Game Review

[midas_touch]

We indeed witnessed two distinctively different games within the one match. In the first quarter, we were absolutely dominant, getting the ball quickly to our forwards who marked everything presented to them, were getting first use of the ball at the centre and in stoppages, and were cramping the Dogs for space. From quarter time onwards though, we were comprehensively outplayed. The Dogs absolutely destroyed us in the clearances, we're a hell of a lot more intense at the ball and in contested situations, plus simply ran us off our feet. We were exposed for lack of pace in the midfield, but more critically, we seemed to lack any energy and intensity in the second half, so our fitness was a concern. The supposed formidable forward line that we possess has no impact at all after quarter time, with Fraser Gehrig having as much impact on the game as a 2m lamp post would have done if it were placed at the goal square. However, I must say our forward line delivery was also very ordinary, with passes directed to 2/3 on 1 situations most of the time.

There were only a few players who could hold their heads up, which include Sam Fisher who absolutely toweled up Brad Johnson, as well as Luke Ball and Adam Schneider. Most of the rest were simply watching the game pass them by as the Dogs exerted their dominance on the game with not much resistance, as exemplified by the weak, unaccountable efforts of Nick Dal Santo. Next week could potentially be nasty, I just hope that we can get our act together within the next 7 days and pull off a performance that is considerably more respectable than the one we were treated to tonight. It was indeed a wakeup call for the players, and shows we are still quite a long way off being a flag contender.

[Grimfang]

1st Quarter - All too easy. Everyone put in and the results showed.

Rest of the game - All too hard. They pretty much all looked like they were waiting for someone else to make that extra effort to fire the team up again.

That game was as bad as the day we got 10 goals up against the Hawks out at Waverley and then stopped and watch them pass us by for the win.

[Saintschampions08]

1st Quarter - All too easy. Everyone put in and the results showed.

Rest of the game - All too hard. They pretty much all looked like they were waiting for someone else to make that extra effort to fire the team up again.

That game was as bad as the day we got 10 goals up against the Hawks out at Waverley and then stopped and watch them pass us by for the win.

Or maybe we tried to play the exact same type of game in the first as the last quarters.

Maybe Eade and the dogs, realised that our entire gameplan revolved around getting the ball or flooding, and Maybe Eade told his men to man up so that we couldn't kick it to anyone when we had the ball.

Maybe it wasn't us? Maybe the dogs had a plan B and we didn't.

[Sainterman]

That game was as bad as the day we got 10 goals up against the Hawks out at Waverley and then stopped and watch them pass us by for the win.

Agree with you there. Every side in the comp will have taken note of that, just as they did back then.

Awful loss tonight, lets hope they can take stock, and get some killer instinct.

[Richter]

Maybe it wasn't us? Maybe the dogs had a plan B and we didn't.

Fair point.

[saintsRrising]

It was both...
Yes the Dogs reacted, changed and improved.

But alos too many Saints basically stopped at quarter time...thinking they had it won???

countless were the times I saw Saints players trotting rather than sprinting at opponents.

In the first quarter the Dogs were harried and ever had space.

After quarter time they were often allowed to roam free and for example always had unmarked go to players on the wings that they could dish off too.

Post quarter time our work rate was crap.

The Dogs lifted theirs and smashed us.

[Saintschampions08]

See if you can find a direct correlation from this.

Round 1 -

Saints: 305 disposals - 21 scoring shots. (14.52 disposals per scoring shot)
Sydney: 303 disposals - 18 scoring shots.

Round 2 -

Saints: 362 disposals - 28 scoring shots (13 disposals per goal)
Carlton: 344 disposals - 23 scoring shots

Round 3 -

Saints: 307 disposals - 21 scoring shots (14.61 disposals per goal)
Bulldogs: 395 disposals - 29 scoring shots

Compared to the benchmark team, Geelong.

Round 1 -

Geelong: 391 disposals - 25 scoring shots (15.64 disposals per goal)
Port: 344 disposals - 21 scoring shots

Round 2 -

Geelong: 462 disposals - 38 scoring shots (12.15 disposals per goal)
Essendon: 357 disposals - 21 scoring shots




Basically, we play a defensive and slow brand of footy. I have nothing against this.

Our disposal must be near perfect. If we're only going to be averaging 325 disposals per game (compared to our oppositions 380) then we need have a much better scoring rate per disposal then them. Our main problem is that we have less disposals then good opposition teams, and our disposal is worse then good opposition teams. Sure, when we pile on the pressure they make mistakes, but so do we, the only difference being that they have 20 disposals per quarter more but the same amount of mistakes.

We can't have 100 less disposals and the same amount of disposals per goal as our opposition.

[vacuous space]

...the weak, unaccountable efforts of Nick Dal Santo.

How is Dal the goat? He's playing for a coach that absolutely refuses to put him on the ball. Dal had six clearances last week, so where was he at the start of the game? On the interchange bench. Where was he for nearly every single centre bounce? Behind centre. So who was it that ripped us up in the centre after quarter time? Not Dal's opponent. Dal wasn't playing on Cross, Cooney or Griffen.

If you want to blame a mid for the loss, blame the ones who were beaten regularly by their opponents. Blame two of our starting onballers who didn't get a single clearance for the night. Blame our rucks who won the hitouts but clearly lost the battle. Blame the guys kicking inside fifty who think it's best to kick it in from centre. Dal didn't have much of a game, but to single him out after that game is unfair. We had plenty of weaker players whose opponents ripped us up.

[midas_touch]

...the weak, unaccountable efforts of Nick Dal Santo.

How is Dal the goat? He's playing for a coach that absolutely refuses to put him on the ball. Dal had six clearances last week, so where was he at the start of the game? On the interchange bench. Where was he for nearly every single centre bounce? Behind centre. So who was it that ripped us up in the centre after quarter time? Not Dal's opponent. Dal wasn't playing on Cross, Cooney or Griffen.

If you want to blame a mid for the loss, blame the ones who were beaten regularly by their opponents. Blame two of our starting onballers who didn't get a single clearance for the night. Blame our rucks who won the hitouts but clearly lost the battle. Blame the guys kicking inside fifty who think it's best to kick it in from centre. Dal didn't have much of a game, but to single him out after that game is unfair. We had plenty of weaker players whose opponents ripped us up.

I didnt mean to single him out as a whipping boy. Most of the team was very ordinary tonight, I just cited him as an example of our overall ineptitude.

[stinger]

now i know what it looks and feels like to watch a train wreck unfold before your very eyes........

[ace]

A mongrel running with the ball approaching the 50 metre arc.
Another mongrel is occupying the space where the ball carrier needs to run, so this mongrel runs towards the boundary line.
The second mongrel's opponent Gilbert follows him, clearing the space for the ball carrier to run into.
Gilbert's opponent was NOT the threat - if he did get the ball as a result of Gilbert going for the ball carrier, it would be on the boundary line.
The threat was the ball carrier.
This is just plain stupid - Gilbert probably thinks "my opponent did not get a touch, the coach can't blame me", but the Bulldogs get yet another goal.
Lyon's accountable football is crap.
He needs to let the players know that one of them is allowed to leave his opponent to threaten and tackle the ball carrier and his mates must cover for him.
Threatening the ball carrier creates turnovers, following your immediate opponent away from the ball carrier only creates running space for the ball carrier.

[ace]

Slackening off of intensity

43 years of watching the Saints and it is still the same old problem.
Get in front on the scoreboard means we can slacken off.
How often have you seen St Kilda well in front and win the last 10 minutes of a match - never in 40 years I think.
Good teams get in front and go further in front right up to the final siren.
They smash you in the last 10 minutes.
Last week they gave Carlton 3 late goals.
This week they gave the Bulldogs 3 quarters.

St Kilda has always had a culture of slackening off the intensity when in front.

[ace]

My sister who rarely sees a match (she has a soccer family) pointed it out to me - Doggies consistently brought the ball into attack down their right wing, our left wing, and had great success.
I could not work out who were our weaknesses down that side, the only player who was consistently in the action there was Schneider, maybe someone can tell me who was AWOL on our left wing and left back flank.

[SaintDippa]

Game Review.

We looked flat as do most teams playing their third game in a row running on the concrete of the Dome (especially after a couple of 6 day breaks).

Dogs looked fresher and for so many of our midfield to show absolutely no zip there must be something else a factor rather than lack of effort.

Agreed Raph and Fiora have probably played their last games for a while.

I'd wait a couple of weeks before agreeing with the forum hysteria over the last 10 hours. But then again we live in an era of kneejerk analysis which keeps the Herald Sun selling so well.

[Dan Warna]

now i know what it looks and feels like to watch a train wreck unfold before your very eyes........

hawthorn game, you know the one, blew an 11 goal lead to lose by 2 or 3.

also same as when we played the hawks last year, they adapted we didn't. they manned up and played a sweeper, we stuck to our plan and were overrun.

pretty confidence sapping.

now othe opposition, like 99 and 00, know even if we get 10 goals up, we can be overrun.

[ace]

Riewoldt is not a WWF wrestler.
He can not stand close to goal and fight for the mark.
He and Gehrig get their marks by leading.
That means players have to make space for him to lead into.
They do that by moving away from him. If their opponent fails to follow, (zoning off) they should move further away and become a free target themselves.
The mid fielders should play through the free target until the defender becomes accountable - freeing up the space for Reiwoldt's and Gehrig's leads.

[ace]

That was supposed to be our best 22 minus Maguire and Baker. Ouch!

[Saintschampions08]

Game Review.

We looked flat as do most teams playing their third game in a row running on the concrete of the Dome (especially after a couple of 6 day breaks).

Dogs looked fresher and for so many of our midfield to show absolutely no zip there must be something else a factor rather than lack of effort.

Agreed Raph and Fiora have probably played their last games for a while.

I'd wait a couple of weeks before agreeing with the forum hysteria over the last 10 hours. But then again we live in an era of kneejerk analysis which keeps the Herald Sun selling so well.

Yup, it wasn't our players fault.
It wasn't our coaches fault.
It wasn't our game plans fault.


The dogs came off 2 straight 6 day breaks. And 2 games at the Dome. We came off 1 6 day break.

[dsreg1]

Riewoldt is not a WWF wrestler.
He can not stand close to goal and fight for the mark.
He and Gehrig get their marks by leading.
That means players have to make space for him to lead into.
They do that by moving away from him. If their opponent fails to follow, (zoning off) they should move further away and become a free target themselves.
The mid fielders should play through the free target until the defender becomes accountable - freeing up the space for Reiwoldt's and Gehrig's leads.

Riewoldt is not right imo.

No pace on the lead, and his key asset, his endurance seems right down. Hence he is playing much closer to goals and getting in wrestling matches.

I must admit his knee has me very very concerned.

[Life Long Saint]

The dogs came off 2 straight 6 day breaks. And 2 games at the Dome. We came off 1 6 day break.

They came off a double six all right but they played at the MCG last week.

We have two more games at the dome before we go elsewhere.

We will be 2-3 after five rounds.

[Saintschampions08]

The dogs came off 2 straight 6 day breaks. And 2 games at the Dome. We came off 1 6 day break.

They came off a double six all right but they played at the MCG last week.

We have two more games at the dome before we go elsewhere.

We will be 2-3 after five rounds.

Maybe, but it has nothing to do with the dome.

[plugger66]

The dogs came off 2 straight 6 day breaks. And 2 games at the Dome. We came off 1 6 day break.

They came off a double six all right but they played at the MCG last week.

We have two more games at the dome before we go elsewhere.

We will be 2-3 after five rounds.

That is just a crap excuse.