Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
Old Mate wrote:Cox....McEvoy
Hickey....Natinui
Stanley....Kennedy
Riewoldt....Darling
Lee....Lynch
Darling and Nat are better below their knees than most smalls. None of our bigs are particularly good at ground level. Even playing a third tall hurts us defensively, but Watters seems to prefer three talls. I wouldn't expect any more than that. We have a much better group of smalls anyway.
I'd expect Roo and Stanley to be two of the three, if healthy. The only reason I have Kosi in the other spot is seniority. I'd hardly be gutted if Hickey, Lee or even Wilkes beat him out during the NAB.
True Believer wrote:Simpkin Rodda Geary
Gwilt Fisher Dempster
Gilbert Armitage Dalsanto
Sippos Reiwoldt Schneider
Lee Stanley Saad
Mcevoy Hayes Steven
Hickey Ledger Ross Milera
. This will be the side of the future. By years end. TLD instead of milera maybe
Old Mate wrote:Cox....McEvoy
Hickey....Natinui
Stanley....Kennedy
Riewoldt....Darling
Lee....Lynch
Darling and Nat are better below their knees than most smalls. None of our bigs are particularly good at ground level. Even playing a third tall hurts us defensively, but Watters seems to prefer three talls. I wouldn't expect any more than that. We have a much better group of smalls anyway.
I'd expect Roo and Stanley to be two of the three, if healthy. The only reason I have Kosi in the other spot is seniority. I'd hardly be gutted if Hickey, Lee or even Wilkes beat him out during the NAB.
I believe Lee gives us the versatility to play an extra tall. At 194cms he looks like a KPP but has the agility to play as the medium-tall / third tall forward. Whereas playing Kosi or someone similar limits structure.
mad saint guy wrote:It's very tough to predict who will get the first crack at seniors, with plenty of regulars departing or losing their spot and lots of new recruits and kids pushing for selection.
Foll: McEvoy, Dal Santo, Steven
Int: Armitage, Gilbert, ***, ***
And the competition for the last spots (my preferred picks in bold)
Competing for two defensive spots: Gwilt, Simpkin, Blake, New Recruit
Competing for one tall forward/ruck relief spot: Kosi, Wilkes, Lee, Hickey
Competing for three midfield/bench spots: Ray, Newnes, Ledger, Dunell, Ross, Milera, TDL, Jones, Curren
How does Siposs, who played a handful of games in the backline become a lock over Gwilt and Simpkin?
I concede, not a lot of run out of defence and this is where we may miss Gram and Raph. I've put the two new boys in there. I presume they are ready to go. Neither is a complete novice.
I think a five-man forward line and seven-man defence. One of Ross's old tricks, but he took it to ridiculous extremes, effectively having a 17 or 16-man defence. Mac would be very good in that role since he reads the play so well.
Last edited by bigcarl on Thu 01 Nov 2012 11:35pm, edited 1 time in total.
True Believer wrote:Simpkin Rodda Geary
Gwilt Fisher Dempster
Gilbert Armitage Dalsanto
Sippos Reiwoldt Schneider
Lee Stanley Saad
Mcevoy Hayes Steven
Hickey Ledger Ross Milera
. This will be the side of the future. By years end. TLD instead of milera maybe
YEP - I'm a regular Nostradamus........
The heavy metal artist formerly known as True Believer!
IF you look around the room and can't identify who the sucker is, then it's probably you!
Old Mate wrote:I believe Lee gives us the versatility to play an extra tall.
Against an AFL defence? I'd like to see Lee do something against a top level team before declaring him a game-changer. Chasing down WAFL defenders is different from the elite. I don't even know if he's chased down any of them. I have real doubts that he'll be effective enough at ground level to be more useful than one of our smalls. Milne and Saad are locks. Schneider and Siposs will play somewhere. Milera probably will too and they may want to squeeze Dennis-Lane in if they can. I don't see the point of an extra tall.
Old Mate wrote:I believe Lee gives us the versatility to play an extra tall.
Against an AFL defence? I'd like to see Lee do something against a top level team before declaring him a game-changer. Chasing down WAFL defenders is different from the elite. I don't even know if he's chased down any of them. I have real doubts that he'll be effective enough at ground level to be more useful than one of our smalls. Milne and Saad are locks. Schneider and Siposs will play somewhere. Milera probably will too and they may want to squeeze Dennis-Lane in if they can. I don't see the point of an extra tall.
A game-changer? I didn't say that. I've seen/read/heard enough of Lee which suggests at this point in his career he plays more as a medium-tall than pure tall and has 10x the agility as Kosi, who was one of our three tall's regularly played at the same time in the 2012 season. Given that I believe Lee plays medium-tall and certainly has the agility to do so, I think it will give us more flexibility to play an extra tall, however depending on who we are playing, which goes without saying.
Anyway, I'm just playing devils advocate cos some have stated that there is no chance our 22 will have 2 rucks/3 tall forwards. I've brought up the fact that two successful teams in the Swans and Eagles regularly played with that structure to good effect. The reason they did is cos they have some agile big guys. Eagles with Natanui and Darling and the Swans with Goodes. Lee looks incredibly agile as well, that's what I'm trying to get across.
Old Mate wrote:Swans also did alright playing 2 rucks / 3 tall forwards. They went into the GF with Mummy and Pyke as rucks and Goodes, Reid and LRT up forward.
Goodes is a midfielder playing forward. We have no one like him so they really had Mumford, Reid, who is very mobile, and LRT as their tall forwards. 3 is plenty and that is where our problem is with a recting ruckman. He really needs to be a forward first and ruck second. For example Stanley.
I concede, not a lot of run out of defence and this is where we may miss Gram and Raph. I've put the two new boys in there. I presume they are ready to go. Neither is a complete novice.
I think a five-man forward line and seven-man defence. One of Ross's old tricks, but he took it to ridiculous extremes, effectively having a 17 or 16-man defence. Mac would be very good in that role since he reads the play so well.
Ray goes from struggling to get a game and looking to be getting traded, to relegating Gwilt to the reserves?
Last edited by saintjake on Fri 02 Nov 2012 9:44am, edited 1 time in total.
I concede, not a lot of run out of defence and this is where we may miss Gram and Raph. I've put the two new boys in there. I presume they are ready to go. Neither is a complete novice.
I think a five-man forward line and seven-man defence. One of Ross's old tricks, but he took it to ridiculous extremes, effectively having a 17 or 16-man defence. Mac would be very good in that role since he reads the play so well.
BC tell us you are joking. A ruckman as the spare man. Never. That was Fishers job. If he cant do it then we need to find someone similar. Also you cant have ruckmen on the bench these days due to only being 3 of them. And you could never have a ruckman as the sub.
I concede, not a lot of run out of defence and this is where we may miss Gram and Raph. I've put the two new boys in there. I presume they are ready to go. Neither is a complete novice.
I think a five-man forward line and seven-man defence. One of Ross's old tricks, but he took it to ridiculous extremes, effectively having a 17 or 16-man defence. Mac would be very good in that role since he reads the play so well.
BC tell us you are joking. A ruckman as the spare man. Never. That was Fishers job. If he cant do it then we need to find someone similar. Also you cant have ruckmen on the bench these days due to only being 3 of them. And you could never have a ruckman as the sub.
Plugger, please give us all the benefit of your enormous wisdom and name your side ... so we can ALL ridicule it.
SW doesn't coach that way and that is why BJ struggled under him. He's very attacking. You need to get the right type of player free and not a ruckman. We get a player free = opposition have a player free. We would get cut to shreds.
Holder of unacceptable views and other thought crimes.
Our midget-sized backline is very vulnerable against big forwards. We were got hold of a number of times last season and this would be an attempt to stop the bleeding.
Also, there's nothing to say that the spare player in defence must be a running type. It's an acceptable and used to be a common tactic to place a ruckman in the hole in front of a gun forward. A ruckman floating across half back, particularly late in games, can be unpassable.
So what I suggested isn't really that radical. Just an attempt to tighten up what was a leaky ship last season, which I believe was the difference between us playing finals and missing out.
So who guards the opposition ruckman going down there to expolit our weakness? Macca should have the nouse to know when to go down there in the first place.
Getting spare men free is a very defensive mindset and it's not what our coach is about. That's what everyone loved about the way we played. The only guy worth getting free IMO is no longer with us but you wanted to play him at FF.
I'm not having a crack but I just don't think it would work.
Holder of unacceptable views and other thought crimes.
SaintPav wrote:So who guards the opposition ruckman going down there to expolit our weakness? Macca should have the nouse to know when to go down there in the first place.
Getting spare men free is a very defensive mindset and it's not what our coach is about. That's what everyone loved about the way we played. The only guy worth getting free IMO is no longer with us but you wanted to play him at FF.
I'm not having a crack but I just don't think it would work.
It's okay, you don't have to agree with me. It's just what I would try.
SaintPav wrote:So who guards the opposition ruckman going down there to expolit our weakness? Macca should have the nouse to know when to go down there in the first place.
Getting spare men free is a very defensive mindset and it's not what our coach is about. That's what everyone loved about the way we played. The only guy worth getting free IMO is no longer with us but you wanted to play him at FF.
I'm not having a crack but I just don't think it would work.
It's okay, you don't have to agree with me. It's just what I would try.
You still want our forward line to have G man, Kosi and Rooy. By the way I dont pick sides because it is is impossible. It is much easier saying how other sides are even more impossible.
saintjake wrote:How does Siposs, who played a handful of games in the backline become a lock over Gwilt and Simpkin?
Because defenders have different roles. Siposs is a direct replacement for Goddard. Gwilt and Simpkin are third talls/undersized full backs. Unless Gwilt loses 4kgs, builds his fitness, gets his kicking back to what it used to be and improves his athleticism, he's not going to be a rebounding flanker.
Don't think he has much tactical vision when it comes to the game, more of an analyst after the fact! Enjoy his posts and his humour, not everyone can be forward thinking! You need glass is half empty guys to provide balance and evoke the creative people to find new strategy!
