Saddington why still in

**chammond** · 2 May 2004, 09:56 PM

Re: Saddington why still in

Originally posted by Wazza
Howdy my first post on this forum, after reading your messages over the last couple of years Ive decided to join in the fun.

I may waffle on a bit being my first post.

Saddington - I know this guy has been disscussed many times but I have to comment with observations so far this season.

1. Why does he continuously try to mark in defence? Why did he try to outmark Lucas on many occasions?

2. Lacks passion and has no second effort, once Saddington is beaten in a contest he drops his head and basically spectates.

3. Surely better to play LRT in place of Saddington, should have traded him (Saddo) last year as his performance this year will reduce his value as trade bait basically no-one will want him.

I dont really see the value in playing Saddington when we could play a kid maybe give Dempster a run? he looks like the best chance to replace Saddo. The other option is when Schauble returns - James can play any role Saddo has played so just swap out Saddo for Schauble.

Ok enough from me Im ready to hear why Saddo is a great player.

Oh good . . . another exciting anti-Saddington thread. Still, you shouldn't worry, waffling about Saddo is a speciality of this Board.

I noted that Lucas had 15 possessions and 5 marks, compared to Saddington's 13 possessions and 8 marks.

I fully realise that all of Lucas's possessions were top quality and potentially match-winning, and I'm sure that his 1 goal was the inspiration for the Bombers' victory. And of course it was obvious that all 8 of Saddo's marks (3rd highest for the Swans?) were totally passionless.

So you'll get no argument from me.

**Wazza** · 2 May 2004, 10:01 PM

your probably correct Saddingtons 15 uncontested possensions as we came out of defence inspired the team. I cant count the number of times Saddo stop an Essendon movement forward - truely inspiring.

**robbieando** · 3 May 2004, 01:45 AM

Gee, not again.

I'll join in on this debate, when it gets to Page 10

**DST** · 3 May 2004, 10:28 AM

Saddington was by far not our worst player and Lucas was not the bombers best player.

The ease the ball was coming out from the clearances gave Lucas ample opportunity to play well and Saddington (like the rest of our defense) did a reasonable job.

Move on, we have much more worries to talk about at present. Like trying to get a cohesive unit in the middle to stop the easy clearances.

DST

**stellation** · 3 May 2004, 01:28 PM

If your midfield is being run over like ours was it is not the fault of the defender if his man takes some marks during the game.

**BAM_BAM** · 3 May 2004, 01:39 PM

AAAAAAARRGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHH

***NMWBloods*** · 3 May 2004, 02:16 PM

Just watching the game again and something Saddington didn't do well is present a target for the kickout. Twice he was kicked to and twice he was beaten one-on-one, which resulted in Essendon regaining possession and kicking goals.

**chammond** · 3 May 2004, 02:54 PM

Originally posted by NMWBloods
Just watching the game again and something Saddington didn't do well is present a target for the kickout. Twice he was kicked to and twice he was beaten one-on-one, which resulted in Essendon regaining possession and kicking goals.

Yeah, I've noticed that many times with Saddo . . . he rarely marks cleanly from the long kickout (or even from the second kick after a kickout), but he's very good at the defensive spoil when they deliberately kick wide and close to the boundary as a defensive strategy.

I think usually they use Saddo as the second tall to a kickout contest, but for some reason against the Bombers both Ball and Goodes had real difficulty finding space to take a mark.

***NMWBloods*** · 3 May 2004, 03:06 PM

Originally posted by chammond
Yeah, I've noticed that many times with Saddo . . . he rarely marks cleanly from the long kickout (or even from the second kick after a kickout), but he's very good at the defensive spoil when they deliberately kick wide and close to the boundary as a defensive strategy.

Yes, he can do that well as he can be an effective third player up when he managed to get to the right spot.

I seem to recall he used to be quite a good player at marking from the kickout, however that was probably when we had Dunkley so Saddo had less opposition to contend with.

I think usually they use Saddo as the second tall to a kickout contest, but for some reason against the Bombers both Ball and Goodes had real difficulty finding space to take a mark.

Both Ball and Goodes looked like they were unfit in some way.

**SWANSBEST** · 3 May 2004, 03:32 PM

Wazza

Roos made the point on the weekend that NO ONE in the Reserves, apart from Nicks, would be able to step up and improve the situation in the Seniors. So using that analysis there is no one readily available to adequately replace Saddo.

**Nico** · 3 May 2004, 07:21 PM

I watched most of the replay today and I thought Saddo did pretty weel. I would say his best performance for some time and he took some timely marks in defence.

You can't always blame the receiver of a kick out because if not centimetre perfect, the person kicked to is under immediate pressure.

I agree with the above post that Lucas had little or no affect on the game regardless of his possessions.

Saddo was one of the few who got into space on the wing, which was the hallmark of his play when he was at the top of his form.

To expect a dfender to have a faultless game is complete folly.

Fletcher had more stats than Barry Hall but you would not have said he beat Barry on the day. Fletcher made mistakes and he is classed as one the top defenders in the comp.

Saddington why still in

Saddington why still in

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment