Roast When will we try something else?

[DeadlyAkkuret]

I don't need the game to be over before starting this thread, even if we got a run on it'd only flatter us (as usual).

How many years of insipid disgusting efforts against the Pies do we need before we actually try something different? I can accept that they're the better team and that's fine, but when Brisbane can beat them and Melbourne can get into a position to defeat them twice in the same season then you have to look at Sydney and think wtf!

The scary thing is it doesn't look like getting better any time soon, I can easily envision the same thing happening next year and the year after unless Longmire has a master plan up his sleeve.

We do have a promising bunch of youngsters and imo a bright future but even when we come up against them carrying some decent form we manage to look like the 2007/2009 model all over again. Surely there's something we can do? Is our list not as good as Melbourne's or Brisbane's?

It's getting to a point where I only barely watch one half of our games against the Pies because usually that's enough, I'm not a sadist afterall.

 

[SM]

To be fair I thought we did try something different tonight, and at various points looked to edge on top of the Pies as we increased our pressure and forced their mistakes. Sadly you just have to look at our long-run of dominance over the Blues and think maybe we're in for a run such as that.

 

[vonn]

Think it's more pyschological then game plan wise.

 

[bradmanstandguy]

Im dissapointed like the rest of us. As usual we had the big build up in the press etc. The
club urging everyone to go to the game and support the boys. Then a total let down,i feel
for the loyal fans who made their way out to the ground and were let down, yet again!

 

[Tas]

I think it is the difference in playing list. It is quite common for one club to have the wood over the other over a period of years because the list remains fairly similar, play a similar way.

I think your list is evolving and might play a bit differently under Horse, I just think the Pies like the way you guys structure up and play footy, it is very hard for a club to just change things up significantly for just one opponent.

 

[liz]

I think it is the difference in playing list. It is quite common for one club to have the wood over the other over a period of years because the list remains fairly similar, play a similar way.

I think your list is evolving and might play a bit differently under Horse, I just think the Pies like the way you guys structure up and play footy, it is very hard for a club to just change things up significantly for just one opponent.

I think that is fair enough. I also think the comment about it being partly psychological is fair. I know our skills against the better teams have been found out in several games this year but right from the start, dropped marks, poor kicks (even when there was a target), and players failing to hold their feet (partly down to the surface, and the Pies did it a bit too) made it clear we were no chance to take it up to Collingwood this year.

I got the impression last night (and on many other nights against Collingwood) that each player was so intent on who their opponent was and the need to stay close to him, that often when a Pie took possession, no-one ran into to pressure because they all peeled off the contest to follow their designated opponents who were spreading very quickly. Just meant the team spent the night chasing tail and unpressured Pie midfielders were able to stroll through the middle of the ground and hit lace out passes to leading forwards.

Overall though - and whether this is psychological, fitness-related, talent related or game plan related - the Pies just worked damn harder than pretty much every Swan out there (with the exception of Dane), both when they had the ball and when they didn't.

 

[Dangas]

i mean it is probably psychological, but every year we seem to take too long getting the ball forward, not playing on from the mark and taking risks. You have to wonder though, if Bradshaw, Moore, Seaby, C.Bolton and Kennelly were playing, would the outcome be any different?

 

[swansfan51]

Here is the problem with our team at the moment, and it isn't just the fringe players.

Goodes - absolutely woeful performance last night. Did pretty much nothing right. Will obviously not lose his spot, but is a passenger on that effort.
Mattner - lost track of the number of errors and turnovers he had in the first half. We were swearing at the TV, again will not get dropped, we do not have a better replacement for the back half.
White - did nothing. Lacks the football knowledge and awareness to get involved in play when we aren't dominating and giving him easy delivery.
Shaw - still a turnover butcher but is far from our worst player.

Then the fringe players:

Jetta - should not have been selected over Veszpremi, who I don't think did too much wrong. Roos strongly hinted he will be removed next week.
Bevan - is nothing more than a trier. His efforts cannot usually be faulted but trying is not good enough at AFL level. Error-prone and lacks the ability to hurt the opposition in any way.
Rohan - shows obvious glimpses of real talent, but doesn't add enough over 4 quarters to be worthy of a spot at the moment. This is in no way a criticism of him, and it is very common amongst young players (except for the pure midfielders).
Hannebery - again, inconsistency can be expected at the stage he's at. I have no issues with that, what I am concerned about is his shoulder, and whether he should have a week or 2 off to make sure he's physically in top form.
Bird - isn't a forward, should only ever be part of the inside midfield rotation. Has fallen down the pecking order there due to the likes of Kennedy, but still absolutely has a future. But not as a forward.

That's everyone from the team against Collingwood I had a problem with, and that's a fair chunk of the team. The squad strength is simply not good enough to match it with the top teams when so many players are either "good honest triers" or young players who can't generate a 4 quarter effort. It should be noted that in good teams, the young players aren't found out as much because of the quality around them. It means they can inject themselves into the game, have great impact, and appear to be better players than the youngsters on the opposition.

Basically our problem is we aren't good enough. There are a few senior players who are playing poorly (Goodes), there are other seniors who are liabilities or inadequate (Mattner, White) that we can't or won't replace because we don't have good enough replacements for. Then there are the fringe players (Bevan, Rohan, Bird, Jetta etc) who COULD be replaced, but its questionable how much better the other fringe players in the reserves would be.

There were, however, some pretty glaring problems in my opinion.

1) Goodes has struggled all year as a primary forward target. We played him there because we feel we don't have forward options now without Hall and O'Loughlin, but several players are putting their hands up and begging to play in that position (Johnston, Dennis-Lane etc). If we play Goodes in the midfield we KNOW we get quality.
2) Bird and Jetta aren't forwards, we needed another goalscoring option. It seemed like we were just picking 22 players and putting them wherever they fit.
3) Completely overrun in midfield. This can in large part be put down to the number of inconsistent or low output players we used there. Players like Jetta have had very low possession counts and TOG this year (I think Jetta has the lowest TOG of any non-ruckman). The more players we use who aren't capable of delivering a 4 quarter effort, the more we will struggle against a team like Collingwood who have a very strong running brigade.

By 4-quarter effort I am referring to players like Rohan, Hannebery, Jetta, Bird, who all had patches in midfield. However the big problem here is that the reserves who would come in for them have similar issues (O'Dwyer, Meredith, Veszpremi, McNeil). Most people here seem to think that we have awesome midfield strength, and maybe that will be true in 2 seasons when the above players are all capable of consistent 4-quarter performances, but for now we are 1-2 quality midfielders short. That is another reason why Goodes should be moved back into the midfield on a more permanent basis.

There are a lot of positive signs for the future, but that's some of my thoughts on where we are now.

 

[WoGiTaLiA]

My problem is how once the game is over we seem to loosen up and actually try to attack.

It is always the same against Collingwood. We play some ugly version of our gameplan until the game gets out of reach, then we run and carry through the middle and make the scoreboard respectable.

We genuinely look like we are trying not to lose, not trying to win and that will almost never work.

 

[legend166]

This loss hurt less than the others because I think they're a legitimately better side than us this year.

 

[smasher]

There was very little forward defence or pressure last night.The Collingwood defenders had a field day (night).Earlier in the season our forward pressing was really good but we've gone downhill in that department.

 

[MF]

Here is the problem with our team at the moment, and it isn't just the fringe players.

Goodes - absolutely woeful performance last night. Did pretty much nothing right. Will obviously not lose his spot, but is a passenger on that effort.
Mattner - lost track of the number of errors and turnovers he had in the first half. We were swearing at the TV, again will not get dropped, we do not have a better replacement for the back half.
White - did nothing. Lacks the football knowledge and awareness to get involved in play when we aren't dominating and giving him easy delivery.
Shaw - still a turnover butcher but is far from our worst player.

Then the fringe players:

Jetta - should not have been selected over Veszpremi, who I don't think did too much wrong. Roos strongly hinted he will be removed next week.
Bevan - is nothing more than a trier. His efforts cannot usually be faulted but trying is not good enough at AFL level. Error-prone and lacks the ability to hurt the opposition in any way.
Rohan - shows obvious glimpses of real talent, but doesn't add enough over 4 quarters to be worthy of a spot at the moment. This is in no way a criticism of him, and it is very common amongst young players (except for the pure midfielders).
Hannebery - again, inconsistency can be expected at the stage he's at. I have no issues with that, what I am concerned about is his shoulder, and whether he should have a week or 2 off to make sure he's physically in top form.
Bird - isn't a forward, should only ever be part of the inside midfield rotation. Has fallen down the pecking order there due to the likes of Kennedy, but still absolutely has a future. But not as a forward.

That's everyone from the team against Collingwood I had a problem with, and that's a fair chunk of the team. The squad strength is simply not good enough to match it with the top teams when so many players are either "good honest triers" or young players who can't generate a 4 quarter effort. It should be noted that in good teams, the young players aren't found out as much because of the quality around them. It means they can inject themselves into the game, have great impact, and appear to be better players than the youngsters on the opposition.

Basically our problem is we aren't good enough. There are a few senior players who are playing poorly (Goodes), there are other seniors who are liabilities or inadequate (Mattner, White) that we can't or won't replace because we don't have good enough replacements for. Then there are the fringe players (Bevan, Rohan, Bird, Jetta etc) who COULD be replaced, but its questionable how much better the other fringe players in the reserves would be.

There were, however, some pretty glaring problems in my opinion.

1) Goodes has struggled all year as a primary forward target. We played him there because we feel we don't have forward options now without Hall and O'Loughlin, but several players are putting their hands up and begging to play in that position (Johnston, Dennis-Lane etc). If we play Goodes in the midfield we KNOW we get quality.
2) Bird and Jetta aren't forwards, we needed another goalscoring option. It seemed like we were just picking 22 players and putting them wherever they fit.
3) Completely overrun in midfield. This can in large part be put down to the number of inconsistent or low output players we used there. Players like Jetta have had very low possession counts and TOG this year (I think Jetta has the lowest TOG of any non-ruckman). The more players we use who aren't capable of delivering a 4 quarter effort, the more we will struggle against a team like Collingwood who have a very strong running brigade.

By 4-quarter effort I am referring to players like Rohan, Hannebery, Jetta, Bird, who all had patches in midfield. However the big problem here is that the reserves who would come in for them have similar issues (O'Dwyer, Meredith, Veszpremi, McNeil). Most people here seem to think that we have awesome midfield strength, and maybe that will be true in 2 seasons when the above players are all capable of consistent 4-quarter performances, but for now we are 1-2 quality midfielders short. That is another reason why Goodes should be moved back into the midfield on a more permanent basis.

There are a lot of positive signs for the future, but that's some of my thoughts on where we are now.

I disagree on this part. With Shaw, Malceski and Kennelly and enough depth in the midfield do we really need another rebounding defender?

I'm not going to beat my drum about this subject because I know it's been done to death and despite my constant calls to drop him I do actually admire the way he plays, he has a real dip and never slacks off.

Anyway... If we were facing Collingwood this week I'd probably be calling for wholesale changes. As it stands, we face Richmond at the G and we'll probably win.

 

[Swans120]

My thoughts are similar to swansfan51 and Malfan regarding Marty. I admire the way he goes about it, always gives his all and tries to take the game on, but he works his way into trouble more often than not unfortunately and makes a lot of mistakes. If Bevan was a more reliable defender once again (he has beaten to guys way down on form and confidence the last two games in Motlop and Leon) i would be prepared to drop Mattner, but really there is nobody in the 2's who can step in and do the job so Roosy will not drop him any time soon, that's for sure.

When Craig returns, however, if i were doing the changes, i would see Marty as in trouble and expendable. With Craig back, that means we have a defensive entourage of Reg, LRT, Craig, Tadhg, Mal, Rhyce, Nick Smith (defender/midfielder), Bevo and Marty. I'd view Marty and Bevo as the odd men out in that situation but i'm fairly certain Roosy won't see it that way regarding Marty. Bevo is shutting his man out of it atm, but making a lot skill errors.

 

[Banyo Bloods]

I got the impression last night (and on many other nights against Collingwood) that each player was so intent on who their opponent was and the need to stay close to him, that often when a Pie took possession, no-one ran into to pressure because they all peeled off the contest to follow their designated opponents who were spreading very quickly. Just meant the team spent the night chasing tail and unpressured Pie midfielders were able to stroll through the middle of the ground and hit lace out passes to leading forwards.

This part of your post is spot on.

This frustrates me more than anything when you see them run away from the man with the ball giving them 20 meteres to run steady and still choose a short leading option.

Ben McGlynn at one point took on two Magpie defenders running it outside of their 50 towards the wing choosing not to stick to one player and pressuring them both as they tried to get an overlap on him the pies fell to pieces it was a very encouraging and inspirational piece of play but it seemed to be the only one.

 

[liz]

I think McGlynn was the only player who went into the game believing the Swans could win.

A few others had a dip at various stages during the game but there was little conviction in anything they did. Even when miraculously near the start of the final term we were only 20 points down (mostly due to the Pies' squandered chances), there was no sense that they thought they could get themselves even closer on the scoreboard. In past games, even against Collingwood, there have been late game charges where a handful of players have upped their intensity and the team has kicked a few goals in a hurry to give us false hope of an unlikely victory. But there was absolutely none of that this time round.

I am convinced that, for all the brave talk before the game, they are collectively spooked about playing Collingwood. I've never really sensed that even playing against our other (and much longer term) bogey team in the Crows.

 

[Dangas]

Benny has been a great addition to the Swans along with Joshy

 

[Skystyler]

there didn't seem to be a lot of composure from our inside mids. We often had first hands on the ball at a stoppage but lost it in a tackle or had it smothered or got a quick, ineffective disposal away. This inevitably led to clean possession for the pies who broke quicker into space. Great pressure from the pies, to give them their due, but also a lack of composure from our guys.