2nds Swans Reserves 2015

Remove this Banner Ad

Ok. My opinion, which shouldn't count for much...GWS applied early pressure that caught us immediately on the back foot. They were "open."
Hit to targets. Boom. Boom. Links in a chain. Our decisions were rattled. Weren't seeing "open" players. Weren't moving the ball. Lost our structures. Scramble. Scramble. Back foot stuff. IT WILL GET BETTER. JUST A BAD DAY!!!
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this ad.

Glenn_ said:
c567174a0d72b0a73c5663f21c1edabf6ee15bbec494714afb7269180d900324.jpg
Click to expand...
woah, woah, woah..slow down. 900 posts in 10 years, pace yourself fella.
 
Q2Q3Q4
Sydney Swans 0.1-12.2-143.3-219.4-58
UWS Giants4.7-319.11-6514.16-10017.19-121
Sydney Swans
Goal Kickers: A. Goodes 3, B. Jack , N. Reinhard , S. Naismith , S. McLaren , C. McFadden , J. Hiscox
Best Players: , Z. Jones , T. Mitchell , A. Goodes , D. Robinson
UWS Giants
Goal Kickers: W. Hoskin-Elliott 5, S. Reid 2, D. Addison 2, A. Kennedy , J. Barrett , T. Mohr , C. Hampton , Z. Williams , R. Lobb , J. Lamb , L. Tiziani
Best Players: , C. Hampton , Z. Williams , W. Hoskin-Elliott , M. Buntine , T. Mohr , J. Lamb
 
Despite getting murdered by 10 goals, all our reserves players are amazing.

Goodes booted three goals (all in the final term) and finished with more than 20 possessions
Click to expand...
Jones was up to the task while, in the absence of injured key defender Aliir Aliir (knee), Abaina Davis and Xavier Richards stood tall despite experienced Giants forward Will Hoskin-Elliott kicking five goals.

Around the ground Robinson and Mitchell were the lynchpins of the Swans’ on-ball division. James Rose and Brandon Jack battled hard as did ruckmen Toby Nankervis and Sam Naismith.
Click to expand...

I note that despite mentioning half the team, there was no discussion of Hewett.

http://www.sydneyswans.com.au/news/2015-04-20/neafl-a-tough-day-at-the-office
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

From my observations generally we were inferior in our structures across the field and couldn't cope with UWS's simple but effective game plan. Sure they had more highly credentialed draft picks in their team but this only accentuated their superiority rather than being the cause of it. Our midfield was beaten with the withdrawal of Hewett and McGlynn not helping our cause. Mitchell battled manfully all day but lacked any real support in the middle. Goodes was a little too offensive in his mindset and due to Downie winning most of the ruck contests this resulted in some easy clearances for them.

Our in-close work in particular requires a massive improvement. I was concerned with this area after watching the Sydney Uni practice game, and I don't think anything has changed since then. Besides trying to bash their way through tacklers (mostly unsuccessful), was there any cohesive plan in the midfield? By contrast, UWS worked well with quick clean handballs in tight feeding a clearing kick or a wide handball to their outside runners whose workrate left most of the Swans opponents embarrassed especially in the first half.

I've already mentioned Mitchell and Goodes, the third inside midfielder was Robinson who had a relatively quiet game. He may have been trying to tag some one as has been his directive since the middle of last year but I'm not sure who it was if there was such a target. They also tried Davis as a midfieldder at some centre bounces but didn't seem to stem the flow of UWS ball.

Also having 3 ruckmen in the team (plus McLaren) is not ideal when the delivery from the midfield is poor - too many high floating balls or kicks that didn't make the distance. What should have been an advantage against their undersized defenders turned into an disadvantage as they ran the ball out easily from the backline. Rose was the shining light playing half-forward/wing, took a nice grab with strong hands and also had some clever possessions heading towards goal.

Speaking of the 3 ruckmen, Naismith had the most time in the ruck with Derickx and Nankervis left to prowl the forward 50. At a rough guess I would say the ruck split was roughly 55% Naismith 25% Derickx and 20% Nankervis. Despite this Nankervis (no bias) had the best tapwork with at least 3 forward 50 taps from throw ins setting up scoring chances including Goodes's first goal. But working against him is his slowness and if he doesn't mark the ball in the forward 50, it's almost certain he won't be gathering the ground ball. Derickx seems to lack footy smarts, he is often arrives half a second too late in the marking contest and sometimes is too careless and clumsy giving away free kicks through misdirected acts of aggression. Naismith is surprisingly athletic for his size, he just needs to learn to play as a forward and lead to the right spots. At the moment he's getting most of his scoring opportunities by having a longer reach than his opponent which is always handy, but needs another facet of his forward play to improve to be even more threatening.

In defence, Richards was missing his partner-in-crime Aliir and was the main culprit in turning the ball over from our defensive 50 mainly through some atrocious kicking. I've seen him kick better so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and put it down to a bad day and/or getting used to his teammates in the back six as he didn't look particularly comfortable marshaling the back 6.

Current problems that require urgent attention:
  • Midfield setup as mentioned above - the return of Hewett and Perris will help.
  • Tall forward setup as mentioned above - hands are quite tied here, the coaches can't really drop one of the ruckmen as you would in the seniors.
  • Too many peripheral players from our listed players brigade. Hiscox, Davis, Marsh, Foote and today McLaren (although more from lack of ball up forward than lack of effort) and most disappointingly Jack need to be more involved.
  • No running defender. Biggs led the rebound 50s for us last year and set up a lot of our scoring chains from half back. His absence has been sorely felt. Perhaps Marsh was put there to address this regard but considering Biggs averaged 32 disposals last year and Marsh had 7 in round 1 and not many more in round 2, it hasn't been an adequate replacement. Jones also played in defence for this game as the small defender on Jarrod Pickett, but he doesn't strike me as the running type. Foote has also been playing in defence despite playing midfield for the Rams last year. Perhaps they can kill 2 birds with one stone by trying BJ in this role - it would see him involved more and add another string to his bow.

For UWS, Hoskin-Elliott was easily best on ground for me, so classy and smooth, he pantsed whoever was on him - I think Hiscox on the wing and a combination of Marsh and Davis when forward. Barrett went head to head with Mitchell and Steele tagged Goodes for most of the game with Hampton relieving him in the last quarter. Lamb was looking particularly dangerous for them moving the ball into their forward half, but would have been disappointed that he wasted quite a number of them. Mohr, Marchbank and Buntine handled our talls quite easily with Buntine quite vocal in directing his teammates where to go.
 
Looking at the gallery photos on the Swans site, it's good to see Jones stepping up with some innovative leadership. He's taking pointing in new directions:
1. Pointing WHILE kicking... multi-tasking - Beat that McVeigh!
2. Pointing with the LITTLE FINGER. This brings a new level of sophistication the Swans.

This new form of superior pointing is now dubbed "The Twinings".
jones twinings.JPG
 
grimlock said:
From my observations generally we were inferior in our structures across the field and couldn't cope with UWS's simple but effective game plan. Sure they had more highly credentialed draft picks in their team but this only accentuated their superiority rather than being the cause of it. Our midfield was beaten with the withdrawal of Hewett and McGlynn not helping our cause. Mitchell battled manfully all day but lacked any real support in the middle. Goodes was a little too offensive in his mindset and due to Downie winning most of the ruck contests this resulted in some easy clearances for them.

Our in-close work in particular requires a massive improvement. I was concerned with this area after watching the Sydney Uni practice game, and I don't think anything has changed since then. Besides trying to bash their way through tacklers (mostly unsuccessful), was there any cohesive plan in the midfield? By contrast, UWS worked well with quick clean handballs in tight feeding a clearing kick or a wide handball to their outside runners whose workrate left most of the Swans opponents embarrassed especially in the first half.

I've already mentioned Mitchell and Goodes, the third inside midfielder was Robinson who had a relatively quiet game. He may have been trying to tag some one as has been his directive since the middle of last year but I'm not sure who it was if there was such a target. They also tried Davis as a midfieldder at some centre bounces but didn't seem to stem the flow of UWS ball.

Also having 3 ruckmen in the team (plus McLaren) is not ideal when the delivery from the midfield is poor - too many high floating balls or kicks that didn't make the distance. What should have been an advantage against their undersized defenders turned into an disadvantage as they ran the ball out easily from the backline. Rose was the shining light playing half-forward/wing, took a nice grab with strong hands and also had some clever possessions heading towards goal.

Speaking of the 3 ruckmen, Naismith had the most time in the ruck with Derickx and Nankervis left to prowl the forward 50. At a rough guess I would say the ruck split was roughly 55% Naismith 25% Derickx and 20% Nankervis. Despite this Nankervis (no bias) had the best tapwork with at least 3 forward 50 taps from throw ins setting up scoring chances including Goodes's first goal. But working against him is his slowness and if he doesn't mark the ball in the forward 50, it's almost certain he won't be gathering the ground ball. Derickx seems to lack footy smarts, he is often arrives half a second too late in the marking contest and sometimes is too careless and clumsy giving away free kicks through misdirected acts of aggression. Naismith is surprisingly athletic for his size, he just needs to learn to play as a forward and lead to the right spots. At the moment he's getting most of his scoring opportunities by having a longer reach than his opponent which is always handy, but needs another facet of his forward play to improve to be even more threatening.

In defence, Richards was missing his partner-in-crime Aliir and was the main culprit in turning the ball over from our defensive 50 mainly through some atrocious kicking. I've seen him kick better so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and put it down to a bad day and/or getting used to his teammates in the back six as he didn't look particularly comfortable marshaling the back 6.

Current problems that require urgent attention:
  • Midfield setup as mentioned above - the return of Hewett and Perris will help.
  • Tall forward setup as mentioned above - hands are quite tied here, the coaches can't really drop one of the ruckmen as you would in the seniors.
  • Too many peripheral players from our listed players brigade. Hiscox, Davis, Marsh, Foote and today McLaren (although more from lack of ball up forward than lack of effort) and most disappointingly Jack need to be more involved.
  • No running defender. Biggs led the rebound 50s for us last year and set up a lot of our scoring chains from half back. His absence has been sorely felt. Perhaps Marsh was put there to address this regard but considering Biggs averaged 32 disposals last year and Marsh had 7 in round 1 and not many more in round 2, it hasn't been an adequate replacement. Jones also played in defence for this game as the small defender on Jarrod Pickett, but he doesn't strike me as the running type. Foote has also been playing in defence despite playing midfield for the Rams last year. Perhaps they can kill 2 birds with one stone by trying BJ in this role - it would see him involved more and add another string to his bow.

For UWS, Hoskin-Elliott was easily best on ground for me, so classy and smooth, he pantsed whoever was on him - I think Hiscox on the wing and a combination of Marsh and Davis when forward. Barrett went head to head with Mitchell and Steele tagged Goodes for most of the game with Hampton relieving him in the last quarter. Lamb was looking particularly dangerous for them moving the ball into their forward half, but would have been disappointed that he wasted quite a number of them. Mohr, Marchbank and Buntine handled our talls quite easily with Buntine quite vocal in directing his teammates where to go.
Click to expand...
W
grimlock said:
From my observations generally we were inferior in our structures across the field and couldn't cope with UWS's simple but effective game plan. Sure they had more highly credentialed draft picks in their team but this only accentuated their superiority rather than being the cause of it. Our midfield was beaten with the withdrawal of Hewett and McGlynn not helping our cause. Mitchell battled manfully all day but lacked any real support in the middle. Goodes was a little too offensive in his mindset and due to Downie winning most of the ruck contests this resulted in some easy clearances for them.

Our in-close work in particular requires a massive improvement. I was concerned with this area after watching the Sydney Uni practice game, and I don't think anything has changed since then. Besides trying to bash their way through tacklers (mostly unsuccessful), was there any cohesive plan in the midfield? By contrast, UWS worked well with quick clean handballs in tight feeding a clearing kick or a wide handball to their outside runners whose workrate left most of the Swans opponents embarrassed especially in the first half.

I've already mentioned Mitchell and Goodes, the third inside midfielder was Robinson who had a relatively quiet game. He may have been trying to tag some one as has been his directive since the middle of last year but I'm not sure who it was if there was such a target. They also tried Davis as a midfieldder at some centre bounces but didn't seem to stem the flow of UWS ball.

Also having 3 ruckmen in the team (plus McLaren) is not ideal when the delivery from the midfield is poor - too many high floating balls or kicks that didn't make the distance. What should have been an advantage against their undersized defenders turned into an disadvantage as they ran the ball out easily from the backline. Rose was the shining light playing half-forward/wing, took a nice grab with strong hands and also had some clever possessions heading towards goal.

Speaking of the 3 ruckmen, Naismith had the most time in the ruck with Derickx and Nankervis left to prowl the forward 50. At a rough guess I would say the ruck split was roughly 55% Naismith 25% Derickx and 20% Nankervis. Despite this Nankervis (no bias) had the best tapwork with at least 3 forward 50 taps from throw ins setting up scoring chances including Goodes's first goal. But working against him is his slowness and if he doesn't mark the ball in the forward 50, it's almost certain he won't be gathering the ground ball. Derickx seems to lack footy smarts, he is often arrives half a second too late in the marking contest and sometimes is too careless and clumsy giving away free kicks through misdirected acts of aggression. Naismith is surprisingly athletic for his size, he just needs to learn to play as a forward and lead to the right spots. At the moment he's getting most of his scoring opportunities by having a longer reach than his opponent which is always handy, but needs another facet of his forward play to improve to be even more threatening.

In defence, Richards was missing his partner-in-crime Aliir and was the main culprit in turning the ball over from our defensive 50 mainly through some atrocious kicking. I've seen him kick better so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and put it down to a bad day and/or getting used to his teammates in the back six as he didn't look particularly comfortable marshaling the back 6.

Current problems that require urgent attention:
  • Midfield setup as mentioned above - the return of Hewett and Perris will help.
  • Tall forward setup as mentioned above - hands are quite tied here, the coaches can't really drop one of the ruckmen as you would in the seniors.
  • Too many peripheral players from our listed players brigade. Hiscox, Davis, Marsh, Foote and today McLaren (although more from lack of ball up forward than lack of effort) and most disappointingly Jack need to be more involved.
  • No running defender. Biggs led the rebound 50s for us last year and set up a lot of our scoring chains from half back. His absence has been sorely felt. Perhaps Marsh was put there to address this regard but considering Biggs averaged 32 disposals last year and Marsh had 7 in round 1 and not many more in round 2, it hasn't been an adequate replacement. Jones also played in defence for this game as the small defender on Jarrod Pickett, but he doesn't strike me as the running type. Foote has also been playing in defence despite playing midfield for the Rams last year. Perhaps they can kill 2 birds with one stone by trying BJ in this role - it would see him involved more and add another string to his bow.

For UWS, Hoskin-Elliott was easily best on ground for me, so classy and smooth, he pantsed whoever was on him - I think Hiscox on the wing and a combination of Marsh and Davis when forward. Barrett went head to head with Mitchell and Steele tagged Goodes for most of the game with Hampton relieving him in the last quarter. Lamb was looking particularly dangerous for them moving the ball into their forward half, but would have been disappointed that he wasted quite a number of them. Mohr, Marchbank and Buntine handled our talls quite easily with Buntine quite vocal in directing his teammates where to go.
Click to expand...
WOW! What a GREAT overview of the game! Fantastic to read such a concise analysis. Thanks for posting.
 
Player|Goals|Behinds|Disposals|Kicks|Handballs|Marks|Tackles|Hitouts|DT
\T.Young|0|0|30|17|13|9|3|0|114
\A.Goodes|3|1|30|17|13|4|1|0|107
\B.Jack|1|0|26|14|12|4|5|0|106
\T.Mitchell|0|0|32|11|21|0|7|0|94
\D.Robinson|0|0|25|14|11|4|3|2|91
\X.Richards|0|0|16|14|12|5|5|0|82
\T.Nankervis|0|0|13|7|6|2|6|21|79
\S.Naismith|1|0|15|7|8|2|1|27|78
\J.Hiscox|1|0|18|12|6|4|3|0|78
\H.Marsh|0|0|16|8|8|4|4|0|68
\J.Foote|0|0|13|5|8|3|7|0|68
\J.Rose|0|1|15|7|8|3|4|0|61
\O.Osborne|0|0|12|6|6|4|2|0|50
\N.Reinhard|1|1|9|7|2|3|1|0|45
\A.Davis|0|0|8|6|2|1|5|0|45
\E.Sertbas|0|0|9|4|5|1|6|0|44
\Z.Jones|0|0|14|7|7|0|2|0|44
\C.McFadden|1|0|7|5|2|1|4|0|42
\W.Taylor|0|0|11|6|5|2|1|0|40
\S.McLaren|1|0|8|3|5|1|2|0|27
\T.Derickx|0|0|3|2|1|2|1|9|24
\N.Foster|0|0|7|0|7|0|3|0|20
 
swansfan51 said:
Why is Derickx on the list exactly? 3rd reserve ruckmen/painfully cringeworthy interviewer?
Click to expand...
He filled his role perfectly last year coming in when Pyke was injured and before either Naismith or Nankervis were ready. If he is out of contract at the end of this year I don't expect him to be getting another one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
VFL 2024 Swans Reserves
24 25 26 27 28
Replies
684
Views
28K
Grand Uncle Horace
Grand Uncle Horace
hairy biker
VFL 2023 Swans Reserves
95 96 97 98 99
Replies
2K
Views
87K
Bloods86
Bloods86
SwansProudly
POTY Round 06 Swans v Suns
2
Replies
25
Views
507
Nuggetz
Nuggetz
SwansProudly
POTY Round 04 Eagles v Swans
Replies
19
Views
441
Olian
Olian
SwansProudly
POTY Round 03 Richmond vs. Swans
Replies
19
Views
468
bedford
B
Edmund hunt
Swans Bigfooty league
Replies
20
Views
951
Edmund hunt
Edmund hunt
hairy biker
Game Day 2024 Non-Swans Game Day
135 136 137 138 139
Replies
3K
Views
53K
the hypnotoad
T

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top