Last minute on Sat. night

[NMWBloods]

That's like saying Nick Davis' injury won us the game...
Davis was injured, we won the game, therefore we won because of his unjury.

Very strange view of cause and effect there.

It was a terrible tactic and was just about the best way of giving Essendon a chance when they really should have had none.

[Wil]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
That's like saying Nick Davis' injury won us the game...
Davis was injured, we won the game, therefore we won because of his unjury.

Very strange view of cause and effect there.

It was a terrible tactic and was just about the best way of giving Essendon a chance when they really should have had none.

Umm... wow. Last time I looked tactics are what win games. If Roos meant to introduce Davis then take him out of the match to confuse the Bombers then, yeah, maybe that helped (Obviously that is not what happened).

What wins games then if not tactics? A change was made to keep the lead. The lead was kept. The tactic worked. Could it of failed? Yes, of course. But it didn't.

But don't worry about it. My ideas on how sport is played is a bit kooky...

[NMWBloods]

But this tactic did not win the game. Our attacking football that kicked 4 goals (plus Essendon stopping to a walk) and put us in front won the game.

Using your line of argument, if we built up a 10 goal lead then decided to flood and our opponents kicked 9 unanswered goals, it was the flood that won the game?

[ROK Lobster]

Originally posted by Wil
Did I leave the game early?? I am sure we won that game. Was there another quarter played after the supporter's kick to kick?

So you are saying that had the Swans not flooded back Essendon would have kicked a goal and a point in the last 30 secs, therefore the tactic won the game.

[Wil]

Ahh, ok, better.

One tactic got us the lead, the other kept it. The game plan that Roos implemented at 3/4 time won us the game. Should Roos have kept playing the higher risk attacking play to the end? Or bring back defenders and challenge the Bombers to beat them? Well obviously both points are completely debatable. One way was chosen and it worked - the game was won and Bombers didn't really threaten to score.

If it went the other way, who would be saying "We should of brought more players back to defend the lead"?

[NMWBloods]

I would argue that we didn't need to go with either extreme - somewhere inbetween would have been better.