Roos blew it

[Mr_Juicy]

I'm usually a supporter of Roos you can tell by my avatar but tonight he stuffed up by not selecting our best 22 he played right into Malthouses hands.
For once I agree with Walls it's time to blood more youngsters and get rid of the old if we want to have a team that can challenge in the finals again.
I know this will be hard for the club because they need to stay competitive in Sydney but it has to be done.

@@@@ sydney and their precious @@@@ing market! Play the the kids, feel some pain, and reap the benefits in 2 years time. Don't drag us through this @@@@ for another 4 years!

[CureTheSane]

I think this is the point that most of us are making and you have also mentioned, we used to switch between attacking and defensive play, there were at least 2 plans, now there seems to be plan A defend, but no plan B. The players do appear to be caged and the person that does that in the end is Roos. He is a good coach, but his match day tactics leave a lot to be desired.

To me a plan A encompasses how we played in 05.
Plan A has slowly dissipated and devolved to a shadow of it's former self and now is all about basketball style play.

Plan B is to be put into place when plan A fails.
It should be radically different and played at an important time (like against a team in the finals who beat us only two weeks ago)
Malthouse last night thought outside the box and made some successful changes.
I'd love to see us do that too.

[CureTheSane]

Well, I think the coaches have to take a lot of responsibility for the kick out following behinds. We were thrashed in this area as we were in the previous game against Collingwood. Yet the same pathetic tactics were employed. As a result we were under pressure and at great risk of turnovers every time a point was scored against us. By contrast Collingwood had little trouble clearing the ball and moving quickly into attack.

Yep, but sometimes teams just match up on other teams really well.
Having said that, probably the biggest gripe I have about this season is the players' lack of ability to find clear space.
Teams seem to find this easy against us, yet every time we kick it to a player there is an opposition player right next to them.
Hall is a pretty big culprit, given what we expect from his fitness level, but he seems to have been injured all season.

Maybe this comes down to coaching, maybe players natural ability to read the game, probably a combination of both.

Roos will work through this and grow as a coach.
He DID bring us a flag and I for one am willing to cut him some slack.

[rastus]

All really good points I think.

But I think too many people here are giving roos too much credit for the loss.

How much should a coach be expected to participate in a teams win?
I mean he sits in a box, with the ability to talk on the phone to benched players.
He's not actually on the ground playing.

Well, I think the coaches have to take a lot of responsibility for the kick out following behinds. We were thrashed in this area as we were in the previous game against Collingwood. Yet the same pathetic tactics were employed. As a result we were under pressure and at great risk of turnovers every time a point was scored against us. By contrast Collingwood had little trouble clearing the ball and moving quickly into attack.

[goswannie14]

All really good points I think.

But I think too many people here are giving roos too much credit for the loss.

How much should a coach be expected to participate in a teams win?
I mean he sits in a box, with the ability to talk on the phone to benched players.
He's not actually on the ground playing.

What about the 3 captains?

They seem to have been happily going about their business.

For gods sake we have 3 of them out there, one in each third of the ground.
Where is the inspiration and leadership they are providing?

If we're going to lay blame at Roos' feet, then surely some needs to also fall at their feet.

In the end Roos is employed by the club.
I'm sure he is doing everything he thinks is right - and if it isn't working? then start laying blame at those who have the power to remove him.

I agree that it is frustrating to see the team play this year and the style of play has slipped.
it used to be exciting - we were one of the most exciting teams to watch in 05, but since then it has gradually slipped from being a good mix of out and out attack coupled with a possession game to pretty much just a possession game.

The players have been caged and I would be worried that they have been putting up with this for success.Now that the success is not there this year changes are needed for other reasons than appeasing supporters.

I think this is the point that most of us are making and you have also mentioned, we used to switch between attacking and defensive play, there were at least 2 plans, now there seems to be plan A defend, but no plan B. The players do appear to be caged and the person that does that in the end is Roos. He is a good coach, but his match day tactics leave a lot to be desired.

[NMWBloods]

actually i think you underestimate what our level of skill was in 2005. we were more able to hit a leading forward than any other team. however four rule changes have stuffed the game plan and our players - roos failed to react to this but perhaps had no choice.

1. the minimum distance for a pass has "lengthened". This has meant the little dinky passes into the forward 50 have not been paid in the last 12 months. but we are skilled/drilled into hitting leading forwards in these circumstances

Hitting targets with 15m passes is not really about skill - it's more about being well drilled.

2. holding the ball rule is now paid with great frequency - where jude bolton could dive on a ball and either get a free for n the back or a new ruck contest we now get frees paid against us - and we are virtually only team who gets frees paid against them for being tackled even when standing up in a tackle - and this has highlighted how few of our players can get the ball rather than kill it (and we really miss paul williams in this respect)

Again, that's drilled rather than skilled.

we are a side who needs stoppages because one on one our defenders cant defend and the majority of our midfielders cant actually get the ball

Hence the observation that we rely on drill rather than skill.

[CureTheSane]

actually i think you underestimate what our level of skill was in 2005. we were more able to hit a leading forward than any other team. however four rule changes have stuffed the game plan and our players - roos failed to react to this but perhaps had no choice.

1. the minimum distance for a pass has "lengthened". This has meant the little dinky passes into the forward 50 have not been paid in the last 12 months. but we are skilled/drilled into hitting leading forwards in these circumstances

2. holding the ball rule is now paid with great frequency - where jude bolton could dive on a ball and either get a free for n the back or a new ruck contest we now get frees paid against us - and we are virtually only team who gets frees paid against them for being tackled even when standing up in a tackle - and this has highlighted how few of our players can get the ball rather than kill it (and we really miss paul williams in this respect)

3. hands in the back rule has highlighted the extent to which mol and hall can't actually take contested marks but the leading i nto space also leads to the absence of crumbers - so the game plan relies on

4. chopping of arms rule has stuffed leo's ability to defend (and to a lesser extent kennelly) and leo has always taken the opposition's best forward with the consequence that our whole backline needs to muck around on the relevant opponent

the reality is that everyone of the rules has been designed to benefit teams who play "pure" 1970s footy - ie one on one high flying marking contests and this simply isn't us

we are a side who needs stoppages because one on one our defenders cant defend and the majority of our midfielders cant actually get the ball

All really good points I think.

But I think too many people here are giving roos too much credit for the loss.

How much should a coach be expected to participate in a teams win?
I mean he sits in a box, with the ability to talk on the phone to benched players.
He's not actually on the ground playing.

What about the 3 captains?

They seem to have been happily going about their business.

For gods sake we have 3 of them out there, one in each third of the ground.
Where is the inspiration and leadership they are providing?

If we're going to lay blame at Roos' feet, then surely some needs to also fall at their feet.

In the end Roos is employed by the club.
I'm sure he is doing everything he thinks is right - and if it isn't working? then start laying blame at those who have the power to remove him.

I agree that it is frustrating to see the team play this year and the style of play has slipped.
it used to be exciting - we were one of the most exciting teams to watch in 05, but since then it has gradually slipped from being a good mix of out and out attack coupled with a possession game to pretty much just a possession game.

The players have been caged and I would be worried that they have been putting up with this for success.
Now that the success is not there this year changes are needed for other reasons than appeasing supporters.

[Bas]

Now that I have had a sleep, I still hope they all get alcoholic poisoning tomorrow! Pathetic lame ducks as the Sydney Telegraph calls them today.

Ther I feel better now.

As Roos refuses to make significant changes to the team, we are in for much the same over the next few years. I think their (coaches/mangement) definition of success is making the finals. They do that it's been a good year.

Not good enough anymore. In the past RWO has sent in threads to the Club what about sending all the threads here in as protest. Let the Swans Board know what the supporters are actually thinking.

[Chow-Chicker]

Out coached and out played. If people here think one or two players would have made the difference, you are kidding. Too many passengers in our side. And I'm sick of everyone making the lame excuse of "poor delivery" to our forwards for their inept display. Barry Hall and Nick Davis were embarrassments last night. Poor positioning, lack of desire and a lousy season from both of them. Time to get rid of them and get some decent leading forwards who impose themselves on the game AND their opponent in the future.

[Melbournehammer]

actually i think you underestimate what our level of skill was in 2005. we were more able to hit a leading forward than any other team. however four rule changes have stuffed the game plan and our players - roos failed to react to this but perhaps had no choice.

1. the minimum distance for a pass has "lengthened". This has meant the little dinky passes into the forward 50 have not been paid in the last 12 months. but we are skilled/drilled into hitting leading forwards in these circumstances

2. holding the ball rule is now paid with great frequency - where jude bolton could dive on a ball and either get a free for n the back or a new ruck contest we now get frees paid against us - and we are virtually only team who gets frees paid against them for being tackled even when standing up in a tackle - and this has highlighted how few of our players can get the ball rather than kill it (and we really miss paul williams in this respect)

3. hands in the back rule has highlighted the extent to which mol and hall can't actually take contested marks but the leading i nto space also leads to the absence of crumbers - so the game plan relies on

4. chopping of arms rule has stuffed leo's ability to defend (and to a lesser extent kennelly) and leo has always taken the opposition's best forward with the consequence that our whole backline needs to muck around on the relevant opponent

the reality is that everyone of the rules has been designed to benefit teams who play "pure" 1970s footy - ie one on one high flying marking contests and this simply isn't us

we are a side who needs stoppages because one on one our defenders cant defend and the majority of our midfielders cant actually get the ball

[NMWBloods]

As for the "highly drilled" vs "highly skilled" notion

we aren't skilled at all. we are tough and edgy but we play too much to a game plan that all the good sides have been able to counter.

Exactly.

That was sort of my point in this thread:

http://www.redandwhiteonline.com/forum/showthread.php?t=15307&highlight=drilled

[Hazcam]

I've been thinking a lot about this. Perhaps that easy stroll against the Hawks, who had early injuries, was the worse thing that could have happened. We need a tough, tight game to get us ready for the Pies game, but instead we got a glorified training run that put us into a false state of confidence.

Yeah but after playing a season of the same brand of footy after doing that for the previous 2 years surely would have burned us out.

As for the "highly drilled" vs "highly skilled" notion

we aren't skilled at all. we are tough and edgy but we play too much to a game plan that all the good sides have been able to counter.

that's the reason why we had only beaten the hawks and port adelaide (before their mid eason surge) from the top 8

[Hazcam]

It comes back to the whole "well drilled" v. "highly skilled" issue.

They are drilled to keep control of the ball - so they always seem to think they need to hit the target with every disposal and hence spend too much time look for the perfect kick or handball. When the opposition takes that away they keep trying to do it like automatons, but end of going nowhere and turn it over.

Yep

We struggled our way to a premiership in '05 doing it that way I mean let's be frank here, in 2005 these were our finals series scores

65 - 69 v wce
56 - 53 v geel
93 - 65 v st kilda
58 - 54 v wce

all games were due to our defensive hard grinding footy, or so called "ugly footy"

well look at the way Geelong has played. Their defensive record has been brilliant as has their attacking.
We can hardly score above 100

[anniswan]

we have made finals 9 out of the last 11 years right, maybe a few years in the wilderness will do us good.

It will help my bank account that"s for sure.

[NMWBloods]

We'll be thereabouts, I doubt a clearout will occur.

Without a clearout we'll go backwards at least 2-4 spots.