Why Does Everyone Favour St Kilda Next Week?

Remove this Banner Ad

Ha ha. Pull out all the straws and omens you like. It's easy to make just as many arguments the other way. Not many people would put money on Swan, Pendles, Beams and a few others playing two sub-standard games in a row. What's to say the Pies wouldn't kick straighter next week, who says the ball won't bounce the other way or the 50/50 umpiring decisions go the other way. In the end both teams have to do it all again. Using omens and suppositions to determine the winner won't make it so! (especially if you try to convince yourself the Saints are fitter than the Pies... No way!)


Absolutely anything could happen. But it is 50/50 and last week...according to all the experts it was 75/25.

Saints last quarter performances this year are not an omen or a superstition, it is a fact. They are an extremely fit team and the reason for that is they learnt from running out of legs in the 09 GF.

You don't wind back 4 goals against a very good side with only 21 men without being a very fit team.
 
i said last week grand finals are a 50/50 contest and it was shown in the 1st grand final. it will be the same in the 2nd

Collingwood fans have now realised this and are a LOT quieter this week. I know plenty of them and haven't heard a thing today.

All the Saints need to do is stop Collingwood's initial burst and I think they'll be right. The Saints' intensity was down in the first half... we didn't see them hit packs as hard as Collingwood until the 4th quarter imo.

Saints by 2-3 goals... fine day forecast, Reiwoldt will fire.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Absolutely anything could happen. But it is 50/50 and last week...according to all the experts it was 75/25.

Saints last quarter performances this year are not an omen or a superstition, it is a fact. They are an extremely fit team and the reason for that is they learnt from running out of legs in the 09 GF.

You don't wind back 4 goals against a very good side with only 21 men without being a very fit team.
You're still clutching at straws. So now the Saints go in favourites. Well given that the Pies did last week that must mean that the Saints will have an off-form game next week. (by your logic!) If history counts for anything the Pies season counts as much as any other stat. Come on, history clearly counts for naught or St Kilda would be a dead cert to be smashed based on the last 6 months alone. I'm afraid like the rest of us you won't find a logical argument that will make any difference. It's 50/50 next week and that's that. Go Pies!
 
Maybe just give the cup to StK, Coll obviously have no hope according to you.

Maybe you're the one with all the arrogance.

I said the SUPPORTERS got humbled and possibly humiliated. :rolleyes: Although I do think the players held that same arrogance that they would flog the Saints.

If you read on you'll see I said the game is in every sense of the word a 50/50 proposition.
 
I specifically said I thought it was 50/50 and you replied "So now the Saints go in favourites".
The point I was making is that omens and betting odds are irrelevant. Youwere making the point that history is important. Convenient of you to ignore the rest of my post I think!
 
In all honesty, judging our season overall, I think the Saints were somewhat lucky to even make the GF

Nobody gave us a chance, even though we had saved our best performances for the QF and PF

I think St Kilda surprised more than a few people against Collingwood, and people are now seeing that the Saints have a gameplan / style that can more than match it with them

Collingwood will still be favourites leading into this weekend, and deservedly so after the season they have had. But St Kilda will come in a fair way also
 
The point I was making is that omens and betting odds are irrelevant. Youwere making the point that history is important. Convenient of you to ignore the rest of my post I think!

Where did Ricmel use omens as any kind of guide towards what might happen this weekend?
 
In all honesty, judging our season overall, I think the Saints were somewhat lucky to even make the GF

Nobody gave us a chance, even though we had saved our best performances for the QF and PF

I think St Kilda surprised more than a few people against Collingwood, and people are now seeing that the Saints have a gameplan / style that can more than match it with them

Collingwood will still be favourites leading into this weekend, and deservedly so after the season they have had. But St Kilda will come in a fair way also
Mostly fair assessment I think but I don't necessarily agree that the pies will go in favourites again. The press is mostly making the case that the Pies have a bigger psychological hurdle than the Saints and so I think the Saints will go in at least even. The point not lost on some (myself included) is that the Saints were without Riewoldt for much of the season and he makes a big difference to how they play. Hd you asked me where I thought the Pies would finish at the start of the year I'd have said 3rd or 4th since I'm still of the opinion that while we have plenty of talent, we still lack experience but we were always going to be better this year than last. Whoever wins it will truly deserve it and I reckon it's going to be a hell of a battle.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I made no reference to history at all.

The following looks distinctly like a reference to history if you ask me:
Saints last quarter performances this year are not an omen or a superstition, it is a fact. They are an extremely fit team and the reason for that is they learnt from running out of legs in the 09 GF..

The point I'm making is that you can make as many such arguments as you like but there are just as many that can be made the other way. If your team has historically won last quarters then well and good. It means nothing in regard to whether or not they will beat the Pies on Saturday. I could as easily say that because we won almost all of our early quarters and generally by enough to smash any opposition that means we've got some kind of advantage. The Pies might also argue that because they are younger they are fitter while you might argue that you have more experience. In the end it counts for nothing on Saturday.
 
There are going to be a few sore players and so I think next week's game will be a bit more open. The last drawn GF in '77 was an example of that, where a tight drawn game was followed up by a goal-fest. Can St. Kilda bring their "Saints footy" again or will the Pies avalanche of inside 50s prove decisive? I can't see the Saints stopping the ball getting inside the Pies forward half and so the Pies should win. Whatever happens, Saturday was an absorbing battle where 44 blokes went to war. No-one will ever forget it .
 
The following looks distinctly like a reference to history if you ask me:


The point I'm making is that you can make as many such arguments as you like but there are just as many that can be made the other way. If your team has historically won last quarters then well and good. It means nothing in regard to whether or not they will beat the Pies on Saturday. I could as easily say that because we won almost all of our early quarters and generally by enough to smash any opposition that means we've got some kind of advantage. The Pies might also argue that because they are younger they are fitter while you might argue that you have more experience. In the end it counts for nothing on Saturday.

OK
Think I was confused when you brought "omen" into it

Basing an argument on what has statistically been occurring over a sustained number of weeks is one thing

Basing it on the fact that it was 44 years since Geelong won their GF in 2007 and comparing it to St Kilda this year is quite another

If you can't base an argument on statistics or form-line, we'd never have a favourite. Every team in every game in every sport would have to start at a 50% chance of winning. Wouldn't they? Mathematics says this is how it probably should be. Reality tells us otherwise
 
The following looks distinctly like a reference to history if you ask me:

.

It's about the fact that we have been a very good 4th quarter team this year and the Pies haven't. That is not history. It's like saying the Pies are the second highest scoring team this year and are therefore very attacking.

It's not history, it's the way the team plays.

Jesus did you just misread this or what?
 
It's about the fact that we have been a very good 4th quarter team this year and the Pies haven't. That is not history. It's like saying the Pies are the second highest scoring team this year and are therefore very attacking.

It's not history, it's the way the team plays.

Jesus did you just misread this or what?
Describing how your team played during the year is definitely history.

Jesus did you go to school?
 
Describing how your team played during the year is definitely history.

Jesus did you go to school?

OK. So on your line of argument "Don't refer to history" (your definition of "history") when making comments about how a team may go this coming week, we should not refer to "omens" such as how the team has played during the year.

Who did YOU think was favourite last week? How did you determine that?

Therefore by your logic I should find no post of yours that refers to the Pies performance in the first GF vis -a -vis how they will go in the replay?

What exactly are we supposed to refer to to determine chances in your opinion? A Ouija board?
 
Describing how your team played during the year is definitely history.

Jesus did you go to school?


Here's a quote from you, from TODAY,

The good news for the Pies is that there's no way Swanny and Pendles would be so far down on form for 2 weeks in a row. It hasn't happened up til now and I can't see it happening next week.

Why is it OK for you to refer to history (your definition) but no one else?
 
Here's a quote from you, from TODAY,

The good news for the Pies is that there's no way Swanny and Pendles would be so far down on form for 2 weeks in a row. It hasn't happened up til now and I can't see it happening next week.

Why is it OK for you to refer to history (your definition) but no one else?
Nobody said it's not OK to quote history. If you could read you would know that I said it makes no difference to the result and proves nothing because there are as many arguments either way, not that you can't do it!
 
Simple.

If you watch the second half again, you can see that St Kilda had altered their style of play (which they are very, very good at) and have figured Collingwood out.

I expect an opposite start next week, St Kilda to kick the first goal and go from there...

The main reason St Kilda were able to stand up in that last quarter was because Collingwood have recently been questionable in terms of last quarters where they have not generated a substantial lead beforehand.

Hopefully St Kilda can make the most of their new-found realizations and start off fresher next week.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Why Does Everyone Favour St Kilda Next Week?

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top