Rd 23 v St Kilda @ Marvel

[jono2707]

Get Roberts and Gus in !

Instead of??

It's quite laughable isn't it to suggest that we'd bring in an 18yo and a 19yo with 3 matches between them into a team travelling nicely into a final with the defending premiers. Not sure why anyone would even bother posting such a silly comment.

Campbell or Harry to sub will be the only likely change I'd reckon.

[mcs]

I'd have the watch the replay to be 100% sure, and I'm not sure I have that in me, but we usually get a bunch of centre
bounce clearances from Hickey and that didn't really happen at all yesterday. It's unrealistic to expect him to do it every
game but we benefit a lot when he does get it out.
It's a pity we're not playing the Demons at the SCG but it is what it is and if we're good enough and willing enough then
we'll win.

Yep Hickey struggled to get much going at all from the middle yesterday I felt. He does usually get us some clearances from in there, or at least taps to advantage. But it didn't feel like he achieved much of either (happy to be proven wrong by the detailed stats of course.

And your last line sums it up well. If we are good enough we will win wherever and whenever we need to. We've played well at the MCG in recent years, so hopefully this will carry over into Finals.

- - - Updated - - -

Hardly a clip.....don't let Lloyd's assessment fool you. It was a punch....you don't go to ground, doubled over in pain, from a 'clip'.

I only said that because it was crap footage and so you can't make out well enough what actually transpired - I suspect it was a well landed punch too.

I didn't even how sound turned on so have no idea what dribble came out of Lloyd's mouth haha.

[stevoswan]

I only said that because it was crap footage and so you can't make out well enough what actually transpired - I suspect it was a well landed punch too.

I didn't even how sound turned on so have no idea what dribble came out of Lloyd's mouth haha.

Fair enough.

[Faunac8]

I have been made aware that no comments are allowed to be made regarding James Rowbottom on this thread which in my opinion is censorship and if I am now excluded from this forum so be it .
It appears that we have chosen to pander to the minority viewpoint and in my opinion this is also a concern.
Please provide some reasons for your decisions.?

[liz]

I have been made aware that no comments are allowed to be made regarding James Rowbottom on this thread which in my opinion is censorship and if I am now excluded from this forum so be it .
It appears that we have chosen to pander to the minority viewpoint and in my opinion this is also a concern.
Please provide some reasons for your decisions.?

There is nothing stopping you talking about James Rowbottom to your heart's content. There never has been. There has never been any suggestion that you can't.

All I ask is that a small handful of people stop directly trying to engage with TheBloods on the topic of James Rowbottom. That is (unless not already abundantly clear) addressing comments to him in the expectation of a response about James. Is that really so hard? Or hard to understand?

[Faunac8]

So still just censorship but maybe censorship lite? You seem to forget that the initial issues arose from his viewpoint on the ability of one of our players ?
Why he gets a free pass is beyond me but if if it is what is is so be it.

[Blood Fever]

I haven't watched a replay, but live, I was getting the impression that fortune was favouring the Saints at centre bounces. As in, they seemed to get quite a few clearances, where the ball bounced around with neither side getting a handle on it, until it ricocheted to a Saints player in a bit of space.

There is always an element of luck but if we can win in that area, it would go a long way to help us beat a side like Melbourne.

[liz]

So still just censorship but maybe censorship lite? You seem to forget that the initial issues arose from his viewpoint on the ability of one of our players ?
Why he gets a free pass is beyond me but if if it is what is is so be it.

He doesn't get a free pass. He is not talking about James at all. There is no "censorship" because you're trying to respond to comments he is no longer making, and trying to goad him into commenting. That is called BAITING.

We all know the past. Can we not move on from that.

If anyone else is still confused, don't post in thread. Send me a PM and I might respond. But I really think this is all pretty straightforward and easy to understand.

[TheBloods]

Let it go people . Move on , say whatever you want to say about whoever you want to say it about and ill do the same for all but one . Whys that difficult

[Blood Relative]

Clarke was good yesterday; started the chain of passing that sent Chad on his way to his goal also beautifully delayed a pass to McDonald until he was certain to take easy chest mark.

[Agent 86]

To be fair, Will's kick should have been eaten up by JMac but he fluffed it.....he is definitely one player who has to improve his output and composure for the finals.

On what happened to TMac, there's some excellent footage here (and Barrett and Lloyd discuss the incident) around the 7:16 mark:

How Pies stole it AGAIN, Lloyd on Dons' next coach, Zorko reaction

I think King should be in trouble despite Lloyd's assertion that 'he's clipped him'. Looks like a hard punch to Tom's chest to me.

Thanks Steve. Puts a bit of a focus on it at least. I thought it might have been a decent hit as Paddy goes straight to see if he’s okay.

A shame Cho gets his kicking form together for this game. Lucky for us that Missy doesn’t.

Thinking Someone has been having a word with Max to be a bit more aggressive?

[Mel]

Clarke was good yesterday; started the chain of passing that sent Chad on his way to his goal also beautifully delayed a pass to McDonald until he was certain to take easy chest mark.

I agree Clarke's disposal was better yesterday, but I thought his tagging/defensive work was off. Perhaps we can't have both from him?

[liz]

I agree Clarke's disposal was better yesterday, but I thought his tagging/defensive work was off. Perhaps we can't have both from him?

I have no doubt the Saints went into the match expecting Clarke to tag Sinclair (since Sinclair was Clarke's first scalp, just a couple of months back) and had worked out a plan to combat it. Watching the game on TV, when you're too stressed about the result to pay attention to all the structural stuff, makes it very hard to know what the Saints did differently. But clearly they did something to free Sinclair up.

[i'm-uninformed2]

What a feeling.

Like everyone, there was that fleeting disappointment in the fact we missed out on second spot but Brisbane’s capitulation really made life hard.

All said and done we finish third and we’re a huge chance here. We know that we bring our best against the best and Melbourne are still the best.

Rowbottom - Some people were very, very wrong. His last month or so has been elite and last night he lead the way again. He’s the epitome of Sydney and our barometer as well.

Warner - Tagged hard every week but that’s a great thing for his development. He’s yet to play his 40th game and he’s already terrifying opposition teams.

Stephens - Hear me out, but he’s got Rolls Royce quality. The thing that can’t be trained but you see it in Mills and players like Hird and Burgoyne. I don’t necessarily think he’ll reach those heights but he oozes natural ability. He’ll go as far as he wants to.

Hayward - Remarkably, he may still be underrated. He never seems to get much attention and there’s no fanfare around him, yet he’s been going at a goal a game for the best part of two seasons. He’s the perfect complimentary player for Logan, Heeney and Papley because they’re all play very different roles but when it gels it’s magnificent.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Very good post.

Re Stephens, the other thing he has is pure speed. It's a small data point, but go back and watch Chad's goal.

Chad bursts from the stoppage at full pelt, and turns it on. The two other blokes in the wide shot are Heeney, who has a seriously set of wheels over those long runs, and has at least as much pace as Chad. But then coming from the defensive wing spot behind the ball is Stephens. He really puts on the after burners and makes up ground easily on both Chad and Heeney. I appreciate Chad had the challenge of running with the ball, and Heeney was probably holding a fraction to stay in reach of Chad in case he was needed, but Stephens' turn of pace is a sight to see.

[Scottee]

The development of Hayward, Rowy, Stephens and to some extent Clarke and Florent in the last month or 2 has been phenomenal. Hayard has just gone to another level. Not sure what has happened, perhaps some confidence has been instilled, but it is very good to see.Having said that we only just fell over the line and our clearances were atrocious, and the back line we also poor.This idea that seems to have developed that the double handed fist is the way to be an effective backman is driving me nuts. We have 3 of the best high marks in the competition and they are negating themselves by their own choice. Totally in the clear for a mark ... double fist, when we could be marking and rebounding and putting the opposition under heaps of pressure. It smacks of lack of confidence that we are taking this option and it saps the morale of the side in my opinion. I think that Wicks showed he is not yet up to handling pressure, Cunners, Ronke or Campbell all ahead of him I think.