Autopsy Positives and Negatives - Round 1

[Shmiddy15]

Great work as always Dylan. Now we just need Dark Sharks to uphold his end of the bargain and we’ll be good to go.

 

[Eaglespur]

I've never been big on Hutch, always just seen him as a solid depth player around the 23-25th guy on the list, but I actually agree with you. I think after this pre season he deserves to be in the team over a few of the guys and the fact that he's an actual midfielder would help us. I think he's a bit hard done by to not be playing the last couple of weeks.

His performance this week in the WAFL should warrant selection . Unless all our mids perform well on Sunday. Unlikely

 

[hudson2006]

It’s good to say that football is back.


After another also-ran season in 2017, this year has a feeling of renewal about it. Priddis and Mitchell are no longer contesting stoppages and the opportunity is there for new faces. New branding, new shirts and a new stadium – and what a stadium it is as well.

15 years ago the decision was made to replace Subiaco Oval as the home of football in WA. Seven years ago it was decided that the new facility would be sited at Burswood. It has taken a long time, (indeed often seemed like it would never happen) but Perth Stadium (now Optus Stadium) has been worth the wait.

So it was almost fitting that the highest profile Western Australian player in the competition stole the headlines on a night when WA was on show.


OVERVIEW

It is disappointing to lose, however there is far more to like about our performance in this match than not. Sydney are a very good team that is exceptionally well-drilled. They are 16-3 (including finals) since their infamous 0-6 injurious start last season – with all three of those losses being either against Hawthorn or hosted at the MCG.

Despite their poor start last season, they were among the leaders in the following statistics in 2017:

• 2nd least opposition goals
• 2nd least opposition goal assists
• 3rd least opposition inside 50s
• 3rd team / opposition goal difference
• 3rd team / opposition goal assist difference
• 2nd contested marks
• 2nd least opposition marks inside 50
• 2nd least opposition bounces
• 1st least opposition centre clearances
• 1st least opposition metres gained
• 3rd team / opposition marks inside 50 difference
• 1st team / opposition metres gained difference

This was a tough fixture to be coming against first-up.

The greatest lingering fear coming into this match was our Jekyll and Hyde form in pre-season JLT games against Port Adelaide and Fremantle. Which was closer to a true representation of comparative output? Will we be able to remain competitive against the best teams in the league or be an embarrassment at the foot of the table?

Other obvious concerns related to the on-going absence of Kennedy and the accompanying dysfunction of the forward line throughout pre-season and the unavoidable topic of the match-readiness of Naitanui considering he had played just two quarters of B team scratch football in 19 months.


SELECTION AND KEY MATCH-UPS:

Obviously the headline grabber with selection was the inclusion of Naitanui, who would partner with Lycett against former-Eagle Sinclair.

With Reid being a late out, Franklin would be operating alone against a squad that had included three key-sized defenders in McGovern, Barrass and Schofield.

For the first time since 1996 (yes, 22 years) we had three debutants in the same match with Venables, Ryan and Waterman each being rewarded for their good pre-season form.

The biggest surprise however was the shock inclusions of Masten and Nelson, after both appeared as non-preferred throughout the pre-season. Nelson coming in for Cole taking bereavement for his late father and Masten for Hutchings who had seemingly done little wrong in pre-season.

I found the Hutchings omission to be especially perplexing, as he is one of the few contested ball winners in the squad and can also provide a solid tag.

Here are the match line-ups:

View attachment 477005


THE MATCH

Thankfully, doubts raised over fitness levels after the JLT2 debacle against Fremantle proved unfounded. We competed through all quarters and despite fielding a sizeable number of new faces in addition to those returning from long injury absences; we were able to run out the match without being excessively fatigued in comparison with the opposition.

Indeed, after the result this week in Adelaide it could be postulated that it was Fremantle who got their pre-season conditioning wrong by peaking too early.


Despite the wet, greasy conditions this was a fairly open and attacking match, which provided an entertaining spectacle deserving of its milestone status.

View attachment 477006

In many respects this was both a heartening and frustrating to watch.

There were some very positive outcomes:

• Resolve to keep fighting and get back into the contest after being five goals down.
• Each of the debutants showed that they have something to offer.
• Senior members of the team with question marks over their form had standout performances.
• Naitanui returned from a near 600 day absence as if he had never left at all.

Yet this was frustrating as we had genuine opportunities to win this match and failed to take them. Sydney by contrast, took theirs to ruthless effect as would be expected by a team that has only missed September football just once since 2002.

The other, more contentious point of frustration was concerning the umpiring in this match – particularly during the final quarter. Now I am not usually one to make complaints about umpiring decisions as they generally tend to even out in their impact over the course of a match. But the umpiring in this match appeared to be otherwise. Indeed, I have gone to the painstaking length of reviewing this match and cataloguing every single free kick (paid and unpaid), when, where and who it was given against; and its impact, if any.

This is the result:

View attachment 477007

As you can see, towards the end of the match when the volume from the crowd increased, the number of free kicks for West Coast that were left unpaid increased also. This is suggestive of implicit overcompensation; whereby the umpires are aware of the potential of the home crowd to bias their judgment and unconsciously make decisions that are less favourable to the home side as a result.

If this issue is not addressed promptly, I can see it becoming a very sore point in our matches at Optus Stadium.

There are further reasons to ignite the ire of supporters:

Sydney were awarded five free kicks inside their attacking fifty, compared to just one for West Coast.

Combining direct and indirect outcomes, the Swans amassed 10.1 from free kicks in this match. Comparatively, the Eagles had a net return of zero from direct and indirect free kick outcomes [Naitanui 1, Lecras -1].

This disparity in relation to indirect free kick outcomes is indicative not of umpire bias, but of the greater discipline of Sydney players to remain switched on during lulls in play and take advantage of any lapses in concentration by their markers.

A great deal of this match can be described as toiling hard to get on top, only to be hit with a sucker punch when pausing for a breath.

These lapses in combination with unnecessary turnovers are what put the team on the back foot and under pressure in this match. In addition to the free kick data above, here is an output of turnovers :

View attachment 477008

Note the repeat offenders in that list. Jetta was particularly poor, being responsible for no less than eight bad pieces of play.


In regard to the contest, as expected, even with Hannebery missing we were comprehensively beaten in the midfield contest:

View attachment 477026

Yet despite this handicap, we were ascendant in many significant areas of this match:

View attachment 477032

Aside from lapses in concentration and execution that Sydney capitalised upon, the majority of this game was under our control.

According to AFL Official Player Ratings 6 of the top 9 players on the ground were Eagles.

The final margin of 29 points flatters Sydney and is an unfair reflection of how competitive this match actually was.

Indeed, our loss was down to a performance of individual brilliance from Buddy Franklin. He was an unstoppable force, and would not be denied, despite all the best attempts of our defence.

View attachment 477033

An outstanding performance by any standards. On an historic eve, an historic player put in a near career-best act in the new theatre of his home state. Sometimes even when you lose, football wins.

View attachment 477036

We cannot of course forget the counterweight to this feat. Nic Naitanui – in forced absentia since August 2016. After all the media attention and continual postponement he would finally return – the king is back to restore order to the realm upon a new field of battle. But had the monarch changed during his sabbatical? Rumours were whispered of his demise; that he was no longer able to wield power like he had previously. Had he come back too soon? Was he prepared for the trial that lay ahead? Only history would tell if this were to be Readeption or Tewkesbury .

There was no need to fear in the end. All word of his downfall was premature. The crown was restored and the kingdom was inspired.

In just 54% time on ground he was arguably our best player and carried us back into the contest during the third quarter. We couldn’t have hoped for anything more from him than this.

If this is what 54% can provide, consider the impact he may have when it gets up to 80%. It is true that we have two teams – with and without Naitanui.

His influence makes this team greater than the sum of its parts.




Three times last season we were down by more than four goals at half time [Round 5 - Hawthorn, Round 9 - Essendon, and Semi Final – GWS]. Each of these matches ended in 50+ point losses where at no point was the margin reduced by any reasonable amount.

To come back like this, despite not being ultimately victorious, is a significant step in the resolve and belief of this squad – particularly for the younger players. Hopefully it also means the second half fadeouts that were such a characteristic of the 2017 season have been consigned to the dustbin of history.


I remain very much convinced that if Kennedy [West Coast] was not injured and played that we would have won this match.



TACTICS:

This match could be surmised as getting involved in a shootout without a full forward against a side with a four-time Coleman medallist.

Lots of entertainment, but without matching firepower of our own up forward this was always going to be an uphill task for victory.


Tactically-speaking, Sydney are a living fossil in the competition. They are yet to embrace zone defences in the manner that most have and their gameplan has hardly changed in the last decade. That is not to demean them by any means – their success speaks for itself. They have a very clear idea of what they intend to go out and do and know precisely the players required in order to execute it.

Merge the Roos Swans with Bomber Thompson Geelong and you get a very simplified idea of what the Longmire Swans are all about. Flood the defence in numbers and then counterattack through the corridor via handball to target forwards in isolated one-on-ones.

In this match with Reid being a late withdrawal, Sydney were forced to play Franklin as the singular key target up forward. It was an accidental masterstroke. It allowed Buddy to roam without congestion or competing leads, just him and the goals at his back – that is when he is at his best. It also meant that double-teaming Franklin left an agile threat like Heeney, Jack, Hewett, Hayward or Papley unmarked.

Here is a simplified diagram of Sydney’s offense:

View attachment 477043

Counterattack rapidly through the “Handball Highway” in the corridor and get it inside forward 50 before the opposition defence can recover.

This explains the discrepancy in the number of handballs between the two sides:

Handballs:
West Coast: 113
Sydney: 174




So how did this affect our play? Due to “Longmire’s Paddock” and the numbers pushed up the ground, our usual defensive zone setup was abandoned in favour of one-on-one match-ups.

This is the primary reason behind the expansive nature of this match. Across the ground there were rotating one-on-ones and minimal use of spares. Considering the well-known concerns with our midfield, this was a high-risk method that could have backfired spectacularly. That it almost came off for a win without Kennedy is a serious positive.


Mentioning Kennedy, how did the forward line cope in his absence? A recurring feature of the pre-season had been the lack of targets in attack and associated slow ball movement going forward.

Darling after having a pre-season to forget probably played his best game since Round 15 last year against the Bulldogs. Lecras turned back the clock and was one of our best. Cripps was getting into the midfield and the three debutants didn’t look out of place.

The problem however was a lack of height. Darling and Waterman are barely key-sized at 191cm and the others mentioned are of course shorter still. This made easy picking for Sydney defenders [particularly the 195cm Melican] coming off their man to spoil:

Spoils:
West Coast: 27
Sydney: 45

The obvious solution was in playing the resting ruck out of the goalsquare. However this was not so easy – our two rucks played just a single game between them last season. Their minutes were to be strictly managed; getting forward was secondary to just getting through the match.

Here are the time on ground totals for our two rucks:

View attachment 477045

For just six minutes (11%) of the entire first half did we have a height advantage matchup in our forward fifty due to the resting ruckman. That improved during the second half as both rucks were given more minutes and it was one of the main reasons why the match changed as it did. The final 13 minutes of the third quarter was the longest period during the match this was sustained – it is no coincidence that we kicked four goals to zero in that period either.

Sydney always work to get a +1 on the back of stoppages. This fulfils two purposes: to provide run from behind and initiate the Handball Highway; and to sweep up any stoppage balls that clear the inside contest. Remember the diagram above how Sydney move the ball – notice the space available that can be exploited if the opposition can clear the stoppage? If the +1 off the back is removed, Sydney becomes very exposed.

In this match Sinclair was the only player for the Swans over 200cm tall. Due to his own commitments as the sole ruckman he was unable to cover Lycett or Naitanui going forward. The ensuing mismatch forced Sydney to make sure that defensive numbers were available to assist in marking contests, which in turn prevented them from getting extras to stoppages as often.

Ultimately this match was decided by three things:

• Turnovers ending in goals.
• Lapses in concentration that were exploited.
• Franklin had 89% time on ground compared to Naitanui with 54%.

PLAYER PERFORMANCES:

#1. Liam Ryan: A solid debut. 12 possessions, half of them contested. Looks like he has been in the team for years. Took his goal well and gave another away to Lecras. Execution let him down however with only half of his disposals being effective and five turnovers.

#2. Mark Lecras: The signs looked positive in the Fremantle JLT game and he stepped it up again here. Was on fire in the 1st quarter (6 disposals [4 contested], 4 tackles and 2 goals). Ended with 16 disposals and 3 goals, turning back the clock in the process. Would’ve been 4 if not for a baffling umpiring decision. His total of 9 tackles is indicative of the work he put in and is the most he has registered in that statistic since Round 11, 2014.

#3. Andrew Gaff: A workman-like performance without really excelling. Started very quiet, but was busy in the second and third quarters. 87.5% effective rate of disposal was the best in the team. Was culpable of missing tackles on at least two occasions that directly led to opposition attacking forays.

#4. Dominic Sheed: This was a good performance. Went head-to-head with one of the premier contested ball winners in Kennedy and broke even. 5 clearances, 6 inside 50s and an impressive 502 metres gained to go with his 12 contested possessions.

#5. Bradley Sheppard: As always, went about his business quietly but effectively. 7 intercepts, 5 tackles and 8 contested possessions. One of only two members of the team who had more handballs than kicks.

#6. Elliot Yeo: Another good performance, playing Mr.Fixit where necessary address the immediate need. Spent the first half sweeping up the defence and providing rebound. Ran with Parker during the third and pushed forward in the last. 26 disposals [12 contested], 6 intercepts, 6 rebounds, 4 clearances, 509 metres gained, 4 tackles, 2 inside 50s and a goal. Looks ready to take the next step.

#7. Chris Masten: He did what he was asked to do – and that’s why he’ll play in Round 2 as well. Ran hard both ways and provided the outlet on many occasions that few else in the squad are able to provide. 5 intercepts from midfield typify how he was able to get back quickly to aid in stopping the opposition counterattack. 6 inside 50s, 1 goal assist and 1 goal – I think most would happily take that before the game. Still caught holding the ball twice though.

#8. Jack Redden: Had an awful first half [8 disposals, 3 clangers at 37.5% effectiveness]. Much like the JLT match against Fremantle, doesn’t seem to be aware of when he is about to get blocked at the stoppage. Improved in the second half, particularly in the last where he had 7 disposals and 4 clearances. His opponent that term in Parker had 8 disposals and a goal however. Only member of the team that got into double figures for handballs. Needs to improve if we are to win midfield contests.

#9. Nicholas Naitanui: Wow… I think we all just hoped for him to get though unscathed – he ended up reminding us just how good he can be and some. Played half a game and carried us. It’s hard to see how he could’ve a much better return. The soul of the club. The competition is already starting to look spooked.

#13. Luke Shuey: Lead the midfield again with the level of performance that we have come to expect. 25 disposals [9 contested] at 80% effectiveness, 7 clearances, 7 inside 50s, 6 tackles, 7 score involvements and 486 metres gained. Was great to see him linking up with Naitanui at stoppages again.

#14. Liam Duggan: After such a good pre-season this was a very disappointing performance. Just 4 disposals to half time. Has no ball sense to operate higher up the ground. Followed Sydney half forwards into the midfield and became completely lost. 10 disposals from a player in his 4th season does not bode well. Heeney is the same draft; Mills the year after. I am having grave doubts that he will never be more than another one-paced flanker.

#15. Jamie Cripps: Played much further up the ground to what we are used to seeing – perhaps he will be become increasingly midfield focused now that Ryan [and soon Rioli] are available. At 183cm, 84kg he has enough size to compete there and fitness is of no concern. Would be huge for this team if he can make the transition. 16 disposals [6 contested], 5 inside 50s, 6 score involvements, 2 clearance and 2 goal assists. That kick to setup Hurn for goal in the 1st quarter was so many levels of good.

#18. Daniel Venables: A promising outing from our second debutant. Just 7 disposals, but 6 contested possessions and 4 tackles. Shows how highly rated he must be by the coaching panel when they have the confidence to put him on Parker in his first quarter of AFL football. Suffered an injury to his hand during the 3rd quarter that required significant time off and strapping. Only had 2 possessions in the second half after that injury. Should be fit for Round 2 though.

#20. Jeremy McGovern: A match that highlighted his limitations. Uncharacteristically misjudged the flight of the ball all game, getting too far underneath it and causing his marking game to become unstuck. At ground level against an opponent like Franklin, he simply doesn’t have the agility to compete. His colours were definitely lowered in this match.

#23. Lewis Jetta: Needs to find an old priest and a young priest to exorcise whatever demons possessed his shoes and then burn them anyway [the shoes, not the priests]. If he had hit his targets, he probably would’ve been one of the better players on field [4 rebounds, 4 inside 50s and 472 metres gained]. However he executed at 43.8% effectiveness for disposal – by far the worst on ground for both teams. In 16 disposals he managed 9 turnovers. This is opposite of what he is meant to be providing – a truly horrible performance. After such a good pre-season this is probably the biggest disappointment from this match. Received a negative value on the AFL Player Ratings index.

#25. Shannon Hurn: A very good match from the captain. Followed the opposition small forwards into the midfield and asserted himself there. Arguably our best in this match. 23 disposals at 82.6% effectiveness, 5 rebounds, 7 intercepts, 4 inside 50s, 495 metres gained and a goal. Concerns about losing the penetration of his kick have been premature.

#27. Jack Darling: Welcome back, Jack. As mentioned previously, easily his best match since Round 15 last year. Read the flight of the ball better than his opponents, used his body well and finished accurately. 12 disposals [ 5 contested], 5 inside 50s, 4 tackles, 5 marks [2 contested], 3.0 goals. A great return to form. Faster ball movement equals better Darling – who would have thought?...

#29. Scott Lycett: Continued his poor pre-season form into this match. 10 disposals for 7 clangers – it’s déjà vu. 5 free kicks against. His poor marking and inability to chase gave the opposition two goals. Only in the team due to Vardy being injured. With McInnes the witches hat next in line I’d be tempted to give Brander a go – he couldn’t be worse could he?

#30. Jackson Nelson: I’m still baffled as to why he was selected. 5 disposals in 86% time on ground for 4 clangers. 5 intercepts and 3 free kicks against. I fail to see what value he currently brings to the team that exceeds others who are outside the selection.

#31. Will Schofield: Maybe the coaches felt sympathy for his article? I can’t think of any other reason why he would merit a place in this team. Another abject performance. 8 disposals in 90% time on ground, 4 marks, 2 intercepts and 1 inside 50. Was directly responsible for 3 Swans goals being scored due his poor marking / mistakes. Surely we have better options available.

#37. Tom Barrass: It is not often that a full forward kicks 8 goals and you can still consider that the full back has played well – but that is the case here. If not for Barrass, Buddy probably would have broken his record of 13 goals in a match with the way the ball was coming in. 20 disposals, 8 marks [2 contested], 5 rebounds, 10 one-percenters and 11 intercepts. Did a brilliant switch kick to the corridor to open up the play which lead to Waterman’s goal.

#45. Jake Waterman: A promising match from our third debutant. Worked hard and showed flashes of quality when he did have possession. Kicked a beautiful pressure goal from the pocket halfway through the final quarter to reduce the margin to 10 points. Did more than enough in this match to retain his spot for Round 2.


So a positive performance but in the end no four points.

There appears to be a lot to be optimistic about looking forward. Now to build on this by travelling to Victoria and getting a win against the Bulldogs.

This probably deserves its own thread. Your comments & diagram on Sydney's gameplan are much appreciated, they are certainly very well drilled while West Coast have a lot to work on in terms of both team defence & ball movement. But as long as both the effort and the kids remain in the team I think this will be a very enjoyable year.

On Nelson, do you think he played a purely tagging role on Papley or another small forward? If so then he may be in the team for a while to come.

 

[hudson2006]

His performance this week in the WAFL should warrant selection . Unless all our mids perform well on Sunday. Unlikely

If Redden has another average game I hope they replace him with Hutchings on the inside. We need to have some pressure on our senior mids, as it would be insane for the selectors to be content losing the clearances & contested ball every week.

 

[Jootube]

Dylan82 Excellent write up mate. Keep churning these out and a club will have to employ you

 

[Shmiddy15]

Dylan82 Excellent write up mate. Keep churning these out and a club will have to employ you

I think the club would rather pick up a chef with footy analyst aspirations than pick up a proven footy analyst.

 

[DanWCE]

Thanks Dylan for the review! A thoroughly enjoyable read.

 

[Dark Sharks]

You're ******* out of control Dylan, settle down.

 

[nearlyblonde]

Dylan.
Wow, just wow.

 

[Kirkswan]

It’s good to say that football is back.


After another also-ran season in 2017, this year has a feeling of renewal about it. Priddis and Mitchell are no longer contesting stoppages and the opportunity is there for new faces. New branding, new shirts and a new stadium – and what a stadium it is as well.

15 years ago the decision was made to replace Subiaco Oval as the home of football in WA. Seven years ago it was decided that the new facility would be sited at Burswood. It has taken a long time, (indeed often seemed like it would never happen) but Perth Stadium (now Optus Stadium) has been worth the wait.

So it was almost fitting that the highest profile Western Australian player in the competition stole the headlines on a night when WA was on show.


OVERVIEW

It is disappointing to lose, however there is far more to like about our performance in this match than not. Sydney are a very good team that is exceptionally well-drilled. They are 16-3 (including finals) since their infamous 0-6 injurious start last season – with all three of those losses being either against Hawthorn or hosted at the MCG.

Despite their poor start last season, they were among the leaders in the following statistics in 2017:

• 2nd least opposition goals
• 2nd least opposition goal assists
• 3rd least opposition inside 50s
• 3rd team / opposition goal difference
• 3rd team / opposition goal assist difference
• 2nd contested marks
• 2nd least opposition marks inside 50
• 2nd least opposition bounces
• 1st least opposition centre clearances
• 1st least opposition metres gained
• 3rd team / opposition marks inside 50 difference
• 1st team / opposition metres gained difference

This was a tough fixture to be coming against first-up.

The greatest lingering fear coming into this match was our Jekyll and Hyde form in pre-season JLT games against Port Adelaide and Fremantle. Which was closer to a true representation of comparative output? Will we be able to remain competitive against the best teams in the league or be an embarrassment at the foot of the table?

Other obvious concerns related to the on-going absence of Kennedy and the accompanying dysfunction of the forward line throughout pre-season and the unavoidable topic of the match-readiness of Naitanui considering he had played just two quarters of B team scratch football in 19 months.


SELECTION AND KEY MATCH-UPS:

Obviously the headline grabber with selection was the inclusion of Naitanui, who would partner with Lycett against former-Eagle Sinclair.

With Reid being a late out, Franklin would be operating alone against a squad that had included three key-sized defenders in McGovern, Barrass and Schofield.

For the first time since 1996 (yes, 22 years) we had three debutants in the same match with Venables, Ryan and Waterman each being rewarded for their good pre-season form.

The biggest surprise however was the shock inclusions of Masten and Nelson, after both appeared as non-preferred throughout the pre-season. Nelson coming in for Cole taking bereavement for his late father and Masten for Hutchings who had seemingly done little wrong in pre-season.

I found the Hutchings omission to be especially perplexing, as he is one of the few contested ball winners in the squad and can also provide a solid tag.

Here are the match line-ups:

View attachment 477005


THE MATCH

Thankfully, doubts raised over fitness levels after the JLT2 debacle against Fremantle proved unfounded. We competed through all quarters and despite fielding a sizeable number of new faces in addition to those returning from long injury absences; we were able to run out the match without being excessively fatigued in comparison with the opposition.

Indeed, after the result this week in Adelaide it could be postulated that it was Fremantle who got their pre-season conditioning wrong by peaking too early.


Despite the wet, greasy conditions this was a fairly open and attacking match, which provided an entertaining spectacle deserving of its milestone status.

View attachment 477006

In many respects this was both a heartening and frustrating to watch.

There were some very positive outcomes:

• Resolve to keep fighting and get back into the contest after being five goals down.
• Each of the debutants showed that they have something to offer.
• Senior members of the team with question marks over their form had standout performances.
• Naitanui returned from a near 600 day absence as if he had never left at all.

Yet this was frustrating as we had genuine opportunities to win this match and failed to take them. Sydney by contrast, took theirs to ruthless effect as would be expected by a team that has only missed September football just once since 2002.

The other, more contentious point of frustration was concerning the umpiring in this match – particularly during the final quarter. Now I am not usually one to make complaints about umpiring decisions as they generally tend to even out in their impact over the course of a match. But the umpiring in this match appeared to be otherwise. Indeed, I have gone to the painstaking length of reviewing this match and cataloguing every single free kick (paid and unpaid), when, where and who it was given against; and its impact, if any.

This is the result:

View attachment 477007

As you can see, towards the end of the match when the volume from the crowd increased, the number of free kicks for West Coast that were left unpaid increased also. This is suggestive of implicit overcompensation; whereby the umpires are aware of the potential of the home crowd to bias their judgment and unconsciously make decisions that are less favourable to the home side as a result.

If this issue is not addressed promptly, I can see it becoming a very sore point in our matches at Optus Stadium.

There are further reasons to ignite the ire of supporters:

Sydney were awarded five free kicks inside their attacking fifty, compared to just one for West Coast.

Combining direct and indirect outcomes, the Swans amassed 10.1 from free kicks in this match. Comparatively, the Eagles had a net return of zero from direct and indirect free kick outcomes [Naitanui 1, Lecras -1].

This disparity in relation to indirect free kick outcomes is indicative not of umpire bias, but of the greater discipline of Sydney players to remain switched on during lulls in play and take advantage of any lapses in concentration by their markers.

A great deal of this match can be described as toiling hard to get on top, only to be hit with a sucker punch when pausing for a breath.

These lapses in combination with unnecessary turnovers are what put the team on the back foot and under pressure in this match. In addition to the free kick data above, here is an output of turnovers :

View attachment 477008

Note the repeat offenders in that list. Jetta was particularly poor, being responsible for no less than eight bad pieces of play.


In regard to the contest, as expected, even with Hannebery missing we were comprehensively beaten in the midfield contest:

View attachment 477026

Yet despite this handicap, we were ascendant in many significant areas of this match:

View attachment 477032

Aside from lapses in concentration and execution that Sydney capitalised upon, the majority of this game was under our control.

According to AFL Official Player Ratings 6 of the top 9 players on the ground were Eagles.

The final margin of 29 points flatters Sydney and is an unfair reflection of how competitive this match actually was.

Indeed, our loss was down to a performance of individual brilliance from Buddy Franklin. He was an unstoppable force, and would not be denied, despite all the best attempts of our defence.

View attachment 477033

An outstanding performance by any standards. On an historic eve, an historic player put in a near career-best act in the new theatre of his home state. Sometimes even when you lose, football wins.

View attachment 477036

We cannot of course forget the counterweight to this feat. Nic Naitanui – in forced absentia since August 2016. After all the media attention and continual postponement he would finally return – the king is back to restore order to the realm upon a new field of battle. But had the monarch changed during his sabbatical? Rumours were whispered of his demise; that he was no longer able to wield power like he had previously. Had he come back too soon? Was he prepared for the trial that lay ahead? Only history would tell if this were to be Readeption or Tewkesbury .

There was no need to fear in the end. All word of his downfall was premature. The crown was restored and the kingdom was inspired.

In just 54% time on ground he was arguably our best player and carried us back into the contest during the third quarter. We couldn’t have hoped for anything more from him than this.

If this is what 54% can provide, consider the impact he may have when it gets up to 80%. It is true that we have two teams – with and without Naitanui.

His influence makes this team greater than the sum of its parts.




Three times last season we were down by more than four goals at half time [Round 5 - Hawthorn, Round 9 - Essendon, and Semi Final – GWS]. Each of these matches ended in 50+ point losses where at no point was the margin reduced by any reasonable amount.

To come back like this, despite not being ultimately victorious, is a significant step in the resolve and belief of this squad – particularly for the younger players. Hopefully it also means the second half fadeouts that were such a characteristic of the 2017 season have been consigned to the dustbin of history.


I remain very much convinced that if Kennedy [West Coast] was not injured and played that we would have won this match.



TACTICS:

This match could be surmised as getting involved in a shootout without a full forward against a side with a four-time Coleman medallist.

Lots of entertainment, but without matching firepower of our own up forward this was always going to be an uphill task for victory.


Tactically-speaking, Sydney are a living fossil in the competition. They are yet to embrace zone defences in the manner that most have and their gameplan has hardly changed in the last decade. That is not to demean them by any means – their success speaks for itself. They have a very clear idea of what they intend to go out and do and know precisely the players required in order to execute it.

Merge the Roos Swans with Bomber Thompson Geelong and you get a very simplified idea of what the Longmire Swans are all about. Flood the defence in numbers and then counterattack through the corridor via handball to target forwards in isolated one-on-ones.

In this match with Reid being a late withdrawal, Sydney were forced to play Franklin as the singular key target up forward. It was an accidental masterstroke. It allowed Buddy to roam without congestion or competing leads, just him and the goals at his back – that is when he is at his best. It also meant that double-teaming Franklin left an agile threat like Heeney, Jack, Hewett, Hayward or Papley unmarked.

Here is a simplified diagram of Sydney’s offense:

View attachment 477043

Counterattack rapidly through the “Handball Highway” in the corridor and get it inside forward 50 before the opposition defence can recover.

This explains the discrepancy in the number of handballs between the two sides:

Handballs:
West Coast: 113
Sydney: 174




So how did this affect our play? Due to “Longmire’s Paddock” and the numbers pushed up the ground, our usual defensive zone setup was abandoned in favour of one-on-one match-ups.

This is the primary reason behind the expansive nature of this match. Across the ground there were rotating one-on-ones and minimal use of spares. Considering the well-known concerns with our midfield, this was a high-risk method that could have backfired spectacularly. That it almost came off for a win without Kennedy is a serious positive.


Mentioning Kennedy, how did the forward line cope in his absence? A recurring feature of the pre-season had been the lack of targets in attack and associated slow ball movement going forward.

Darling after having a pre-season to forget probably played his best game since Round 15 last year against the Bulldogs. Lecras turned back the clock and was one of our best. Cripps was getting into the midfield and the three debutants didn’t look out of place.

The problem however was a lack of height. Darling and Waterman are barely key-sized at 191cm and the others mentioned are of course shorter still. This made easy picking for Sydney defenders [particularly the 195cm Melican] coming off their man to spoil:

Spoils:
West Coast: 27
Sydney: 45

The obvious solution was in playing the resting ruck out of the goalsquare. However this was not so easy – our two rucks played just a single game between them last season. Their minutes were to be strictly managed; getting forward was secondary to just getting through the match.

Here are the time on ground totals for our two rucks:

View attachment 477066

For just six minutes (11%) of the entire first half did we have a height advantage matchup in our forward fifty due to the resting ruckman. That improved during the second half as both rucks were given more minutes and it was one of the main reasons why the match changed as it did. The final 13 minutes of the third quarter was the longest period during the match this was sustained – it is no coincidence that we kicked four goals to zero in that period either.

Sydney always work to get a +1 on the back of stoppages. This fulfils two purposes: to provide run from behind and initiate the Handball Highway; and to sweep up any stoppage balls that clear the inside contest. Remember the diagram above how Sydney move the ball – notice the space available that can be exploited if the opposition can clear the stoppage? If the +1 off the back is removed, Sydney becomes very exposed.

In this match Sinclair was the only player for the Swans over 200cm tall. Due to his own commitments as the sole ruckman he was unable to cover Lycett or Naitanui going forward. The ensuing mismatch forced Sydney to make sure that defensive numbers were available to assist in marking contests, which in turn prevented them from getting extras to stoppages as often.

Ultimately this match was decided by three things:

• Turnovers ending in goals.
• Lapses in concentration that were exploited.
• Franklin had 89% time on ground compared to Naitanui with 54%.

PLAYER PERFORMANCES:

#1. Liam Ryan: A solid debut. 12 possessions, half of them contested. Looks like he has been in the team for years. Took his goal well and gave another away to Lecras. Execution let him down however with only half of his disposals being effective and five turnovers.

#2. Mark Lecras: The signs looked positive in the Fremantle JLT game and he stepped it up again here. Was on fire in the 1st quarter (6 disposals [4 contested], 4 tackles and 2 goals). Ended with 16 disposals and 3 goals, turning back the clock in the process. Would’ve been 4 if not for a baffling umpiring decision. His total of 9 tackles is indicative of the work he put in and is the most he has registered in that statistic since Round 11, 2014.

#3. Andrew Gaff: A workman-like performance without really excelling. Started very quiet, but was busy in the second and third quarters. 87.5% effective rate of disposal was the best in the team. Was culpable of missing tackles on at least two occasions that directly led to opposition attacking forays.

#4. Dominic Sheed: This was a good performance. Went head-to-head with one of the premier contested ball winners in Kennedy and broke even. 5 clearances, 6 inside 50s and an impressive 502 metres gained to go with his 12 contested possessions.

#5. Bradley Sheppard: As always, went about his business quietly but effectively. 7 intercepts, 5 tackles and 8 contested possessions. One of only two members of the team who had more handballs than kicks.

#6. Elliot Yeo: Another good performance, playing Mr.Fixit where necessary address the immediate need. Spent the first half sweeping up the defence and providing rebound. Ran with Parker during the third and pushed forward in the last. 26 disposals [12 contested], 6 intercepts, 6 rebounds, 4 clearances, 509 metres gained, 4 tackles, 2 inside 50s and a goal. Looks ready to take the next step.

#7. Chris Masten: He did what he was asked to do – and that’s why he’ll play in Round 2 as well. Ran hard both ways and provided the outlet on many occasions that few else in the squad are able to provide. 5 intercepts from midfield typify how he was able to get back quickly to aid in stopping the opposition counterattack. 6 inside 50s, 1 goal assist and 1 goal – I think most would happily take that before the game. Still caught holding the ball twice though.

#8. Jack Redden: Had an awful first half [8 disposals, 3 clangers at 37.5% effectiveness]. Much like the JLT match against Fremantle, doesn’t seem to be aware of when he is about to get blocked at the stoppage. Improved in the second half, particularly in the last where he had 7 disposals and 4 clearances. His opponent that term in Parker had 8 disposals and a goal however. Only member of the team that got into double figures for handballs. Needs to improve if we are to win midfield contests.

#9. Nicholas Naitanui: Wow… I think we all just hoped for him to get though unscathed – he ended up reminding us just how good he can be and some. Played half a game and carried us. It’s hard to see how he could’ve a much better return. The soul of the club. The competition is already starting to look spooked.

#13. Luke Shuey: Lead the midfield again with the level of performance that we have come to expect. 25 disposals [9 contested] at 80% effectiveness, 7 clearances, 7 inside 50s, 6 tackles, 7 score involvements and 486 metres gained. Was great to see him linking up with Naitanui at stoppages again.

#14. Liam Duggan: After such a good pre-season this was a very disappointing performance. Just 4 disposals to half time. Has no ball sense to operate higher up the ground. Followed Sydney half forwards into the midfield and became completely lost. 10 disposals from a player in his 4th season does not bode well. Heeney is the same draft; Mills the year after. I am having grave doubts that he will never be more than another one-paced flanker.

#15. Jamie Cripps: Played much further up the ground to what we are used to seeing – perhaps he will be become increasingly midfield focused now that Ryan [and soon Rioli] are available. At 183cm, 84kg he has enough size to compete there and fitness is of no concern. Would be huge for this team if he can make the transition. 16 disposals [6 contested], 5 inside 50s, 6 score involvements, 2 clearance and 2 goal assists. That kick to setup Hurn for goal in the 1st quarter was so many levels of good.

#18. Daniel Venables: A promising outing from our second debutant. Just 7 disposals, but 6 contested possessions and 4 tackles. Shows how highly rated he must be by the coaching panel when they have the confidence to put him on Parker in his first quarter of AFL football. Suffered an injury to his hand during the 3rd quarter that required significant time off and strapping. Only had 2 possessions in the second half after that injury. Should be fit for Round 2 though.

#20. Jeremy McGovern: A match that highlighted his limitations. Uncharacteristically misjudged the flight of the ball all game, getting too far underneath it and causing his marking game to become unstuck. At ground level against an opponent like Franklin, he simply doesn’t have the agility to compete. His colours were definitely lowered in this match.

#23. Lewis Jetta: Needs to find an old priest and a young priest to exorcise whatever demons possessed his shoes and then burn them anyway [the shoes, not the priests]. If he had hit his targets, he probably would’ve been one of the better players on field [4 rebounds, 4 inside 50s and 472 metres gained]. However he executed at 43.8% effectiveness for disposal – by far the worst on ground for both teams. In 16 disposals he managed 9 turnovers. This is opposite of what he is meant to be providing – a truly horrible performance. After such a good pre-season this is probably the biggest disappointment from this match. Received a negative value on the AFL Player Ratings index.

#25. Shannon Hurn: A very good match from the captain. Followed the opposition small forwards into the midfield and asserted himself there. Arguably our best in this match. 23 disposals at 82.6% effectiveness, 5 rebounds, 7 intercepts, 4 inside 50s, 495 metres gained and a goal. Concerns about losing the penetration of his kick have been premature.

#27. Jack Darling: Welcome back, Jack. As mentioned previously, easily his best match since Round 15 last year. Read the flight of the ball better than his opponents, used his body well and finished accurately. 12 disposals [ 5 contested], 5 inside 50s, 4 tackles, 5 marks [2 contested], 3.0 goals. A great return to form. Faster ball movement equals better Darling – who would have thought?...

#29. Scott Lycett: Continued his poor pre-season form into this match. 10 disposals for 7 clangers – it’s déjà vu. 5 free kicks against. His poor marking and inability to chase gave the opposition two goals. Only in the team due to Vardy being injured. With McInnes the witches hat next in line I’d be tempted to give Brander a go – he couldn’t be worse could he?

#30. Jackson Nelson: I’m still baffled as to why he was selected. 5 disposals in 86% time on ground for 4 clangers. 5 intercepts and 3 free kicks against. I fail to see what value he currently brings to the team that exceeds others who are outside the selection.

#31. Will Schofield: Maybe the coaches felt sympathy for his article? I can’t think of any other reason why he would merit a place in this team. Another abject performance. 8 disposals in 90% time on ground, 4 marks, 2 intercepts and 1 inside 50. Was directly responsible for 3 Swans goals being scored due his poor marking / mistakes. Surely we have better options available.

#37. Tom Barrass: It is not often that a full forward kicks 8 goals and you can still consider that the full back has played well – but that is the case here. If not for Barrass, Buddy probably would have broken his record of 13 goals in a match with the way the ball was coming in. 20 disposals, 8 marks [2 contested], 5 rebounds, 10 one-percenters and 11 intercepts. Did a brilliant switch kick to the corridor to open up the play which lead to Waterman’s goal.

#45. Jake Waterman: A promising match from our third debutant. Worked hard and showed flashes of quality when he did have possession. Kicked a beautiful pressure goal from the pocket halfway through the final quarter to reduce the margin to 10 points. Did more than enough in this match to retain his spot for Round 2.


So a positive performance but in the end no four points.

There appears to be a lot to be optimistic about looking forward. Now to build on this by travelling to Victoria and getting a win against the Bulldogs.

Brilliant! No other word for it... Don't agree with everything you said, but most

Explaining the handball highway and why we haven't made the changes to our set ups that most teams have is a work of art. Look for this to be stolen and start appearing on the footy talk shows!

 

[Eastcoasteagle]

I'm attempting to rewatch every game from this year, recording games that come on foxfooty. Got about 10 recorded so far, but starting from the start with this Sydney game!

Outtakes:
- Buddy was not missing a thing
- Umpiring was god awful
- You could really see the new game style in its early stages
- You could see their confidence wasn't quite there yet otherwise would've won
- Waterman played really well
- God it was good watching Nic Nat
- Best: Le Cras, Shuey, Sheed, Hurn