Autopsy Solid win against Freo

Remove this Banner Ad

There was a LOT of players screaming at each other last night, scenes typically seen in diabolical losses. Given we were in front for nearly the entire game and ended up winning comfortably I took it as a good thing. Shows the boys aren't satisfied just winning, they want to hold each other accountable and strive to get their systems right.
Mills got into the defence on a number of occasions. Justifiably.
 
Am I the only one who thought the body language from both Buddy and Parker was just ever so slightly off when Heeney took the final mark of the game, or am I seeing things?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Aye Carumba ! What a first quarter. (watching the game today).
I guess the regular Hayward haters can all sit down and take the weekend off.
Nary a bad player in the team, everyone chipping in with good play when called upon, but Parker and Hayward were fantastic.
 
Serong actually had 12 turnovers. 3 in the first quarter, 3 in the second, none in the third and 6 in the final quarter.


He sounds like a perfect fit for us then
 
Am I the only one who thought the body language from both Buddy and Parker was just ever so slightly off when Heeney took the final mark of the game, or am I seeing things?


Will have to re look, they both just look tired.

Did seem to be more aggro between players than we usually see,

Hard to judge when you can't hear , dont
mind a captain talking out there though
 
At times he was on the resting ruck, either Jackson or Treacy. When he wasn't on a resting tall he was 3rd man up.

What I would like to know is who was playing on Lachie Shultz? Whoever it was got slaughtered. He must have leprosy he had so much room. Every mark he took he was totally alone. Whoever played on him needs a lesson in defensive work. Or next time just play someone else on him.
I’m not entirely sure who was on Shultz - but as I’ve noted previously, Blakey was playing loose …. and I think on occasion that meant nobody was on him.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

The boys were also getting around Will Hayward for every little thing too. I mean I had him as BOG but he'd do the most basic thing and one or two boys would really get around him and seemingly encourage him. Reckon they knew he's been struggling and dare I say it him having such a good start to the game might've even been the firestarter for the boys.
 
The boys were also getting around Will Hayward for every little thing too. I mean I had him as BOG but he'd do the most basic thing and one or two boys would really get around him and seemingly encourage him. Reckon they knew he's been struggling and dare I say it him having such a good start to the game might've even been the firestarter for the boys.


Gotta suck up to the coaches fav 😉
 
Gotta suck up to the coaches fav 😉
What I saw: "Great job Wilbur, keep it up kiddo"

What actually happened: "Hey Wilbur when you meet with Horse over tea and crumpets this week can you tell him I like his new haircut"
 
What I saw: "Great job Wilbur, keep it up kiddo"

What actually happened: "Hey Wilbur when you meet with Horse over tea and crumpets this week can you tell him I like his new haircut"


Clarke and Stephens should take Wilbur to ten pin bowling, go karts and maccas after if they want to play.
 
The boys were also getting around Will Hayward for every little thing too. I mean I had him as BOG but he'd do the most basic thing and one or two boys would really get around him and seemingly encourage him. Reckon they knew he's been struggling and dare I say it him having such a good start to the game might've even been the firestarter for the boys.
Maybe they wanted to show the supporters who bag him out that they are behind him
 
Parker was great but I don't think he was as lone as people made out. Gulden busted a gut and got to more contests imo but just wasn't clean with a single touch like he usually is. If anything, we need Warner to get to more contests
 
I don't know if I agree with the idea that Parker "needed help" in the mids. I think that statement undersells the game of Rowbottom, who I think was every bit as instrumental in the clinches as Parker was. There was at least five or six occasions where the only thing standing between a Freo mid and a clean break leading to a scoring opportunity was Rowbottom, and he impacted every time.

If his game wasn't as 'big' as Parker's, it could be because he simply wasn't in the action as much. He had 10% less time on ground than Parker and 10 less centre bounce attendances than Parker. (Not to mention he also had that corky early on, which was about the seventh time this year he's come off with some sort of injury or ailment during a game, only to come back on and bust an absolute gut for the team.)

That was Parker's "help". Without it I think that midfield battle could've ended up similar to the North game earlier this year, where Parker was Herculean but had to do too much heavy lifting and the midfield was belted.
 
I don't know if I agree with the idea that Parker "needed help" in the mids. I think that statement undersells the game of Rowbottom, who I think was every bit as instrumental in the clinches as Parker was. There was at least five or six occasions where the only thing standing between a Freo mid and a clean break leading to a scoring opportunity was Rowbottom, and he impacted every time.

If his game wasn't as 'big' as Parker's, it could be because he simply wasn't in the action as much. He had 10% less time on ground than Parker and 10 less centre bounce attendances than Parker. (Not to mention he also had that corky early on, which was about the seventh time this year he's come off with some sort of injury or ailment during a game, only to come back on and bust an absolute gut for the team.)

That was Parker's "help". Without it I think that midfield battle could've ended up similar to the North game earlier this year, where Parker was Herculean but had to do too much heavy lifting and the midfield was belted.


Fair re Rowbottom but he seems more a defensive bull at the stoppages , as you say he was elite with the stops, being all that stood between us and Freo opportunity. Seemed to be we didn't clear it without parker last night , which I am not a fan of, as he can't kick for s**t usually.

There's probably some massive clearance rowbottom stat? but he seems more likely to stop the opponent clearing it than win it himself last night ? He also seems to be in the B group for the CBA. They seem to like Parker Warner and even Papley a lot , be interesting to see the groups.

But I gave Rowbottom my 3 votes thought he was important
 
Fair re Rowbottom but he seems more a defensive bull at the stoppages , as you say he was elite with the stops, being all that stood between us and Freo opportunity. Seemed to be we didn't clear it without parker last night , which I am not a fan of, as he can't kick for s**t usually.

There's probably some massive clearance rowbottom stat? but he seems more likely to stop the opponent clearing it than win it himself last night ? He also seems to be in the B group for the CBA. They seem to like Parker Warner and even Papley a lot , be interesting to see the groups.

But I gave Rowbottom my 3 votes thought he was important
Rowbottom's our second-most used mid at CBAs this year, so not likely. Last night he spent more time forward and just less time in general on the field (lowest TOG of any Swan except the subs) and again that was likely because of the corky he copped early on.

Horse loves a defensive stopper and if say Rowbottom got injured then someone else would be doing that role. It's harder to win the ball as you're basically having to gain your possessions from turnover rather than getting into the easier positions to win the ball.

So taking that into account I thought the fact he was able to do both - stop so many of their plays while winning some important balls himself - made things easier for Parker. Ideally Mills finds some form on the inside again next week. That trio were the key to our GF run last year IMO.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top