Malaxos interview on 6pr

[liz]

Originally posted by Charlie


So... we're not actually a top four team, but we got lucky. Is that what you're saying?

Almost every team needs luck to finish top 4 - maybe not the current Brisbane squad, such is its depth, but the competition is so close that yes, luck does play a part along with skill and application.

In actual fact, not everything went right. A lot went wrong. O'Loughlin, Ball, Seymour, Fixter, Doyle, Cresswell and Saddington all missed considerable chunks of the season through injury. We had a win stolen from us in round 18. We lost several winnable matches. How, exactly, does that constitute everything going right?

Our injury record this season was pretty "normal" for an AFL team. Several others could point to far worse. In fact, we had a pretty good run til late in the season and that maybe makes it seem worse then than it really was. And yes, maybe that cost us a bit (especially losing Ball) but thems the breaks.

Also, I hardly think we had a win stolen from us in rd 18. We came close to snatching a match that we probably shouldn't have got close in. In none of our other losses did we ever really look like taking the points.

Against Brisbane at the Gabba we won a game we should never have been allowed a sniff in.

I don't think anyone can grasp my basic point: We may not improve, but if we don't, then that is nothing to be proud of. We cannot bow out in the semi-finals and have people congratulating us on how well we've done, because we will not have done well.

Firstly, you have to distinguish between reality and what clubs say publically. I can't see any team other than the Lions or Port coming out 6 months before the season gets under way and saying they're aiming for the premiership next year.

I agree that they should be aiming to win every match - and therefore win the premiership, but clubs have to set realistic targets against which to measure their progress and that sounds like what Malaxos was talking about, regardless of whether he said "aim" or "expect".

It comes down to a view of what the assessment will be if we do finish 4th-6th next year. Will it have been a failure? Who knows, because it depends on many other factors than simply ladder position.

I also think it's worth commenting that the journey is as important - in fact more so - than the destination itself. Sure, you have to have a destination in mind or the journey becomes an aimless meandering, but ultimately it is the memories of that journey that tend to last much longer than the final triumph itself. And given that there's a chance you may never reach the destination in this context, you have to make sure you enjoy the journey as it unfolds, or you might as well give it all away and take up stamp collecting.

And if you don't believe me, imagine, just for a moment, that Brisbane and Sydney swapped playing squads for next season and the "new" Sydney won the flag. The records would show we had finally broken our premiership drought, but it would all feel a little empty, don't you think?

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by Bear
there is no such thing as "playing above yourself", only playing to your full potentail, where EVERYTHING goes right

Of course you can play above yourself. For example I go out onto the golf course. I hit every shot just right and manage to par the course. I had never done that before and would probably never do it again. You could say I played up to my full potential, but a more accurate description is I played above what I am normally capable of regularly playing, hence I played above myself.

The analogy goes the same for football. To some degree it's a case of semantics, but in certain cases one is a more accurate description than the other.

[ugg]

To finish in the top six next season would not necessarily be a drop in performance. You have to look at it in the context of each of the two seasons. We are going to find it hard to replace one of our best midfielders in Cressa and maybe decreased inputs from Maxfield and Williams. The two teams are not the same so you cannot directly compare the finishing positions to say whether we have gone forward or backwards. I'll be happy playing some finals and having some young kids coming through.

[Charlie]

Well... I seem to be almost one-out here, which is extremely disappointing.

All that means, however, is that as far as I'm concerned, I refuse to make an excuse. Those who are saying that they'd be happy with a lower finish are making an excuse.

Excuses don't win premierships.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by Charlie
All that means, however, is that as far as I'm concerned, I refuse to make an excuse. Those who are saying that they'd be happy with a lower finish are making an excuse.

Excuses don't win premierships.

Oh rubbish. Finishing lower on the ladder is not an excuse.

How will losing the GF be a better accomplishment than losing the prelim again or losing a SF? What is far more important is for the side to progress as a cohesive unit capable of seriously challenging for the flag, and hopefully winning it, over the next few years.

[Nico]

Sounds like a typical line any club official would take at this time of the year.

Ask any official from any club and most would say, "right now we would be disappointed if we don't make the 8". Malaxos said the top 6.

What else would any club official at a top 3 club be expected to say.

[Go Swannies]

I think everyone is getting het up about nothing. I'm glad to see Malaxos is still toeing the Swans corporate line and saying that we're aiming for the top six. After we had finished the 22 rounds we had to wait until two other matches to see if we came 4th or 6th. So 6th isn't really stepping backwards.

But I'm with Charlie, too. I've seen what this team is capable of - and hope that Cressa's departure means that someone else can come in and lift as so many did. I think I've spoken to most of the team and I don't think any think that performing worse than they did this year would be acceptable - as a team I think they KNOW they are capable of a premiership. Did you see the guys in the IR seek out the other Swans at every opportunity?

I'm really tired of all this "stars" crap. Brisbane has great players and we beat them twice. Hawthorn were the only ones to make us look silly and I haven't heard them described as the team of the century. When the Swans have the team spirit there is no-one they can't beat - they proved that this year. Pies and Bombers - certainly more of a constellation than we are (yet).

They are a young team where there is heaps of room for improvement. LRT could be more sure with his disposals, Schneider missed a lot of goals through inexperience. Magic was still on the verge of injury throughout. Pebbles kicked too many out of bounds on the full. And Saddington bounced off some big full forwards. Even Goodes had some ordinary games. Our kicking in after a behind was fraught every time. Bazza was still running the "big bad" tag and couldn't get a free kick to save his life.

I expect that, right now, we have a very young keen team ready to improve during the pre-season training. If we do then the minor premiership is not beyond us. Then it's finals times and it is just a matter of how we stand for injuries and luck whether we get a shot at the GF. Then we can show what a united team with a respected coach can do. I don't care where we finish in the eight - as long as we put on a good showing and win the GF.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by Go Swannies
I think I've spoken to most of the team and I don't think any think that performing worse than they did this year would be acceptable

I hardly think they would say otherwise.

as long as we put on a good showing and win the GF.

It's pretty hard to do the latter without also doing the former...

[Bear]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
Of course you can play above yourself. For example I go out onto the golf course. I hit every shot just right and manage to par the course. I had never done that before and would probably never do it again. You could say I played up to my full potential, but a more accurate description is I played above what I am normally capable of regularly playing, hence I played above myself.

The analogy goes the same for football. To some degree it's a case of semantics, but in certain cases one is a more accurate description than the other.

now you are trying to squirm out of it by putting a new definition on 'playing above yourself'.

WARNING: This gets complicated...

playing above yourself, by definition is playing above what you are capable of , i.e. playing above your full potential

in any case, you just argued that playing above yourself means "playing above what you are REGULARLY or NORMALLY CAPABLE of" - in fact you are actually agreeing with me as you ARE REGULARLY CAPABLE of playing at your full potential even though most of the time you don't

if (as i think) you meant to say that playing above yourself is playing better than what you REGULARLY ACTUALLY PLAY then you are still wrong because you did not specify this previously and in any case this is not the accepted definition of 'playing above yourself'

if you are going to argue on the definintion of 'playing above yourself', which actually literally and colloquially means playing above WHAT YOU ARE CAPABLE OF, then don't bother, too boring

[NMWBloods]

Well, you've decided exactly how everything is decided haven't you, but I'm not overly surprised.

I meant playing above what you are normally capable of. To say I am trying to squirm my way out is ridiculous as I simply said they played above themselves and I didn't offer an explanation of what that meant.

Playing above oneself can often be divided into two types. One is often short-term and relates to playing above what you can normally do. This is like one of those "perfect" rounds of golf. Then there is the case where you play to your full potential where everything just clickes. This can be shorter term or longer term.

My reference was to the latter, given that it took place over a whole season and had some ups and downs, and certainly wasn't "perfect."

Of course there is also a third option, where a team or player plays to their potential for a period but never manages to maintain that potential over the longer term.

One hopes that this is not the outcome for the Swans, however I don't expect it will be.

However, it doesn't really matter what I say or think as you are going to disagree anyway as you usually do.

[Bear]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
Well, you've decided exactly how everything is decided haven't you, but I'm not overly surprised.

I meant playing above what you are normally capable of. To say I am trying to squirm my way out is ridiculous as I simply said they played above themselves and I didn't offer an explanation of what that meant.

Playing above oneself can often be divided into two types. One is often short-term and relates to playing above what you can normally do. This is like one of those "perfect" rounds of golf. Then there is the case where you play to your full potential where everything just clickes. This can be shorter term or longer term.

My reference was to the latter, given that it took place over a whole season and had some ups and downs, and certainly wasn't "perfect."

Of course there is also a third option, where a team or player plays to their potential for a period but never manages to maintain that potential over the longer term.

One hopes that this is not the outcome for the Swans, however I don't expect it will be.

However, it doesn't really matter what I say or think as you are going to disagree anyway as you usually do.

well you have covered all bases now with three meanings for 'playing above yourself'

my point is you cannot play above yourself in the true sense and I'll stick to it

as Charlie also took it, you cannot play better than your best

[sharpie]

well, it all really depends on what the definition of 'is' is...

[penga]

IMO, its just a throw-away line, im sure he wouldve almost said "they'll take it one week at a time, after all, a week is a long time in football!"

[Plugger46]

Originally posted by Charlie
Well... that had better not be true.

How is it that so many people seem willing to accept a decrease in performance???

WE MUST MOVE FORWARD!!!

Spot on mate. Couldn't have said it better myself. This ****house attitude, is the reason that we haven't won a flag since 1933. I'm sick of mediocrity, and just being happy with a reasonable season.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by Bear
well you have covered all bases now with three meanings for 'playing above yourself'

I haven't "covered all bases", I simply noted that there is not a commonly accepted meaning and I also pointed out which one I was referring to.

However, you think there is no such thing as "playing above yourself" but you also think there is an "accepted definition."

Nevertheless, you seem quite insistent on providing the appearance that you are correct, so I will not interfere with that.