You're right. I just checked. But I prefer the version I originally interpreted!Originally Posted by ernie koala
You're right. I just checked. But I prefer the version I originally interpreted!
Last edited by liz; 27th April 2014 at 04:28 AM.
I thought the game was entertaining and just defensive rather than sloppy. Melbourne were competitive, people aren't giving their improved whole field defence enough credit this season. They are literally ten goals a game better compared to last year in terms of what they concede. They've mostly lost this year because they don't have a forward line yet and because they're still learning. Watch them claim a couple of scalps later in the year.
So I think there's a bit too much wrist-slitting here for a five goal win.
We got the job done. Could have won by more but missed a lot of shots in the second half.
Last edited by R-1; 27th April 2014 at 04:00 AM.
I agree. I came down from Sydney for the match and was really delighted by the strong support the Swans received. Even the Melbourne friends I went with, who are Demons' members, commented on it.
Have decided to read none of the above ... but noticed "entertaining" as a comment on the game ... well let me speak and get a few things of my chest ... not necessarily profitable or positive ... but honest ...
1. this was the most uninspiring / unsatisfying 30 point Swans "win" I have ever endured
2. it was like self inflicted torture most of the time
3. field kicking ... terrible
4. goal kicking ... terrible
5. hand passing ... mostly awful ... both givers and receivers (running into dead ends) at fault
6. general skill level / ball handling ... terrible
7. opportunities wasted / clangers ... horrendous
8. it got into a pattern that was predictable ... the best passages were Melbourne ... even if they mostly couldn't finish it off
9. if I was ever silly enough to watch a replay I'm sure there is more
10. and last weeks "arrival" is seen for what it wasn't with the Freo loss at home.
Bright spots in the gloom ... Hanners is back ... Rampe is simply great ...Tom D looked a bit better ... Shaw had a lot of possessions ... Goodes ... but we won'y get anywhere near Geelong, Hawthorn etc serving up this error riddled drivel.
Rubbish.
We won.
For a start, any of those 3 losses earlier in the session were worse
Many people are commenting on the lack of output by LRT and Tom D.
Is it time to acknowledge that Tippett will need to do some ruckwork when he is back?
Tippett seems to break if someone even breathes heavily in his general direction at the moment. How's he going to handle ruck duties?
I'm not so sure. Rucking down in the forward line takes tippet out of the contest for goal kicking which I think he is better suited to. Additionally he is more likely to reinjure his knee and ribs
I'm sort of agreeing with Leigh Matthews about the ruck and I think the ground work of hanners Kennedy etc is prob more important. Surely the clearances are more important than hit outs. We won clearances 35 29 despite losing hit outs 26 48
Last edited by aguy; 27th April 2014 at 08:43 AM. Reason: Spelling
I cant beleive the negativity here. Any sloppiness was due to Melbourne pressure and slippery ball. Give the opposition some credit. If the demons played like that every week, theyd have a few more wins.
I liked laidlers game. He reminds me a bit of LRT. Not much talent but plenty of guts and determination.
I'm not negative. I think we did ok, but that is because I have lowered my expectations. I think you should too. Your comment about the demons playing like that every week could be said about north and gws as well. As I say to my son - if you have arguments with one person it could be them or you, If you have arguments with everyone in the house it's probably you. The dees kicked less than forty points for the MATCH in cold but dry conditions. We coulda shoulda woulda beat them by more but won by just five goals kicking less than seventy points ourselves. It wasn't even that windy. A lot of our set shots just missed, never deviated off the line, just missed. Man Craig bird didn't even make the distance from 45. And that kicking was no different but considerably better than that off half back where we missed player after player time and time again. At the ground all you heard were groans from both sets of fans (and the Bronx cheers for jack watts).
After a while you either come to the realization that with the current 22 injuries, experience, skills we are playing about as well as we can and that, hopefully, Reid and Tippett and maybe Rohan and Mitchell will improve us. But I doubt it to be honest. If last nights skills were anything to go by our field kicking would have to improve out of this world to beat Port and essendon, let alone Geelong and hawthorn.
I can see us finishing between 5-10 unless the personnel or skills improve. I think we have it in us to improve, but we are coming from a long way back at the moment
As a football lover I'm looking forward to the battle of the Swans attack v Hawks defence. If everyone is ready it's:
Tippett V Lake
Franklin V Gibson
Goodes V Stratton
Reid V Schoennakers
That is the best AFL attack V the best AFL defence (Geelong Key defence is similar class).
What strategies could the Swans forwards use to get on top?
I don't agree.
Our mids are finding form
Our defenders have been excellent (one of the best outfits in the league)
Our forwards have been poor but will change dramatically with the inclusion of Tippett, Reid and a match fit Goodes.
If we get a lucky run with injuries, I predict we'll still finish top 4.
Sorry Melbournehammer, just noticed you qualified with "personnel improve'....So perhaps we agree?
Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect... MT
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks