Page 3 of 13 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 25 to 36 of 145

Thread: Changes for Rnd 5 V West Coast

  1. #25
    Thought the umpiring was piss poor for both sides but favouring Adelaide.

    It's a relief we have a really good record against West Coast in Sydney, but those away games are the ones we need to win.
    Last edited by bloodsbigot; 18th April 2016 at 02:50 AM.

  2. #26
    Fatal error: Allowed memo undy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Lane Cove
    Posts
    1,226
    Quote Originally Posted by longmile View Post
    Can't see Richard getting better/returning to old form
    I can - he's done it before and is possibly a little underdone given his late start to the season.
    Before you criticize a man, walk a mile in his shoes. That way you'll be a mile away and he'll be shoeless.

  3. #27
    Sinclair and Jones in for Nankervis and Towers.

  4. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by Chilcott View Post
    Sinclair and Jones in for Nankervis and Towers.
    I'd be tempted to chop McGlynn for Hewett/Rose too, but we don't want too many changes. I know McGlynn has credits in the bank, but if we're playing Papley as the small forward then I don't think McGlynn suits our midfield. He's short, average paced, and has been poor at times with disposal. Hewett was unlucky to be dropped and Rose has been tearing up ressies.

  5. #29
    Captain of the Side Captain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Northern Beaches
    Posts
    2,581
    We are badly missing Reid who surely must come in as a key defender.

    Only change for this week would be:

    In: Sinclair
    Out: Nankervis

    Need to give Papley another run to see what he is made of.

  6. #30
    Travelling Swannie!! mcs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    5,051
    Quote Originally Posted by graemed View Post
    Saturday night's game proved that our ability to curb teams that run aggressively forward is lacking. Last year we were found out by the Bulldogs, Hawks and Eagles amongst those contending for the flag
    We cope well with teams that turn the ball over or have deficiencies in disposals but if teams have high precision they can get around us. Why?

    Unfortunately, I think it's comes down to our strengths, we are contested ball team and our mid-field getting first hand on the pill can make up for many other faults as was evidenced by the first quarter. When Adelaide even up the clearances we found ourselves with a defence under undue pressure. Winning the clearances becomes a priority but more than that having the pill in the hands of good decision makers with the ability to hit targets is gold.

    Jarrad McVeigh is out best decision maker and amongst the best kicks to advantage in the team. Parker is next best followed by ... Kennedy (??).

    I thought we played great on the night and were desperately unlucky. I don't think McVeigh should have been selected, Smith was pushed, Rampe was suckered a couple of times and Papley could have kicked better. These things happen from time to time.

    This overlooks the fact that we were the better team in the first quarter and played well against quality opposition all night in spite of IMHO picking a side that was not equipped to serve the two masters of clearance winners or speed to and from contests.

    Jones must come back into defence McVeigh must go forward, Heeney sh have a more prolonged run in the mids as must Mills. Pragmatically, West Coast look to have too much speed if we miss targets no matter what team we select.
    A good summary there Graeme - I'd argue our key fault, even against teams that can trouble us as you outline here, is that we simply don't kick to advantage enough into our forward line. Give it a year or two, and hopefully getting a few more elite kicks into our team (or improving the skills of what we got) and that might change - but it is a real Achilles heal. If we had skills commensurate with those of the Hawks in that regard, we would of won fairly comfortably on Saturday night, for what really hurt us is that, too often, when we have the ball and time to deliver it into our forward line, we butchered any chance we had to get a result out of it by having poor delivery into the forward line. Get a few of those poor kicks right into the forward line and the result would have been different.

    That doesn't take away from a pretty good performance, at a ground and against an opposition where not many teams will take the points (assuming their early season form holds up).
    "You get the feeling that like Monty Python's Black Knight, the Swans would regard amputation as merely a flesh wound."

  7. #31
    Travelling Swannie!! mcs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    5,051
    Quote Originally Posted by bloodsbigot View Post
    Thought the umpiring was piss poor for both sides but favouring Adelaide.

    It's a relief we have a really good record against West Coast in Sydney, but those away games are the ones we need to win.
    On balance, across the 4 quarters, the shoddy umpiring was pretty even in my book - the 50/50 calls were fairly even across the night. The one that still has me frustrated (and even got a mention from that useless Robbo in his column today) was the Betts Hands in the Back Non-free kick. I can take 50/50 calls going against you sometimes and in your favour others, but ones like that, where it was blatantly obvious what happened, that really frustrate me. The umpire simply bottled it at a key time in the match - that is not to say the result would have been different, but it was a critical call at a critical moment, and it was a simple one to make as well.
    "You get the feeling that like Monty Python's Black Knight, the Swans would regard amputation as merely a flesh wound."

  8. #32
    Travelling Swannie!! mcs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    5,051
    Quote Originally Posted by Chilcott View Post
    Sinclair and Jones in for Nankervis and Towers.
    Yep, I'd be happy with those changes as well.
    "You get the feeling that like Monty Python's Black Knight, the Swans would regard amputation as merely a flesh wound."

  9. #33
    Veteran Site Admin
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    13,774
    Quote Originally Posted by mcs View Post
    On balance, across the 4 quarters, the shoddy umpiring was pretty even in my book - the 50/50 calls were fairly even across the night. The one that still has me frustrated (and even got a mention from that useless Robbo in his column today) was the Betts Hands in the Back Non-free kick. I can take 50/50 calls going against you sometimes and in your favour others, but ones like that, where it was blatantly obvious what happened, that really frustrate me. The umpire simply bottled it at a key time in the match - that is not to say the result would have been different, but it was a critical call at a critical moment, and it was a simple one to make as well.
    And while it probably didn't matter too much in the end (and acknowledging we tend to focus on decisions late in the game more than those early), the non-deliberate call against Walker when he booted the ball into a completely empty forward line just to get possession was clearly against the way the DOOB rule has been adjudged this year. We should at least have regained possession rather than having a throw in.

  10. #34
    McVeigh for Brownlow RogueSwan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Coffs Harbour - home of Swans summer camp
    Posts
    4,160
    Quote Originally Posted by liz View Post
    And while it probably didn't matter too much in the end (and acknowledging we tend to focus on decisions late in the game more than those early), the non-deliberate call against Walker when he booted the ball into a completely empty forward line just to get possession was clearly against the way the DOOB rule has been adjudged this year. We should at least have regained possession rather than having a throw in.
    Yep, it was an obvious one yet none our boys tried to call for it to be a free, even the commentators mentioned that.
    The push in the back ... I have a hard time understanding those calls. Often a player will be going for a ball only to be completely held, arms across the body and nothing happens but if it was in a marking contest they would get a free. It is hard to explain but a clip would show it easily. It is the one thing about the game my dad is at a loss to understand, it completely frustrates him and I can't explain to him why it happens.
    "Fortunately, this is the internet, so knowing nothing is no obstacle to having an opinion!." Beerman 18-07-2017

  11. #35
    Veterans List Ludwig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Chiang Rai
    Posts
    5,932
    Quote Originally Posted by RogueSwan View Post
    Yep, it was an obvious one yet none our boys tried to call for it to be a free, even the commentators mentioned that.
    The push in the back ... I have a hard time understanding those calls. Often a player will be going for a ball only to be completely held, arms across the body and nothing happens but if it was in a marking contest they would get a free. It is hard to explain but a clip would show it easily. It is the one thing about the game my dad is at a loss to understand, it completely frustrates him and I can't explain to him why it happens.
    There were a number of decisions that really hurt us, including a few questionable or soft ones that cost us goals, but I didn't get the impression there was a particular bias in the calls over the course of the game.

    I thought the umpiring was poor across the fixture this round. The most telling one was by Andrew Stephens making 2 successive 15 mtr calls against the Saints in the final minutes of the game that were clearly okay. This led to Hawthorn's winning goal. It was picked up later that Stephens is an avid Hawthorn fan. Here is a screenshot of his Twitter page, before it was withdrawn (due to the comments).

    aestephens.jpg

    ************************************************** ************************************
    Hawthorn have themselves well covered, both on the field and on the AFL Commission. Nothing left to chance.
    Last edited by Ludwig; 18th April 2016 at 12:55 PM.

  12. #36
    Travelling Swannie!! mcs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    5,051
    Quote Originally Posted by Ludwig View Post
    There were a number of decisions that really hurt us, including a few questionable or soft ones that cost us goals, but I didn't get the impression there was a particular bias in the calls over the course of the game.

    I thought the umpiring was poor across the fixture this round. The most telling one was by Andrew Stephens making 2 successive 15 mtr calls against the Saints in the final minutes of the game that were clearly okay. This led to Hawthorn's winning goal. It was picked up later that Stephens is an avid Hawthorn fan. Here is a screenshot of his Twitter page, before it was withdrawn (due to the comments).

    aestephens.jpg
    Must be trying to compete with Matt Stevic to become Hawthorn's #1 member

    Stevic'spresence in the 2012 decider made our victory all the sweeter that day - despite his best efforts to drag his wees and poos over the line.

    The Hawks have been, in my book, exceptionally lucky through the first few rounds with the umpiring, getting several key calls go their way. Hopefully they use up all their luck this year early on, and when they need it (which invariably seems to be prelim final weekend) they find the barrel is empty.
    "You get the feeling that like Monty Python's Black Knight, the Swans would regard amputation as merely a flesh wound."

Page 3 of 13 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO