Page 1 of 2
Sturt that good? or south that bad?

Posted:
Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:41 pm
by stampy
having watched some of todays game sturt are playing at their peak and the woeful old panthers couldnt knock off hackham, can they still make the 5? and as for the blues a great rebound after their reality check against the bays a fortnight back
Re: Sturt that good? or south that bad?

Posted:
Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:45 pm
by MightyEagles
After today's effort, I can't see South doing to much more.
Sturt were just to good today.
Re: Sturt that good? or south that bad?

Posted:
Sat Jul 14, 2007 6:09 pm
by Jimmy
south made mistake after mistake and according to the comms they lacked interest but were pressured heavily by sturt who were very systematic. Many passages of play the comms stated did not touch a south hand.
as stampy says, great rebound from 2 weeks ago.
now north and we have a bit of confidence going into that game!
Re: Sturt that good? or south that bad?

Posted:
Sat Jul 14, 2007 6:11 pm
by RoosterMarty
Hopefully North win comfortably tomorrow.. no matter the result it sets up a cracking day next Sunday, damn shame it's not a Saturday arvo match.
At least Sturt finished South off, North would have won by 5 goals.
Re: Sturt that good? or south that bad?

Posted:
Sat Jul 14, 2007 6:15 pm
by therisingblues
Great to hear a full call on the radio today. I had the day off work owing to a typhoon blowing through my part of Japan, so I had the rare pleasure of listening to a full Sturt game. Very pleased with that effort, the commentators just can't say enough good things about the Blues. Of course I am relying fully on their descriptions of proceedings, but 2 players who didn't play against Glenelg at Adelaide who sounded as though they played blinders today were Herring and Mattner. One of them is a regualr AFL player for Adelaide and could slot back straight away, the other is definitely a Sturt regular (when he isn't o/s). Very heartened by Mattner's performance all the same. At the beginning of the game I couldn't understand why he wasn't backing himself for goals, but it soon became apparent that he was sharing the pill around with team mates who he hasn't played with for a long time, the commentators echoed that sentiment a few minutes after I typed it on doubleblue.org.
South are very up and down, and the side they beat last week was a very down on confidence Magpies outfit. Obviously they weren't up to standard today, but I should leave that analysis to people who at least saw it on TV or went there. But any side that is in position to have a fair crack at the 5 as South are, must have reason to put in their best effort. A few motivation problems down South perhaps. Whatever, it was great to finally have a real big win over somebody, and glad Chambers could boot 9.
GO YOU BLUES!!!
Re: Sturt that good? or south that bad?

Posted:
Sat Jul 14, 2007 6:51 pm
by am Bays
Well played Sturt, fully prepared to admit I was wrong. At the start of the year I had South as certain finalist and Sturt to be anywhere between 7-9.
Wrong Wriong Wrong.
Well done Strut to kill of any team that is a potential finalist by over 17 goals is a great result.
Sturt are the real deal and will play finals.....
I am shockled by South so far this year. They aren't officially out of it yet but by tommrow night they will b at least a game out side the five and the worst percentage of the four sides battling for 5th spot it will take a mighty efffort to make the five from here.
Re: Sturt that good? or south that bad?

Posted:
Sat Jul 14, 2007 6:57 pm
by mighty_tiger_79
I think it is a bit of both, STURT have improved from last year and a lot of that is due to the coach. I bet the members/board/players are happy they didnt sign PYMAN up.
South are just about gone, the rumours are rife running through the club about the ultimatum - players go or the coach goes - at the end of year.
its a shock that south have been so ordinary this year, as last year they were a good team to watch and they buried teams at home last year with quick running hard attacking footy
Re: Sturt that good? or south that bad?

Posted:
Sat Jul 14, 2007 7:04 pm
by BPBRB
mighty_tiger_79 wrote:I think it is a bit of both, STURT have improved from last year and a lot of that is due to the coach. I bet the members/board/players are happy they didnt sign PYMAN up.
South are just about gone, the rumours are rife running through the club about the ultimatum - players go or the coach goes - at the end of year.
its a shock that south have been so ordinary this year, as last year they were a good team to watch and they buried teams at home last year with quick running hard attacking footy
Pyman will go and no dobt one or two over priced interstaters as well. They must hate the cold months training at the South Pole! Most of the South players live at Glenelg and the surrounding suburbs in an case that's why we see them training at Glenelg so often in pre-season - its even cold at Polar Park in summer!
But seriously - I was at a social event recently at Glenelg where a South interstate recruit spent the whole night slagging the whole club from the coach to the supporters. I asked him why he stayed after his first year (that will give a clue!) and he said he got offered more money as he was setting a business. He doubts if he will stay next year unless South add more dollars to his contract. He raised the eyebrows of a few that night with his total honesty and at the same time lack of loyalty to the club he is playing for and that about sums up South at the moment IMHO.
Re: Sturt that good? or south that bad?

Posted:
Sat Jul 14, 2007 7:28 pm
by blueandwhite
Sturt were good today.
South were insipid. A total lack of respect shown for each other , the club,the coach, the guernsey and the supporters. What an appalling effort, no fight, no discipline no desperation in a game which was screened live on ABC TV, what a horrible advertisement for the club.

Re: Sturt that good? or south that bad?

Posted:
Sat Jul 14, 2007 7:36 pm
by saintal
blueandwhite wrote:Sturt were good today.
South were insipid. A total lack of respect shown for each other , the club,the coach, the guernsey and the supporters. What an appalling effort, no fight, no discipline no desperation in a game which was screened live on ABC TV, what a horrible advertisement for the club.

Yep. Especially given it was the skippers testionial dinner tonight.
21 overpriced blue and white witches hats.
As for players heading east, I heard that Steve Kenna has taken a job in Vic and will be heading back. A real shame if this is the case.
Re: Sturt that good? or south that bad?

Posted:
Sat Jul 14, 2007 7:50 pm
by bayman
to answer stampy's ? the answer is both
Re: Sturt that good? or south that bad?

Posted:
Sat Jul 14, 2007 8:09 pm
by zipzap
I'd tend to lean towards 'South that bad' over 'Sturt that good'. Won't be until next week that we will truly be able to see how far we have come.
Last time the 2 teams met I remember copping flak for suggesting the Panters were IMO the worst team we had come across this year. Well, now it's official. They are an absolute dispirited rabble at the moment, not unlike the Sturt of late 06. An awesome team effort for the Blues today, no doubt, but boy South were shocking at times.
Re: Sturt that good? or south that bad?

Posted:
Sat Jul 14, 2007 8:18 pm
by Mic
RoosterMarty wrote:Hopefully North win comfortably tomorrow.. no matter the result it sets up a cracking day next Sunday, damn shame it's not a Saturday arvo match.
At least Sturt finished South off, North would have won by 5 goals.
I agree. Centrals and Sturt, 2 of the 3 top teams, won by 100+ points. The other top 3 team didn't even get close to doing that.

Re: Sturt that good? or south that bad?

Posted:
Sat Jul 14, 2007 8:52 pm
by Hondo
Mic wrote:RoosterMarty wrote:Hopefully North win comfortably tomorrow.. no matter the result it sets up a cracking day next Sunday, damn shame it's not a Saturday arvo match.
At least Sturt finished South off, North would have won by 5 goals.
I agree. Centrals and Sturt, 2 of the 3 top teams, won by 100+ points. The other top 3 team didn't even get close to doing that.

No the 'other top 3 team' (OTTT) didn't
OTTT instead had the second biggest victory ever by a visiting team at Alberton while the other two top 2 teams had close games with them
Oh ..... and they beat Skirt by 50 points IIRC

what's with the downer posts lads?
Re: Sturt that good? or south that bad?

Posted:
Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:28 pm
by Insider
South blew their chance years ago when they had a good group of young lads coming through. signed Greg Anderson and he proceeded to recruit interstate players that were all after money. I can name at least 10 locals that left under his coaching role due to being told your in the team on thursday night then friday night get the team manager to rig and say "sorry mate your gonna have to play 2's tomorrow Jonno (not real name, can say if u want lol) is flying in tomorrow at 1230 and can play" Why would a young player wanna stay and play there?? They F k their locals over!!!!
Re: Sturt that good? or south that bad?

Posted:
Sat Jul 14, 2007 10:08 pm
by Dutchy
one of the ramifications of playing their home games on Sundays, is the regular 6 day back up they will have to get used to, esp when they are playing a side coming off a 14 days break
Re: Sturt that good? or south that bad?

Posted:
Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:00 pm
by Pseudo
The game was not worth watching after half time. Interest was kept solely in the hope that Chambers might notch his 10th. Boo for only dobbing 1 in the final term and finishing on 9! Woulda been good for the comp to see a few more players kick double figures, and will be good for the comp if Chambers cracks the ton this year.
Re: Sturt that good? or south that bad?

Posted:
Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:03 pm
by Dutchy
way too much love between the Bay and Sturt fans lately but thanks for doing us a favour 2 weeks ago and today!!!

Re: Sturt that good? or south that bad?

Posted:
Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:14 pm
by Cambridge Clarrie
In my opinion you could say that both statements are true.
Sturt played pretty ruthless footy all day. They kept the pressure up until the final siren when I half expected them to ease off the intensity in that last quarter. Their skills were sharp and their delivery to Chambers was great.
South were dismal. Playing such an important match I expected much more from them. From what I heard from some people (supposedly) in the know, they'll be paying Pyman out and looking for someone new. I don't think it's fair to blame the coach alone though. The whole concept of buying a winning team is flawed. There were a lot of players who showed today they are playing as individuals and for $$$ alone. Gotta say, I felt pretty sorry for Sampson. A true club man deserved a better effort on the eve of his testimonial dinner...
Re: Sturt that good? or south that bad?

Posted:
Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:29 pm
by southee
Hey guys,
Words can not describe what a witnessed today. I think if you saw the game you would know.
What a load of rubbish that was!! A televised game to promote the SANFL and we witness that!!! It was ugly.
Sturt showed great class, character and what a real football club is about. Not stars but players that actually want to be there and play for their club.
South on the other hand, well, uncomitted, undisiplaned, disinterested, no team plan, lack of skills, no character, poor team work, no team plan, unintelligent football - should i go on?
Lets face it. We are in serious trouble.
Someone has to do something. It was not pretty to see certain South board members still smiling when the team is down by 100 points. I know me and the few other South supporters were not!!
Wake up!!! Start to make some hard decisions now!!!
Going with my Sturt supporters mates it was utterly embarrassing to watch a game like that.
Shame on the players who did not care today.
Sampson busted his guts out today and to see the other players put in a effort like that shows a total lack of respect to a great player for the South Adelaide Football Club.
A disgrace!!!!
