That’sthejoke.jpgYou would've been +54!
Review Positives and Negatives @ Sydney Rd 13
- Thread starter HoneyBadger35
- Start date
- Tagged users None
RookiePick
Brownlow Medallist
- Aug 13, 2014
- 26,557
- 47,338
- AFL Club
- West Coast
I'm not sure what it is about Sydney but they definitely seemed better than us in creating space on Friday. We seemed to get sucked into the congestion in numbers and if Sydney got the ball clear they had structure outside to run and carry. Swans are very well drilled.
yeah but there will be no resting him....
Its no surprise that Yeo played his best game with Boots in the side this week. Over the last month and half he's been doing the hard yards in the coal face for us and his impact per possession hasn't been as high as its been in the past(But still pretty good). Last week Swans decided to tag Boots and he was able to play a less contested game and carved the swans with his run and carry. 29 touches (13 contested), 2 goals, 13 inside 50's, 8 score involvements and 734 meters gained.
Can't wait till boots is fit and firing again and good lucky to any opposition midfield that doesn't target one of them.
Bit Disappointed in Gaff cause he is a big game player but he did have a bad one this week. It looked like he played a tad more inside this week and IMO his link up was missed as were pretty ordinary in that part of the game. Not sure if its a coaching blunder playing Gaff more inside.
Can't wait till boots is fit and firing again and good lucky to any opposition midfield that doesn't target one of them.
Bit Disappointed in Gaff cause he is a big game player but he did have a bad one this week. It looked like he played a tad more inside this week and IMO his link up was missed as were pretty ordinary in that part of the game. Not sure if its a coaching blunder playing Gaff more inside.
replicant
Premiership Player
SCG is bigger than Optus. Just saying.It's been a fun week of chat. I'll be watching the rest of your games closely, as I suspect our rivalry from 05-07 has well and truly returned.
ps, I don't say this in a flippant way, but I hope if we play again this year, we play you in Perth. The SCG is not really suiting our game style this year. We have played our best footy away from home. The bigger grounds suit the speed we've brought into the side. Still, I'd never say no to a home final
Just to provide proof to all the "SCG is so small, no room to lead etc...".
Optus: 160x130m = area of 16336m^2
SCG: 155.5x135 = area of 16487m^2.
So ground size wasn't the decider. Home ground advantage is real, but it's not an SCG problem, it's a travel problem.
Last edited:
Lots of different reports of SCG’s dimensions. One site said 152m long, another said 145m long.
The AFL site says 149m
http://m.afl.com.au/tickets/venues/scg
replicant
Premiership Player
Oh no, I fear the truth is getting in the way of a good conspirastory here...
Hardly. Just quoting the current AFL website you twit.
Tut tut, I wasn’t referring to you, methinks a guilty conscience doth present itself.
I meant in the generally perceived ‘wisdom’ around the dimensions of the SCG, held by many supporters from most clubs.
Guilty of?
Going off half cocked about the ground size. We (Swans supporters) have been putting up with this for a few seasons now, I don’t even bother defending it anymore either.
Since they reconfigured the SCG about 5 years ago the length and shape has been a constant source of annoyance. The afl either stupidly or willfully refuses to put the right dimensions on. As replicant has shown via google earth, the ground is actually larger in overall size than your own, and many other grounds currently being used.
Anyway, play on as they say!
How accurate is Google maps? Wikipedia reckons 153m.
Google earth is satellite based photographic technology, and Wikipedia tends to be populated by nutters and conspiracy theorists. One uses triangulation and mathematics, the other is edited by anyone on the net, basically.
replicant
Premiership Player
Not just that. The people at the SCG themselves have said they've measured it as 155.5m.
But sure, go with wikipedia.
Settle down guys. I know Google maps is pretty accurate but wasn't sure it would be accurate to the exact meter/half a meter (which is pretty cool).
Please go to the SCG and record yourself measuring the length with one of those wheel things while holding todays newspaper. It's the only way to settle this.
Brave Sir Robin
Cancelled
- Jun 27, 2008
- 4,277
- 4,985
- AFL Club
- West Coast
The SCG is exactly 83 Mcgoverns lying end on end, I don't know why this is a source of controversy to all of you.
Well obvs now we know it's 155 instead of 149m we will win next game at the SCG. Our match plan was just off by 6m. This is clearly why we only marked 6% of our inside 50's. It's reassuring for our mids to not work on their skills under pressure and decision making.
where did you get 160m x 130m btw?
These all have the length as 165m.
Area wise, OS would have the 3rd largest area.
http://www.afl.com.au/tickets/venues/optus-stadium/
https://thewest.com.au/sport/west-c...nds-ahead-of-optus-stadium-move-ng-b88745328z
http://www.austadiums.com/stadiums/stadiums.php?id=399
replicant
Premiership Player
You're absolutely right. I got 160 from an article that referenced bith it and the MCG together. It's 165, so slightly larger than the SCG. My mistake
Still, the SCG is larger than Spotless, Adelaide, Etihad and GMHBADERFTGHHY (Cattery).
you make good points then you shoot yourself in the foot with 'it's a travel problem' - proof?
maybe swans are a better drilled team, maybe the coach is better, maybe swans were better on the day, for different reasons, each time they played WCE, but maybe it won't be that way next time...lots of variables..and this season travel has been the least of our worries. (but good to debunk the 'small cramped scg oval illusion' once and for all)
Who cares?
Some of your supporters, who continue to run with the “small field” theory in here and elsewhere.
Similar threads
