West Coast Deserved It

[A swans fan]

They absolutely deserved to win. I can't believe we got so close, in a game where we had NO BUSINESS getting so close.

Deserved to win?

I disagree! Is this just because they played well in the first half and we played poorly?

Why is it somehow perceived to be "better" or "more deserving" if a team plays well in the first half rather than in the second half?

West Coast kicked 8 goals to our 4 in the first half, and then this was reversed 4- to 8 in the second half.

It's a game of 4 quarters!

[Damien]

Not sure I can ever watch the replay, but my feeling all day was that we were being outplayed but somehow staying close enough to make a charge, but even our 'charge' wasn't really the typical type of charge, I spent the last quarter praying that we would fall over the line.

A football loss has never ever hurt me as much as yesterday, actually made me question how or why I got myself so attached to something that can make me hurt so badly!

The early nineties never ever hurt this much, it is more relaxing going for a crap side lol

Can't wait to return to work and get the "I'm so sorry about the Swans" crap out of the way, so I can try and remove it from my memory.

Saw a replay of the last 10 seconds at the aiport tonight...made me feel sick...

My dad reminded me that the Swans have now played in two grand finals in a row with 1 premiership, and the two closest grand finals for decades also. When it dies down, I'll look at all this in the right context, but for now it's not much fun.

[dimelb]

Originally posted by A swans fan
Deserved to win?

I disagree! Is this just because they played well in the first half and we played poorly?

Why is it somehow perceived to be "better" or "more deserving" if a team plays well in the first half rather than in the second half?

West Coast kicked 8 goals to our 4 in the first half, and then this was reversed 4- to 8 in the second half.

It's a game of 4 quarters!

Hear hear!
If we were so bad, how come we got so close?

[desredandwhite]

Originally posted by dimelb
Hear hear!
If we were so bad, how come we got so close?

One of the great mysteries of all time. If you ever solve it, let me know

I think West Coast were clearly better than us. Completely outplayed us in the first half, and really should have put us away. However, a combination of some dodgy kicking, one or two dodgy decisions and some spectacularly arsey goals meant that we kept in touch, and were ALMOST in a position to capitalise on said luck.

Of course, the "better" team on the day doesn't always win... But IMO they did on this ocassion. That's my whole point really. WCE IMO much better on the day, but we got close due to a bit of G&D, and some luck.

[W84]

I don't think that either team "deserved" to win the game.

The only thing that each team deserved was a spot in the GF. Nothing else matters, and rightfully so.

At the end of the game, the only team that deserved the premiership was the team that won on the day.

That team being the West Coast Eagles

[Big Al]

Originally posted by A swans fan
Deserved to win?

I disagree! Is this just because they played well in the first half and we played poorly?

Why is it somehow perceived to be "better" or "more deserving" if a team plays well in the first half rather than in the second half?

West Coast kicked 8 goals to our 4 in the first half, and then this was reversed 4- to 8 in the second half.

It's a game of 4 quarters!

The fact that we lead for only 3 minutes of the game seems to indicate we weren't good enough on the day. Lets remenber when Goodes kicked that goal in the 1st minute of the last Qtr we had all the momentum but still couldn't get in front. As shattering as the result is, the eagles were the better team on the day.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by Damien
Not sure I can ever watch the replay, but my feeling all day was that we were being outplayed but somehow staying close enough to make a charge

I think part of the reason we stayed close is they weren't able to put us away, which goes to their key problem of a poor forward line.

[ScottH]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
I think part of the reason we stayed close is they weren't able to put us away, which goes to their key problem of a poor forward line.

Yep, I think they missed just as many goals as we did.

[Sanecow]

Originally posted by ScottH
Yep, I think they missed just as many goals as we did.

But not nearly as many as I expected them to.

[liz]

Originally posted by ScottH
Yep, I think they missed just as many goals as we did.

They did - but probably nothing to rival the sitters that Hall and Bolton missed. Plus Monty and Tiger's mistakes gifted them two goals, and at least three others came from pretty ordinary defensive errors by Sydney. On the other hand, the O'Keefe goal had a significant element of luck / defensive error.

Still think that West Coast were the better team but the Swans certainly managed to create enough opportunities to steal it.

[ScottH]

Originally posted by liz
They did - but probably nothing to rival the sitters that Hall and Bolton missed. Plus Monty and Tiger's mistakes gifted them two goals, and at least three others came from pretty ordinary defensive errors by Sydney. On the other hand, the O'Keefe goal had a significant element of luck / defensive error.

Still think that West Coast were the better team but the Swans certainly managed to create enough opportunities to steal it.

And ROK's smothered kick was another bad mistake, which resulted in a goal, too.

[liz]

Originally posted by ScottH
And ROK's smothered kick was another bad mistake, which resulted in a goal, too.

That was one of the three "others" that I referred too. There were a couple of other occasions where two Swans defenders went to the same contest and went to ground, leaving an Eagle to run onto an easy ball and stroll towards goal. One involved Richards and B2. The other was Mathews and someone else, maybe B2 as well. The first was probably Richards' error because I reckon B2 had the contest covered.