Autopsy Brave Swans fall 9 points short

[Dubai Quacker]

And surely full of much higher draft picks, the number of top 10 picks must be mouth watering, and most more than likely playing at the peak of their powers.

We had Mills, Heeney, Campbell, Blakey, McDonald, Stephens, Paddy Mac all running round on Saturday.

Seven top 10 picks.

Don’t think (?) Melbourne has more than that.

Carlton, GWS and Gold Coast probably do.

 

[melbournehammer]

Lol it's only stupid because it proves a point. Heeney is not as up and down as you think, he gets pushed around the ground as does Mills because they're such flexible players. How many games when he has ball in hand is Heeney poor? He goes missing because Horse pushes him around the ground. Play him up forward and he'll give you 2-3 goals a game and consistent effort.

that’s crap. He plays forward 80%-90% of game time. He doesn’t get pushed around. He occasionally goes into defence and less occasionally plays off a wing or midfield. Heeney is one of the key components of the forward line.

he’s arguably our only reliable contested mark forward of centre but his tackling pressure and crumbing aren’t great. But the comparison is with Bailey Fritsch or gunston or de goey or petracc. I suspect his output is about the same in some respects. On top of that if he’s not in our top five earners I will go he. So would be some of those. So his value for money is not that bad.

but let’s not pretend he’s being used to plug all sorts of holes. He’s basically in the modern sense a forward.

 

[SM]

that’s crap. He plays forward 80%-90% of game time. He doesn’t get pushed around. He occasionally goes into defence and less occasionally plays off a wing or midfield. Heeney is one of the key components of the forward line.

he’s arguably our only reliable contested mark forward of centre but his tackling pressure and crumbing aren’t great. But the comparison is with Bailey Fritsch or gunston or de goey or petracc. I suspect his output is about the same in some respects. On top of that if he’s not in our top five earners I will go he. So would be some of those. So his value for money is not that bad.

but let’s not pretend he’s being used to plug all sorts of holes. He’s basically in the modern sense a forward.

That's not crap at all, but everyone's entitled to their opinion.

 

[Bandicoot]

I don’t want us to miss finals but I can see some upside if we do. If it does happen, I hope it creates some serious burn for the team and an uncomfortably long time to reflect on the fact that you don’t just get better through the passing of time.

Every other side is busting their butts to get better and beat you every week, and you need to earn it. And if you turn up expecting things to happen, you will get beat.

I thought that this pre season was all of that after throwing away the first semi final last year.

 

[Bandicoot]

seemed to be a scoring end

right of screen - city end I think


Essendon 11.2- 68
Sydney 7.10- 52 (wasteful)


the other end - punt road i think

essendon 4.3.27
sydney 5.4.34

so 30 scoring shots to 16 , and they didnt waste that end



that really didnt prove anything, but its late, did that in my head so * it, ill post it

The wind was favouring the city end goal.

 

[Bandicoot]

If that's what's needed.

Just curious though who did you have as rated lower than Stephens?

10 was an exaggeration however Rampe, McDonald, Florent and Campbell were below Stephens imo. In fact I also thought McInerney was no better.
Everyone is killing him based on that poor kick in the last but Gulden made a similar kick OOF on the opposite wing in the third when only trying to kick it 20.
No-one seems to worry about that though.

 

[Bandicoot]

Rowbottom just doesn't have the size to play the role he's been trying to play this year. He gets manhandled off the ball and when he does win the ball he can't break a tackle.

Days like today you just need JPK type to literally wrestle momentum back by getting a few contested clearances. I know he's not the future but we really miss his impact inside the contest

We need to go all out in trying to get Hopper to the Swans.

 

[Nuggetz]

We suck

 

[Bandicoot]

Give it a rest. We’ve beaten the Demons, Saints and the Tigers in the last 5 games. All have been in the 8 when we played them.

Yeah, and North almost beat us at home, we lost to the Suns (although we normally lose to them now anyway) when they were in the bottom 6, we let Hawthorn kick the first 5 goals of the game, we lost to Carlton when they were coming off a 5 day break and could barely run in the last quarter. AND THEN we lose to Essendon, who will finish in the bottom 4.
I don't trust this team at all any more.

 

[caesar88]

Usually I would walk away from a loss frustrated but I found myself walking away angry yesterday. I was trying to work out why the difference. What I have come up with is this.

When we were getting picked apart from the Essendon kick outs yesterday, nothing seemed to change. We have had these fade-outs all year. Nothing has changed. Then we hear at the presser ‘we need to stick to the plan’. The plan isn’t ******* working clearly, so why are we sticking to the plan? Now if the coach was to argue that players aren’t playing to the plan, then ******* drop them. Nothing is going to change by patting them on the head and giving them a game again next week.

I heard talk about Melbourne when they had their three losses and May went around belting teammates at restaurants that there is a toxic us and them attitude amongst the players getting senior games and those getting stuck in the reserves. I get the feeling that is what has developed at our club. The Bloods culture has become the entitled Bloods and the other Bloods. I know my perception could be way off the mark but I think there are some clear indicators that things aren’t coming up smelling roses behind the scenes.

I reckon you're closer to the mark than you give yourself credit for.

We wanted flashy players, big personalities and "characters". Well we've got 'em in spades.

This is what it looks like.

 

[Dubai Quacker]

I reckon you're closer to the mark than you give yourself credit for.

We wanted flashy players, big personalities and "characters". Well we've got 'em in spades.

This is what it looks like.

I agree.

And when we did decide to bring in a blue-collar workhorse, he kicked 2 goals, smothered the Saints most important player ….. and was promptly dropped.

 

[caesar88]

Yep We are hanging on to that for as long it will be a viable get out clause. How long have we been rebuilding now ? Imo its 5 years.

WW, I always appreciate your honesty. I'm asking out of genuine curiosity/confusion, not to be a smart arse (so please don't give me a smart arse response, as fond as I am of them from you!)

But are we a team of overrated players whose talent is over-hyped? Or are we a team of very good and talented players who aren't being coached/playing the right way? Because I've seen you argue both points but I feel like they are kind of contradictory. Is Horse squandering an elite list, or is he dealing with a bunch of lemons?

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

Longmire said Heeney hurt his knee very early in the game not related to his ankle.

Might be in doubt this week?

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Bombers kicked 15 goals, 2 behinds, 1 post and 2 rushed.

That is unbelievably accurate

And probably never to be repeated by them, so we can take some heart from the fact that there was an element of dumb luck to the game.

 

[hairy biker]

I presume the 18 pages to date have mostly been about how s**t we are because we can't beat Essendon and we don't deserve to play finals, but it won't matter because we won't make them anyway?

Figure I'll just roll out an old adage; bad kicking is bad football.
Essendon's conversion rate 75%, ours 46%.

The expectation seemed to be we'd easily down Essendon, because well they're Essendon. And I'm tipping that mindset has permeated this autopsy thread.
Our performance on Saturday wasn't great, but it was a game of (relatively minor) momentum shifts and the Bombers took their chances and we didn't.
In my view the Port loss was much more concerning than this game.

In the Port match they controlled the game.
They went quick through the corridor when they could and played possession football when they needed (241-165 uncontested possessions) and they applied far greater pressure, that we couldn't cope with and slowed our ball movement significantly (tackles 72-51).

OK so why am I crapping on about the Port game rather than the Essendon match?
Because I'm fairly sure there will be plenty of people complaining about our inability to stop opposition momentum/run ons.
To me the match on the weekend was just one where, as with most games, there were periods when one team or the other was on top and when that occurs it's about making the most of your opportunities.

So I'll now go off on another tangent and mention the Wallabies v England rugby union game on the weekend.
The Aussies had a player sent off in the first half and suffered a number of injuries just before and during the game but came out 30-28 winners ( a score that flattered England).

After the match the Aussie coach talked about how the team practices for having 13/14 players against the oppositions 15 and also mentioned how he looked for his senior players to provide leadership on the run.

Against Port we seemed to have no ability or plan to counteract them when they switched from quick corridor football to possession football.
There are of course options eg pressure the receivers, effectively go one on one in the area of possession or perhaps do the complete opposite and drop back to outnumber the opposition when they try to put the ball into the fwd 50.

However as with the Wallabies you need to have a plan that everyone understands and you need to practice it (ideally in the pre-season).

The Wallabies coach (Dave Rennie) also highlighted the need for leadership on the ground.
Jarrad McPointy copped a lot, but whatever else he was an organiser, who saw the game across the ground and made sure people understood their roles.
Our leaders since eg JPK, Parker, Mills etc have tended to be 'follow me' type players who IMO tend not to concentrate on the big picture.
Rampe wasn't bad, but of late he seems much more concerned with his own player, rather than having a focus on ensuring players are positioned correctly etc. Indeed there have been a couple of instances where he has berated players after the event (when Rampe's opponent has impacted the game), whereas previously he'd have been the one setting up our defence to stop the play eventuating.

So overall I put the game on Saturday down as a disappointing loss, rather than a disaster, but I do think we have issues that should have already been addressed.
Stopping momentum as in the Port game is not easy, but it's pretty much impossible if you don't have an established, understood and practiced plan to combat the opposition when they change their mode of play.

And we do miss that leader who out on the ground can identify momentum shifts and ensure the established plan is implemented.
Too often we seem to wait until breaks for the coaches to react, when the players should already understand what needs to be done.
It's why a Luke Hodge type leader is so valuable, but tbh other than perhaps Errol Gulden (in the future) I'm not sure we have one on our list (even as a poor man's Hodge/McVeigh).

Tl;dr
Essendon loss is 'one of those things', but we do have issues stopping the opposition when they get momentum, when our onfield leaders should be implementing an established strategy to curb the opposition's run-ons.

 

[Jewelsbon]

I presume the 18 pages to date have mostly been about how s**t we are because we can't beat Essendon and we don't deserve to play finals, but it won't matter because we won't make them anyway?

Figure I'll just roll out an old adage; bad kicking is bad football.
Essendon's conversion rate 75%, ours 46%.

The expectation seemed to be we'd easily down Essendon, because well they're Essendon. And I'm tipping that mindset has permeated this autopsy thread.
Our performance on Saturday wasn't great, but it was a game of (relatively minor) momentum shifts and the Bombers took their chances and we didn't.
In my view the Port loss was much more concerning than this game.

In the Port match they controlled the game.
They went quick through the corridor when they could and played possession football when they needed (241-165 uncontested possessions) and they applied far greater pressure, that we couldn't cope with and slowed our ball movement significantly (tackles 72-51).

OK so why am I crapping on about the Port game rather than the Essendon match?
Because I'm fairly sure there will be plenty of people complaining about our inability to stop opposition momentum/run ons.
To me the match on the weekend was just one where, as with most games, there were periods when one team or the other was on top and when that occurs it's about making the most of your opportunities.

So I'll now go off on another tangent and mention the Wallabies v England rugby union game on the weekend.
The Aussies had a player sent off in the first half and suffered a number of injuries just before and during the game but came out 30-28 winners ( a score that flattered England).

After the match the Aussie coach talked about how the team practices for having 13/14 players against the oppositions 15 and also mentioned how he looked for his senior players to provide leadership on the run.

Against Port we seemed to have no ability or plan to counteract them when they switched from quick corridor football to possession football.
There are of course options eg pressure the receivers, effectively go one on one in the area of possession or perhaps do the complete opposite and drop back to outnumber the opposition when they try to put the ball into the fwd 50.

However as with the Wallabies you need to have a plan that everyone understands and you need to practice it (ideally in the pre-season).

The Wallabies coach (Dave Rennie) also highlighted the need for leadership on the ground.
Jarrad McPointy copped a lot, but whatever else he was an organiser, who saw the game across the ground and made sure people understood their roles.
Our leaders since eg JPK, Parker, Mills etc have tended to be 'follow me' type players who IMO tend not to concentrate on the big picture.
Rampe wasn't bad, but of late he seems much more concerned with his own player, rather than having a focus on ensuring players are positioned correctly etc. Indeed there have been a couple of instances where he has berated players after the event (when Rampe's opponent has impacted the game), whereas previously he'd have been the one setting up our defence to stop the play eventuating.

So overall I put the game on Saturday down as a disappointing loss, rather than a disaster, but I do think we have issues that should have already been addressed.
Stopping momentum as in the Port game is not easy, but it's pretty much impossible if you don't have an established, understood and practiced plan to combat the opposition when they change their mode of play.

And we do miss that leader who out on the ground can identify momentum shifts and ensure the established plan is implemented.
Too often we seem to wait until breaks for the coaches to react, when the players should already understand what needs to be done.
It's why a Luke Hodge type leader is so valuable, but tbh other than perhaps Errol Gulden (in the future) I'm not sure we have one on our list (even as a poor man's Hodge/McVeigh).

Tl;dr
Essendon loss is 'one of those things', but we do have issues stopping the opposition when they get momentum, when our onfield leaders should be implementing an established strategy to curb the opposition's run-ons.

Great post HB, absolutely nailed it

 

[Old Kenny]

I presume the 18 pages to date have mostly been about how s**t we are because we can't beat Essendon and we don't deserve to play finals, but it won't matter because we won't make them anyway?

Figure I'll just roll out an old adage; bad kicking is bad football.
Essendon's conversion rate 75%, ours 46%.

The expectation seemed to be we'd easily down Essendon, because well they're Essendon. And I'm tipping that mindset has permeated this autopsy thread.
Our performance on Saturday wasn't great, but it was a game of (relatively minor) momentum shifts and the Bombers took their chances and we didn't.
In my view the Port loss was much more concerning than this game.

In the Port match they controlled the game.
They went quick through the corridor when they could and played possession football when they needed (241-165 uncontested possessions) and they applied far greater pressure, that we couldn't cope with and slowed our ball movement significantly (tackles 72-51).

OK so why am I crapping on about the Port game rather than the Essendon match?
Because I'm fairly sure there will be plenty of people complaining about our inability to stop opposition momentum/run ons.
To me the match on the weekend was just one where, as with most games, there were periods when one team or the other was on top and when that occurs it's about making the most of your opportunities.

So I'll now go off on another tangent and mention the Wallabies v England rugby union game on the weekend.
The Aussies had a player sent off in the first half and suffered a number of injuries just before and during the game but came out 30-28 winners ( a score that flattered England).

After the match the Aussie coach talked about how the team practices for having 13/14 players against the oppositions 15 and also mentioned how he looked for his senior players to provide leadership on the run.

Against Port we seemed to have no ability or plan to counteract them when they switched from quick corridor football to possession football.
There are of course options eg pressure the receivers, effectively go one on one in the area of possession or perhaps do the complete opposite and drop back to outnumber the opposition when they try to put the ball into the fwd 50.

However as with the Wallabies you need to have a plan that everyone understands and you need to practice it (ideally in the pre-season).

The Wallabies coach (Dave Rennie) also highlighted the need for leadership on the ground.
Jarrad McPointy copped a lot, but whatever else he was an organiser, who saw the game across the ground and made sure people understood their roles.
Our leaders since eg JPK, Parker, Mills etc have tended to be 'follow me' type players who IMO tend not to concentrate on the big picture.
Rampe wasn't bad, but of late he seems much more concerned with his own player, rather than having a focus on ensuring players are positioned correctly etc. Indeed there have been a couple of instances where he has berated players after the event (when Rampe's opponent has impacted the game), whereas previously he'd have been the one setting up our defence to stop the play eventuating.

So overall I put the game on Saturday down as a disappointing loss, rather than a disaster, but I do think we have issues that should have already been addressed.
Stopping momentum as in the Port game is not easy, but it's pretty much impossible if you don't have an established, understood and practiced plan to combat the opposition when they change their mode of play.

And we do miss that leader who out on the ground can identify momentum shifts and ensure the established plan is implemented.
Too often we seem to wait until breaks for the coaches to react, when the players should already understand what needs to be done.
It's why a Luke Hodge type leader is so valuable, but tbh other than perhaps Errol Gulden (in the future) I'm not sure we have one on our list (even as a poor man's Hodge/McVeigh).

Tl;dr
Essendon loss is 'one of those things', but we do have issues stopping the opposition when they get momentum, when our onfield leaders should be implementing an established strategy to curb the opposition's run-ons.

This is a great analysis Biker.

 

[Wolfgang West]

WW, I always appreciate your honesty. I'm asking out of genuine curiosity/confusion, not to be a smart arse (so please don't give me a smart arse response, as fond as I am of them from you!)

But are we a team of overrated players whose talent is over-hyped? Or are we a team of very good and talented players who aren't being coached/playing the right way? Because I've seen you argue both points but I feel like they are kind of contradictory. Is Horse squandering an elite list, or is he dealing with a bunch of lemons?

Since you ask I will be honest. You lost me at a bunch of lemons. You know perfectly well they are not that. 2 days after the debacle and that is exactly what it was and calming down yesterday I am now scratching my head wondering what of the 2 issues you suggest is the problem. To confuse the issue even more for you I will say this.

We have players on our list that are overrated and we have players on the list with extreme talent who are not being coached to bring out the best in that talent and will continue to stagnate. This season has been frustrating to the point of exhaustion and efforts like Saturday just plain infuriating. Interestingly enough though and this is not to endorse my argument because I have clearly admitted I am confused as to where we are at, every Swans supporter I have spoken to since being at the game Saturday and there has been a few all believe something has to change because we have hit a serious road bock.

 

[BloodySwan]

I never felt that this season was never going to be our season but I didn't expect that we'd continue to put in such poor performances.

The only silver lining is we get another high draft pick. I truly believe our team is building towards something so not worried about the long term but real tired of these feckless showings

 

[bedford]

Why is this tread called Brave Swans , should be pathetic swans

 

[RW]

Why is this tread called Brave Swans , should be pathetic swans

It's tongue in cheek bedders, no-one could call that effort brave.

 

[RUNVS]

I have lost all faith in the Swans after Saturday's performance. Other than North Melbourne there is no game we can go into and think "we are going to win this" as we just don't know which Sydney will turn up and even if they do turn up for some of the game we have no idea how many quarters it will be or the damage done will be when they don't turn up.

When Sydney hit a wall, which we do every game, we give up big numbers of goals.

 

[bedford]

It's tongue in cheek bedders, no-one could call that effort brave.

Should be changed , its offensive

 

[Glenn_]

I have lost all faith in the Swans after Saturday's performance. Other than North Melbourne there is no game we can go into and think "we are going to win this" as we just don't know which Sydney will turn up and even if they do turn up for some of the game we have no idea how many quarters it will be or the damage done will be when they don't turn up.

When Sydney hit a wall, which we do every game, we give up big numbers of goals.

Even Norff aren't a given , as seen by earlier this season.

 

[melbournehammer]

10 was an exaggeration however Rampe, McDonald, Florent and Campbell were below Stephens imo. In fact I also thought McInerney was no better.
Everyone is killing him based on that poor kick in the last but Gulden made a similar kick OOF on the opposite wing in the third when only trying to kick it 20.
No-one seems to worry about that though.

Blakey made a dozen poor kicks in the match. Buddy kicked it oof and he earns $1m per annum. We could do this all day.

Im much less concerned about stephens than those who want to drop him n immediately - I am much much more concerned about our inability to win the ball at the coalface when the opponent manages to kick 5 goals in five minutes. and its not just essendon that does it. Our stoppage work when we concede two fast goals leaves a lot to be desired. Stephens isnt contributing to that and its not the first time this season it has happened and almost all of those occasions stephens wasnt there or even in the team.

Hairy Biker is correct when he points to port as an example of a team that just destroyed us. Brisbane did the same. But in nearly every other game teams have done it for fifteen minutes and have kicked 5-6 goals in that time. Its bloody hard to be on top in games for 50% of the game if the other team can score heavily in the 25% that they are on top (assuming the rest is just mad contests). It demands that you be on top for almost the entirety.