Analysis Horse's Untouchable

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

My view on the sub choice, you pick your 22nd best player for the role. Obviously not a KPP or tall, as they tend to have 0 impact. Has to be someone who can run, have an impact and apply defensive pressure.

However, I don't think the sub should be used for tactical reasons. You put your best in, and they should get the result, you shouldn't rely on the sub sparking a win. However, in saying that, the sub should be able to have an impact.

We should be able to make top 4 without using the sub as a tactic.

If we were a middle of the road side and most of our games are in the balance, that's when you need to sub to come in and spark something for you. But for a team in our position, we should be winning a majority of our games without relying on a sub to impact the game.

Hence, my opinion that you put a player who's on the fringe.

Heeney's perfect sub material, he's still developing. Rohan was good, I'd also use Jetts, Towers, Cunningham, McGlynn, Bird. Anyone who's a little lower in the pecking order, any of the young kids coming through, Zac Jones would be perfect.
 
GoTheSwannies said:
My view on the sub choice, you pick your 22nd best player for the role. Obviously not a KPP or tall, as they tend to have 0 impact. Has to be someone who can run, have an impact and apply defensive pressure.

However, I don't think the sub should be used for tactical reasons. You put your best in, and they should get the result, you shouldn't rely on the sub sparking a win. However, in saying that, the sub should be able to have an impact.

We should be able to make top 4 without using the sub as a tactic.

If we were a middle of the road side and most of our games are in the balance, that's when you need to sub to come in and spark something for you. But for a team in our position, we should be winning a majority of our games without relying on a sub to impact the game.

Hence, my opinion that you put a player who's on the fringe.

Heeney's perfect sub material, he's still developing. Rohan was good, I'd also use Jetts, Towers, Cunningham, McGlynn, Bird. Anyone who's a little lower in the pecking order, any of the young kids coming through, Zac Jones would be perfect.
Click to expand...
Agree. Heeney or Goodes for me to sub. Heeney for why you mentioned, Goodes for what the Bulldogs did with Gia

All KPP (Franklin, Tippett, Richards, Grundy etc) would never start off as the sub. Would always be a mid or a running type player like Rohan or Towers.
 
TheWhiteRhino said:
I don't know how most posters on this board would cope if the Swans weren't a top 4 team and premiership contender. They already bitch and moan so much.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be nearly as concerned. It would not be an issue. The problem is we are are a schizophrenic team and there is an abyss between our bad and our good. Hell we find it hard to play at an average, there is only genius or poor crap.

The issue is we have some of the best prime beef in the AFL, a squad that rivals any in the clubs history, a squad that would make most of the other teams coaches drool to be honest, multiple AA's, premiership experience galore in the coaches box and on the field, enviable club management, record number of supporters.

And yet we find a way to be 40 behind the druggies and in an insipid first half against another contender could only managed 1 goal. The come-backs are great but why be in that position in the first place? GWS game, Grand Final etc.

The issue is these "un-Swan like performances that are never going to happen again" are beginning to happen with alarming regularity and only the brilliance of the squad gets them out of gaol.

Would like to see more of the Port game as the norm and not the exception given the talent we have on the park.
 
cinderella man said:
It was a bit tongue in cheek to intimate sacking Longmire but if you are happy with the way he sets up the forward structure continually allowing a spare, Franklin to be 2 outed sometimes 3 and wasting the forward arsenal he has at his disposal then that is you prerogative I guess. I for one am sick of watching other teams going inside 50 with options to kick at in comparison to us only having Franklin with 2 blokes hanging off him. Posters on here who have continually lamented the fact we continually go to Franklin when he is outnumbered do not realise that most of the time Buddy and the 2 leeches hanging off him are the only players ahead of the footy. Of course they are going to kick to him.

I think it is a poor structure and also poor coaching. We are not a skilled enough side to enter the 50 cleanly without pressure let alone having the extra burden of being held up behind half forward or through the middle with no options forward of the ball. Hanneberry getting caught cold in the middle late in the last qtr underlined it. Momentum handed back to Freo and game over. Is it just pure coincidence that when Franklin and Tippett are both inside 50 with even numbers we can score heavily and bloody quickly ? This type of Swans footy is an irresistible force and better than anything that any of our competitors can produce. The other crap when executed poorly or under great pressure from a good team is bottom 4 quality. My opinion only.
Click to expand...

Hanners had options ahead. He just fluffed it. Tired legs, tired brain, running on adrenalin or whatever. I forgive him (just)

I see where you're coming from but when we were 0-3 last year folks were calling for Horse's head. Now we're 3-1 with a narrow loss on the road to Freo so our game plan has improved. I don't think Horse tells the players to boot it long to Buddy but Franklin has a presence and, under pressure, he stands out like a lighthouse in a storm. Tippet as fill in ruck isn't ideal and, TBH, I felt better with Goodes up there to draw a defender. There will be adjustments and we find the best team balance but, to be fair, its early days yet.
 
MarkP said:
I wouldn't be nearly as concerned. It would not be an issue. The problem is we are are a schizophrenic team and there is an abyss between our bad and our good. Hell we find it hard to play at an average, there is only genius or poor crap.

The issue is we have some of the best prime beef in the AFL, a squad that rivals any in the clubs history, a squad that would make most of the other teams coaches drool to be honest, multiple AA's, premiership experience galore in the coaches box and on the field, enviable club management, record number of supporters.

And yet we find a way to be 40 behind the druggies and in an insipid first half against another contender could only managed 1 goal. The come-backs are great but why be in that position in the first place? GWS game, Grand Final etc.

The issue is these "un-Swan like performances that are never going to happen again" are beginning to happen with alarming regularity and only the brilliance of the squad gets them out of gaol.

Would like to see more of the Port game as the norm and not the exception given the talent we have on the park.
Click to expand...
Don't we all brother. Preaching to the choir so to speak.

Some consistency would be nice byt then again when has our club not surprised us with shock losses & tough, team first, against the odds wins? It's the clubs DNA to keep us coming back I'm sure....
 
TheWhiteRhino said:
I don't know how most posters on this board would cope if the Swans weren't a top 4 team and premiership contender. They already bitch and moan so much.
Click to expand...

I don't agree with this.

People's views reflect their expectations. We currently have a list that should finish in the first six. We have one of the best contested marks in the game as a ff. We have the best forward in the game at chf. We have an AA FB. The CHB is a grossly underrated player. The back pocket is AA. The midfield has about 4 AAs in it. I could go on.

Our expectations are high.

Were we a melbourne or a sydney from 1994 we would have a different set of expectations
 
cinderella man said:
It was a bit tongue in cheek to intimate sacking Longmire but if you are happy with the way he sets up the forward structure continually allowing a spare, Franklin to be 2 outed sometimes 3 and wasting the forward arsenal he has at his disposal then that is you prerogative I guess. I for one am sick of watching other teams going inside 50 with options to kick at in comparison to us only having Franklin with 2 blokes hanging off him. Posters on here who have continually lamented the fact we continually go to Franklin when he is outnumbered do not realise that most of the time Buddy and the 2 leeches hanging off him are the only players ahead of the footy. Of course they are going to kick to him.

I think it is a poor structure and also poor coaching. We are not a skilled enough side to enter the 50 cleanly without pressure let alone having the extra burden of being held up behind half forward or through the middle with no options forward of the ball. Hanneberry getting caught cold in the middle late in the last qtr underlined it. Momentum handed back to Freo and game over. Is it just pure coincidence that when Franklin and Tippett are both inside 50 with even numbers we can score heavily and bloody quickly ? This type of Swans footy is an irresistible force and better than anything that any of our competitors can produce. The other crap when executed poorly or under great pressure from a good team is bottom 4 quality. My opinion only.
Click to expand...

A classic example of this was the goal that lloyd kicked to get us one goal behind. Franklin marked the ball just forward of centre and he had to wait for lloyd to run from behind him to mark the ball inside fifty.

A kick which, I think, only Franklin in our team would have the capability to have hit.

I think the compress everyone to one kick from the contest is somewhat counter-productive for our current team - it worked well when we had a crap forward line. I'm not certain it is the same model with our current team.
 
TheWhiteRhino said:
I don't know how most posters on this board would cope if the Swans weren't a top 4 team and premiership contender. They already bitch and moan so much.
Click to expand...

We have already missed out on a flag with this current group if i had to guess we probably have this year and the next to add another flag before another mini rebuild is in place.

Yes we have extremely high expectations you have to make hay when the sun is still shining the end can come very quickly.
 
melbournehammer said:
I don't agree with this.

People's views reflect their expectations. We currently have a list that should finish in the first six. We have one of the best contested marks in the game as a ff. We have the best forward in the game at chf. We have an AA FB. The CHB is a grossly underrated player. The back pocket is AA. The midfield has about 4 AAs in it. I could go on.

Our expectations are high.

Were we a melbourne or a sydney from 1994 we would have a different set of expectations
Click to expand...

What's your point?

The Swans are clearly meeting all of those expectations.
 
TheWhiteRhino said:
What's your point?

The Swans are clearly meeting all of those expectations.
Click to expand...

I dont think what i said was rocket science. But if it was I'm happy to rephrase.

People bitch and moan based on their expectations - they currently expect the side to win every week. Whether thats realistic is neither here nor there. The expectation is that we could play better and not be 50-9 down at half time (or whatever it was against the bombers or the hawks etc etc)

If we were a bottom four side they would bitch and moan about not beating the bottom four sides and would complain about bad delivery by foot and poor skills -but in a different way. I follow West Ham over land and sea. I don't expect to win against any of the major sides, but I hate sam allardyce playing long balls to andy carroll against west brom or swansea - sides which we have reasonable expectations of beating and where the football is dire and unwatchable.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

melbournehammer said:
I dont think what i said was rocket science. But if it was I'm happy to rephrase.

People bitch and moan based on their expectations - they currently expect the side to win every week. Whether thats realistic is neither here nor there. The expectation is that we could play better and not be 50-9 down at half time (or whatever it was against the bombers or the hawks etc etc)

If we were a bottom four side they would bitch and moan about not beating the bottom four sides and would complain about bad delivery by foot and poor skills -but in a different way. I follow West Ham over land and sea. I don't expect to win against any of the major sides, but I hate sam allardyce playing long balls to andy carroll against west brom or swansea - sides which we have reasonable expectations of beating and where the football is dire and unwatchable.
Click to expand...

Some expectations on this board are over the top. We'll have our ups and the odd down. Last year we were up more than any previous Swans team but we had a down on absolutely the wrong day. Even great batsmen get the odd duck. I understand what TheWhiteRhino was getting at and I appreciate your point too, but some others on here do genuinely just like to whine. I know everyone's entitled to their opinion but, as the saying goes, some opinions are worth more than others.

Before the GF we were tied with Hawks for games won in the last 10 years, we had won an equal number of GFs but had played more finals (every year). We're back on equal games won but still just one GF behind the 'greatest team of the modern era' (as the media likes to call them). The difference is we're looking out of our premiership window enjoying a warm spring breeze while their window is closing as the autumn turns cold. Absolutely we have a right to high expectations but we still need to be patient and, I believe, trust the guys who got us to where we are to take us that bit further. A 3-1 start is still way ahead of our usual starts ! I'm pretty happy with it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Grand Uncle Horace
Coach Horse: Retain, Retire, Reinvent?
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
134
Views
6K
Kiama Chris
Kiama Chris

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top