Eade lashes Thomas over 'ugly' tag

[The Fireman]

A ship without a rudder the Saints.

lol, how stupid can this bloke be? One kick from a GF in 2004 I'm tippin this toss hasn't been sailing

 

[MrChristo]

Which is why we flogged Sydney at the MCG in the semi-finals, in atrocious conditions.

2 win from last 10 'outdoors'?

 

[Grimfang]

2 win from last 10 'outdoors'?

There was only one team outside of the 2004 top 8 that we lost to in that group of games and that is the Doggies.

You have noticed that Port, Brisbane, Melbourne, Essendon, Sydney and Geelong are also out of the Wok?

 

[Sedat!]

Can any St Kilda supporters asnwer this simple question:

Whose job is it to counter the tactics of the opposition coach on match days?

If the likes of Hayes, Reiwoldt, Hamill, Harvey, Dal Santo, Fiora, Goddard and others played at or near their best on the weekend, then either:

A) Dogs are more talented than St Kilda - No

B) Dogs got a more even contribution from all 24 players - Yes

C) Grant Thomas was mader to look a fool in the coaches box all night - Absolutely yes

I personally think it is gutless of Thommo to insult his players by saying 15 other clubs would have beaten them on the night, especially when his best players all stood up for him. He has successfully shifted the focus away from his terrible performance as coach to the so-called "ugly football" debate. Smoke and mirrors Thomas strikes again. No-one can accuse him of not being clever and not being able to manipulate the moronic football media (not a hard thing to do admittedly).

 

[RodgerFox]

I saw it like that, the press/commentators saw it like that, Eade saw it like that, JeffDunne [Saint's Big Footy] supporter saw it like that.

Seriously, are you surprised that the media and the commentators found a way to get a headline out of Grant Thomas?

Have a read of what Eade said, or better still isten to the entire interview. I wouldn't say that Eade was too concerned at all.

 

[RodgerFox]

Can any St Kilda supporters asnwer this simple question:

Whose job is it to counter the tactics of the opposition coach on match days?

If the likes of Hayes, Reiwoldt, Hamill, Harvey, Dal Santo, Fiora, Goddard and others played at or near their best on the weekend, then either:

A) Dogs are more talented than St Kilda - No

B) Dogs got a more even contribution from all 24 players - Yes

C) Grant Thomas was mader to look a fool in the coaches box all night - Absolutely yes

I personally think it is gutless of Thommo to insult his players by saying 15 other clubs would have beaten them on the night, especially when his best players all stood up for him. He has successfully shifted the focus away from his terrible performance as coach to the so-called "ugly football" debate. Smoke and mirrors Thomas strikes again. No-one can accuse him of not being clever and not being able to manipulate the moronic football media (not a hard thing to do admittedly).

HAHAHAHAAHA!!!!

That is fantastic.

Sedat, I'm not sure where you've been over the past week but maybe you should follow up what you're talking about.

Watch last weeks game, who was playing for each side, which positions they were playing in and the final score. Then listen to what Thomas said after the game. Don't read it, because they only printed the 'juicy' parts. Listen to what he said, then listen to what Eade said. Again, don't read it but actually listen to it.

Do that then come back and post again.

Perceptions are an amazing thing, but your's is one bizarre perception!

 

[RodgerFox]

Can any St Kilda supporters asnwer this simple question:

Whose job is it to counter the tactics of the opposition coach on match days?

If the likes of Hayes, Reiwoldt, Hamill, Harvey, Dal Santo, Fiora, Goddard and others played at or near their best on the weekend, then either:

A) Dogs are more talented than St Kilda - No

B) Dogs got a more even contribution from all 24 players - Yes

C) Grant Thomas was mader to look a fool in the coaches box all night - Absolutely yes

I personally think it is gutless of Thommo to insult his players by saying 15 other clubs would have beaten them on the night, especially when his best players all stood up for him. He has successfully shifted the focus away from his terrible performance as coach to the so-called "ugly football" debate. Smoke and mirrors Thomas strikes again. No-one can accuse him of not being clever and not being able to manipulate the moronic football media (not a hard thing to do admittedly).

Sorry, but I have to add that Thomas actually said at the beginning of the interview that they 'had planned and expected the flooding tactics but, obviously they hadn't prepared well enough. I have to take full responsibility for that'.

If that's shifting focus away from him being 'outcoached', he's not a very good spin doctor!!

 

[Sedat!]

Sorry, but I have to add that Thomas actually said at the beginning of the interview that they 'had planned and expected the flooding tactics but, obviously they hadn't prepared well enough. I have to take full responsibility for that'.

If that's shifting focus away from him being 'outcoached', he's not a very good spin doctor!!

Rodger, I heard the full after-match interview with Thommo, and I heard his "give credit to the opposition" spiel. But in the same breath he castigated his players for not performing on the night (ther "15 other clubs would have beaten us" line - which was unfair as most of your best players all played well) and then proceeded to have a pointed crack at Eade for the "ugly" game. I'm simply saying he had a bad night in the box, and his assertions about the ugly style of game shifted the focus away from his poor performance. Haven't read one article in the paper mentioning how Thomas did not handle the tactics of the opposition on the night. It's all been about the ugly football on the night (which it wasn't anyway).

One final point if I may. If Thomas cannot handle even a little congestion in the forward half, or the revolutionary tactic of a spare mane in defence, a-la Hodge the previous week, then he will be in for some torrid match days this season. Your side are now the hunted this year, and all 15 other coaches will be devising intricate plans and tactics to counter the natural ability your side possesses. Thomas better be ready for that onslaught week-in week-out or it could end up to be a disappointing season for St Kilda.

 

[RodgerFox]

Rodger, I heard the full after-match interview with Thommo, and I heard his "give credit to the opposition" spiel. But in the same breath he castigated his players for not performing on the night (ther "15 other clubs would have beaten us" line - which was unfair as most of your best players all played well) and then proceeded to have a pointed crack at Eade for the "ugly" game. I'm simply saying he had a bad night in the box, and his assertions about the ugly style of game shifted the focus away from his poor performance. Haven't read one article in the paper mentioning how Thomas did not handle the tactics of the opposition on the night. It's all been about the ugly football on the night (which it wasn't anyway).

One final point if I may. If Thomas cannot handle even a little congestion in the forward half, or the revolutionary tactic of a spare mane in defence, a-la Hodge the previous week, then he will be in for some torrid match days this season. Your side are now the hunted this year, and all 15 other coaches will be devising intricate plans and tactics to counter the natural ability your side possesses. Thomas better be ready for that onslaught week-in week-out or it could end up to be a disappointing season for St Kilda.

You need to understand though Sedat, that St.Kilda have been flooded against all of last year.

They believe they have the game plan and style of play to beat it. And on 17 occasions they did.

When St.Kilda's intensity drops, the flood beats them.

Thomas knows this, the players know this - and the opposition know this.

This flood isn't a revelation - particularly not against St.Kilda.

I'm amazed that people who appear to have a knowledge of football forget this.

 

[Sedat!]

You need to understand though Sedat, that St.Kilda have been flooded against all of last year.

They believe they have the game plan and style of play to beat it. And on 17 occasions they did.

When St.Kilda's intensity drops, the flood beats them.

Thomas knows this, the players know this - and the opposition know this.

This flood isn't a revelation - particularly not against St.Kilda.

I'm amazed that people who appear to have a knowledge of football forget this.

Could also easily be argued that St Kilda won 17 times last season because they had the sheer talent on the field to overcome the flood, or any other on-field tactics for that matter. Intentional 4 quarter floods never work: they will always be overcome by a more talented opposition. Only exceptions I can think of were Dogs v Essendon in 2000 and the Saints-Swans draw (which only half worked). Besides, there was very little in the way of traditional flooding on Friday night anyway: more a case of our midfielders running back to support the defence at strategic moments when St Kilda had a run-on going. A sign of our increased fitness compared to the pathetic fitness levels of our players in the last 2 years. Thomas needed to bite his tongue after the match on Friday night because that was an admission of weakness on his behalf. He should be eternally grateful to Eade for showcasing what might happen to St Kilda when the real stuff starts, rather than be dismissive and insulting.

 

[MrChristo]

I'm amazed that people who appear to have a knowledge of football forget this.

I'm amazed at all these comments from people who weren't at the game.

The Bulldogs deliberately dropped 1-2 men back only in the last minute or 2 of each quarter.

Most of the night there was plenty of space up forward, and on many occassions Riewoldt/Harris and Koschitzke/Rawlings had the 50 to themselves.


You have noticed that Port, Brisbane, Melbourne, Essendon, Sydney and Geelong are also out of the Wok?

er...huh? You didn't play Essendon outside the dome, and yeah, you lost all those other games 'away' (even tho the Port game was in Launceston)....What's your point?
You beat Geelong by 61 @ the dome, lost by 9 away.
Beat Brisbane by a point @ the dome, lost by 45 away.....All coincidence you say?...Sorry...Lack of intensity!!

ok....here's another coincidence for you; Gehrig kicked less than 2 goals on 5 occassions last season (2 he didn't play in)...St. Kilda lost 4 of those games, only beating Richmond.

So...getting back onto the main topic, maybe GT does need a bit of work finding another goal kicker, and chances are he will be seeing the odd man or two 'spare' in front of the G-train this season.

 

[Derek Zoolander]

No clue about what "Flooding" actually is, but who cares. All i have to say is thank god.

No longer do we get the "i feel sorry for the Bulldogs because they're bad" now we get the hate because of what we're doing on the field again. And at the first sign of turning things around too!

I love it. ********ing love it.

 

[Grimfang]

er...huh? You didn't play Essendon outside the dome, and yeah, you lost all those other games 'away' (even tho the Port game was in Launceston)....What's your point?
You beat Geelong by 61 @ the dome, lost by 9 away.
Beat Brisbane by a point @ the dome, lost by 45 away.....All coincidence you say?...Sorry...Lack of intensity!!

ok....here's another coincidence for you; Gehrig kicked less than 2 goals on 5 occassions last season (2 he didn't play in)...St. Kilda lost 4 of those games, only beating Richmond.

The contention of the orginal poster was that we can't win at the MCG. Unless you've dramatically rewritten history, the statment is demonstrably false.

I posted the other teams to highlight that they were all in the finals last year but are out of the WOK after the first two rounds this year. With all the carry-on at the moment you'd think we were the only ones.

So...getting back onto the main topic, maybe GT does need a bit of work finding another goal kicker, and chances are he will be seeing the odd man or two 'spare' in front of the G-train this season.

Could be very hazardous to their health in certain circumstances. Remember the review panel has set a precedent...

 

[RodgerFox]

Could also easily be argued that St Kilda won 17 times last season because they had the sheer talent on the field to overcome the flood, or any other on-field tactics for that matter. Intentional 4 quarter floods never work: they will always be overcome by a more talented opposition. Only exceptions I can think of were Dogs v Essendon in 2000 and the Saints-Swans draw (which only half worked). Besides, there was very little in the way of traditional flooding on Friday night anyway: more a case of our midfielders running back to support the defence at strategic moments when St Kilda had a run-on going. A sign of our increased fitness compared to the pathetic fitness levels of our players in the last 2 years. Thomas needed to bite his tongue after the match on Friday night because that was an admission of weakness on his behalf. He should be eternally grateful to Eade for showcasing what might happen to St Kilda when the real stuff starts, rather than be dismissive and insulting.

The same probably would have happened last Friday had their best team been on the field.

Again, I genuinely didn't see it that way. I saw Thomas telling it how it was - his team wasn't mentally and physically prepared for what he believed he had them prepared for. He then took responsibility for that.

He said St.Kilda were terrible and he apologised to St.Kilda supporters for the way their team played. He congratulated the Bulldogs and gave them credit.

I can't see the issue??