly disturbing.

I'm sorry, I thought this was a football forum... you know, for discussing football.

Perhaps old age is getting the better of you, is it past your nap time or are you drunk again?

Looks like the lynch-mob is out again.

Bully.

Moderators, please ban this poster for all eternity.

[rodgerfox]

Did do it last year.

It was exciting to watch our defence make the opposition turnover the ball and us score on the rebound.

Exciting to see Roo kick goal after goal.

Our forward defence wasn't as good this year and Riewoldt being out for 4 months didn't really help the scoring.

Do you remember the game before Riewoldt went down?

So the fix is to keep Roo fit?

Brilliant!! Ingenius!!!!

Don't know if you agree or not but apparently it has been noted that Riewoldt is one of the better players in the League and one of the best forwards.

May have slipped past you but how was our attack in R2? You know the round before Riewoldt was injured? How many did we score and how many did Riewoldt kick?

As for you question, I thought it would be imperative to keep one of the best players in the League fit, however you question was why didn't we play exciting football last year. Last year was 2009 and we did play exciting attacking football, brought about by defence.

So apart from you silly sarcasm, you have attempted to retort to the wrong part of my answer.

As someone else said, your modis opperandi is well known, and I am just playing a straight bat to see how far you twist and distort the fact that you made an error in your first question.

Our Finals Scores...
52
68
83
88

The Premier's Finals Scores....
108
68
120
124


Against the same opposition.


If that's what we call 'exciting' then god help us. If Lyon's answer to this is to just get an extra 2 goals from Roo each week, we're rooted.


If we're hanging our hats on a big score in R2, then we're even worse off than I thought.

[joffaboy]

Did do it last year.

It was exciting to watch our defence make the opposition turnover the ball and us score on the rebound.

Exciting to see Roo kick goal after goal.

Our forward defence wasn't as good this year and Riewoldt being out for 4 months didn't really help the scoring.

Do you remember the game before Riewoldt went down?

So the fix is to keep Roo fit?

Brilliant!! Ingenius!!!!

Don't know if you agree or not but apparently it has been noted that Riewoldt is one of the better players in the League and one of the best forwards.

May have slipped past you but how was our attack in R2? You know the round before Riewoldt was injured? How many did we score and how many did Riewoldt kick?

As for you question, I thought it would be imperative to keep one of the best players in the League fit, however you question was why didn't we play exciting football last year. Last year was 2009 and we did play exciting attacking football, brought about by defence.

So apart from you silly sarcasm, you have attempted to retort to the wrong part of my answer.

As someone else said, your modis opperandi is well known, and I am just playing a straight bat to see how far you twist and distort the fact that you made an error in your first question.

Our Finals Scores...
52
68
83
88

The Premier's Finals Scores....
108
68
120
124


Against the same opposition.


If that's what we call 'exciting' then god help us. If Lyon's answer to this is to just get an extra 2 goals from Roo each week, we're rooted.


If we're hanging our hats on a big score in R2, then we're even worse off than I thought.

Now you are changing it to finals only???????

Are we just specifically talking about finals.

Talk about goalpost changing

[plugger66]

Did do it last year.

It was exciting to watch our defence make the opposition turnover the ball and us score on the rebound.

Exciting to see Roo kick goal after goal.

Our forward defence wasn't as good this year and Riewoldt being out for 4 months didn't really help the scoring.

Do you remember the game before Riewoldt went down?

So the fix is to keep Roo fit?

Brilliant!! Ingenius!!!!

Don't know if you agree or not but apparently it has been noted that Riewoldt is one of the better players in the League and one of the best forwards.

May have slipped past you but how was our attack in R2? You know the round before Riewoldt was injured? How many did we score and how many did Riewoldt kick?

As for you question, I thought it would be imperative to keep one of the best players in the League fit, however you question was why didn't we play exciting football last year. Last year was 2009 and we did play exciting attacking football, brought about by defence.

So apart from you silly sarcasm, you have attempted to retort to the wrong part of my answer.

As someone else said, your modis opperandi is well known, and I am just playing a straight bat to see how far you twist and distort the fact that you made an error in your first question.

Our Finals Scores...
52
68
83
88

The Premier's Finals Scores....
108
68
120
124


Against the same opposition.


If that's what we call 'exciting' then god help us. If Lyon's answer to this is to just get an extra 2 goals from Roo each week, we're rooted.


If we're hanging our hats on a big score in R2, then we're even worse off than I thought.

Didnt you say 2 goals a game would have won us to GF's. Surely that is exciting enough. You are very strange indeed.

[rodgerfox]

Did do it last year.

It was exciting to watch our defence make the opposition turnover the ball and us score on the rebound.

Exciting to see Roo kick goal after goal.

Our forward defence wasn't as good this year and Riewoldt being out for 4 months didn't really help the scoring.

Do you remember the game before Riewoldt went down?

So the fix is to keep Roo fit?

Brilliant!! Ingenius!!!!

Don't know if you agree or not but apparently it has been noted that Riewoldt is one of the better players in the League and one of the best forwards.

May have slipped past you but how was our attack in R2? You know the round before Riewoldt was injured? How many did we score and how many did Riewoldt kick?

As for you question, I thought it would be imperative to keep one of the best players in the League fit, however you question was why didn't we play exciting football last year. Last year was 2009 and we did play exciting attacking football, brought about by defence.

So apart from you silly sarcasm, you have attempted to retort to the wrong part of my answer.

As someone else said, your modis opperandi is well known, and I am just playing a straight bat to see how far you twist and distort the fact that you made an error in your first question.

Our Finals Scores...
52
68
83
88

The Premier's Finals Scores....
108
68
120
124


Against the same opposition.


If that's what we call 'exciting' then god help us. If Lyon's answer to this is to just get an extra 2 goals from Roo each week, we're rooted.


If we're hanging our hats on a big score in R2, then we're even worse off than I thought.

Now you are changing it to finals only???????

Are we just specifically talking about finals.

Talk about goalpost changing

I'm using finals as an example.

A far more appropriate example than a R2 win over a lowly opponent, I would have thought.

Kicking an extra 2 goals every week in the H&A season doesn't mean shiit. Even if it gets you a spot or two higher on the ladder, if you can't perform in the finals then it doesn't matter.


And Riewoldt was fit in the finals. So if the strategy is to keep him fit and kick an extra 2 goals because of this, then I'd hate to see what we dish up next September if he isn't fit!

[rodgerfox]

Did do it last year.

It was exciting to watch our defence make the opposition turnover the ball and us score on the rebound.

Exciting to see Roo kick goal after goal.

Our forward defence wasn't as good this year and Riewoldt being out for 4 months didn't really help the scoring.

Do you remember the game before Riewoldt went down?

So the fix is to keep Roo fit?

Brilliant!! Ingenius!!!!

Don't know if you agree or not but apparently it has been noted that Riewoldt is one of the better players in the League and one of the best forwards.

May have slipped past you but how was our attack in R2? You know the round before Riewoldt was injured? How many did we score and how many did Riewoldt kick?

As for you question, I thought it would be imperative to keep one of the best players in the League fit, however you question was why didn't we play exciting football last year. Last year was 2009 and we did play exciting attacking football, brought about by defence.

So apart from you silly sarcasm, you have attempted to retort to the wrong part of my answer.

As someone else said, your modis opperandi is well known, and I am just playing a straight bat to see how far you twist and distort the fact that you made an error in your first question.

Our Finals Scores...
52
68
83
88

The Premier's Finals Scores....
108
68
120
124


Against the same opposition.


If that's what we call 'exciting' then god help us. If Lyon's answer to this is to just get an extra 2 goals from Roo each week, we're rooted.


If we're hanging our hats on a big score in R2, then we're even worse off than I thought.

Didnt you say 2 goals a game would have won us to GF's. Surely that is exciting enough. You are very strange indeed.

??

Can you please elaborate?

Not sure what you're referring to, what your question is, or what the context is.

[plugger66]

Did do it last year.

It was exciting to watch our defence make the opposition turnover the ball and us score on the rebound.

Exciting to see Roo kick goal after goal.

Our forward defence wasn't as good this year and Riewoldt being out for 4 months didn't really help the scoring.

Do you remember the game before Riewoldt went down?

So the fix is to keep Roo fit?

Brilliant!! Ingenius!!!!

Don't know if you agree or not but apparently it has been noted that Riewoldt is one of the better players in the League and one of the best forwards.

May have slipped past you but how was our attack in R2? You know the round before Riewoldt was injured? How many did we score and how many did Riewoldt kick?

As for you question, I thought it would be imperative to keep one of the best players in the League fit, however you question was why didn't we play exciting football last year. Last year was 2009 and we did play exciting attacking football, brought about by defence.

So apart from you silly sarcasm, you have attempted to retort to the wrong part of my answer.

As someone else said, your modis opperandi is well known, and I am just playing a straight bat to see how far you twist and distort the fact that you made an error in your first question.

Our Finals Scores...
52
68
83
88

The Premier's Finals Scores....
108
68
120
124


Against the same opposition.


If that's what we call 'exciting' then god help us. If Lyon's answer to this is to just get an extra 2 goals from Roo each week, we're rooted.


If we're hanging our hats on a big score in R2, then we're even worse off than I thought.

Didnt you say 2 goals a game would have won us to GF's. Surely that is exciting enough. You are very strange indeed.

??

Can you please elaborate?

Not sure what you're referring to, what your question is, or what the context is.

Pretty simploe really. I was referring to what you said previously that an extra 2 goals would have won us 2 GF"s and now you are saying if the answer is an extra 2 goals then we are rooted. Is that to hard to understand. Surely even you get it.

So my question is why isnt 2 extra goals enough when we would have won the last 2 GF's. Get it. Have got that. Do understand. Comprehend.

[SainterK]

Need to get the footy inside 50 more, then the scoring will come.

Things that will help this.

A fit Gram.

A Gamble type as a stay at home forward, so when guys like Joey and Peake get the ball and run it down the wing, there is actually someone near the goals to kick it to.

Guys like Joey and Peake (and Dal) actually taking it upon themselves to run the ball inside 50 and kick a goal themselves.

Schneider playing in the midfield more often, with the side benefiting from his creativity in setting up goals more often.

A Gilbert or Stanley type preventing opposition running backmen toying with our talls.

[saintsRrising]

Need to get the footy inside 50 more, then the scoring will come.

.

Afraid not.

Part of our problem in 2010 was what we did one we entered the 50.

ie

In 2009 Mini was a sure path to goal either in scoring himself, or setting up goals. In 2010 if he got the ball he often could not work it well due to how other teams where setting up against us.

Or in 2010, we often got the ball to Kosi., But he was not clunking the ball like he used to...with the oposition then hurting us with rebound.


Just getting the ball into our 50 more often is not enough. It is a good start, but not enough.

[rodgerfox]

Pretty simploe really. I was referring to what you said previously that an extra 2 goals would have won us 2 GF"s and now you are saying if the answer is an extra 2 goals then we are rooted. Is that to hard to understand. Surely even you get it.

That's not what I was saying at all.

I was saying if we're merely hoping that Roo's fitness will give us the 2 extra goals we need - then we're rooted.

I made that pretty clear.

[SainterK]

I agree sRs...however you are looking at the first line of my post in isolation.

[plugger66]

Pretty simploe really. I was referring to what you said previously that an extra 2 goals would have won us 2 GF"s and now you are saying if the answer is an extra 2 goals then we are rooted. Is that to hard to understand. Surely even you get it.

That's not what I was saying at all.

I was saying if we're merely hoping that Roo's fitness will give us the 2 extra goals we need - then we're rooted.

I made that pretty clear.

But apart from you, who said RL was trying to get Rooy to kick 2 extra goals? It seems as if it was just made up by you.

[joffaboy]

Pretty simploe really. I was referring to what you said previously that an extra 2 goals would have won us 2 GF"s and now you are saying if the answer is an extra 2 goals then we are rooted. Is that to hard to understand. Surely even you get it.

That's not what I was saying at all.

I was saying if we're merely hoping that Roo's fitness will give us the 2 extra goals we need - then we're rooted.

I made that pretty clear.

But apart from you, who said RL was trying to get Rooy to kick 2 extra goals? It seems as if it was just made up by you.

No, he just went off on a tangent.

he first asked a question of why didn't the Saints play exciting fotball last year.

I commented that last year was 2009 and they did play attacking football winning 19 straight, which was pretty bloody exciting.

I then said that it dropped off this year because arguably the best player in the league was out of our attack for four months, however i reminded him that we scored 24 goals with Roo kicking 7 the week before he was injured.

RF extrapolated from that answer that RL was relying on Riewoldt to stay fit to kick the extra two goals which was never once stated either by Lyon in the article of by myself in the response to RF's original question.

RF is trying to compare an explanation of the past two season to what Lyon will do in the future by pure assumption with no critical analysis of what has been posted.

So yes you are correct, he is making it up.

[PJ]

I was saying if we're merely hoping that Roo's fitness will give us the 2 extra goals we need - then we're rooted.

That's not what you said.

If Lyon's answer to this is to just get an extra 2 goals from Roo each week, we're rooted.

This is the reality with your little anti-lyon twist. Nice try

[Spinner]

I was saying if we're merely hoping that Roo's fitness will give us the 2 extra goals we need - then we're rooted.

That's not what you said.

If Lyon's answer to this is to just get an extra 2 goals from Roo each week, we're rooted.

This is the reality with your little anti-lyon twist. Nice try

Exactly.

Serious RF, just ask for Lyon to be sacked. Because thats what you want.

Go and hire another coach. Maybe GT needs a nice profitable job atm.

[Mr Magic]

I was saying if we're merely hoping that Roo's fitness will give us the 2 extra goals we need - then we're rooted.

That's not what you said.

If Lyon's answer to this is to just get an extra 2 goals from Roo each week, we're rooted.

This is the reality with your little anti-lyon twist. Nice try

Exactly.

Serious RF, just ask for Lyon to be sacked. Because thats what you want.

Go and hire another coach. Maybe GT needs a nice profitable job atm.

Don't misrepresent him Spinner!

He doesn't want Lyon sacked.
Afterall, if Lyon was sacked, he wouldn't have anybody to run his agenda against on here.

rodger 'knew' within 3 months of Lyon being appointed that Lyon was no good as our coach. (I suppose I'll have todrag out the quote again when yrodger denies it with mock indignation)

Just like the sun rises in the east every morning, you can bet it won't be long before rodger drums up some new (and sometimes even novel) way of banging on about his hobby horse.

[Wrote for Luck]

Need to get the footy inside 50 more, then the scoring will come.

.

Afraid not.

Part of our problem in 2010 was what we did one we entered the 50.

ie

In 2009 Mini was a sure path to goal either in scoring himself, or setting up goals. In 2010 if he got the ball he often could not work it well due to how other teams where setting up against us.

Or in 2010, we often got the ball to Kosi., But he was not clunking the ball like he used to...with the oposition then hurting us with rebound.


Just getting the ball into our 50 more often is not enough. It is a good start, but not enough.

Tend to agree with both. And feel the Kosi/Mini factor was the inside 50 issue, rather than delivery. But feel the delivery was stifled also.

Really don't think we need to re-invent the wheel. More improve and develop. New face or two, and a couple of new ideas.

Big change will probably come more from the new coaches rather than players.

Noone was going to get close to collingwood last year (finals). We did pretty well in a competitive sense. Obviously GF2 was a write off.

[rodgerfox]

Pretty simploe really. I was referring to what you said previously that an extra 2 goals would have won us 2 GF"s and now you are saying if the answer is an extra 2 goals then we are rooted. Is that to hard to understand. Surely even you get it.

That's not what I was saying at all.

I was saying if we're merely hoping that Roo's fitness will give us the 2 extra goals we need - then we're rooted.

I made that pretty clear.

But apart from you, who said RL was trying to get Rooy to kick 2 extra goals? It seems as if it was just made up by you.

I didn't say it.

I've asked the question.



The response suggested that missing Roo for a chunk of 2010 was the difference between our scoring in 09 and 10.
Therefore, I sought clarification as to whether or not that was the solution - to keep Roo fit.

As I said, if it is, we're rooted.



And back to my previous question, why didn't we 'promise exciting footy' last year? Or in 2009?

Why have we decided to do this now?

[rodgerfox]

I was saying if we're merely hoping that Roo's fitness will give us the 2 extra goals we need - then we're rooted.

That's not what you said.

If Lyon's answer to this is to just get an extra 2 goals from Roo each week, we're rooted.

This is the reality with your little anti-lyon twist. Nice try

Exactly.

Serious RF, just ask for Lyon to be sacked. Because thats what you want.

Go and hire another coach. Maybe GT needs a nice profitable job atm.

I don't want Lyon sacked. I've never said he should be sacked.


And re the quote above by whoever that brain surgeon was, I can't see any difference whatsoever between the two statements.

[bob__71]

I would add some thoughts, but apparently that would be joining the mob and being a bully.