Do you not consider that JPK's relative lack of influence was by design? He attended very few centre bounces, with the coaching panel choosing to use other (mostly smaller and faster/more nimble) players there instead. And that choice was made with Mills unavailable. If they were experimenting with ways to make the team more dynamic at centre bounces, George would surely add to the problem, not solve it.
I acknowledge we were well beaten at centre clearances against the Giants last week. Maybe that will push the coaches to go back and look at their use of Kennedy, particularly if/while Mills is unavailable.
I'm not sure you can draw that conclusion based on a single game, especially one where the Swans' work-rate was well down on where it needed to be (and on the Giants'). The thing most obviously lacking - to me - in that game was any decent attempt to move the ball as they were last year. There was too much long, aimless bombing to a forward line that wasn't working hard enough. You might interpret that as "teams" (or maybe just the Giants) finding ways to counter our ball movement style. I interpret it as a team that was too rusty or lethargic to make an effort to move the ball the way they did last year.The other thing that is a bit concerning is that last year we took the whole competition by surprise and had 4 wins, or something like that, on the board before teams began to work our new game style out a bit. Now, as evidenced in the practice match, teams have strategies in place to much more effectively counter it.
Only time will tell. Not one scratchy pre-season game.
Bookmarks