why can't we win ?

[StrengthThroughLoyalty]

i can't believe that i am going to quote mike sheahen (?) but he wrote a sentence that i can not get out of my mind. it went something like "st kilda, has there ever been a side more coy or introverted when they are faced with victory". we have stared victory in the face 7 or 8 times this year and have found a way to lose each time, we were the better team today and still lost.

our senior players do not have the composure to step up and take control of the game. we badly miss robert harvey in these situations he is a game winner and knows what to do in the pressure situations. thommo tries hard and stewie loewe is fantastic but lacks the class of harvey. banger won't be captain next year but if the reiwoldt's, kossi's, dal santo's, clarkes, maguires, balls .... follow his and hammills work ethic and their on field leadership, we will be a great side in the future.

whils't i am gutted about losing today (married to a collingwood supporter who has 5 sisters and parents who are collingwood supporters, and i will get a fair amount of phone calls and sh*t stirring) i am now convinced that our club has stopped the hemoriging of the last few years and will be on the improve from here on end.

i had 2 bets this weekend on the footy, 15 points in for a slab of boags and 20 points in for a slab of cascade. (licks lips and laughs at the stupidity of collingwood supporters)

 

[ozzult]

I think that because St Kilda have been on the losing end for a fair while now they've forgotten how to win games of footy.

When it gets down to the clutch goals and passes, they shirt themselves. 2 points in the last quarter, just not a good enough effort, I'm not so sure it was a fitness issue either.

Although, then I look at the game against Geelong, and that whole argument can be dismissed.. who knows. Only time will tell.

 

[MarkT]

This will probably get the Saints fans off side from reactions I have seen in the past, but IMO it comes down to History and "culture". Words like culture are thrown around about as loosely as champion but IMO the Saints have, over a long time, bred a feeling that a fighting loss is a good effort. Rarely have they looked like a team that knew how to win and win well. Even their team of '66 should have been good enough to win more than one Premiership.

At a St.Kilda v Collingwood game a few years ago a Saints friend who I was sitting with said they would be over run in the second half even though they had outplayed Collingwood in the first half and led comfortably. I was surprised but it seemed to me to confirm a losing mentality that you just don't expect to win.

That becomes amplified when the opposition know they can keep at you and you will fold or find a way to lose. It is impossible to feel out of the match if you think the opposition can always be beaten.

I have heard a lot of people say St.Kilda don't know how to win or have forgotten how to win. IMO it is deeper than that. They have never known how to win.

IMO the culture that has been often referred to with players dictating terms and not being as disciplined as at some other teams is all part of the acceptance of less than 100% commitment to winning.

It is a cliché but winning is a way of life. If you recycle people who have not been associated with a winning mentality you have less chance to change that cycle. Changes have to be made at all levels of the club to make a significant change to the culture odf a club. That is obviously easier said than done. Whether you believe it is a cultural thing or not, there has to be a reason for repeated failure to capitalise on winning opportunities and strong sides.

I'm not trying to have a go at the Saints or stick the boots in but if the sum total of your history is a single premiership with a 1 point win win against a side renowned for loosing Grand Finals you have to at least consider that it may be something internal that effects the performance over the long term.

 

[Joffaboy]

Originally posted by MarkT
This will probably get the Saints fans off side from reactions I have seen in the past, but IMO it comes down to History and "culture". Words like culture are thrown around about as loosely as champion but IMO the Saints have, over a long time, bred a feeling that a fighting loss is a good effort. Rarely have they looked like a team that knew how to win and win well. Even their team of '66 should have been good enough to win more than one Premiership.

At a St.Kilda v Collingwood game a few years ago a Saints friend who I was sitting with said they would be over run in the second half even though they had outplayed Collingwood in the first half and led comfortably. I was surprised but it seemed to me to confirm a losing mentality that you just don't expect to win.

That becomes amplified when the opposition know they can keep at you and you will fold or find a way to lose. It is impossible to feel out of the match if you think the opposition can always be beaten.

I have heard a lot of people say St.Kilda don't know how to win or have forgotten how to win. IMO it is deeper than that. They have never known how to win.

IMO the culture that has been often referred to with players dictating terms and not being as disciplined as at some other teams is all part of the acceptance of less than 100% commitment to winning.

It is a cliché but winning is a way of life. If you recycle people who have not been associated with a winning mentality you have less chance to change that cycle. Changes have to be made at all levels of the club to make a significant change to the culture odf a club. That is obviously easier said than done. Whether you believe it is a cultural thing or not, there has to be a reason for repeated failure to capitalise on winning opportunities and strong sides.

I'm not trying to have a go at the Saints or stick the boots in but if the sum total of your history is a single premiership with a 1 point win win against a side renowned for loosing Grand Finals you have to at least consider that it may be something internal that effects the performance over the long term.

While I tend to disagree with specifics of your post, I cant but agree with the main arguement.

However, you hear this "the<insert young or rebuilding team> dont seem to know how to win" line about a team every year.

Since I've been on the planet Mark, the Saints have won EXACTLY the same amount of premierships as Collingwood. From your own admission Collingwood isn't that great when it comes to clutch games aka GF's. Does this mean that Collingwood have a choking culture?? I know how grating the Collywobbles term is for Collingwood supporters, it is the same for us Saints supporters when a generalisation about culture is made.

St. kilda has a history of losing. Does that mean this current bunch of player have to share that history? Dean Wallis and matt Rendell and Ken Sheldon are from winning "cultures". Is the St.Kilda's "culture" so powerful that it sucks the winning cultures into its losing vortex?

Mark, your point has some merit, but this all encompassing "culture" word is something that has yet to be explained to me.

 

[Vintage 62]

StKilda just don't know how to win. They haven't developed the habit.

Robert Harvey is no different though, for all his value to the team he isn't a match winner. He used regularly gather 30 possessions and still the saints would lose, partly because he didn't/doesn't know how to kick a goal.

The Sainters are definitely on the rise though, I think Thomas would be a good candidate for 'coach of the year.'

 

[MarkT]

Originally posted by Joffaboy
However, you hear this "the<insert young or rebuilding team> dont seem to know how to win" line about a team every year.

Yes you do but to an extent it is a truism. It can be applied to the Saints this year and I wouldn’t disagree. Over their history it has to run a little deeper than the age of the list IMO. It is a line over used though.

Originally posted by Joffaboy
Since I've been on the planet Mark, the Saints have won EXACTLY the same amount of premierships as Collingwood. From your own admission Collingwood isn't that great when it comes to clutch games aka GF's. Does this mean that Collingwood have a choking culture?? I know how grating the Collywobbles term is for Collingwood supporters, it is the same for us Saints supporters when a generalisation about culture is made.

You don’t have to tell me about Colliwobbles, I’ve seen more losing premierships than you probably seen finals wins. We could theorise until the clichés come home about choking v pushing a group of players to a GF when they were not really good enough. IMO Collingwood should have won a GF in the late 60’s early 70’s with their list but I was pretty young and can only go on what “they” say about the list and historical records. The Hafey era was one where IMO the coach got all he could out of the players and they were lucky to make so many GF’s. In the end though if you get there that often you should win one, even if it is only due to the law of averages. I have no doubt that the eventual psychological effect of the Colliwobble tag affected the players. Whether that constitutes a choking mentality I don’t know. Given they have since won one and since then have roughly performed to their abiliy I would say they do not now have a choking culture. All that is not really relevant in terms of St.Kilda though.

I am sure the generalizations grate on the supporters but until the results change you will have to keep hearing them. I have no doubt if Colingwood lose the 2 finals this year we will hear the Colliwobble calls. If we win our way into the GF wand lose we will hear them. If we win we won’t hear about the Colliwobbles. Relevant or not they are tal;ked about because of what did happen not what should have happened of what the current ability of the team really is. Personally it wouldn’t worry me because I am realistic about where we stand right now.

Originally posted by Joffaboy
St. kilda has a history of losing. Does that mean this current bunch of player have to share that history? Dean Wallis and matt Rendell and Ken Sheldon are from winning "cultures". Is the St.Kilda's "culture" so powerful that it sucks the winning cultures into its losing vortex?

All of that is subjective and uncertain. IMO yes it is part of the problem. Sheldon came from Carlton but spent a lot of time at St.Kilda and I’m not sure that Rendell came from a winning culture anyway. Fitzroy were e decent side in his time there but didn’t win a flag. Walls ahs said they underachieved. Even if they all did though, I would say that the club is sum total of what has gone before and who is there now to various degrees. The whole board, staff, playing group, supporters, the press you get based on accurate or inaccurate assessments of your culture and things like that all effect the mentality.

 

[Hurricane75]

Its all about culture Essendon demand success and St Kilda accept mediocrity.

Having said that, I have to respect St Kilda supporters, you can never accuse them of jumping on the bandwagon. Loyal til then end.

 

[fabulousphil]

If you expect 2nd best , then no doubt you will achieve it.


Got to respect Terry Wallace at the Bulldogs which i reckon had the same sort of losers mentality that the saints have before he went there

 

[MarkT]

Originally posted by fabulousphil
Got to respect Terry Wallace at the Bulldogs which i reckon had the same sort of losers mentality that the saints have before he went there

I don't think it is a losers mentality as much as not a winning one. It may be a subtle difference but I don't think any club would exist right now if it expected to lose or even accepted losing. It's more a matter of not having the win at all costs or second is failure attitude IMO. I agree that Wallace has changed the Bulldogs mentality. It took him some time though and that is even after Malthouse got them to the fianls and they were thereabouts under Wheeler for a time.