"Why bother?"

[Cheer Squad]

http://www.smh.com.au/afl/afl-news/swans-lose-plot-as-finals-campaign-becomes-nearly-irrelevant-20110814-1it49.html

In today's SMH, Richard Hinds pretty well sums up the situation we're in with two words -"why bother?" That's as good an explanation as anything else that's been put forward for yesterday's performance. The team seems to have lost heart.

O'Keefe was interviewed last week and mentioned something about team chemistry either not being there or not being what it should be. To me, it sounds like we're not being led properly. Perhaps it's the endless changes being made to the team that's got everyone fundamentally unsettled.

I think the real problem is leadership. We haven't got the captaincy right. Someone needs to take the situation by the scruff of the neck. As to who that might be, it's obviously not McVeigh. He's doesn't have the personality for it and he's got far more important things to worry about ATM.

I think we need to sort out the captaincy issue once and for all. If not Goodes or McVeigh, it needs to be someone who's going to be around for a while. Maybe Jack, or Hannebery? Who else would have the personality for it?

[browneeg]

I'm my opinion, Goodsey should have been sole Captain this year, that way he would have felt more empowered and allowed the freedom to Lead in his own authentic way. This Co-captian @@@@ only works if both have the same vision and same application. I have never been a fan of Co-Captaining.

Jack and Hannerbery are too young, however Jack could be the 2 IC to Goodsey. Hannerbery just too young!

[erica]

Winning is up to the players. I can't accept that professional players don't have pride in their performances. I'm not giving up my support for my team so neither should they. Let's regroup and slay the Saints on Sunday.

[ScottH]

I don't believe anybody is too young. If you have the qualities that make a good leader, then why can't you be captain.
From what I saw and heard on Sunday makes me think Hanners has the makings of a great captain.
He was the one who seemed to be calling the shots out there.

[toothy76]

I always questioned the promotion of McVeigh into the captaincy role. He must be very good off field. I have wondered if it was an incentive to keep him at the club at his last contract negotiation - stay with us and we'll make you captain one day.

While I would prefer that a young player wasn't burdened with the captaincy, don't forget that Paul Kelly was only 23 when given the role. Hannebery is clearly leadership material, especially on field, and will be an elite player - he's one of the few we have with genuine skill and coolheadedness on the field. He is visibly affected by losses - moreso than many of his teammates - and has that fearless courage that Kelly also had.

I'd put Hannebery ahead of Jack. It may also be the only way of keeping him at the club. Maybe in a couple of years if Goodes retires.

I had no confidence that we would win yesterday. The result highlighted what happens when a side continues to play finals and not drop to the bottom to pick up players like Cotchin, Deledio and Martin. We have good players, but not potentially great ones. It will happen eventually (I hope) but it's not there yet.

[liz]

You don't need the label of "captain" by your name to provide leadership. Whoever the named leaders of the team are should make no difference to players acting as leaders out on the ground. We clearly lacked leaders yesterday, especially in the midfield, but I can't accept that who is named captain can be completely to blame for that.

[ernie koala]

http://www.smh.com.au/afl/afl-news/swans-lose-plot-as-finals-campaign-becomes-nearly-irrelevant-20110814-1it49.html

In today's SMH, Richard Hinds pretty well sums up the situation we're in with two words -"why bother?" That's as good an explanation as anything else that's been put forward for yesterday's performance. The team seems to have lost heart.

O'Keefe was interviewed last week and mentioned something about team chemistry either not being there or not being what it should be. To me, it sounds like we're not being led properly. Perhaps it's the endless changes being made to the team that's got everyone fundamentally unsettled.

I think the real problem is leadership. We haven't got the captaincy right. Someone needs to take the situation by the scruff of the neck. As to who that might be, it's obviously not McVeigh. He's doesn't have the personality for it and he's got far more important things to worry about ATM.

I think we need to sort out the captaincy issue once and for all. If not Goodes or McVeigh, it needs to be someone who's going to be around for a while. Maybe Jack, or Hannebery? Who else would have the personality for it?

Yeah, I agree Cheer Squad, leadership, on the field, is sadly lacking.
Even Goodsie at his imperial best is not a troop gatherer, he does what he can on his own.
There is no central force gathering the troops when momentum is against us.
Bolton is the most obvious candidate until others, like Hanners or Jack, emerge, but it had to happen at the start of this season.
I know I'm pissing in the wind on this one, there will be no change.
It would be too unsettling and directionless, to swap leaders, at this early stage of their tenure.

[Plugger46]

You don't need the label of "captain" by your name to provide leadership. Whoever the named leaders of the team are should make no difference to players acting as leaders out on the ground. We clearly lacked leaders yesterday, especially in the midfield, but I can't accept that who is named captain can be completely to blame for that.

Agree totally. Not enough footy won by our midfielders. Just turned up expecting to win.

As for making the finals - I'd much prefer to finish 8th than 9th. We've shown that we can play some good footy so I can't see why anyone wouldn't want to make it.

[Cheer Squad]

You don't need the label of "captain" by your name to provide leadership. Whoever the named leaders of the team are should make no difference to players acting as leaders out on the ground. We clearly lacked leaders yesterday, especially in the midfield, but I can't accept that who is named captain can be completely to blame for that.

Why did we lack leaders yesterday? I think our problem goes far deeper that the midfielders having a bad day. I think O'Keefe probably nailed it last week when he said the team lacked chemistry. That's quite debilitating, because that means they're not playing for each other. A strong leader is needed to sort that out.

[GongSwan]

The contrast between this and the effort against Essendon makes me wonder about our young blokes ability to back up, however, it was again the senior players who did not have enough impact on the game, so I would agree the leadership is a real issue, but I think it comes from the group of older players who should be leadsing the way. Once again skill errors and the lack of a proper forward line has us scrambling. As does the need for outright speed in the midfield

[liz]

Why did we lack leaders yesterday? I think our problem goes far deeper that the midfielders having a bad day. I think O'Keefe probably nailed it last week when he said the team lacked chemistry. That's quite debilitating, because that means they're not playing for each other. A strong leader is needed to sort that out.

I don't know why we lacked them - but we clearly did. Goodes looked like he was carrying the weight of last week's loss on his shoulders. McVeigh looked like his head was somewhere else - it might well have been, and no-one would blame him if it were, except he probably shouldn't have been playing. It is hard to believe that Jude didn't care enough to put an effort in, so one has to assume that he is either very sore or running out of steam. ROK probably wasn't the worst but his game was a shadow of some of his other efforts. He has been down for the last few weeks (as has Bolton). Is he too carrying something? Jack showed signs of stepping up to be a team leader at the end of last year but he hasn't really gone on with it this year (his excellent game against the Dogs notwithstanding). Is the ankle still bothering him? Did the six or seven missed weeks of training take their toll? Mumford tried to change the tide early in the second quarter with a couple of excellent smothers and chases. But he ran out of legs. I suspect the lack of a pre-season is really catching up with him, not helped by the extra workload he has shouldered this year.

[RogueSwan]

Agree totally. Not enough footy won by our midfielders. Just turned up expecting to win...

What he said.

[Wardy]

David Parkin & Chris Grant both said after the game that there was no chemisty - simple. Perhaps too much emphasis has been put on leadership groups and the like, worrying too much about all the little incidental things that are happening off the field rather than focusing on the big things that need to happen on the field. Because, at the end of the day, its Footy - its not rocket science. Its not changing world poverty - its just footy. And I know that there are those who embrace the leadership group and the blood brothers thing - but like all fads, they tend to run their course. maybe ours has. (Its only my observations, feel free to shoot me down should you wish)

[Melbournehammer]

David Parkin & Chris Grant both said after the game that there was no chemisty - simple. Perhaps too much emphasis has been put on leadership groups and the like, worrying too much about all the little incidental things that are happening off the field rather than focusing on the big things that need to happen on the field. Because, at the end of the day, its Footy - its not rocket science. Its not changing world poverty - its just footy. And I know that there are those who embrace the leadership group and the blood brothers thing - but like all fads, they tend to run their course. maybe ours has. (Its only my observations, feel free to shoot me down should you wish)

I tend to think that overanalyzes things too. The reality is that games are decided by a series of lucky or unlucky bounces, umpire decisions, spoils which go where players are or don't etc. The first five minutes of the game showed we weren't up for it but who knows what might have happened if Aj had kicked the goal after doing all the work, or if Kennedy snaps truly at the start of the last etc. For those with a long memory of preliminary final night 2005 you may recall I think it was magi re hitting a shot from outside fifty in the first couple of minutes after three quarter time which had it gone in I reckon would have seen our bacon cooked. It drifted wide. We then kicked on in a manner which has stuck with me since then and probably in my last moments instead of whispering rosebud I'll be saying Schneider, Micky, Schneider...

The reality is that we tried hard but simply got lost once the ball went into the packs at half forward, and they were faster than us coming out of those. and they had a number of balls go to full forward where their forwards were first to the ball and we had a similar number of situations where we were second to the ball. A fickle bounce or two and things are completely different.

[Wardy]

I tend to think that overanalyzes things too. The reality is that games are decided by a series of lucky or unlucky bounces, umpire decisions, spoils which go where players are or don't etc. The first five minutes of the game showed we weren't up for it but who knows what might have happened if Aj had kicked the goal after doing all the work, or if Kennedy snaps truly at the start of the last etc. For those with a long memory of preliminary final night 2005 you may recall I think it was magi re hitting a shot from outside fifty in the first couple of minutes after three quarter time which had it gone in I reckon would have seen our bacon cooked. It drifted wide. We then kicked on in a manner which has stuck with me since then and probably in my last moments instead of whispering rosebud I'll be saying Schneider, Micky, Schneider...

The reality is that we tried hard but simply got lost once the ball went into the packs at half forward, and they were faster than us coming out of those. and they had a number of balls go to full forward where their forwards were first to the ball and we had a similar number of situations where we were second to the ball. A fickle bounce or two and things are completely different.

it probably does - but so much was put on the blood brothers ethos and leadership group in recent years that seemed to overide what was happening on the field - they need to get back to basics - smart decision making, kicking to targets, backup each other up, maning up when in defence, and kicking accurately at goal and all the other things that go into playing top class footy.

As Joshua P Kennedys good old grandpa said at Hawthorn all those years ago "dont think, dont hope, DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!"

[The Big Cat]

When a team's flat, the best leadership can't lift it. We had flat days with Kirky and with Kell. The team looked nervous and tentative from the very start on Sunday. I think the Swans are at their most vulnerable (in terms of playing at their best) when they are playing games that appear certain wins. Sure we struggle to beat top teams, but usually we give a good account of ourselves both in effort and in staying in the game for long periods. WE needed to start well and we didn't. Richmond's skills early on were terrible but once they got a sniff the confidence grew the skills improved, they weren't double guessing themselves and they became unstoppable.

[The Big Cat]

On the issue of chemistry, ROK's comments have been taken so far out of context it is laughable. He was responding to a question regarding the forward line and was comparing the situation to when MOL and Hall were playing and they knew when to lead, where to lead, when to open up space etc. He went on to make the point that this will come as the new players become accustomed to each other. This site never ceases to amaze me with the jumps in "logic" that are made. A lot of these threads promise the world but struggle to deliver an atlas.

[The Big Cat]

As Joshua P Kennedys good old grandpa said at Hawthorn all those years ago "dont think, dont hope, DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!"

Just by coincidence, he was sitting at a table beside me in one of the bakeries in Ararat today. He and his wife (I presume) and another bloke were looking at the menu. Did I hear him say to him wife (as you quoted) "dont think, dont hope, DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. At least you can go out of this bakery and say - I ate ...or I drank .... or I put on a shepherd (pie) ....."

[Plugger46]

On the issue of chemistry, ROK's comments have been taken so far out of context it is laughable. He was responding to a question regarding the forward line and was comparing the situation to when MOL and Hall were playing and they knew when to lead, where to lead, when to open up space etc. He went on to make the point that this will come as the new players become accustomed to each other. This site never ceases to amaze me with the jumps in "logic" that are made. A lot of these threads promise the world but struggle to deliver an atlas.

Absolutely spot on.