Autopsy Why you cant trust this team yet 23 point loss to Port.

[Superstar swan]

Even in hindsight the buddy deal was a master stroke. He is going to leave a bigger hole than people expect not only at the club but the entire game

 

[RubbaDuck]

Imo, we are not giving Port enough credit. They played a blinder... regardless of who was in or out for them, they played a beauty!

Their pressure and work rate was elite, and we didn't match them... Their pressure was so good that we couldn't arrest their momentum, something we have been pretty good at this year. So then we're under pressure and being out worked, which then led to poor decision making, poor kicking and poor hand balling. The boys knew going in it would be a high pressure game, and probably thought they were prepared for it. They were wrong. Since round 5 Port have held teams to: 33, 42, 69, 46, 50, and 59 with Tigers beat them by a couple of goals, and Cats by 6 goals.

We didn't play well, because they didn't let us play well... and when we couldn't turn it round, instead of getting down to the hard work of pressure and tackling, we panicked. It's a young team, this stuff happens randomly. This is pretty much the same team that beat the Tigers and Demons, so lets not give up on them just yet...

Having said that, I'm getting pretty tired of the bloody stupid, unnecessary, goal giving away frees! That's not down to umpires, it just sheer bloody stupidity!!!

I agree. The fact that we've lost the last 4 to Port suggest they have some wood on us. They also beat us last year in Adelaide when we came off the bye.
I expect Ken Hinkley understands Don Pyke pretty well and would have some ideas on how to counter the Pyke elements of our attacking game plan.

I'm concerned that our midfield struggled. I wonder how a player can just stop and expect to remain untackled. Ladham didn't help, free kicks aside, he doesn't follow-up after the tap as Hickey does, nor does he impact enough in general play. Hickey & Kennedy would have been useful, even if just to steady our young guys. They got rattled too easily and several looked very flat. It was if they'd spent the bye on the piss. I think papley could have had a run on the ball just to give him a feel of the leather. He needs to find his mojo if we're to make finals.

Full kudos to Hinkley and his players. They brought the same sort of manic intensity and pressure we'd normally pride ourselves on. Their scores from turnovers showed just how poor we were under their pressure. The fact that they had 25% more disposals than us yet they laid 40% more tackles should raise alarms. One or two of our players were sticking tackles but too many were wearing teflon gloves.

We win when we bring manic pressure or we lose when it's brought to bear on us. When we're under pressure, stuffing things up and turning the ball over we need to get back to basics. Having Ladhams play his best game ever for Port didn't help, nor did the stupid kicks and poor decisions of many of our team.

Port won the game or we lost it. Take your pick.

 

[caesar88]

Even in hindsight the buddy deal was a master stroke. He is going to leave a bigger hole than people expect not only at the club but the entire game

Not that I want Buddy to retire, because I don't, but I'm really looking forward to seeing how the players respond when he's no longer around. It'll be really interesting to see who steps up and who thrives on no longer having a GOAT around to save the day, to intimidate them, to act as a shield, whatever other effect Buddy seems to have on different players.

 

[Kapers]

I'm angry and I'm not going to give Port any credit.


Stuff them, we didn't turn up.

 

[RubbaDuck]

Yeh well if Roo says he did it,

He did do it.

 

[Joycerama]

Well said. Buddy's not the problem. Other forwards tend to get dragged into Buddy's gravitational pull even as he tends to suck the ball towards him. The few times we looked like scoring were when there was some space around Bud. McDonald and Buddy were glued at the hip sometimes. Whoever is managing the forwards needs to tell them to move and separate. Three stationary forwards squeezed together can be beaten by a single punch from Aliir. Half the time they were

At this point I'd go:

Out: Ladhams, Wicks, Hayward, Lloyd
In: Hickey, Ronke, Campbell, Fox

Can't see Lloyd or Will getting dropped though, COR probably won't survive. I'd also be fine with Amartey in for Reid. Gould and Stephens on the cusp.

That is crazy. Reid is the least of our worries. And you think Stephens is going to set the world alight? Let’s face it - our mental prep before the bye mustn’t have been great. We have often been laksidazical (sp?) post bye. Reset, reload and let’s see.

 

[scaryness]

Rankings after analysing replay
Everyone starts at 0 and only goes up, accounting for the entire game (i.e. most players average out to a 5 and below that doesn't necessarily mean a "bad" game. Not everyone can be a stand out.)

Heeney 9/10
Mills 8/10
-
Reid 7/10
Parker 6/10
P McCartin 6/10
-
Franklin 5/10
T McCartin 5/10
O'Riordan 4/10
McDonald 4/10
Papley 4/10
-
Cunningham 3/10
Blakey 3/10
Rowbottom 3/10
Warner 3/10
Hayward 3/10
McInerney 3/10
Wicks 3/10
Gulden 2/10
Florent 2/10
-
Ladhams 1/10
Rampe 1/10
Lloyd 1/10


Port rankings: Review - Round 14, 2022 vs Sydney

 

[Kirkswan]

not sure why people fret over buddys deal

we signed reid to 5 year deal, longer before iirc, tippett was here for 6, blakey got an extension without playing, heeney is on what now 6 and in the top 10 highest in the comp, lloyd 4 years, parker 5

hayward is on a longish deal isnt he

we throw deals and cash at players , its not just buddy

Heeney has never been all australian, never won a best and fairest, why is he a top 10 paid player , and hes a bloody local


not picking on individual players, just the buddy deal cops it, hes been a better contract than most

The issue at the time was 9 years for a 25yro (or maybe 26yro), and the amount of cash.

It was huge amount of money at the time, and we were potentially committing to paying a 34yro who had broken down at 29... it was a big deal.

Long deals under 5 years are not comparable to 9 year deal in economic strain, should the player get injured, breakdown, retire.

Would love a reference/source for 'Heeney is ... in the top 10 highest in the comp'?

 

[Kirkswan]

I agree. The fact that we've lost the last 4 to Port suggest they have some wood on us. They also beat us last year in Adelaide when we came off the bye.
I expect Ken Hinkley understands Don Pyke pretty well and would have some ideas on how to counter the Pyke elements of our attacking game plan.

I'm concerned that our midfield struggled. I wonder how a player can just stop and expect to remain untackled. Ladham didn't help, free kicks aside, he doesn't follow-up after the tap as Hickey does, nor does he impact enough in general play. Hickey & Kennedy would have been useful, even if just to steady our young guys. They got rattled too easily and several looked very flat. It was if they'd spent the bye on the piss. I think papley could have had a run on the ball just to give him a feel of the leather. He needs to find his mojo if we're to make finals.

Full kudos to Hinkley and his players. They brought the same sort of manic intensity and pressure we'd normally pride ourselves on. Their scores from turnovers showed just how poor we were under their pressure. The fact that they had 25% more disposals than us yet they laid 40% more tackles should raise alarms. One or two of our players were sticking tackles but too many were wearing teflon gloves.

We win when we bring manic pressure or we lose when it's brought to bear on us. When we're under pressure, stuffing things up and turning the ball over we need to get back to basics. Having Ladhams play his best game ever for Port didn't help, nor did the stupid kicks and poor decisions of many of our team.

Port won the game or we lost it. Take your pick.

I think it's pretty simple really, Ladhams came apart under pressure and lost a ruck. If Hickey, we win (not well, but we win). Not the way I wanted, in a calm and business like fashion, but we scrape over the line...

We came back as usual in the last quarter, but Port held (and as you said, full kudos to them!).

Keep in mind that Ladhams in young and developing ruck, random poor games should be expected! When he's on song, he reinforces the mids and gives them first look... but he doesn't yet have the experience or know how to turn it around. He'll get there...

You would be hoping that Pyke understood Hinkley and his team pretty well, given my understanding is that his role all about knowing and understanding how the opposition play!

 

[Kirkswan]

Not that I want Buddy to retire, because I don't, but I'm really looking forward to seeing how the players respond when he's no longer around. It'll be really interesting to see who steps up and who thrives on no longer having a GOAT around to save the day, to intimidate them, to act as a shield, whatever other effect Buddy seems to have on different players.

I wouldn't say I'm really looking forward to it, but it will be interesting!

I reckon it'll fluctuate a bit, with good and bad games and we'll all bicker (fight) about whether its Buddy's influence...

One thing for sure, I reckon McDonalds going to be a beauty!!!

 

[Kirkswan]

Rankings after analysing replay
Everyone starts at 0 and only goes up, accounting for the entire game (i.e. most players average out to a 5 and below that doesn't necessarily mean a "bad" game. Not everyone can be a stand out.)

Heeney 9/10
Mills 8/10
-
Reid 7/10
Parker 6/10
P McCartin 6/10
-
Franklin 5/10
T McCartin 5/10
O'Riordan 4/10
McDonald 4/10
Papley 4/10
-
Cunningham 3/10
Blakey 3/10
Rowbottom 3/10
Warner 3/10
Hayward 3/10
McInerney 3/10
Wicks 3/10
Gulden 2/10
Florent 2/10
-
Ladhams 1/10
Rampe 1/10
Lloyd 1/10


Port rankings: Review - Round 14, 2022 vs Sydney

Have I missed something here... what are these rankings based on?

 

[Dubsforsam1]

While we complain about how poor we were it all comes down to goal kicking in the end. We kicked 2-7 in the 2nd quarter when we had momentum and they kicked 6-2 in the third when they had momentum.
The sooner we get our accuracy at goal better we win more games

 

[Wheresbuddy]

While we complain about how poor we were it all comes down to goal kicking in the end. We kicked 2-7 in the 2nd quarter when we had momentum and they kicked 6-2 in the third when they had momentum.
The sooner we get our accuracy at goal better we win more games

This is very true. Poor goal kicking is such a momentum killer

 

[The King!]

The issue at the time was 9 years for a 25yro (or maybe 26yro), and the amount of cash.

It was huge amount of money at the time, and we were potentially committing to paying a 34yro who had broken down at 29... it was a big deal.

Long deals under 5 years are not comparable to 9 year deal in economic strain, should the player get injured, breakdown, retire.

Would love a reference/source for 'Heeney is ... in the top 10 highest in the comp'?

google Heeney contract won't take you long ? he's consistently in the list for top 10 paid , which is guesswork, but then technically so is the buddy deal.

the amount of money buddy is on was never that unusual though, why's it an issue , he delivered when many others i listed on long term contracts have not , so buddy is just the lazy target.

Plus buddy has some of his salary in the marketing cap IIRC.


in my opinion there's no buddy contract issue, it's just an excuse not to hold some other golden boys accountable for failing to deliver , including the coach who is on big $ too

 

[bedford]

While we complain about how poor we were it all comes down to goal kicking in the end. We kicked 2-7 in the 2nd quarter when we had momentum and they kicked 6-2 in the third when they had momentum.
The sooner we get our accuracy at goal better we win more games

We have been the most accurate team all year

 

[ShireSwan]

I don't quite understand the "we'd be soOoOo much better with Dawson and Hewett" complaints.

Dawson, as gifted as he is, is not a natural leader and had his own self-confessed work rate issues. Would he be a point of difference for us, or would he be just another talented Swan slacking off every few weeks?

Hewett, as wonderful a player as he is, was not going to be used as a ball-winner in this team. Would he be a point of difference for us, or would he be just another defensive mid getting 15-20 touches?

I rate both, and I'm not sure I'll ever get over our use of Hewett, but it's naive to believe they'd make much of a difference to what's unfolded this year.

Top 4 team with both this year IMO.
But I guess we'd also be way over the cap and have had to give them tv contracts to appear on Neighbors to get around it.

 

[The King!]

Top 4 team with both this year IMO.
But I guess we'd also be way over the cap and have had to give them tv contracts to appear on Neighbors to get around it.

tonight on ten Paul Robinson hires newcomers George and Jordan to assist him with his evil scheme to get Erinsborough into the AFL

 

[ShireSwan]

We have a systematic problem with our mids. If and when we get the ball first at a centre bounce (probably most contests to be fair) there is no ball movement. It is literally get the ball to the player who can slam it on the boot fastest and kick a rain maker forward. We don't have the forwards to capitalise on those high ball's.

I know with the 666 rule the aim is to get the ball into the forward line as quickly as possible but there needs to be a balance between fast ball movement and going into 50 with some sort of a direction .

Opposition mids routinely win the ball and with a series of quick hands, get the ball into the hands of a player moving towards the 50 with the game in front of them. They then can assess the forward options and make the right choice. That is a step up issue and how the players are trained rather than personnel issue.

Right now defenders know that ball is coming in shallow and high 90% of the time and it makes it very easy to defend. We will make our lives alot easier if we had some ball movement at the stoppage. Unfortunately thats not something that can rectifoed and engrained into plagers i a matter of weeks.

TESTIFY !
Watching Hewett give off effective handballs to runners at Carlton is killing me. Clarke did that for us a few games two years ago too. Probably does it in reserves. Sadly Ladhams is our best at playing other mids into space. Maybe Rowbottom second. Is it the players, or the coaching that sees our midfield play so stilted and lacking in fluidity? Both? Seems to have been that way for years....we seem to get rid of or demote players capable of doing it....(Hewett, Mitchell, Clarke to some extent)

 

[caesar88]

I think it's pretty simple really, Ladhams came apart under pressure and lost a ruck. If Hickey, we win (not well, but we win). Not the way I wanted, in a calm and business like fashion, but we scrape over the line...

We came back as usual in the last quarter, but Port held (and as you said, full kudos to them!).

Keep in mind that Ladhams in young and developing ruck, random poor games should be expected! When he's on song, he reinforces the mids and gives them first look... but he doesn't yet have the experience or know how to turn it around. He'll get there...

You would be hoping that Pyke understood Hinkley and his team pretty well, given my understanding is that his role all about knowing and understanding how the opposition play!

Agree with the sentiment but wowee I think it's a stretch to suggest that if Hickey played we would've won. We were complete tripe in every area of the ground.

Defenders who were so far behind their opponents they were playing in different time zones.

Midfielders who were sluggish with not much hunt for the ball.

Forwards who literally had no idea how to lead (and then couldn't kick straight when they had chances.) And who also applied minimal pressure which is so crucial to our forward half game.

Hickey wouldn't have helped any of that. At best, he might not've given away those silly frees in the 3rd, but Hickey did average 2 whole frees against more than Ladhams (prior to Ladhams' dog day afternoon on Saturday), so he could've cost us in other ways in the frees department.

 

[caesar88]

Top 4 team with both this year IMO.
But I guess we'd also be way over the cap and have had to give them tv contracts to appear on Neighbors to get around it.

Do you honestly believe we'd be a top 4 team with Hewett and Dawson?

How would Dawson with his laconic play, and Hewett with his 15-20 touches as a defensive mid help with our issue of just switching off in games?

 

[bedford]

Do you honestly believe we'd be a top 4 team with Hewett and Dawson?

How would Dawson with his laconic play, and Hewett with his 15-20 touches as a defensive mid help with our issue of just switching off in games?

It would be better than what we had

 

[caesar88]

TESTIFY !
Watching Hewett give off effective handballs to runners at Carlton is killing me. Clarke did that for us a few games two years ago too. Probably does it in reserves. Sadly Ladhams is our best at playing other mids into space. Maybe Rowbottom second. Is it the players, or the coaching that sees our midfield play so stilted and lacking in fluidity? Both? Seems to have been that way for years....we seem to get rid of or demote players capable of doing it....(Hewett, Mitchell, Clarke to some extent)

Not playing Parker & Mills in the same centre bounce would probably help.

 

[caesar88]

It would be better than what we had

If Horse used Hewett correctly we'd be top 4. But he wouldn't, so we wouldn't.

 

[Jewelsbon]

The issue at the time was 9 years for a 25yro (or maybe 26yro), and the amount of cash.

It was huge amount of money at the time, and we were potentially committing to paying a 34yro who had broken down at 29... it was a big deal.

Long deals under 5 years are not comparable to 9 year deal in economic strain, should the player get injured, breakdown, retire.

Would love a reference/source for 'Heeney is ... in the top 10 highest in the comp'?

I usually agree with most of your posts Kirksy but personally I think you're way off here. Buddy's contract was a brilliant move and the memory of him as a Swan will only be soured by not having won a flag in his time here

 

[SuperMal]

Agreed on all your player calls and general comments there except...
Florent has very limited football nous. He has a half decent bit of acceleration and obviously is a dedicated trainer an good guy - that's it. I mean his dedication is a good trait for sure, but...we need dedicated trainers that are also good at football.
I don't know for how long we have to keep persisting with him thinking it'll be different. But I'm sure we will. He owes us the second game of his two great games per year, so maybe it'll be next week...
I don't think Clarke will set the world on fire, but when he has had a run I've liked how our midfield has operated as a group a bit more.More fluid, he may compliment the likes of Warner, McInerney and Rowbottom more IMHO. I know I''m in the minority. I also know he'd get dropped for one error, where as Florent and a few other chosen onens play on through mulitple ones just as bad, or worse.

Anyway I just think it a sound principle to run a club with - reward good form.

Florents season/career stats: average, below-average, average, below-aveage, average, average. Not much else to say really.


View attachment 1427819

Florent is the Dylan Shiel of the Swans. No grunt.