Why are we so bad at playing in the wet?

[bloodsbigot]

It almost seems the swans have always been poor at playing in the rain. Is this just my own perception or is it an actual fact?

When it started raining in the first quarter last Saturday, I instantly thought, "ohhhhhhh **************!" Sure enough, our game went downhill after that.

Can anyone explain the poor performances in the rain? Do they call off training when it rains or something? Do we draft players from drought-stricken areas?

[Dosser]

* Waiting for horse to post something *

[Doctor]

That is the best question anyone has asked on this forum for a long, long time. Shame I can't answer it.

The wet, and the extra long break at quarter time, well and truly played in the Giants' hands. These are not excuses mind you, just things that helped their chances because of our own weaknesses.

[Triple B]

In truly wet conditions, like Essendon and Carlton at SCG last year, I don't think we are that bad. When it's so wet that nobody can pick the ball up and the tactics are go in hard, fight and scratch to move it forward any way you can, we stand up pretty well.

We fall down badly when the ball is slippery through dew or drizzle like last week and Port last year etc. Our short handball game around the clearances to release guys into space just breaks down continually with the slippery ball, yet we don't seem to adjust our game in those situations.

For many years now I have contended we are a MUCH better team in the day than in the night when we often have to endure dewy conditions...

[DK_]

I think it's a perception. As Triple B pointed out, we did well against Essendon and Carlton in the wet last year and we took the dogs apart in the wet at the SCG the year before. There's probably an argument that it favours the weaker team as it takes away the advantage of better skills or a better game plan and turns it into a slog fest.

[Auntie.Gerald]

it was a blip in the system
i cant analyse the loss any further

But i do remember .......Freedom is the road seldom travelled by the multitude !


Public Enemy - Show 'Em Whatcha Got - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHDee9BwC-0)



X

[Meg]

SCG dry but unrecognisable!

http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/03/20/asybe2yp.jpg

[i'm-uninformed2]

Because none of our players wee good boys as kids, like Hanners clearly wasn't, and were deprived slip'n'slides by Santa

Caro should get onto this

- - - Updated - - -

Because none of our players were good boys as kids, like Hanners clearly wasn't, and were deprived slip'n'slides by Santa

Caro should get onto this

[O'Reilly Boy]

Lack of competitiveness in ruck exacerbated in wet: more stoppages, OOBs, messy clearances, yet more stoppages. Then the dam burst in the second half of the fourth quarter. Play two rucks!

[mcs]

In truly wet conditions, like Essendon and Carlton at SCG last year, I don't think we are that bad. When it's so wet that nobody can pick the ball up and the tactics are go in hard, fight and scratch to move it forward any way you can, we stand up pretty well.

We fall down badly when the ball is slippery through dew or drizzle like last week and Port last year etc. Our short handball game around the clearances to release guys into space just breaks down continually with the slippery ball, yet we don't seem to adjust our game in those situations.

For many years now I have contended we are a MUCH better team in the day than in the night when we often have to endure dewy conditions...


That Port game last year was dreadful. We just tried the same things over and over and over and over and over and over and over again. Whereas Port clearly changed their game to suit their conditions, we just kept hitting our heads against a brick wall.

I think in those sort of slippery but not truly wet conditions, we still go in thinking our normal game plan will do it. I remember when Geelong beat us comfortably on a wet night (fairly recently at the SCG?) They completely changed their style of play to one in which you just force the ball forward at all costs, i.e. they played with a specific aim to get the ball forward and make the play to your advantage, in your attacking half of the field, and trust your guys further up field to control possession, even in a 1 on 1 situation.

I don't understand why we don't do that. For when its slippery and wet like it was at the Port game last year, its very unlikely that the other team is going to absolutely punish you kicking it long and taking lots of marks and getting you on the counter. We need to trust more in our defenders to do the job 1 on 1 in the wet, and take some risks to push the ball forward and break the congestion that way.

[Plugger1300]

I shudder anytime we play in wet conditions. They have no idea how to adapt at all. Not saying that our skills don't sometimes get us over the line anyway.

[Industrial Fan]

Particularly in the backline we rely on quick handballs and run from behind to release the ball.

The slippery ball slows down the movement, and the heavy ground stops our run.

[Melbournehammer]

We handpass to the defensive side of the stoppage by choice. This creates the conditions for teams to keep the ball going that way.

As an aside I just wish young daniher had chosen us

[sharp9]

We handpass to the defensive side of the stoppage by choice. This creates the conditions for teams to keep the ball going that way.

As an aside I just wish young daniher had chosen usIt's not the handpassing that was the problem it was not actually picking up the ball. We have been really terrible in the wet for more than a decade - especially against Hird, Voss, Aker, Ablett types. We have (generally speaking) very poor handskills compared to other teams. Vs St. Kilda in Wellington anyone??? Now THAT was embarrassing! A bit of dew and you would have thought the thing was actually made of soap.

Last year (as some have pointed out) for the very first time since I have been watching the Swans, we were better in the wet than a couple of others and won going away. But the usual story was the year before when we lead Carlton by 20 points....pouring rain....Bevan can't pick up the ball - but it's not a problem for Judd, Murphy and that skinny bloke with the beard.

Against GWS I was saying out loud during 3rd quarter "we will lose thins because they are much. much more skillful in close with a slippery ball" Time after time during those big scrimmages we had chances to pick up and do something with it....fail. The GWS boys could ACTUALLY PICK UP THE BALL and control it long enough to send it forward. If anyone can bear to watch the replay it is very obvious. They weren't winning contested ball by standard measures. They could just handle it properly. It got worse as the game wore on. They began to get really confident because they knew that they could go in quickly to the contested ball and we couldn't.

Also we are clearly nowhere near as fit as them.

[Panttz]

Do we actually train in the wet? Do the players practice their skills with the sprinklers on at all?

I am actually interested if this actually happens

[Meg]

Also we are clearly nowhere near as fit as them.

Agree. But why?

[wolftone57]

I found the players handling the ball like a slippery bar of soap frustrating. I wonder if our side still use rosin on the players hands in the wet? It is the best substance for helping grip the ball in the wet. I can remember when I was a kid the players all used it and I used it and it proved really good in wet conditions. You could actually grip the ball. Interesting that it is distilled from oil of turpentine, you'd think it would be slippery but it isn't, it is sticky.

Our ball handling in slippery conditions is a problem and certainly we need to lose the dinky handball in these conditions and we also need to lose the panic kick out of defence as it almost always comes back.

[bloodsbigot]

The mythbusters should put this theory to practice.

If it's a day game and it's not raining, I'm always confident we'll win.