Tom Lee
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 22756
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
- Has thanked: 8669 times
- Been thanked: 3793 times
Re: Tom Lee
BigMart wrote:Point is
He shouldn't be on the list as a viable key defender..
Something he is not and never will be at AFL level.
Simpy lacks height,pace and ability.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9642
- Joined: Fri 16 Feb 2007 3:24pm
- Location: WARBURTON
- Has thanked: 135 times
- Been thanked: 1232 times
Re: Tom Lee
Tom Lee would be a fine third tall in the Rivers mould. Unfair to judge him on games like yesterday when we where exposed down back even further after McCartin got injured early.
NO IFS OR BUTS HARVS IS KING OF THE AFL
Re: Tom Lee
How did McCartin getting injured expose us further down back?
Btw
The fact we were exposed down back actually reaffirms the fact he is not a kpd
He is a third tall back/third tall forward
At 91kg that's all he is
Btw
The fact we were exposed down back actually reaffirms the fact he is not a kpd
He is a third tall back/third tall forward
At 91kg that's all he is
- skeptic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 16621
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 7:10pm
- Has thanked: 3493 times
- Been thanked: 2762 times
Re: Tom Lee
I feel like that's obvious. How was he played?BigMart wrote:How did McCartin getting injured expose us further down back?
Btw
The fact we were exposed down back actually reaffirms the fact he is not a kpd
He is a third tall back/third tall forward
At 91kg that's all he is
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9642
- Joined: Fri 16 Feb 2007 3:24pm
- Location: WARBURTON
- Has thanked: 135 times
- Been thanked: 1232 times
Re: Tom Lee
McCartin going down meant Roo had to play majority forward robbing us of his marking down back when he plays wing. Lee is a third man up type defender. Josh Gibson the best in the game gets exposed playing on tall forwards.BigMart wrote:How did McCartin getting injured expose us further down back?
Btw
The fact we were exposed down back actually reaffirms the fact he is not a kpd
He is a third tall back/third tall forward
At 91kg that's all he is
NO IFS OR BUTS HARVS IS KING OF THE AFL
-
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3266
- Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2007 4:05pm
- Been thanked: 390 times
Re: Tom Lee
McCartin going down in the first quarter was significant to the structure of the side.
Simply, instead of McCartin, Bruce and Membrey stretching them in our attacking zone, and Riewoldt giving a "chop out" to a defence where Delaney and Lee were charged with the responsibilities they were (in the absence of Carlisle, Fisher and Goddard - and Dempster who has performed as a KPP defender this season), they were able to deploy to stretch us in their attacking zone.
So the loss of McCartin was significant.
That said, we really need to look for attacking, ball carrying defenders (the types who seem to carve us up) and move past the likes of Savage, Geary and Webster - and allow Montagna to return to the mids where we were also easily beaten for pace, spread and run yesterday.
Simply, instead of McCartin, Bruce and Membrey stretching them in our attacking zone, and Riewoldt giving a "chop out" to a defence where Delaney and Lee were charged with the responsibilities they were (in the absence of Carlisle, Fisher and Goddard - and Dempster who has performed as a KPP defender this season), they were able to deploy to stretch us in their attacking zone.
So the loss of McCartin was significant.
That said, we really need to look for attacking, ball carrying defenders (the types who seem to carve us up) and move past the likes of Savage, Geary and Webster - and allow Montagna to return to the mids where we were also easily beaten for pace, spread and run yesterday.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 22756
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
- Has thanked: 8669 times
- Been thanked: 3793 times
Re: Tom Lee
I think you are really on the wrong tram there.To the top wrote:McCartin going down in the first quarter was significant to the structure of the side.
Simply, instead of McCartin, Bruce and Membrey stretching them in our attacking zone, and Riewoldt giving a "chop out" to a defence where Delaney and Lee were charged with the responsibilities they were (in the absence of Carlisle, Fisher and Goddard - and Dempster who has performed as a KPP defender this season), they were able to deploy to stretch us in their attacking zone.
So the loss of McCartin was significant.
That said, we really need to look for attacking, ball carrying defenders (the types who seem to carve us up) and move past the likes of Savage, Geary and Webster - and allow Montagna to return to the mids where we were also easily beaten for pace, spread and run yesterday.
Savage and Webster are part of our future.
On the other hand, Delaney and Lee aren't.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9642
- Joined: Fri 16 Feb 2007 3:24pm
- Location: WARBURTON
- Has thanked: 135 times
- Been thanked: 1232 times
Re: Tom Lee
Yeah Webster and Savage are keepers. Would like a run of games with Carlisle Roberton Lee Webster Savage Geary.saynta wrote:I think you are really on the wrong tram there.To the top wrote:McCartin going down in the first quarter was significant to the structure of the side.
Simply, instead of McCartin, Bruce and Membrey stretching them in our attacking zone, and Riewoldt giving a "chop out" to a defence where Delaney and Lee were charged with the responsibilities they were (in the absence of Carlisle, Fisher and Goddard - and Dempster who has performed as a KPP defender this season), they were able to deploy to stretch us in their attacking zone.
So the loss of McCartin was significant.
That said, we really need to look for attacking, ball carrying defenders (the types who seem to carve us up) and move past the likes of Savage, Geary and Webster - and allow Montagna to return to the mids where we were also easily beaten for pace, spread and run yesterday.
Savage and Webster are part of our future.
On the other hand, Delaney and Lee aren't.
NO IFS OR BUTS HARVS IS KING OF THE AFL
- Linton Lodger
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2467
- Joined: Mon 18 Aug 2014 2:07pm
- Has thanked: 86 times
- Been thanked: 256 times
Re: Tom Lee
There was nothing wrong with Lee's game yesterday nor the rest of the back six.
Quite simply we were smashed in the midfield and that's about the only reason for the loss.
Quite simply we were smashed in the midfield and that's about the only reason for the loss.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1205
- Joined: Tue 25 Sep 2007 3:45am
- Has thanked: 32 times
- Been thanked: 38 times
Re: Tom Lee
Pretty sure missing many easy goals and veteran players turning the ball over resulting in goals didn't help.Linton Lodger wrote:There was nothing wrong with Lee's game yesterday nor the rest of the back six.
Quite simply we were smashed in the midfield and that's about the only reason for the loss.
- Linton Lodger
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2467
- Joined: Mon 18 Aug 2014 2:07pm
- Has thanked: 86 times
- Been thanked: 256 times
Re: Tom Lee
True. But Gold Coast's kicking for goal was as awful as ours. It all started from the guts, where we were belted, even though we pretty much kept Ablett on a leash.ROLS-LEE wrote:Pretty sure missing many easy goals and veteran players turning the ball over resulting in goals didn't help.Linton Lodger wrote:There was nothing wrong with Lee's game yesterday nor the rest of the back six.
Quite simply we were smashed in the midfield and that's about the only reason for the loss.
Re: Tom Lee
Roo took a few marks late against Geelong as all numbers were pushed behind the footy.
But how many times have you seen Roo as a third up in the D50 this year? I cannot even remember it??
He is often used as an outlet and as a connect from d50 to f50
But as a plus 1
Never seen it... Except in the last minute against Geelong to save the game
But how many times have you seen Roo as a third up in the D50 this year? I cannot even remember it??
He is often used as an outlet and as a connect from d50 to f50
But as a plus 1
Never seen it... Except in the last minute against Geelong to save the game
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9642
- Joined: Fri 16 Feb 2007 3:24pm
- Location: WARBURTON
- Has thanked: 135 times
- Been thanked: 1232 times
Re: Tom Lee
He still pushes behind the ball which alters teams ball movement going to their forwards.BigMart wrote:Roo took a few marks late against Geelong as all numbers were pushed behind the footy.
But how many times have you seen Roo as a third up in the D50 this year? I cannot even remember it??
He is often used as an outlet and as a connect from d50 to f50
But as a plus 1
Never seen it... Except in the last minute against Geelong to save the game
NO IFS OR BUTS HARVS IS KING OF THE AFL
-
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3266
- Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2007 4:05pm
- Been thanked: 390 times
Re: Tom Lee
If Geary, Webster and savage are "locks" for the future, why exactly are we deploying Montagna to a defensive responsibility?
Sorry, our small/medium defenders ARE a problem and a very big one.
Sorry, our small/medium defenders ARE a problem and a very big one.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 796
- Joined: Fri 16 Sep 2011 8:23am
- Location: brisy
- Has thanked: 5 times
- Been thanked: 103 times
Re: Tom Lee
Bruce was originally recruited as a backman maybe a break in the backline would do him good.
Obviously with Paddy likely to miss, Roo up the ground who/how would you structure a forward line?
Could you park Hickey down forward,Holmes in ruck and rely on the smalls?
Obviously with Paddy likely to miss, Roo up the ground who/how would you structure a forward line?
Could you park Hickey down forward,Holmes in ruck and rely on the smalls?