RICH V SAINTS - GAME THREAD [Merged]

[Dyer'ere]

The last four permiership teams have players in their midfield whose job is negating. Ling (returned to tagging duties in 07) Tyson Stenglein, Luke Ablett, Kane Cornes (trained as a mid in stopping role that year).

When the Wost Coached Eagles didn't have one they traded a first rounder to get one.

Defensive mids are gold.

Having the best mid in the AFL and having the bloke who shuts him out of the game is exactly the same nett value.

 

[Scoop]

Just on those Simmonds and Richo moments if either player had laid the opponent out we win the game by ten goals IMO.

I did see in the first quarter Jack Riewoldt all 80kgs of him coming streaming across the wing in the general direction of a Dyer'ere fav, big Goose McGuire. The big Goose, was streaming after Matty White maybe? anyhow JR made a beeline to create contact with the Goose and provide the Shepard. The Goose went sideways at a rate of knots didn't want any part of Nick's cousin. Pea heart would be a step up for the goose.

 

[IrockZ]

The last four permiership teams have players in their midfield whose job is negating. Ling (returned to tagging duties in 07) Tyson Stenglein, Luke Ablett, Kane Cornes (trained as a mid in stopping role that year).

When the Wost Coached Eagles didn't have one they traded a first rounder to get one.

Defensive mids are gold.

Having the best mid in the AFL and having the bloke who shuts him out of the game is exactly the same nett value.

but how many can you have?

Johnson, Jackson, Hyde etc is too many imo

 

[hellenictiger]

I know where you're coming from but I think we need to look to higher the bar in the future. I think the days of having a player on your list who's pure skill is to stop another player at their own expense is past. I think it is necessary to have players who are flexible, players who can be damaging in their own right but who if need be for the sake of the team can play a defensive role instead. Cornes is a perfect example of this. In my opinion thats what we need to aim for if we are to become a top team.

If he does the job and sacrifices his own game for the team then he is an integral part. He did shut their in form player out of the game, who doesnt play on the ball. Tuck or Johnson usually do the job on the ball, but Hyde's job was to run with Montagna all night on the wing and half forward. Ofcourse he did get his 19 touches and 3 tackles but his task was straight forward, Montagna only got it 11 times. He got right into him too which was good to see.

But in Hyde's case he wasnt used on the ball. Montagna played a floating role. The same way the saints used Fisher on Richo. Horses for courses I guess, it depends on the opposition but 2-3 is enough. Maybe thats why Jacko hasnt figured that much lately?

Johnson on the ball, maybe Tuck depending on the opponent and then Hyde to mind a wingman or halfback flanker.

 

[Big Cat Lover]

but how many can you have?

Johnson, Jackson, Hyde etc is too many imo

Please don't put Johnson in that bracket! His is much more than a defensive tagger, his in close work has been great this year.

I agree, can only carry one of Jackson or Hyde and Hyde's last 2 weeks have been fantsastic. Both are like a deer in headlights at times when they get the ball but Hyde obvioulsy has the mental application to shut down an opponent. We definitely need that ATM. Hopefully we will be the hunted in 2-3 years time.

 

[pahoffm]

I dont subscribe to the theory of taking players out. Very 80s. Why dont we just play better and win? Interesting theory I know.

It's ageless really.
Goes back to Caesar and the "Ides of March", or even before.
Certainly occurred well before the 80s, and it still happens now.

For me, doing it in that game against Milne wouldn't be vital reason to do so.
Whether we won or lost in itself wasn't as important and what the boys should have learned by losing it.

Of course, the long term object is to play better and to win as a consequence thereof.

But there will come a time, hopefully soon, say, survival in a final's game, or win/lose a GF when it will be crucial.

The boys will look at themselves directly, at that crucial time, and ask themselves, "This could be a once in a life-time occasion, what do we need to do to ensure that we win?"

Whether it be a Laurie Fowler, a Neil Balme, a Jimmy Jess, a Colin Robertson, a Mark Yeates, a Dean Wallis, et al, there may come that time.

 

[Legends of 2017]

Oh, and Steven Baker.

Now there's a fellow whose almost made a profession out of the "king hit" behind play.

how many times has he been rubbed out? And isn't he serving a hefty sentence at the moment?

 

[pahoffm]

how many times has he been rubbed out? And isn't he serving a hefty sentence at the moment?

Yep!

And that person should be prepared to wear the cost of their actions.

And the club should covertly support him in those actions, if he was doing it for the team.

 

[TigerForce]

It's ageless really.
Goes back to Caesar and the "Ides of March", or even before.
Certainly occured well before the 80s, and it still happens now.

For me, doing it in that game against Milne wouldn't be vital reason to do so.
Whether we won or lost in itself wasn't as important and what the boys should have learned by losing it.

Of course, the long term object is to play better and to win as a consequence thereof.

But there will come a time, hopefully soon, say, survival in a final's game, or win/lose a GF when it will be crucial.

The boys will look at themselves directly, at that crucial time, and ask themselves, "This could be a once in a life-time occasion, what do we need to do to ensure that we win?"

Whether it be a Laurie Fowler, a Neil Balme, a Jimmy Jess, a Colin Robertson, a Mark Yeates, a Dean Wallis, et al, there may come that time.

Our only player to do that would definitely be King.

 

[pahoffm]

Our only player to do that would definitely be King.

At this point, he would be the clearly recognisable one.

Young Lewis & Brown of Hawthorn also take on that role.

 

[TigerForce]

At this point, he would be the clearly recognisable one.

Young Lewis & Brown of Hawthorn also take on that role.

Maybe Connors in the future.

GoodOne says it's very 80's, but very 80's is what AFL supporters want to see. ;D

 

[Tigers2011]

I think an easier thing to have done was to get King to play a little tighter instead of trying Newman and Moore at later stages of the match.

King was terrific offensively, as Milne didn't chase or tried to hang back looking for an easy kick if a turnover occured. However for sake of playing Milne, a little closer, the same objective could have been achieved.

King wasn't as effective when he was moved off Milne either.

 

[TigerForce]

I can't wait too see Jake King in a few years with more experience.

David King started as a suburban footballer, looked like a half-dud in the early stages but became a top defender.

I reckon Jake King will develop in the same way. Still has a lot to learn and has the brains for it.

 

[pahoffm]

I think an easier thing to have done was to get King to play a little tighter instead of trying Newman and Moore at later stages of the match.

King was terrific offensively, as Milne didn't chase or tried to hang back looking for an easy kick if a turnover occured. However for sake of playing Milne, a little closer, the same objective could have been achieved.

King wasn't as effective when he was moved off Milne either.

I agree. King was the best match up for Milne. Moore was the worst of the three but was probably a mental lapse by the defensive match ups coach.

 

[Port1870]

I have a soft spot for king, the mongrel in him commands respect, good on the kid. I hope he dusts himself off and thrashes johnson or chapman.

 

[GoodOne]

how many times has he been rubbed out? And isn't he serving a hefty sentence at the moment?

Baker is just a sniper. I find it hard to understand how people have respect for that on the footy field. I guess if you can't play footy then there might be a veiled reason for doing it. I have nothing against the hard fair hit but to play for the purpose of taking people out is just, well, gutless.

 

[GoodOne]

but how many can you have?

Johnson, Jackson, Hyde etc is too many imo

Comparing Cornes and Ling to Hyde and Jackson is ludicrous. Cornes and Ling are exactly what I was talking about, players who can negate and defend but also depend on matchups able to get lots of ball themselves and use it well.

 

[pahoffm]

Baker is just a sniper. I find it hard to understand how people have respect for that on the footy field. I guess if you can't play footy then there might be a veiled reason for doing it. I have nothing against the hard fair hit but to play for the purpose of taking people out is just, well, gutless.

Yes, it is a value judgement.

In a remote way, I fully understand what it takes to make yourself the object of scourn for the good of your team.

Yeh, it's a value judgement.

 

[Big Cat Lover]

It's ageless really.
Goes back to Caesar and the "Ides of March", or even before.
Certainly occurred well before the 80s, and it still happens now.

For me, doing it in that game against Milne wouldn't be vital reason to do so.
Whether we won or lost in itself wasn't as important and what the boys should have learned by losing it.

Of course, the long term object is to play better and to win as a consequence thereof.

But there will come a time, hopefully soon, say, survival in a final's game, or win/lose a GF when it will be crucial.

The boys will look at themselves directly, at that crucial time, and ask themselves, "This could be a once in a life-time occasion, what do we need to do to ensure that we win?"

Whether it be a Laurie Fowler, a Neil Balme, a Jimmy Jess, a Colin Robertson, a Mark Yeates, a Dean Wallis, et al, there may come that time.

What *&%ing planet do you live on?? Too much pot in the 80's I think.
When was the last GF decided by some bloke kinging an opposition player? Or a finals game? Teams that are agressive at the ball are the teams that win and that's the way I'd love to see my team play. eg Deledio on Sat night. BTW Baker was the guy running the other way Sat night and he had the chance to run through Deledio but he also showed courage in attemting the mark instead of protecting himself and going the man.

Yes, it is a value judgement.

In a remote way, I fully understand what it takes to make yourself the object of scourn for the good of your team.

Yeh, it's a value judgement.

You've been drinking right? On your 15th stubby? What the ##*k does this mean?

 

[Scoop]

Maybe because its a non-argument. McMahon is not a stopper, no-one expects him to be. Dunno why they expect Newman to be one either really.

Not a stopper? He plays in the back half and we were getting carved and we still refused to see him try and actually play a accountable brand of football. The fact the coaching panel deemed him to be incapable of that role speaks volumes about his defensive game. I find it quite disgusting that some people find that acceptable from a backman.