Autopsy Got there in the end - Swans def Blues

[SwansProudly]

 

[bedford]

When you look at the long range forecast it looks like a decent chance its going to be wet.
Maybe that gives someone like Corey more of an opportunity to stay in.
Florent probably comes into the starting 22.
Adams is almost surely being picked.
If it actually is wet I wouldn't be risking Mills at all. Now I'm not saying they shouldn't pick him, but if there is any doubt that he can't play a game of AFL then you don't play him. At this point in time, without knowing how he pulled up and what his program is, I say not to play him.
I bring back Hanily for groundball pressure and then the last spot goes to Paton (I know, I know).

Out: Francis, Amartey, JMac
In: Adams, Hanily, Paton

Rely on Ladhams forward for small parts like Friday night, with Hamling playing his usual defensive forward role, this time on May.
Heeney and Hayward are the guys that have to play taller. If the Dee's try and go bigger in their forward line, Hamling can always go back.
Oh, and watch out for one of the best match ups for the round. Wicks on Pickett.

Saturday is sunny and 21 , , Sunday will probably be fine

 

[Bloods86]

I think Hamling is going to have to stay forward which I'm not a fan of. Melbourne don't have many good tall forwards.

I agree with Punts give Mills another week in the twos, why rush after being so careful.

I think we go shorter up front , but Hamling and Ladhams hmm. Will be hayward to play well, Adams in means Heeney and Warner can push forward though, Florent plays a full game. i don't think Mclean should be back from one shit game, not sold on Buller.


Florent comes back in, we looked better and at least Ladhams competes.


Out Francis, Jmac, Amartey

In Adams, Hanily , and heck maybe Paton and he can be sub

Hanily forward , Ladhams and Sheldrick to relieve Heeney and warner

Happy to go with 2 talls forward, but not sure about 2 forward AND 2 back (one being Rampe).

Dees likely to have 2 KPFs out of Turner, Petty or could bring JVR back. Lever might return, could push McDonald forward a bit.

And you'd probably want to send Rampe to Fritsch, with Wicks on Pickett. So I think Tmac and Hamling in defence is needed.

 

[SwansLifer]

Saturday is sunny and 21 , , Sunday will probably be fine

It could be. At this point where I looked its saying Sunday afternoon showers. Monday 26, Tues 27, Wed 28 all rain.

I'm not a good weather guy but I always think the weather comes in a little bit from long range. But it is Melbourne, could be mid 20s and perfect for footy.

I hope it's not going to rain.

 

[bedford]

It could be. At this point where I looked its saying Sunday afternoon showers. Monday 26, Tues 27, Wed 28 all rain.

I'm not a good weather guy but I always think the weather comes in a little bit from long range. But it is Melbourne, could be mid 20s and perfect for footy.

I hope it's not going to rain.

Might help us

 

[bedford]

Ladhams kicking that goal would have been the most awesome moment of the year

Can find more awesome things than this for him , maybe learn to kick at the standard of an AFL player

 

[liz]

And you'd probably want to send Rampe to Fritsch, with Wicks on Pickett. So I think Tmac and Hamling in defence is needed.

Maybe we don't bother with anyone on Fritsch. He's bound to kick a handful either way, his biggest haul of the season. If we can just stop the rest, we might win.

 

[liz]

IMO the period that won us the game was on the back of a five or ten minute period late in the third when our pressure just broke Carlton. You could see the fight leaving their players, happening in real time, and they never recovered, even after the 3QT break. It reminded me of the GF ambushes we've faced where the game basically slips out of our grasp in the blink of an eye because of some sustained pressure on us.

Campbell, Cleary, Warner Jr, Wicks etc were amazing in this period. We don't win without them.

I think we were pretty good for the whole second half. Whether we just gradually ramped it up as the half progressed, or if it was Carlton gradually wilting, I don't know.

I was a little confused (or underwhelmed) by Voss's post match press conference, where he claimed they had the game exactly where they wanted it but then let it slip. I wouldn't have thought either coach felt they had the game where they wanted it unless it was Cox after Heeney kicked his second goal. The margin was never big enough for either team to think they had it in the bag and, while Carlton did have the better of the territory for patches of the first half, most of their entries were rubbish. It wasn't like they were creating lots of genuine scoring chances but just blowing them (as we have for many patches of games this year).

 

[RedBloodBlackSwan]

Ladhams didn't kick a goal had 1 tackle

McLean last week kicked a goal and had 2 tackles

I don't think my analysis is too strong but it points to more so the small forwards turning up

Also Amartey. He chases and tackles well for a big man.

 

[caesar88]

I think we were pretty good for the whole second half. Whether we just gradually ramped it up as the half progressed, or if it was Carlton gradually wilting, I don't know.

I was a little confused (or underwhelmed) by Voss's post match press conference, where he claimed they had the game exactly where they wanted it but then let it slip. I wouldn't have thought either coach felt they had the game where they wanted it unless it was Cox after Heeney kicked his second goal. The margin was never big enough for either team to think they had it in the bag and, while Carlton did have the better of the territory for patches of the first half, most of their entries were rubbish. It wasn't like they were creating lots of genuine scoring chances but just blowing them (as we have for many patches of games this year).

I assume he was talking about it purely from a scoreboard perspective. If you lead for nearly the entire game then you generally shouldn't be losing. But yeah if he was talking about it from a tactical game ascendancy sense then it's confusing.

 

[bedford]

I think we were pretty good for the whole second half. Whether we just gradually ramped it up as the half progressed, or if it was Carlton gradually wilting, I don't know.

I was a little confused (or underwhelmed) by Voss's post match press conference, where he claimed they had the game exactly where they wanted it but then let it slip. I wouldn't have thought either coach felt they had the game where they wanted it unless it was Cox after Heeney kicked his second goal. The margin was never big enough for either team to think they had it in the bag and, while Carlton did have the better of the territory for patches of the first half, most of their entries were rubbish. It wasn't like they were creating lots of genuine scoring chances but just blowing them (as we have for many patches of games this year).

6 9 to 3 4 , at least we've had 2 good 2nd halfs

 

[The King!]

Can find more awesome things than this for him , maybe learn to kick at the standard of an AFL player

What’s this even mean? Not sure what point you are making

 

[The King!]

You forget one stat

Amount of times McLean mopes around- every other time.

He is turtle slow. Look ideally you’d play none of these two and Francis but I’m definitely going Ladhams over those two he’s less likely to annoy me

Was McLean playing poorly? Yes

But he has moved well in plenty of games, and played some solid footy, if he kicked straighter his year looks better.

We know what he can do

 

[bedford]

Was McLean playing poorly? Yes

But he has moved well in plenty of games, and played some solid footy, if he kicked straighter his year looks better.

We know what he can do

sfa at times

 

[RedBloodBlackSwan]

For next week:

I’d make McLean think he is unlikely to play, and then if he puts in in training on the areas he needs to improve, I’d pick him. On a big MCG, his turning circle is less of an issue, and he can take a mark and kick a long goal. And the cupboard is bare. Costly error by Amartey. If McLean doesn’t put in, then Buller.

I’d challenge the JMac ruling (arguing low impact) and if unsuccessful (most likely), bring in Florent from sub.

For Frances, I’d bring Hamling back. I’d get Haywood to play Hamling’s defensive role on a tall.

I’d bring in Adams to support the half forward and mid rotations, enabling Heeney to play even more forward.

If Mills pulls up from reserves and training, I’d be tempted to play him off half back, with limited minutes.
I’d then make Lloyd sub. Make him realise he was one of the players the “the message” was for by who didn’t respond well enough.

Out: Amartey, JMac, Frances, Lloyd (to sub)

In: McLean/Buller, Florent (from sub), Adams, Mills (limited minutes, maybe the second half of each quarter)

 

[The King!]

No your argument is just getting destroyed through statistics right in front of you.

McLean is an average AFL player most of the time and is currently out of form but he is still putting up better numbers than Ladhams.

The stats are showing that it isn't any difference to Pressure on ball caused by McLean or Ladhams but more so directly caused by the small forwards turning up


PA difference between Carlton game and their average:

Cleary +6
Campbell +1
Hayward +5
McInerney +1
Corey -2


Tackles
Campbell +3
Cleary -2
Hayward +1
McInerney +1

We are only what a month removed form this game below.

I think McLean is a confidence player too, if he kicked 4.2 even 3.3 and became the match winner that game, I think it turns his season.

He will also probably take time to get VFL form back, but he can play like the Port game and thats more than decent (bar the goal kicking)

 

[bedford]

What’s this even mean? Not sure what point you are making

What don't you understand , he's a shocking kick

 

[The King!]

\

sfa at times

Yeah maybe it was too wet or some other bullshit excuse you make up for the 4-5 players you like

 

[The King!]

What don't you understand , he's a shocking kick

I didn’t say he was a good kick though, I just like one piece of play, He is an average kick, though he makes less mistakes than some. Maybe it was too wet his entire career

 

[liz]

I assume he was talking about it purely from a scoreboard perspective. If you lead for nearly the entire game then you generally shouldn't be losing. But yeah if he was talking about it from a tactical game ascendancy sense then it's confusing.

Maybe. But what was the biggest lead they got out to? Twelve points? Or was it thirteen? And that biggest lead was towards the end of the first quarter, so hardly a lead to protect. Although the differential wasn't huge, we were matching - and beating them at contested ball and clearances for most of the game, and were certainly on top by the end. The conditions meant that a lot of clearances were messy and quickly turned over (by both teams), but contested ball is meant to be their strength.

The only thing they really had going for them was one very good (and one pretty good) tall forward who know how to lead. So they only needed a couple of clean transitions down the ground to have a good chance of creating set shots. But then, as Voss himself observed, they allowed Heeney to have seven shots on goal, and he'd often convert several of those he missed.

 

[The King!]

Maybe. But what was the biggest lead they got out to? Twelve points? Or was it thirteen? And that biggest lead was towards the end of the first quarter, so hardly a lead to protect. Although the differential wasn't huge, we were matching - and beating them at contested ball and clearances for most of the game, and were certainly on top by the end. The conditions meant that a lot of clearances were messy and quickly turned over (by both teams), but contested ball is meant to be their strength.

The only thing they really had going for them was one very good (and one pretty good) tall forward who know how to lead. So they only needed a couple of clean transitions down the ground to have a good chance of creating set shots. But then, as Voss himself observed, they allowed Heeney to have seven shots on goal, and he'd often convert several of those he missed.

Voss must feel like a dead man walking though, seems bereft of ideas, why’s he keep picking Young?

 

[caesar88]

Maybe. But what was the biggest lead they got out to? Twelve points? Or was it thirteen? And that biggest lead was towards the end of the first quarter, so hardly a lead to protect. Although the differential wasn't huge, we were matching - and beating them at contested ball and clearances for most of the game, and were certainly on top by the end. The conditions meant that a lot of clearances were messy and quickly turned over (by both teams), but contested ball is meant to be their strength.

The only thing they really had going for them was one very good (and one pretty good) tall forward who know how to lead. So they only needed a couple of clean transitions down the ground to have a good chance of creating set shots. But then, as Voss himself observed, they allowed Heeney to have seven shots on goal, and he'd often convert several of those he missed.

Well I personally think Carlton are kinda average, so maybe Voss isn't that happy with how they're going either, so he was just happy to be in front? He might've also thought they had more upside than us, given they had the lead despite not being on top in the area they're usually pretty strong in (clearance & contest)

 

[Punts]

Voss must feel like a dead man walking though, seems bereft of ideas, why’s he keep picking Young?

Was talking to a fella in the know and said he won’t get sacked but they are getting all new assistants for him next year in his last year of contract. Complete re gig

 

[The King!]

Was talking to a fella in the know and said he won’t get sacked but they are getting all new assistants for him next year in his last year of contract. Complete re gig

Interesting, Carlton way would be to go and get Longmire or Simpson on 5 years

 

[SwansLifer]

Well I personally think Carlton are kinda average, so maybe Voss isn't that happy with how they're going either, so he was just happy to be in front? He might've also thought they had more upside than us, given they had the lead despite not being on top in the area they're usually pretty strong in (clearance & contest)

While I agree he might believe they're not going well, that is the exact reason he may just be out of a job in the next month.
Everyone in the footy industry agrees they have some great pieces. Not many teams, if any at all, have AA player(s) in each 3rd of the ground. Yet this guy keeps being given a pass for some reason. I am a Voss fan overall, but in a world where people here are giving Cox grief a handful of games into this type of season, surely Voss is on the hot seat for not doing SFA with a HUGE amount of talent.

 

[Mister B]

McInerney you could maybe argue that the force should be low given he didn't have a HIA?

Amartey though I suspect we just plea guilty and take the 3. Part of me is surprised they didn't send it straight to the Tribunal.

I'd guess the reason they didn't send it straight to the tribunal is that it could leave open the ability to argue the bump of McInerney moved Boyd's trajectory and the last second direction change in direction led to an unavoidable collision. By giving him 3 weeks, I believe we can only argue on the grading. Could be wrong on that though.