As we all know when u playing a big overlap running game it is very hard to sustain for 4 qtrs.
The dogs tired from this style of play and tried to go more direct as the game went on and we counter attacked well on these entries.
We hung in there and didn�t let them get to far ahead.
But quite frankly we should have been beaten.
Our backline transitions are still a major problem and when an opposition team comes at our slower backs we get found out as per the first two qtrs
The evidence is overwhelming in support of where the game has moved to and that is fast fast fast......we need to have a backline especially that can use this to our advantage
At the moment teams like the dogs are exposing our weakness of not having a fast enough team on the big fields like the MCG
We even got done on the small SCG by a fast flooding port backline rushing forward in numbers
We have to have the same mix players to take it to teams like this
Let�s be honest if we could flood forward as fast as say port or the dogs did to us then these type of teams would not push as high vs us because they won�t be able to chase as hard in defence when they are upfield to high
Opposition teams that have speed are not scared to push ahead in numbers vs us and see if they can get the reward for this separation from our slower players
Port were successful
Dogs almost as well exposing our style of play and slower backs
Both Florent's and Dickson's wonderful goal from a banana on the run are on the AFL summary page for the game below. I believe Dickson ran further- so if anyone is heartbroken over a potential too many steps by Florent (I agree, I don't believe it was) then it's probably even.
http://www.afl.com.au/match-centre/2018/4/wb-v-syd
I knew him as a gentle young man, I cannot say for sure the reasons for his decline
We watched him fade before our very eyes, and years before his time
You make some fair points but Bulldogs helter skelter style relies on almost flawless execution as well the risk of tiring. If they are a little bit off, then it is a recipe for fatal turnovers that plagued them in rounds 1 and 2. Also, our style of play blew Port out of the water but we didn't convert just like Bullies yesterday. Almost every side has their time in a game and must take their opportunities. Understand your concerns but no team in comp is perfect.
Yep, reckon you could say that about their first four weeks of footy.
Sinclair has become a valuable player for us. He has improved markedly since he arrived - his contested marking and kicking for goal in particular. Also his endurance. He tries hard too and it really means a lot to him.
Harry did some good things. That snapped goal out of the pack in the third was important. He made a bad error late, turning the ball over in our forward 50 when he tried batting it on, when he should have taken possession.
I think JPK has fallen out of the "elite" category of midfielders now.
Towers is proving an inspired mature draft choice.
The AFL website has a video of the last 2 minutes of the game. Have watched it several times. Just love the reaction in the coaches box when it's obvious we're going to hang on. John Longmire, Rhyce Shaw, Brett Kirk and Dean Cox are all obviously pumped!
GO SWANNIES!!
I think you're right on all accounts here. It did look as Aliir was given a very specific role and instructions not to stray off the plan. He usually takes the game on, which he didn't even try to do this game. There may have been concern about his ability to handle the Dogs' pressure if played in defence, including his tendency to give away free kicks. I think we will have to go with him against a tall Adelaide forward line.
We've not been defending well around our defensive 50 arc this year, letting the ball come in too easily. We are also being hurt by the chaos ball. I'm not sure what the answer is, or if Aliir is the answer in this regard. The 60-42 inside 50s against us is a continuing worry. If we are not defending well inside 50 then we have to find a way to get the ball out of there better. It could be a classic a case of a the best way to defend is to attack. I think we were a better defence against the high ball coming in, but not so good against the quick and chaotic ball movement that the Bulldogs started and is trending in the game now. It's one of he reasons that the Bulldogs seem to play well against us.
I also thought Heeney, Parker, Macca and Towers were our best. Papley was good too. When we turned up the pressure in the 3rd qtr we looked very good, but you could say the same about the Bulldogs in the 1st qtr. It's hard to sustain that kind of effort for a full game.
Thought the helmeted bulldog was auditioning for a boundary ump role the way he threw the ball over his head in the last couple of minutes.
Bookmarks