Roos' Press Conference

[Plugger46]

He said we had many players down and probably needed a Lockett to stand up and kick 5 in a quarter to just get you over the line.

That's probably what we lack, a genuine champion to just take control when the chips are down. Mind you players of Plugger's ilk only come around once a century.

[Diego]

We should clone plugger vintage 1996. ;)

[SWANSBEST]

Swans feeling the absence of prime movers
August 11 2003





Wanted urgently - "a couple of superstars" to help Sydney through some flat spots.

Swans coach Paul Roos complained of the lack of a Tony Lockett-type matchwinner after Sydney's 17-point home loss to Hawthorn at the SCG on Saturday night. It was the Hawks' first win in Sydney since 1994.

Hawthorn kicked 17.8 for the second time against the Swans in 2003, the biggest scores Sydney has conceded this season.

Roos said the Swans had looked like "a pretty ordinary footy team".

Sydney rallied from a 48-point third-quarter deficit but never seriously threatened to steal the game. "We probably needed a Lockett to kick five in a quarter because if you have 10 blokes who are down, but you've got a bloke like that kicks you a few goals, that's what wins games like that," Roos said.


"When you haven't perhaps got the effort across the whole 22 (players) you need a couple of superstars to just keep the thing bubbling away for a little while and then the other blokes can jump back on board.

"We know we don't have that calibre of player, so it does make it harder to keep going week in, week out."

Roos conceded the Swans had yet to find players who could replace Lockett, Paul Kelly, Andrew Dunkley and Wayne Schwass, who all retired last year.

-http://www.realfooty.theage.com.au/articles/2003/08/10/1060454085444.html

[CureTheSane]

I'm gonna say this now that the ritirement is over and all.....

Dunkley was and is overrated.

I think we have gone on quite well this year without him.

In the comments Roos made, I get the feeling that they are directed pretty much at Hall, and probably rightly so.
He has been way down on form all year.

And his marking has been shocking.

[BAM_BAM]

I love Dunks, he was my favourite player for some time, I don't agree that he was overrated, but I agree the backline has a completely differently dynamic without him, and it's one I quite like and think we needed.

[CureTheSane]

Dunks was great.

He contemplated retirement during his career because he didn't think he had what it took to play at senior lever, and he worked through that to cement a place in the side.

But let's face it, he played FOOTball and couldn't kick :lol

He was a solid backman who managed to do a great job holding a FF player.

Good solid played, but hardly TOC material IMO

[TheHood]

Originally posted by CureTheSane
I'm gonna say this now that the ritirement is over and all.....

Dunkley was and is overrated.

I think we have gone on quite well this year without him.

In the comments Roos made, I get the feeling that they are directed pretty much at Hall, and probably rightly so.
He has been way down on form all year.

And his marking has been shocking.

IMO Dunks was a terrific contributor and never overrated because most did not rate him.

He was the best overhead mark (with Kel) in the team and was as tough as nails.

As for Hall's form, Roos has been talking it up all year so I doubt that it is considered down. I reckon he has been great for most of the year, in career best form in fact.

[Arks]

Not having a go at Hall but the marks he usually drops which are difficult to take, are the marks plugger would have taken.

But thats why he was the greatest.

[Plugger46]

Originally posted by CureTheSane
I'm gonna say this now that the ritirement is over and all.....

Dunkley was and is overrated.

I think we have gone on quite well this year without him.

In the comments Roos made, I get the feeling that they are directed pretty much at Hall, and probably rightly so.
He has been way down on form all year.

And his marking has been shocking.

Are you the full quid?

Dunks was a magnifficent player, gave his all for the club. How could you even contemplate him being overrated?

He had a great pair of hands. He couldn't kick but it didn't really matter as he used to always give off the handball.

[Plugger46]

Originally posted by Arks
Not having a go at Hall but the marks he usually drops which are difficult to take, are the marks plugger would have taken.

But thats why he was the greatest.

Spot on Arks.

The man was amazing, Hall can't be expected to live up to him.

[floppinab]

Not having a go at Hall but the marks he usually drops which are difficult to take


Sorry Arks can not agree with you there. Hall drops far too many that other tall forwards eat for breakfast. At least two on the Satdy where he's done the body on body thing, got the defender out of way and then dropped the ball.
Not good enough.

[TheMase]

I didn't want to say anything in this thread ... BUT ...

I actually thought Hall's marking was better than usual in parts on the weekend.

His contested marking was sensational, much better than he has done previously in times during the season.

Twice that I can recalled he had two blokes in the air with him, and he beat them taking a fantastic mark.... Maybe I was seeing things ..

[Plugger46]

Originally posted by TheMase
I didn't want to say anything in this thread ... BUT ...

I actually thought Hall's marking was better than usual in parts on the weekend.

His contested marking was sensational, much better than he has done previously in times during the season.

Twice that I can recalled he had two blokes in the air with him, and he beat them taking a fantastic mark.... Maybe I was seeing things ..

I agree. He dropped some marks on a lead that he would normally take. But he took some contested marks for a change which was good to see. I thought he was our best player on Saturday Night.

It's an unfair ask of him, or anyone for that matter, to take the marks, Lockett used to.

[liz]

Lockett and Hall were/are two very different types of player and its a little unfair to compare them. Lockett was one of the absolute best forwards to play the game, had amazing all over body strength and skills. We may never see another like him.

However, there are things that Hall does that Lockett didn't, or couldn't. His mobility and ground level skills are amazing (Lockett was pretty good at ground level too - better than many give him credit for - but probably not as good as Hall).

There was an article a few weeks ago that pointed out that Hall actually has quite skinny legs, a legacy of his boxing background. If you look at him he certainly doesn't have the lower body bulk of Lockett. That same article pointed out that this is one of the reasons why he's not a great contested mark and that makes sense intuitively.

PS I also think that his marking was better on Saturday than it has been in recent weeks, and he's one of only 5 players who I thought did themselves justice.

[Charlie]

Whilst I agree there is only one Tony Lockett... that doesn't mean that Barry Hall is excused for not being able to take a mark overhead his big bald head. It is what stops him from being a regularly effective forward. He either fixes it, or we continue to have a severe weakness. Weaknesses are what we need to remove.

[Plugger46]

Originally posted by Charlie
Whilst I agree there is only one Tony Lockett... that doesn't mean that Barry Hall is excused for not being able to take a mark overhead his big bald head. It is what stops him from being a regularly effective forward. He either fixes it, or we continue to have a severe weakness. Weaknesses are what we need to remove.

I agree Charlie, but Hall nor anyone can possibly be compared to Lockett, because he is arguably the best player of all time. Hall is totally different to plugger, you can't build a team around Hall like you could Lockett. You're right he's not excused, but we probably have to understand, that taking contested marks is never going to be a strong point in his game, but he does other things that are for the good of the team.

Barry Hall is a CHF and not a FF anyway, so why anyone would compare them is beyond me, both on ability and their role within a team.

[desredandwhite]

Originally posted by Plugger46


Barry Hall is a CHF and not a FF anyway,

Spot on. Barry isn't as strong overhead as Plugger, and doesn't have the same vice-like one-grab mark. He really should be playing more at CHF where his long leads can result in uncontested chest marks and allow him to set up long goals, or a delivery into the goalsquare.

Bung Mick in at full-forward where he is IMHO stronger one-on-one than Barry.

We dont' have many out and out champions left - we can't afford as many people having an off-day as many other teams can.

[Plugger46]

Originally posted by desredandwhite
Spot on. Barry isn't as strong overhead as Plugger, and doesn't have the same vice-like one-grab mark. He really should be playing more at CHF where his long leads can result in uncontested chest marks and allow him to set up long goals, or a delivery into the goalsquare.

Bung Mick in at full-forward where he is IMHO stronger one-on-one than Barry.

We dont' have many out and out champions left - we can't afford as many people having an off-day as many other teams can.

Spot on.

[Charlie]

Um... I reckon not being able to take overhead marks is a bigger problem at CHF than at FF. Generally, when you're in the square, the ball is already near to the ground. There's a reason that Micky gets more chest marks than Baz - the ball falls into his arms. Often, at CHF, the marker actually has to chop off kicks that have too much penetration to hit their target - it's easier for a midfielder to kick 40m than 30m. Hence, we see Bazza going for more overhead marks than Micky.

Bazza needs to take them, or its a wasted inside50. But they go slightly over his head, and suddenly he's not a chance in hell because of his ridiculously buttery fingers. At the moment, Baz is better off at CHF, because he is our most imposing forward. But if we got another KPP forward, I'd want Baz to go back to FF - where he might actually mark the thing.

[aflconvert]

Re the loss of retired players - why bother to mention Tony Lockett 2002 version at all ? He only played 1 or 2 games in his attempted comeback and then retired mid-season

That's hardly a loss.

Dont get me wrong - There is only one Tony Lockett and he deserved his spot in TOC . His retirement after 1999 season was a loss but not his 2002 second retirement

[Plugger46]

Originally posted by aflconvert
Re the loss of retired players - why bother to mention Tony Lockett 2002 version at all ? He only played 1 or 2 games in his attempted comeback and then retired mid-season

That's hardly a loss.

Dont get me wrong - There is only one Tony Lockett and he deserved his spot in TOC . His retirement after 1999 season was a loss but not his 2002 second retirement

He played 3 games and was really stiff, it should have been a success but that's another story. But we were not talking about him last year, and neither was Roosey, he was talking about him in his prime mate.