My only comment is that I don't think the margin would have been as much at halftime if we had a fully fit mcglynn, rohan, Heeney, Pyke
If we weakened the Hawks by removing approx equivalent style players such poppa, Gunston, Breust, McEvoy then it would have been interesting
But we will never know
Either way the Hawks have put to the sword their two biggest contenders and if west coast continue to evolve they might be the only team to provide any resistance
I find it disturbing that so many here in this thread and commentators have already gifted Hawthorn the premiership. Not that its unwarranted but with all the efforts of the AFL to manipulate equalisation it shows that already on round 17 they have failed miserably, as they have with stylising the game through constant knee jerk rule changes. I wouldn't object to a major overhaul though.
In the Swans defence I can only observe that we have never been good at dominating through a full season of the home and away. We were obliged to start hot after such a dismal 2014 GF. Hopefully after muddling through a few dodgy wins against the lowly teams the horror show of last night will kickstart some genuine reforms or spirit in the run up to the finals.
Here's the link to Rohan Connally's comments on SEN referred to earlier. It's worth a listen, but nothing new that hasn't been commented on already.
http://www.sen.com.au/news/07-15/con...plete-shambles
The biggest problem I see with our list is the bottom 6/fringe players. B.Jack, Shaw, Jones, Lloyd, Towers, Nankervis, Cunningham, Robinson and the like is where we're falling away in my view.
The bottom 6 has always dictated how good a team is. It was one of the reasons St.Kilda failed, their bottom 6 was very ordinary and the host of superstatrs couldn't cover that.Originally Posted by Plugger46
Our depth has been severely diluted over the past two seasons and our bottom six would not get a game in a number of other teams. That is where we are currently at.
Brian Lake's marking the man technique has me intrigued. He stands to the side and not directly in front (presume this is legal as he is not pulled up on it) and then runs in. Anyone else notice this?. Does any other player do this?. I know they move around on the mark a lot.
Well, that was pretty @@@@, wasn't it? It's not like I didn't predict they were going to rip us a new one.
Wild speculation, unsubstantiated rumours, silly jokes and opposition delight in another's failures is what makes an internet forum fun.
Blessed are the cracked for they are the ones who let in the light.
This is a real issue - especially compared to our bottom 6 of the 2012 Flag team. In last year's unmentionable game, it wasn't an issue as our Bottom 6 expanded to be a Bottom 22 - but quite clearly, the bottom of our 22 is weak. Compare that to Hawthorn - who seem to be able to lose half a dozen players and their depth is unaffected, and you can see why the rest of the comp is well behind them in terms of being able to put out a quality line up, week in, week out.
"You get the feeling that like Monty Python's Black Knight, the Swans would regard amputation as merely a flesh wound."
Worked great too.
Swans should have put a player to block him since he is not standing the mark.
But swans were playing for themselves so not interested .
Is this because we can't afford to pay for something slightly better or is our player development not as good as it was?
Not sure what it is Aardvark - I'd hazard a guess its a combination of the two, plus a deterioration in clarity around our gameplan, which means our bottom six are far more exposed than they were in 2012.
- - - Updated - - -
I hate this trend in footy at the moment - there should be one man on the mark and that is it, none of this nonsense we are seeing at the moment where they are forming an arc of players. Good on them if they can get away with it, but it is a real bug bear of mine.
"You get the feeling that like Monty Python's Black Knight, the Swans would regard amputation as merely a flesh wound."
Agree on this. We can be negavtive as long as it's constructive.
I to said that we were in danger. With the ladder had played out. It gave us a false sense of where we are at.
We still have 12 weeks to get this right.
Nothing wrong with being a realist
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks