#AFL Round 6, Swans vs Cats, 1:45pm 28/04 Kardinia Park #AFLCatsSwans

[Bloods05]

The stats do not back this up at all

Facts, schmacts.

[magic.merkin]

controlled ball movement won us the day. move the ball sideways, backwards whatever. maintain possession move to space, create the overlap or the opportunity and then move forward. It was beautiful when we started doing this and generated great forward entries. Bombing long down the line is so less effective even when we have talls because so few are great one grabbers.

[barry]

The stats do not back this up at all

Of course they do. Just depends on your sample size.

[Bloods05]

Of course they do. Just depends on your sample size.

!!!!

[Meg]

MRO:

Heeney ok.
�Isaac Heeney has been given the all clear for his tackle on Cat George Horlin-Smith with Christian finding it to be a reasonable action in the circumstances.�

But Ronke(!) and Jack fined for the melee at end 3rd quarter.
�A tussle at the end of the third quarter of that game saw young Swan Ben Ronke offered a $1500 fine for instigating a melee. Geelong defender Zach Tuohy can accept the same sanction for engaging in a melee, which was increased for a second offence, while Tom Stewart and Kieren Jack were hit with the same charge and can accept $1000 fines.�

Ronke had an interesting AFL debut! What did he do - give a bit of lip? Anyway the melee didn�t seem to harm the Swans going into the final quarter ......!

[liz]

I reckon this whole "instigating a melee" stuff is a load of crap. Who's to say what action instigates it? In this instance, a Swan (I think it was Jack) was felled by a glancing body blow as the siren sounded. Ronke just stuck his chest into Tuohy's as a pretty mild square up. I don't see how he can be deemed to instigate what happened next. If anything, I think it was Jack who instigated the melee by throwing himself into the fracas.

I reckon two players squaring up to each other (which is what Ronke and Tuohy were doing) is not a melee and can't be deemed to be instigating a melee. If they are hell bent on holding one person responsible for instigating (which they seem to be, this season), I reckon the third player into the fracas should be that person. If two players - say one from each team - enter at the same time, they should both be held responsible.

[S.S. Bleeder]

Interesting comment by Kane Cornes the AFL site video: "The round so far". They showed an image of Sydney's fourth term goalkickers - Fox (2), Hayward (2), Florent, Jones & Ronke and he said "If you told me these guys would kick your seven goals in the last quarter, before the game, I would have laughed".

I can't say I would have disagreed, either. It's great that they all stood up at the end. I thought Rohan was very good in the last quarter as well, but almost non-existent in the third quarter. (I got the feeling that he had a very tough day - looked to be getting beaten up a bit in the third).

But the thing is, it only makes a different if we are winning the ball in the middle, and Kennedy was obviously the one who did it for us. I'm inclined to agree that the Swans are too dependent on one player, but that player isn't Buddy Franklin - it's Josh Kennedy.

It's going be difficult replacing him when he retires. Mitchell would have been perfect for this. We have plenty of great mids but none who will replace him.

[Meg]

Also from the MRO, Murdoch was cleared for his backside high hit on Heeney when Murdoch turned side on to collect the ball. I completely agree that Murdoch should have been cleared.

Murdoch also had a free kick awarded against him for this. Should a free kick have been given, or should it have been viewed as accidental and simply play on? I really don�t know - except to say many free kicks are awarded for actions which are accidental (a particular one in the 2016 GF comes to mind).

Chris Scott not only criticised the match report of Murdoch, he also alleged the free kick was a mistake. What do others (objectively) think?

[liz]

Interesting comment by Kane Cornes the AFL site video: "The round so far". They showed an image of Sydney's fourth term goalkickers - Fox (2), Hayward (2), Florent, Jones & Ronke and he said "If you told me these guys would kick your seven goals in the last quarter, before the game, I would have laughed".

I think that's a bit of a dickhead comment from Cornes. "Raised an eyebrow", maybe, but "laughed"?

But the thing is, it only makes a different if we are winning the ball in the middle, and Kennedy was obviously the one who did it for us. I'm inclined to agree that the Swans are too dependent on one player, but that player isn't Buddy Franklin - it's Josh Kennedy.

The previous time we beat Geelong at Kardinia Park (ages ago - way back in 2017) JPK didn't play.

It's easy to say a team is too dependent on a particular player when they've just put in a BOG performance but I reckon our team is even enough that they're not overly dependent on any individual. When someone is missing, others step up more often than not.

[ugg]

Coaches votes

Kennedy 9
Sinclair 9
Kelly 5
Lloyd 3
Stewart 3
Heeney 1

Breakdown

Kennedy Sinclair 5-4
Kelly 3-2
Lloyd Stewart 2-1 or 3-0
Heeney 1-0

[liz]

Also from the MRO, Murdoch was cleared for his backside high hit on Heeney when Murdoch turned side on to collect the ball. I completely agree that Murdoch should have been cleared.

Murdoch also had a free kick awarded against him for this. Should a free kick have been given, or should it have been viewed as accidental and simply play on? I really don�t know - except to say many free kicks are awarded for actions which are accidental (a particular one in the 2016 GF comes to mind).

Chris Scott not only criticised the match report of Murdoch, he also alleged the free kick was a mistake. What do others (objectively) think?

It's hard to tell. I reckon you could pick out several free kicks (in different directions) from many contests each game. It's certainly not the "worst" free kick ever awarded. As you say, accidental head high contact is often penalised.

Does anyone remember if Hurley received a free kick from that much-talked-about collision with Hanners a few years back? The one where Dermie said that if Hanners were courageous he'd have gone in head first...

[Meg]

Does anyone remember if Hurley received a free kick from that much-talked-about collision with Hanners a few years back?

I too had the Hannebery incident in mind as a comparison to the Heeney collision. So just did a search. According to an Age report (which thought Hannebery should have been penalised), Hurley did not receive a free kick.

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/...519-zrhtn.html