Outdated game plan

[bedford]

Yesterdays GF showed how dated our game plan is, there is no way known we can win another flag with it.
We are now way behind the top 2 and yes so is everybody else, but we have to try and catch them.
Paul Roos, i love him for what he has done for our club but i believe he has become stubborn just like Eade did. His assistants are mates and people who have not played the modern game, why are the weagles chasing a Scott Burns because they want the best but we are stuck with the Craig Holdens,Brett Allison,Steve Taubert and people like Peter Berbacov (who).
Who wants a Vespremi learning to play negative footy when the kid has natural flair lets start playing more attractive footy and the crowds might come back.
To watch our 2nd half against the Bulldogs was pathetic after a pretty good 1st half, they counter attacked from the kick ins playing on straight away, how many times do we do this WE DON'T.
Roos won't change because that would be like giving in to the footy public and the Melbourne media.

 

[DeadlyAkkuret]

I wish you posted this on RWO, would have been funny.

I know what you're saying but I also believe we have to be realistic about the style we're capable of. With Vespa, Goodes, McVeigh and Jack in the middle we should definitely attack more often, but I don't think we could sustain it for 4 quaters and would probably have suffered some huge losses.

It's important to protect young players from damaging defeats as much as you can. Roos seems to groom players by starting them in a defensive role to toughen them up, meaning they're more confident when given a more attacking role.

McVeigh is a classic example of this and I believe Jack will turn into a real weapon for us next year, too. Eski will probably be assigned more of a midfield role if he's fully fit and Vespa was unleashed from the beginning.

It's not all doom and gloom, but I do hope Longmire isn't our next coach as I'd be excited to see what some fresh ideas could do for our team.

 

[bedford]

Your last paragraph was spot on

 

[ssfc0203]

Its not outdated when an attacking side is brought to compliment the defensive like it was done for the parts of the year where we had a fully fit team. Its a matter of having the personnel to execute it, and for the past couple of years even though the team was fit, the players' abilities didn't allow a faster paced gameplan to be put into effect.

With the introduction of Pat (+stamina), Kieren, Tadhg (+shoulders), Bolts (+groin), Goodes (+groin), McVeigh (+ankle), O'Keefe (+ankle) you'll see a lot more pace being injected into the team. True, we need a truer outside mid to help nudge the process along, but we're not as defensive as we used to be.

A change in the average number of points this year to a couple of years ago will highlight that better than words probably can.

 

[bedford]

Its not outdated when an attacking side is brought to compliment the defensive like it was done for the parts of the year where we had a fully fit team. Its a matter of having the personnel to execute it, and for the past couple of years even though the team was fit, the players' abilities didn't allow a faster paced gameplan to be put into effect.

With the introduction of Pat (+stamina), Kieren, Tadhg (+shoulders), Bolts (+groin), Goodes (+groin), McVeigh (+ankle), O'Keefe (+ankle) you'll see a lot more pace being injected into the team. True, we need a truer outside mid to help nudge the process along, but we're not as defensive as we used to be.

A change in the average number of points this year to a couple of years ago will highlight that better than words probably can.

It is outdated, it is a plan to get us into the 8 to try and keep the support in Sydney.
IT IS BORING

 

[bloods05]

It is outdated, it is a plan to get us into the 8 to try and keep the support in Sydney.
IT IS BORING

I think our problem start's with our back line,hold onto the footy for to long,hardly ever long and direct,that was one thing Crouch gave us toward's the end of the season.

When the other's have it they run around in circle's doing little chip kick's giving the other side the chance to get back and spoil and cause a turn over which is then rushed quickly and more direct and putting pressure on the back line again.

Which is how the pies have shafted us for the last few year's and other side's started using the same game plan but our coach's refused to change their's.

 

[bedford]

Spot on about Crouch at least he took it through the corridor and kicked long into the forward line.
If we moved it quicker BBBH would be one out more often and would probably kick more goals.

 

[MC Bad Genius]

Spot on about Crouch at least he took it through the corridor and kicked long into the forward line.
If we moved it quicker BBBH would be one out more often and would probably kick more goals.

so why do you make sarcastic comments like "IT IS BORING" when people suggest updating the game plan?

the good teams use the corridor and try to get it into the forward 50 as quickly as possible to get their forwards one out. geelong have been the benchmark in their use of the corridor and part of the reason they lost on the weekend is that the hawks refused to let them own the corridor and forced them out to the flanks.

i personally think that the swans would be more effective in changing their gameplan to more of a run and carry style, rather than wait and find a target style.

and lets be honest, if our forward line is fully fit by the start of next season, it is still a VERY potent forward line!!! so lets give them as much chance to destroy other teams as possible.


***sorry for quoting you on this one .... i thought you were being sarcastic and now realised that you started the thread. i AGREE with you!!!

 

[MushroomRocket]

playing at the highest level for 2 years takes a massive toll on the body. the core group of players may be the same, but they don't have it in them right now.

they need to believe their body can come back up to that level, which few players have done ala, lloyd, hird, judd etc.

hodge was an average player last year. this year he is the norm smith medallist. he will be up there with his team for another couple of years, before the steam runs off and they will then get by on reputation alone.

only truly great players like harvey, ablett sr, matthews and tuck play at their peak throughout their career, which franklin will do imo.

premiership teams are built around great players and good players in exceptional form. the second bit is the key to winning a premiership.

 

[Tedeski]

Yesterdays GF showed how dated our game plan is, there is no way known we can win another flag with it.
We are now way behind the top 2 and yes so is everybody else, but we have to try and catch them.
Paul Roos, i love him for what he has done for our club but i believe he has become stubborn just like Eade did. His assistants are mates and people who have not played the modern game, why are the weagles chasing a Scott Burns because they want the best but we are stuck with the Craig Holdens,Brett Allison,Steve Taubert and people like Peter Berbacov (who).
Who wants a Vespremi learning to play negative footy when the kid has natural flair lets start playing more attractive footy and the crowds might come back.
To watch our 2nd half against the Bulldogs was pathetic after a pretty good 1st half, they counter attacked from the kick ins playing on straight away, how many times do we do this WE DON'T.
Roos won't change because that would be like giving in to the footy public and the Melbourne media.

Hi Bedford!
I know what you are trying to say but................................................what was so positive about a gameplan where the winning team rushes 10 behinds??

Sorry mate! On this occassion I have to disagree with you. I would have to say that the current game plan we have is the right one to win a p'ship.
Hawthorn actually used it to a point & Geelong did last year.
But you need your key players up & running.
Where we have fallen down is that we have struggled to follow it for 4 Qs for the last few years ue to a lack of discipline & have had injuries to key players in that time.
You will note that both the Geelong & Hawthorn teams have had an embarrasment of players knocking on the door to break into the team on GF day.
We wouldn't have had such a problem with many of our players actually playing when they wouldn't have if there were any suitable replacements. Our depth both this year & last year has been shot.

ALL of Hawthorns goals came from a defensive situation. They waited for the Cats to enter their forward line & then rebounded in their own often open forward line that manufactured goals from the pressure applied by the small forwards. Straight out of the Brisbane guide to p'ships, which has been borrowed by Roos. Geelong & Hawthorn have simply borrowed it from us. How often did you see Buddy & Franklin down on the wing or half backline. Straight out of the Swans gameplan when MOL or Hall would often roam down to break up the play & create another option around the ball.

A key component of it is that you must hit your targets otherwise your gamestyle will look unattactive & will get shoved back down your throat.
Now this is where we have also fallen down.

No team will ever win a p'ship with all out attack. They need to be a defensively strong team. That Geelong won it last year against Port says more about the quality of the opposition that day but this year the Hawks made a usually dominant & classy Geelong team look stagnant & clumsy.
Collingwood did it too earlier in the year against Geelong. But you must produce it week in & week out, especially when the finals come around.

Geelong lost the GF because they haven't had to dig deep in big games for nearly 2 years. When Collingwood applied the pressure they failed. Not by 10 points or 40 points. They failed by 80 odd points. They had no idea where the fight was going to come from. That's what happens when all you know is attack, attack. When they needed to get defensive & claw their way back into the game, they couldn't. Instead they tried to keep attacking & constantly chose poor options because Hawthorns defensive pressure was first rate led by Hodge.

Basically Hodge turned a negative defensive role into a match winning 'attacking' one from the half back line with precise kicking & handballing. One that looked like a "new gameplan" because they always hit targets which got the ball into their non cluttered forward line quickly on the counter attack. Then the thing that matters most is that they converted from far fewer shots on goal then Geelong. When things got dangerous in their backline, they simply went negative & rushed a behind. Not once, not 5 times but 10 times.

Now that is not what a person watching our game for the first time would call a great brand new gameplan IMO.

It's pretty much old school. Tackle, tackle & tackle again until you tire your opponent & then strike.
Matthews did it. Roos did it. Now Clarkson has done it. All Roos has to do now is teach this new crop of yougsters how to execute it week in, week out. Then & only then will it look like a new gameplan.

Basically all the teams other then the Hawks now have an outdated gameplan.
Even Geelong have because whatever they did last year, didn't work this year. Just my opinion though!

Cheers mate!

 

[Jaymeee]

i think we do have an outdated game plan and that we CAN implement a Geelong/attacking game style.

Just take a look at Geelong's list. On an individual level, it is arguable whether they have the most talented group of players yet as a team they've produced some of the best football I've ever seen.

They've got Ablett who is a standout and players like Bartel, Selwood, and scarlett who are very good players. But when you look further down their list, you realise that its not that much different to other teams including our swannies. The other players on their list are good but, as individuals, I think they are perceived to be better than they really are.

That's why I believe, we can play a more attacking brand of football. We don't have a team of superstars, but, as Geelong have shown, you don't need a superstar-laden team to carry it out.

 

[carsoutback]

This is probably what you'd expect from a Swans fan, but I would back in the Sydney teams of 2003-2006 (and their tactics) against the current Geelong team on Grand Final day. We just got too old and are no longer good enough. So we need a regeneration of players before being too concerned with revolutionising the game plan.

Malthouse has an interesting pov about the "Sydney gameplan" (and Adelaide too), of which he was a fan of course. Believes that you can only play that style of footy with mature bodies in the midfield (25yo+, 100+ games type) - that young footballers just don't have the maturity or physicality to be able to sustain it for a full game. There were very few who ran through our midfield in 05-06 who didn't meet that age/games criteria. If you accept that pov, then a new gameplan will surely evolve as guys like Kirk, Bolton, Crouch, Fosdike & even Kennelly move on and are replaced by a (hopefully) younger generation. A new plan will evolve with a new team won't it?

As for it being boring...you were bored on Grand Final day 2005?

 

[skipper kelly]

Saturdays game was a slogfest, riddled with skill errors and plenty of negative football. I loved it.

Other than the way it was played, I loved it because I know that these 2 sides are not that far ahead of the pack. I will be betting heavily against either Hawthorn or Geelong winning the 2009 flag. If neither make the Grand Final the result will be huge. This will be my betting focus for the next 12 months.

As for our game plan. I believe overall game plans outdate every year. Sometimes they outdate during the year. Roos has the ability to adapt which he does, but the basic principles must stay the same and suit the playing list.

Roos must get off the bench and back up to the coaches box.

For us to be a serious contenders we need everything to go our way. Injuries and no Hall or Goodes brain fades are vital. Our best 22 can beat all comers. Our game plan will always revolve around defence, as I believe it should. Hawthorn on Saturday held on by the skin of their teeth playing defensive. Geelong would have blown them away if it was attack at all costs. Eventually Hawthorn got on a bit of a roll after denying Geelong and we saw what happened. Quick goals. Seems very familar to how we have had many of our best victories over the last 5 or so years.

Our list is not like the bulldogs were they prefer open, free flowing and fast games. We dont have those type of players. We have a list of inside players with a few game breakers who can show their stuff when the game opens up.

 

[disgruntled goat]

I wish you posted this on RWO, would have been funny.

I know what you're saying but I also believe we have to be realistic about the style we're capable of. With Vespa, Goodes, McVeigh and Jack in the middle we should definitely attack more often, but I don't think we could sustain it for 4 quaters and would probably have suffered some huge losses.

It's important to protect young players from damaging defeats as much as you can. Roos seems to groom players by starting them in a defensive role to toughen them up, meaning they're more confident when given a more attacking role.

McVeigh is a classic example of this and I believe Jack will turn into a real weapon for us next year, too. Eski will probably be assigned more of a midfield role if he's fully fit and Vespa was unleashed from the beginning.

It's not all doom and gloom, but I do hope Longmire isn't our next coach as I'd be excited to see what some fresh ideas could do for our team.

I agree with a lot of this, and I definitely agree on Kieren Jack, but on that point of protecting kids from damaging defeats, do you think Roosy might like to work on something to protect we fans from damaging defeats the next time we face the likes of Collingwood or Adelaide??? Coz I'm sick of those games.

"The style we are capable of" is a self-defeating statement, but then I guess the way we have played each one of the past five games against Collingwood, and a few against the Crows, is self-defeating too.

.

 

[vonn]

I agree with most of the posts here, games are won by a strong midfield, lots of clearances or a HB flank that can supply to a forward line. Looking back on 05 and 06, we had alot of the clearances, and other succesful teams now (such as hawthorn) were still rebuilding/young/inexperienced, yet they've stuck to their game plan (Until this year when everyone decided to copy geelongs) and won a flag.
In 05 Our players were at the peak of their fitness and confidence in their game (except Kirky, that man is just god)
If you look at Essendon now they can have all the amazing gameplans in the world but most are young and amatures against the likes of geelong and hawthorn.
Most of the boys who played in the 05 granny's bodies are just past the stage when they can do their bidding (hello leo barry)

In 4 years hawthorn could be rebuilding and essendon can win the premiership, it's all about time (having said that a stupid gameplan is not going to work)

 

[MC Bad Genius]

Hi Bedford!
I know what you are trying to say but................................................what was so positive about a gameplan where the winning team rushes 10 behinds??

Sorry mate! On this occassion I have to disagree with you. ....

the gameplans of the hawks/cats are miles apart from the one we played in 05/06.

the hawks run and carry; the same way that the cats play. both teams also try to own the corridor.

the swans played a patient lead and chip game that was happy to go right up the flanks, paying little attention to the corridor.

and the point about collingwood isn't a great point. because the pies ability to pressure teams will upset any gameplan. im quite sure they've managed to pressure the swans out of their gameplan for quite a while now!!

 

[disgruntled goat]

the gameplans of the hawks/cats are miles apart from the one we played in 05/06.

the hawks run and carry; the same way that the cats play. both teams also try to own the corridor.

the swans played a patient lead and chip game that was happy to go right up the flanks, paying little attention to the corridor.

and the point about collingwood isn't a great point. because the pies ability to pressure teams will upset any gameplan. im quite sure they've managed to pressure the swans out of their gameplan for quite a while now!!

So, SURELY someone (let's say, for argument's sake, THE COACH!!!) should see that the gameplan doesn't work against Collingwood, and change it.
And that should've been about 18 months ago, after the second identical loss to the Pies.

 

[MC Bad Genius]

So, SURELY someone (let's say, for argument's sake, THE COACH!!!) should see that the gameplan doesn't work against Collingwood, and change it.
And that should've been about 18 months ago, after the second identical loss to the Pies.

are you suggesting you aren't happy with roos?

and im pretty sure that it is agreed upon by everyone here on the sydney bigfooty forum that we needed to try something different against the pies. the amount of anger and frustration after that game was bigger than any other loss this season!!

 

[bedford]

This is probably what you'd expect from a Swans fan, but I would back in the Sydney teams of 2003-2006 (and their tactics) against the current Geelong team on Grand Final day. We just got too old and are no longer good enough. So we need a regeneration of players before being too concerned with revolutionising the game plan.

Malthouse has an interesting pov about the "Sydney gameplan" (and Adelaide too), of which he was a fan of course. Believes that you can only play that style of footy with mature bodies in the midfield (25yo+, 100+ games type) - that young footballers just don't have the maturity or physicality to be able to sustain it for a full game. There were very few who ran through our midfield in 05-06 who didn't meet that age/games criteria. If you accept that pov, then a new gameplan will surely evolve as guys like Kirk, Bolton, Crouch, Fosdike & even Kennelly move on and are replaced by a (hopefully) younger generation. A new plan will evolve with a new team won't it?

As for it being boring...you were bored on Grand Final day 2005?

The last line is stupid of course i wasn't bored.I waited all my life for that from 6 months of age at the Lake Oval !
I am talking about NOW move on

 

[disgruntled goat]

are you suggesting you aren't happy with roos?

and im pretty sure that it is agreed upon by everyone here on the sydney bigfooty forum that we needed to try something different against the pies. the amount of anger and frustration after that game was bigger than any other loss this season!!

What I'm saying is that that feeling of anger and frustration has been there after each consecutive loss, why was nothing changed after the first, or at least the second carbon-copy defeat???
Look, I'm a Roos fan, how can you not be, but there are times when I wonder what he's thinking.

 

[SM]

Roos HAS tried to change it. That's the point. The problem is that the Pies just match up really well on us and can choke us, panic us, pressure us, and no matter what Roos tries, it just doesn't work. Like with Geelong, Bomber said, "It was almost as if there was no point trying anything, cos you knew it wouldn't work." That's EXACTLY how it's been the last two seasons against the Pies.

 

[Tedeski]

the gameplans of the hawks/cats are miles apart from the one we played in 05/06.

the hawks run and carry; the same way that the cats play. both teams also try to own the corridor.

the swans played a patient lead and chip game that was happy to go right up the flanks, paying little attention to the corridor.

and the point about collingwood isn't a great point. because the pies ability to pressure teams will upset any gameplan. im quite sure they've managed to pressure the swans out of their gameplan for quite a while now!!

I guess what I'm trying to say that there is a natural evolution of the gameplan to suit the 'cattle'. But when on fire our boys were running straight through the corridor on the rebound in 05 & 06 depending on the opponent. Whenever we played a tough opponent the best way to win was to lock the game down as with West Coast. Can't you remember Kennelly at his best. He was Awesome. We ran in waves down the middle.

Saturdays GF wasn't what you would call free flowing. It actually resembled some of our arm wrestles, with Hawthorn capitalising on Geelongs inability to score accurately in the second term.

As for the lead & chip game. Not even we do that as much anymore because the unpires hurry you up but if that rule didn't come in then I'm sure that the Cats & the Hawks would have used the lead & chip at different stages of the game on Saturday. This is where the rules have an influence on the subtle changes in gameplan according to the cattle available.

But one striking resemblence between the Hawk game on Sat. & the way we played when we won our GF. They didn't rely on Buddy & Roughead to kick their goals. In fact if you were told that they would only kick a couple each then one could be forgiven for assuming that they lost convincingly.
Bazza & MOL did the same in our P'ship win. In other words another avenue to goal was needed other then the predictable ones.

This is why I think the Hawks beat Geelong on Saturday. Because once Croad went off, Clarkson was forced to move players around & they were able to adapt to another gameplan.
This is the very thing that the Swans did (although many can't seem to see it). The Swans when at their peak were able to flick a switch & go all out attack & then when suddenly in front by 24 - 30 points they would go into shut down mode & they did it to perfection.
That many Swans supporters on here seem to forget that we had different gameplans for different situations in a game & different opponents from week to week only means that you have short memories.

The only difference between the way we have played in 07 & 08 as compared to 05 & 06 are because of the rule changes & the execution of the gameplans. Add to that the injuries we have had to key players & in 08 the addition of some fresh faces that now need to learn the gameplans.

But basically all the top teams tackle hard & relentlessly, keep possession at all costs, be the best defensively and enter the forward 50 ASAP in order to catch your opposition backmen out of position.

Nothing new BC.................nothing new!

Your thoughts?

 

[Corpuscles]

Jason Ball was a sensational ruckman and a very clever player ( would take important marks both in attack and defence) when he had his confidence up(I screamed blue murder when they tried to play him at CHF!)

Jolly is good but we have not had the super dominance both gave us in 2005 to persist with constant stoppage play and more and more pressure is put on Kirk and Jude to get it out! But it just doesn't come out clean!


The whole thing as several have already said is .....it is coping with existing trained cattle!


But there is no excuse (other than minimising losses and staying close... which has it own merits) for not playing on and moving it quickly !!!!! and persisting with SWANS stop start chip and hope football! for too long! and too early! they could be fitter and outrun but now likely only in a rocket powered wheelchair

The rest Hawks Cats Pies Dogs (the pack) are 2 years ahead of us!


The stupid Swans preoccupation with "finances" and crowd /membership attendance is stuffing up the works!

The AFL NEED SYDNEY!!!!... let them prop us up$$$ if we plummet before getting there, and lets find out who are real fans???.... and THEN have a serious crack at the modern game!

They changed the rules to thwart Swans... kick -in, push in back, length of kick etc etc if we had won in 2008 they would have limited interchange rotations too ....TRUST ME!

BBBH is too push in back conscious he will never learn now
Leo and Bolts... only survived at elite backs by bending the rules


Wasn't Luke (NOG's) dad a GF AFL sprint champ why is he so bloody slow?


REBUILD! demolish and search for new materials in 09

 

[bedford]

Well said Corps

 

[disgruntled goat]

Roos HAS tried to change it. That's the point. The problem is that the Pies just match up really well on us and can choke us, panic us, pressure us, and no matter what Roos tries, it just doesn't work. Like with Geelong, Bomber said, "It was almost as if there was no point trying anything, cos you knew it wouldn't work." That's EXACTLY how it's been the last two seasons against the Pies.

Right, so we just accept that the Pies will beat us every time?

What a pathetic cop-out, and I do not believe you're seriously offering ANYTHING in defence of our "gameplan" for matches against Collingwood.

The fact is we have lost the last 6 games to Collingwood, and at least the past 5 of those pretty much followed the same pattern, and if you're suggesting Paul Roos has "tried" to change it, and that's good enough ... good grief, I'm not quite sure what to say.

"No point trying anything ... it wouldn't work."

If that's what it's come to, seriously, if you or anyone else is actually making excuses for that alleged mindset ... you should be avoiding all team sport and spending weekends in the library or washing your hair or something.